Comments on: PST USMNT Man of the Match: Michael Bradley

By: schmutzdeck

schmutzdeck — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:44:21 +0000

By my standards, which are almost entirely results oriented, Bradley had a good game.

It seems like you evaluate him on a minute by minute basis and then add it up to see if he had more good minutes than bad.

I prefer to see how the game turned out. Bradley was probably indispensable in the US scoring their two goals. He was not responsible for Russia’s two goals. I couldn’t not care less about anything else. So in my book he had a good game.

Howard is a keeper. And that means his performance kept Russia to two goals but if Bradley had not been around, then the match probably ends 2-0, wasting Howard’s performance.

I’m also not convinced Guzan or for that matter Nicky Rimando would not have done as well as Timmy but we will never know.

By: mvktr2

mvktr2 — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 11:45:12 +0000

LOL, red card Timmy for punching Goodson. I’d make Howard MotM also followed by Bradley, Kleistan, Agudelo, Edu, Boyd, and Jones. (only watched the 2nd half) Those are the guys that get a passing grade from me, with Johnson, Gatt, & Chandler drawing non-grade/neutral with everyone else getting a failing grade.

By: wfjackson3

wfjackson3 — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 02:08:39 +0000

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I don’t think we have an established standard to adequately rely on when comparing the impactfulness of these three players under Klinsman. Considering that the adjustment to his philosophies is a process, having recent information about how Bradley performs in it and not having recent information about Donovan makes this a really tough sell.

By: tylerbetts

tylerbetts — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 22:05:00 +0000

This is an odd one for me. Watching the game live, the entire team was missing in creativity, width, and first touch. I felt like Bradley, honestly, was having a bad game.

But, I thought about it more.

And, he wasn’t having a bad game. Just a bad game for the standards we’ve set for him. Compared to the best Michael Bradley, this guy was a shell of that and not near what we know he can be. So, the true compliment here is that Bradley had a bad game, by his standards, and still had a very good game, by “in a vacuum” standards. The guy is spoiling us.

But, despite that, Timmy was the man of the match. Though, I thought he might get a red card for punching Goodson. And I’m not sure I could have blamed him.

By: Richard Farley

Richard Farley — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 19:21:04 +0000

Admittedly, I had written two `graphs on Howard before changed. (blushes)

By: speedsterofbeantown

speedsterofbeantown — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 19:19:51 +0000

Yes, Michael Bradley was pretty good in this game, but I still can’t make him the man of the match. Tim Howard’s seven saves kept the U.S. in the game and covered a lot of marking mistakes by the back line. And besides, Bradley missed a wide-open header when he had loads of space in the box that almost made me throw my remote at the TV. Still, I think the 25-year-old is crucial to this team.

By: Richard Farley

Richard Farley — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 18:47:38 +0000

Possibly, but that doesn’t change the point. Perhaps they can (and will) perform much better, but there was no drop off from what they have been – the standard referenced in the post.

I think the bigger qualm with my piece would be the criteria itself. Does maintaining a standard without Dempsey and Donovan say anything about Bradley? I contend yes, but that’s a hard case to make.

By: wfjackson3

wfjackson3 — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 18:38:00 +0000

And that is because Bradley/Dempsey/Donovan have played how many games together under Klinsman?

By: Richard Farley

Richard Farley — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 18:37:01 +0000

I completely disagree, obviously. IMO, the U.S. always looks like they did on Wednesday.

By: wfjackson3

wfjackson3 — Wed, 14 Nov 2012 18:34:45 +0000

“Against Russia, with the U.S.’s two most recognizable players not called in, there was no discernable drop off.”

I totally disagree with this. For much of the game we were very poor offensively and our midfield wasn’t getting it done. Bradley didn’t find areas to attack or players to link up with for the majority of the game.

Would we have been worse off without him in the game? Absolutely. Was there a dropoff because of a lack of Dempsey and Donovan. Of course there was.