the Timbers looked like they had a chance at 3 point twice this game: Before Austin settled into their mid block defense and when Austin stopped their mid block and moved to bunkering. To see how little ball progression there was through the middle for the Timbers. To see how little movement there was to try to progress the ball. This was a feature last year and looks like they don’t think it is a problem.
Their inability to move the ball from midfield to the forwards was shocking. I saw many times when the forwards made runs timed to stay onside but the passes never came. I got the feeling the intention was 100% to move the ball up the sideline and Austin knew they could use the sideline to shut that down. I get the feeling this will get better because we had so many new players out there, but the set piece was our only chance at a goal on Saturday, and fortunately that paid off.
The defense looked pretty good against Austin, and difficult to gauge it against Vancouver because we were down a man for 80 minutes. But we still haven't given up an even strength goal this year. We need to keep Pantemis is goal. I felt that way last year and still do.
Our movement off the ball is… completely nonexistent. It’s agonizing. And I feel like I was saying this all last year too because, well, I was. At this point it feels intentional, because clearly Neville doesn’t see it as a problem. We pass around the back and NO ONE is running around to open space. The players on the ball are looking forward, but no one is moving. Even if one or two players are moving, it’s not good enough, because they get the ball and then pass it right back. Everyone needs to be moving to open space. This is such a fundamental issue that it makes me want to stab my eyes out. I think (hope) that once da Costa moves into the middle that will help a lot, I thought he was largely ineffective when he took up a position on the wing (where the lineup placed him), he was best when he positioned himself in the middle. I’m sure we’re gonna keep the 3-4-2-1 formation since it worked, but I wouldn’t mind seeing the 3-5-2 formation again just to get Da Costa in the middle more.
We need to take more risks in possession, there were tons of times where there were open passes, but it required some level of risk that we weren’t willing to take. Not that we need to take all of them, but we have to take some. Our possession was way too safe. There was one amazing line breaking pass that Smith played in the first few minutes that opened up the play and got us in a great position; we need more of that. Also more of Smith dribbling forward into the midfield, he’s comfortable going forward, so he should do that more! That inside channel space is not really covered by the defense, so dribbling into that space draws in a defender or two and opens up other players. I hope he does that more in future games. That being said, I was happy how much we held onto the ball in the second half — Austin had nothing going forward basically. We just need to turn that possession into meaningful possession. This is an aspect of the game I think we miss Bravo in, I’m still not sure if Fory is better than him
During pre season and even during the first game, it's clear that Kelsy is running off the ball, and from a few times I observed when they played together, Costa is ready and willing to play the early ball when he is in a position to do so. I think that will start to come off, especially if there are some high lines against us. I suspect that is a product of their European experience.
It was safe possession, but any possession is good possession. Working the ball from side to side and up and all over helps grind a team down. They're finding their way. Surman and Smith in particularly did well passing, which was great to see. The midfield needs to sort it out.
"Our movement off the ball is… completely nonexistent. It’s agonizing. And I feel like I was saying this all last year too because, well, I was. At this point it feels intentional, because clearly Neville doesn’t see it as a problem."
Phil is not a good coach. This is just one manifestation of that. And the fact that he refuses to acknowledge it as a problem is infuriating.
I think it's a player thing. Smart players don't like to lose the ball. If anything, it sounds like Phil is encouraging the players to be more daring. Smart players know when to attack and when to control the game, etc, and not lose it. I kinda lose it when the players seem to not care if they lose the ball. Last game was a big step in the right direction for possession, and I think it had a lot to do with some of the changes. Yes, we need work in the final third, but as I've mentioned in other threads, I'd like to see Ayala more involved there because he values the ball, has the skill and the impetus to make goal creating chances.
I'm with you there, but the original statement was "Our movement off the ball is… completely nonexistent." And that's coaching, and that's what I was responding to.
"If anything, it sounds like Phil is encouraging the players to be more daring."
Which would be great, again, if their off-the-ball movement matched that. But when they don't have the ball - whether on offense or whether it's recovering after a lost ball - their movement to regain shape or whatever is awful. Not daring, not risk-taking, just...awful.
As you say, the possession was a bit better this last game, but overall, it's been a problem all throughout Neville's time, and one game is a very small green shoot in a very large brown field. I hope it grows.
I guess my fear, unlike yours, is that grinding out 1-0 results like that isn't actually sustainable. It may work against teams like Austin, but I'm not sure it'll work against actual good attacking teams. Jonathan Rodriguez can't come back soon enough. Mora is great and da Costa can definitely help, but this team needs a guy who can destroy the back of the net.
Also, if three at the back worked pretty well without Kamal Miller, what happens when Kamal Miller is eligible again? Does Phil recognize what works and keep going with it, or does he revert back to what he thinks will work? I guess we'll find out. The defense does look a bit better than last season so far, so hopefully that continues to improve, with or without Kamal.
I was a lot more comfortable with Pantemis in goal, for sure, the play through and from the back looked a lot more fluid with him than it does with Crepeau.
Yep. I’m also cautious that da Costa avoids using his left foot. By my eyes, he too often forced a play onto his right foot and missed opportunities.
Kelsey I think will be very good, but he seems the kind of pure striker who needs service. And he didn’t get any against Austin.
Austin is a bad team we got lucky to beat. Vancouver is a good team who destroyed us. I suspect that portends the year unless JRod and Zup come back soon in good shape.
Re: Crépeau and Miller- is it safe to say we have not seen them at their best yet? And, if so, can they sustain those performances because we haven’t seen it yet 🤷♀️
I was super, super hyped when the Timbers picked up Crepeau before last season. It felt like a steal. But he has, for whatever reason, not been even remotely the keeper he was pre-injury, at least at club level. He's still good for Canada, but with the Timbers, he's just had way too many moments of indecision, too many flat-out mistakes, and just in general him not being what I thought he could be, that it's just a shame that I don't think we'll get that Crepeau back.
Same with Kamal - but honestly, I put a lot of the blame there on Phil. Kamal is not really a guy that is suited to play a high defensive line; he's not fast, he's not agile. He can be a very good defender, I think, he's just not being used in a way that is anywhere near his actual skillset. So he looks actually bad, but he's more miscast here I think, which again is too bad, because I was excited to see him come here.
Thanks for the podcast guys! I enjoy the discussion (not something I can get in Idaho). Not the prettiest or most fun game but I like your point that we only had one 1-0 win last year. I don’t want a whole season of games like this but for a team that always starts slow and has numerous injuries and new players I don’t mind playing conservatively for a month or so.
the Timbers looked like they had a chance at 3 point twice this game: Before Austin settled into their mid block defense and when Austin stopped their mid block and moved to bunkering. To see how little ball progression there was through the middle for the Timbers. To see how little movement there was to try to progress the ball. This was a feature last year and looks like they don’t think it is a problem.
Their inability to move the ball from midfield to the forwards was shocking. I saw many times when the forwards made runs timed to stay onside but the passes never came. I got the feeling the intention was 100% to move the ball up the sideline and Austin knew they could use the sideline to shut that down. I get the feeling this will get better because we had so many new players out there, but the set piece was our only chance at a goal on Saturday, and fortunately that paid off.
The defense looked pretty good against Austin, and difficult to gauge it against Vancouver because we were down a man for 80 minutes. But we still haven't given up an even strength goal this year. We need to keep Pantemis is goal. I felt that way last year and still do.
Our movement off the ball is… completely nonexistent. It’s agonizing. And I feel like I was saying this all last year too because, well, I was. At this point it feels intentional, because clearly Neville doesn’t see it as a problem. We pass around the back and NO ONE is running around to open space. The players on the ball are looking forward, but no one is moving. Even if one or two players are moving, it’s not good enough, because they get the ball and then pass it right back. Everyone needs to be moving to open space. This is such a fundamental issue that it makes me want to stab my eyes out. I think (hope) that once da Costa moves into the middle that will help a lot, I thought he was largely ineffective when he took up a position on the wing (where the lineup placed him), he was best when he positioned himself in the middle. I’m sure we’re gonna keep the 3-4-2-1 formation since it worked, but I wouldn’t mind seeing the 3-5-2 formation again just to get Da Costa in the middle more.
We need to take more risks in possession, there were tons of times where there were open passes, but it required some level of risk that we weren’t willing to take. Not that we need to take all of them, but we have to take some. Our possession was way too safe. There was one amazing line breaking pass that Smith played in the first few minutes that opened up the play and got us in a great position; we need more of that. Also more of Smith dribbling forward into the midfield, he’s comfortable going forward, so he should do that more! That inside channel space is not really covered by the defense, so dribbling into that space draws in a defender or two and opens up other players. I hope he does that more in future games. That being said, I was happy how much we held onto the ball in the second half — Austin had nothing going forward basically. We just need to turn that possession into meaningful possession. This is an aspect of the game I think we miss Bravo in, I’m still not sure if Fory is better than him
During pre season and even during the first game, it's clear that Kelsy is running off the ball, and from a few times I observed when they played together, Costa is ready and willing to play the early ball when he is in a position to do so. I think that will start to come off, especially if there are some high lines against us. I suspect that is a product of their European experience.
It was safe possession, but any possession is good possession. Working the ball from side to side and up and all over helps grind a team down. They're finding their way. Surman and Smith in particularly did well passing, which was great to see. The midfield needs to sort it out.
"Our movement off the ball is… completely nonexistent. It’s agonizing. And I feel like I was saying this all last year too because, well, I was. At this point it feels intentional, because clearly Neville doesn’t see it as a problem."
Phil is not a good coach. This is just one manifestation of that. And the fact that he refuses to acknowledge it as a problem is infuriating.
I think it's a player thing. Smart players don't like to lose the ball. If anything, it sounds like Phil is encouraging the players to be more daring. Smart players know when to attack and when to control the game, etc, and not lose it. I kinda lose it when the players seem to not care if they lose the ball. Last game was a big step in the right direction for possession, and I think it had a lot to do with some of the changes. Yes, we need work in the final third, but as I've mentioned in other threads, I'd like to see Ayala more involved there because he values the ball, has the skill and the impetus to make goal creating chances.
"Smart players don't like to lose the ball."
I'm with you there, but the original statement was "Our movement off the ball is… completely nonexistent." And that's coaching, and that's what I was responding to.
"If anything, it sounds like Phil is encouraging the players to be more daring."
Which would be great, again, if their off-the-ball movement matched that. But when they don't have the ball - whether on offense or whether it's recovering after a lost ball - their movement to regain shape or whatever is awful. Not daring, not risk-taking, just...awful.
As you say, the possession was a bit better this last game, but overall, it's been a problem all throughout Neville's time, and one game is a very small green shoot in a very large brown field. I hope it grows.
I guess my fear, unlike yours, is that grinding out 1-0 results like that isn't actually sustainable. It may work against teams like Austin, but I'm not sure it'll work against actual good attacking teams. Jonathan Rodriguez can't come back soon enough. Mora is great and da Costa can definitely help, but this team needs a guy who can destroy the back of the net.
Also, if three at the back worked pretty well without Kamal Miller, what happens when Kamal Miller is eligible again? Does Phil recognize what works and keep going with it, or does he revert back to what he thinks will work? I guess we'll find out. The defense does look a bit better than last season so far, so hopefully that continues to improve, with or without Kamal.
I was a lot more comfortable with Pantemis in goal, for sure, the play through and from the back looked a lot more fluid with him than it does with Crepeau.
Yep. I’m also cautious that da Costa avoids using his left foot. By my eyes, he too often forced a play onto his right foot and missed opportunities.
Kelsey I think will be very good, but he seems the kind of pure striker who needs service. And he didn’t get any against Austin.
Austin is a bad team we got lucky to beat. Vancouver is a good team who destroyed us. I suspect that portends the year unless JRod and Zup come back soon in good shape.
Re: Crépeau and Miller- is it safe to say we have not seen them at their best yet? And, if so, can they sustain those performances because we haven’t seen it yet 🤷♀️
I was super, super hyped when the Timbers picked up Crepeau before last season. It felt like a steal. But he has, for whatever reason, not been even remotely the keeper he was pre-injury, at least at club level. He's still good for Canada, but with the Timbers, he's just had way too many moments of indecision, too many flat-out mistakes, and just in general him not being what I thought he could be, that it's just a shame that I don't think we'll get that Crepeau back.
Same with Kamal - but honestly, I put a lot of the blame there on Phil. Kamal is not really a guy that is suited to play a high defensive line; he's not fast, he's not agile. He can be a very good defender, I think, he's just not being used in a way that is anywhere near his actual skillset. So he looks actually bad, but he's more miscast here I think, which again is too bad, because I was excited to see him come here.
Thanks for the podcast guys! I enjoy the discussion (not something I can get in Idaho). Not the prettiest or most fun game but I like your point that we only had one 1-0 win last year. I don’t want a whole season of games like this but for a team that always starts slow and has numerous injuries and new players I don’t mind playing conservatively for a month or so.