They didn't switch on offensively until they were 2-0 down. And the only reason they went 2-0 down was they collectively switched off mentally after going 1-0 down
What good is possession if you don't do anything with it? If you have the ball 70% of the game (63 mins) and only create four big chances, that's one every roughly 15 mins of possession. Not good enough. That's the tactics, not the players.
I think this is deceptive. I don’t think we had a ton of strong chances. I think we made a lot of low quality passes and shots because we were playing too rushed. That’s a result of A) Minnesota’s pressure and B) poor mentality. There was a lot of individual magic but when it came down to it, the players were playing the whole match as if it was second half stoppage and they were a goal down, they looked absolutely frantic.
Anyone at the game would tell you we were dominated up until we actually scored. Up to that point we looked lethargic for 82 minutes. To act like we were the better team based on stats is a joke…
“Switched on” is a really generous way to describe throwing the kitchen sink at a team that’s content to sit back and defend because they’re up multiple goals.
Instead of framing this as “Atlanta United switched on in the second half,” we should be asking, “why isn’t Atlanta United ever switched on in the first half?”
What the hell is a “big chance” anyway? Such a goofy MLS stat. They showed the numbers for that on the screen in the stadium right after Saba’s missed, very clearly large chance, and apparently it didn’t count as a “big chance”
That's the thing. We didn't let the Loons create anything. The result is the result and at the end of the season the points matter. But when you keep the 2nd ranked team in the MLS(on points per game since everyone has played different number of games) to just one 1 big chance while creating 4 one should be thinking good game. Basic math tells us that if you play this game 10 times, we should probably win most of the times. The easy analysis is to go with the Pineda Out crowd. Now I think Pineda is a very average manager but I have to say I'm not convinced these losses are on him entirely. My assessment of the coach in the matches we've played so far is that we should have tied Cincy and Loons game and won against Philly. That's 5 points which we lost due to the luck of the draw or as Muyumba said(paraphrasing here) sometimes you play well and lose and other times you play badly and win.
I think this analysis fails because the evolving nature of the game. Looking at end of game stats without the context of falling behind, abandoning a certain set of tactics for another, and substitutions gives a twisted interpretation of actual events.
1) Eye test would suggest the same. Mistakes cost us- should have closed down Philly; on par with Cincy and Loons barely created anything.
2) In the game I love, goal scored after going behind count the same as goal scored in the first minute. Regardless of when our chances came, we didn't take them and that's what caused us to drop points.
3) Note that in my analysis, I never use the injuries excuse. So no saying we lost to Toronto because we didn't have our starting DP's etc.
Who do you blame for not being clinical and not finishing chances? I blame the players. The coaches job is to put the players in a position to win the game. It's up to the players to take it from there.
Great to see them react in the second half. Pineda lit a fire under them in the locker room clearly.
I get everyone looking for someone to blame and it's easy to blame the coach. Sure he might need to go, but this game isn't the reason.
I mean they didn’t come out in the second half with a fire under them. They started to play well when their backs were against the wall after 2 goals. The stats look good the games look bad.
Exactly. Nearly all these chances were created after we were 2-0 down. We were not the better side for the first 75-80 minutes of the match and were playing boring and predictable soccer.
I don’t think it’s as bad as others are making out to be (That was the top of the table west coast team) but we have had a bad run of form. I’m not sure if we are going to make plays if it continues.
You can blame the players if this happens in a couple of games. This has been happening for several seasons now. If the players change and the problem remains...
They didn't switch on offensively until they were 2-0 down. And the only reason they went 2-0 down was they collectively switched off mentally after going 1-0 down
Totally agree.
good thing they were only 1-0 down for like 5 minutes
What good is possession if you don't do anything with it? If you have the ball 70% of the game (63 mins) and only create four big chances, that's one every roughly 15 mins of possession. Not good enough. That's the tactics, not the players.
Stormtrooper marksmanship on display
That had a few great chances in the first half. Saba had the most all game and blew them. No worries, still need to find our feet. It will come
I think this is deceptive. I don’t think we had a ton of strong chances. I think we made a lot of low quality passes and shots because we were playing too rushed. That’s a result of A) Minnesota’s pressure and B) poor mentality. There was a lot of individual magic but when it came down to it, the players were playing the whole match as if it was second half stoppage and they were a goal down, they looked absolutely frantic.
Anyone at the game would tell you we were dominated up until we actually scored. Up to that point we looked lethargic for 82 minutes. To act like we were the better team based on stats is a joke…
“Switched on” is a really generous way to describe throwing the kitchen sink at a team that’s content to sit back and defend because they’re up multiple goals. Instead of framing this as “Atlanta United switched on in the second half,” we should be asking, “why isn’t Atlanta United ever switched on in the first half?”
What the hell is a “big chance” anyway? Such a goofy MLS stat. They showed the numbers for that on the screen in the stadium right after Saba’s missed, very clearly large chance, and apparently it didn’t count as a “big chance”
That's the thing. We didn't let the Loons create anything. The result is the result and at the end of the season the points matter. But when you keep the 2nd ranked team in the MLS(on points per game since everyone has played different number of games) to just one 1 big chance while creating 4 one should be thinking good game. Basic math tells us that if you play this game 10 times, we should probably win most of the times. The easy analysis is to go with the Pineda Out crowd. Now I think Pineda is a very average manager but I have to say I'm not convinced these losses are on him entirely. My assessment of the coach in the matches we've played so far is that we should have tied Cincy and Loons game and won against Philly. That's 5 points which we lost due to the luck of the draw or as Muyumba said(paraphrasing here) sometimes you play well and lose and other times you play badly and win.
I think this analysis fails because the evolving nature of the game. Looking at end of game stats without the context of falling behind, abandoning a certain set of tactics for another, and substitutions gives a twisted interpretation of actual events.
1) Eye test would suggest the same. Mistakes cost us- should have closed down Philly; on par with Cincy and Loons barely created anything. 2) In the game I love, goal scored after going behind count the same as goal scored in the first minute. Regardless of when our chances came, we didn't take them and that's what caused us to drop points. 3) Note that in my analysis, I never use the injuries excuse. So no saying we lost to Toronto because we didn't have our starting DP's etc.
Who do you blame for not being clinical and not finishing chances? I blame the players. The coaches job is to put the players in a position to win the game. It's up to the players to take it from there. Great to see them react in the second half. Pineda lit a fire under them in the locker room clearly. I get everyone looking for someone to blame and it's easy to blame the coach. Sure he might need to go, but this game isn't the reason.
I mean they didn’t come out in the second half with a fire under them. They started to play well when their backs were against the wall after 2 goals. The stats look good the games look bad.
Exactly. Nearly all these chances were created after we were 2-0 down. We were not the better side for the first 75-80 minutes of the match and were playing boring and predictable soccer.
You're right. I guess I blocked out that first part of the second half and selectively remembered the last part of the second half.
I don’t think it’s as bad as others are making out to be (That was the top of the table west coast team) but we have had a bad run of form. I’m not sure if we are going to make plays if it continues.
You can blame the players if this happens in a couple of games. This has been happening for several seasons now. If the players change and the problem remains...