SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums College, Pro & International Soccer Next MNT Coach

Well, to make things short, the only time B-C (boys) has instituted a 4-5-1 game plan was when the Bearcats were pretty much decided underdogs entering those matches.

I can think of Northwestern this year (a 3-2 loss at USC's practice fields) in which we ran that formation (actually our variation was more of a 5-4-1 to clog the middle against the Trojans' prolific midfield/forward attack).

I know in 2004 with a nucleus of sophomores at the Carolina Soccer Classic and just one senior and one junior in the lineup that physically we didn't match up that well with host Wando. However, the 4-5-1 in that instance kept the game within reach and unfortunately at 1-0 down with just minutes remaining we missed a back post opportunity. As it goes, the Warriors countered a wide-open field and shoved one into the back of the net to win 2-0.

Generally, Brookland-Cayce has run a 3-5-2 or traditional 4-4-2 the past 6-7 years, while on occasion implementing a 3-4-3 (2002, in particular). Personnel dictates the formations available to your squad.

But, a 4-5-1 (or its variation) does not lend an exciting brand of attacking soccer unless you have quality outside midfielders that are simply more talented than opposing midfielders and backs. Thus, the outside mids can dictate the pace of the match and support the lone forward.

My opinions of course!

You're a fan of english (and attacking) soccer so would I be correct in assuming B-C has moved to the zonal defending world and overlapping wingbacks? We made the switch from sweeper/stopper the past two years and have experienced a period of offensive growth!

Personnel is the most important factor I agree. We ran the 4-4-2 in 2005 with a flat back and flat midfield and found overlapping and through runs bountiful. We got our own share of "Total Soccer". The surplus of speedy frontrunners in 2006 had us modify things this year to a 4-3-3. Overlaps and long runs from the back have become a little more stagnant, but the results much better.

I receive happiness in knowing that Ol Jose, a manager that can have any player/team he wishes, implements a 4-3-3. But despite their results, Chelsea is not one to dominate possession-another fault of the system I assume.

I have found that playing defensive does little more than invite the other team to attack you more. When first running the 4-3-3 we found that our midfield triangle with the point up did little more than invited the midfield to go wide, but deep into our defensive third. Flipping that triangle allowed us to use a lot of high pressure and cut the opposing movement before it became too far advanced. We would give our wingers defensive responsibilities (4-5-1) when playing with a lead late. That allowed for great defensive cover without major personnel/tactical changes.

No, B-C doesn't use the zonal defending. Strictly man-to-man so someone is responsible.

...they are responsible during penetration of one's zone. Geez, I write all that and you one-line me. Killing me here...

From this week's Sports Illustrated. Great stuff on the US youth soccer system:

No team in the World Cup took fewer shots than the U.S., not even such lightweights as Trinidad and Tobago (seven) and Tunisia (eight). And the ultimate blame for that lies in a youth system that rewards order over imagination.

While the problem with U.S. basketball is the decline of fundamentals, the bugbear of American soccer is essentially the opposite. Where is the individual flair on the ball to split swarming defenses? Where is the improvisation to build attacks on the ground? The answer isn't complicated: It's being developed on playgrounds in Brazil and Ghana, not on the regimented fields of American youth soccer. "There's probably too much coaching [in the U.S.]," says U.S. captain Claudio Reyna, who announced his international retirement last week. "When I grew up, I just went to the park and we put up two cans for goals and played seven-on-seven for hours. Now when I see youth soccer, I see too much organization, too many kids standing around in line waiting to shoot."

It's worth noting that the U.S.'s best player in Germany, 23-year-old midfielder Clint Dempsey, spent his formative years inventing moves on the dusty plains of Nacogdoches, Texas -- not sucking on orange slices in suburban youth leagues. Likewise, Reyna has kept his sons, Jack, 7, and Giovanni, 4, from joining structured soccer leagues.

"I roll the ball out and we just play," Reyna says. "They can worry about learning tactics when they're 15 or 16, but until then it's all about letting them enjoy it." With that, Reyna hugged his two boys and left the World Cup stage, taking an underachieving U.S. team with him.

"There's probably too much coaching [in the U.S.]," says U.S. captain Claudio Reyna, who announced his international retirement last week. "When I grew up, I just went to the park and we put up two cans for goals and played seven-on-seven for hours. Now when I see youth soccer, I see too much organization, too many kids standing around in line waiting to shoot."

Can I hear a big AMEN.

Kyle,
Here is an article I received in email from Soccer America as a part of their World Cup Watch update. Gives another side of the 4-5-1 issue:

Tuesday, June 27, 2006

Last beating of the U.S. dead horse

By Ridge Mahoney
in Hamburg

(This will the final installment regarding the U.S. performance in Germany, replete with references to criticisms, valid and otherwise.)

FORMATION. The 4-5-1 formation used primarily by Bruce Arena took a lot of abuse, of course, since a simplistic, knee-jerk reaction is to deride it as defensive.

Well, it ain't. With the outside players pushed up as wingers, the formation resembles a 4-3-3 used by many teams out to score goals. If the midfielders are deployed in two lines and use the middle third effectively, the formation can be solid defensively yet still spring attacks. And with the wide players piercing the flanks on either side, the opponents' defensive shape is disrupted.

The system is dependent on wide players breaching the flanks, the lone forward being mobile and tough, the attacking mid finding space to play through balls and go for goal himself, and the central mids coming forward when possible. For Chelsea, if wide midfielders Arjen Robben and Joe Cole are beating defenders and either getting to the byline to deliver crosses or knifing into the middle, they are threats to score, as are Didier Drogba up front and Frank Lampard and Michael Essien moving up from midfield. If the wide players and attacking mid are stifled, attacks bog down, as the USA quite vividly demonstrated.

Final word on the 4-5-1: the Czechs used it to tear apart the U.S., and they also played it against Ghana, which ran through them nearly at will. Arena isn't the first coach to point out that players, not systems, win games. Application supersedes formation.

Yeah..when the players continue to fail at the strategy.. you should keep that formation..and just hope something changes. Instead of making a change yourself..which would be your job as the coach.

Interesting perspective.