Compelling Soccer

In the last few days we've talked about formations in light of the loss of Charlie Davies. It began with the 4-4-2, the standard formation the US puts out. Yesterday we looked into the possibilities of the 4-5-1, since the US might be down to one competent striker. But today we do a complete 180 and look at what might happen if the US went with a 4-3-3.

4-3-3? Yeah, I know, it sounds crazy.

Yesterday we examined some of the options for the US national squad if they stuck with the 4-4-2 formation even in light of Charlie Davies injury. After all, the US was playing 4-4-2 before Davies' emergence this summer. That formation is flexible and can be used in both offensive and defensive methods. However, this US team seems to have plenty of intriguing options in the midfield while lacking that dynamic striker to go with Jozy Altidore. Right now they are facing choices that are uninspiring, unproven or could hurt the team in other spots. So if you don't have two forwards, why not play with one?

A month ago, the US looked to have solved what had long been it's longest running hole, lack of dynamic strikers. Sure in the past the US has had some decent guys and even a pretty solid target man in Brian McBride. But creativity and forward have never really been words that go together when describing US forwards. That changed with Jozy Altidore and Charlie Davies. The US finally had a pair of guys who could survive a bit without solid midfield play and create on their own. We saw that at times in qualifying.

However Davies' injury means, barring a miracle, he's out for the World Cup. That means Altidore will have to be paired with someone else up top. Who that someone is will be heavily scrutinized over the next eight months. Unfortunately, the options are not pretty.

It was the best of times.... It was the blurst of times...

-Remember all that hype when German midfielder Jermaine Jones switched FIFA allegiances to the US? He was going to right in a be the best midfielder on the squad right?