Arsenal interested in Hazard

Better sign him fast. Pretty soon he will be too old....

QUOTE(#2):

Originally posted 09:36 AM ET  01.23 by Crosscountrycpjon

Better sign him fast. Pretty soon he will be too old....

He's only 21 and was voted twice best young talent in the french permier league. Arsenal isn't the only team who are keen to sign him.

Zidane himself has recommended Hasard at Real Madrid

QUOTE(#6):

Originally posted 02:43 PM ET  01.23 by Mr. Sonic

Zidane himself has recommended Hasard at Real Madrid

I fail to see how that means anything. Zidane has recommended that Real Madrid move for everyone under the age of 25 playing in France at this point and I remember any of his proposed moves happening.

No new post for today?

Bummer.

Well, Bill Archer and the guys talked about why the US should stick to a 4-4-2 after this weekend's friendly with Chile.

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/blog.php?b=10833

14 spam in a row...record?

QUOTE:

Originally posted by

spam spam I love spam

What the hell did you do??

QUOTE(#23):

Originally posted 08:58 AM ET  01.24 by D Richey

No new post for today?Bummer.Well, Bill Archer and the guys talked about why the US should stick to a 4-4-2 after this weekend's friendly with Chile.http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/blog.php?b=10833

I think any formation period is better than the glob i saw.

QUOTE(#23):

Originally posted 08:58 AM ET  01.24 by D Richey

No new post for today?Bummer.Well, Bill Archer and the guys talked about why the US should stick to a 4-4-2 after this weekend's friendly with Chile.http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/blog.php?b=10833

Until we have a world beater up front, we should never go solo up front. a 4-2-3-1 would only work with Duece in the CAM/2nd striker role and for all that you might as well just do a 4-4-2

QUOTE(#27):

Originally posted 09:46 AM ET  01.24 by Geezus

Until we have a world beater up front, we should never go solo up front. a 4-2-3-1 would only work with Duece in the CAM/2nd striker role and for all that you might as well just do a 4-4-2

Haha Geezus, sure you have your state correct? There is either Springfield VA or Silver Spring MD.

QUOTE(#28):

Originally posted 09:50 AM ET  01.24 by R-Dog

Haha Geezus, sure you have your state correct? There is either Springfield VA or Silver Spring MD.

I'm trying to get this mess updated. It's MD though. DC VIAD is unstoppable.

there we go.

QUOTE(#30):

Originally posted 09:51 AM ET  01.24 by Geezus

there we go.

Thanks, I am stickler for cartopraphy and geography.

QUOTE(#31):

Originally posted 09:54 AM ET  01.24 by R-Dog

Thanks, I am stickler for cartopraphy and geography.

DC Metro is represented well on here!

QUOTE(#23):

Originally posted 08:58 AM ET  01.24 by D Richey

No new post for today?Bummer.Well, Bill Archer and the guys talked about why the US should stick to a 4-4-2 after this weekend's friendly with Chile.http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/blog.php?b=10833

Reality is we don't have the fullbacks necessary to support a deviation from a 4-4-2.

QUOTE(#33):

Originally posted 10:00 AM ET  01.24 by J11: RIP

Reality is we don't have the fullbacks necessary to support a deviation from a 4-4-2.

As much as I hate it, might moving to a 3-5-2 make the most sense?

It allows us to play Holden, Bradley, and Jones together in midfield. We can use Edu as one of the centerbacks. It lets us play Donovan out wide and either Dempsey up top as a second striker or back in his usual winger role.

QUOTE(#32):

Originally posted 09:55 AM ET  01.24 by LetsPlay2

DC Metro is represented well on here!

So are the Clowns from Cow Town...

;-)

QUOTE(#34):

Originally posted 10:03 AM ET  01.24 by J11: RIP

As much as I hate it, might moving to a 3-5-2 make the most sense?It allows us to play Holden, Bradley, and Jones together in midfield. We can use Edu as one of the centerbacks. It lets us play Donovan out wide and either Dempsey up top as a second striker or back in his usual winger role.

I actually think it suits us right now. We should use a formation that plays to our strengths, and that is a midfield heavy formation. And given that our strieks suck on their won, 'd put two up top rather than having an extra guy at the back.

now, would you go 3-2-3-2? or 3-3-2-2? I like the former as it gives you more triangles for passing your way down field.

x---x
x---x---x
x---x
x---x---x
x

QUOTE(#34):

Originally posted 10:03 AM ET  01.24 by J11: RIP

As much as I hate it, might moving to a 3-5-2 make the most sense?It allows us to play Holden, Bradley, and Jones together in midfield. We can use Edu as one of the centerbacks. It lets us play Donovan out wide and either Dempsey up top as a second striker or back in his usual winger role.

The 5 mid would be

Edu--------MB-------Jones
----Holden-------LD------

MB would basically have free roam between the attack and defense.

QUOTE(#36):

Originally posted 10:06 AM ET  01.24 by RHuss FIRE!!!

So are the Clowns from Cow Town...;-)

I'm sure there would be more fire fans here if McDonalds let their employees have the interweb. But then my fries would be cold...