Angela Miller
Registered
OH Sweetie Im 51 years old I know all about the TV show ! But how dose it relate to Eirik??
So who starts at GK in the playoffs?
- Thread starter FredMertz
- Start date
Angela Miller
Registered
Of Course you be the one with the Poku jersey??
My thanks to danger who took this photo of the celebration from Jack's goal. I'm the guy with the Poku jersey with hands up in front.
He's very tall and long limbed.
#MyDemographic
So what part of Logic are you referring to with decisions PV has made this year?
Playing Saunders when he's had so many deficiencies?
Benching Mix without ever playing with full-strength 1st team?
Playing Mikey next to Pirlo?
Playing Hernandez as RB?
Playing RJ as LB?
Playing White at all?
Playing old guys about 5-6 games in a row in three weeks in 90+ degree temps and getting crushed in the last game because of walking?
If there's one thing PV does well, it's make decisions that defy logic. Eirik is gonna start.
In sport, and in life, there are inevitable changes. Whatever happens in the business of the game, I will never forget the feelings I've experienced with Josh in that goal. Good, bad and ugly. This very young history of ours has been made by a small group of people and Josh is and will forever be cemented in that foundation for me.
I come at it differently. I think that there are logical explanations in real time for most/all of the above, albeit in some/most cases building in some logic for decisions based upon lack of depth as well as a reasonable amount of a new coach needing to tinker with new personnel. (However, those are 6 or 7 separate discussions not important here).
I think that it would be logical for PV to play Lurch here. It would not be surprising to learn that he has improved, matured, learned, and grown more confident on a positive trajectory throughout the season which has convinced PV to consider him late in the season as an improvement to Saunders. He gave him an opportunity in Mexico and he demonstrated his development in a live game. PV then clearly had enough collective information to decide to play Lurch in what was, by leaps and bounds, the most important 90 minutes of our season. He was up to the task, and proved to (likely) be an upgrade over Saunders in toto. Therefore, it certainly seems logical that PV would take what might seem like the extraordinary measure of making the change going forward.
In short, it makes sense to me because it makes sense.
Oh I agree with you, because that is logical. The playing Saunders and him not losing his job due to 1 match isn't logical.
Yup, for sure.
It makes sense to us because Eirik is the better keeper. However the decision to play Saunders the entire year last year, give him a raise and play him the entire year this year up until the last game only to then make a switch of keepers and play Eirik makes no sense at all.
If it took PV this long to realize that Saunders just doesn't fit then that's a big oversight on his part.
I'm just saying after everything this year to suddenly throw Eirik in there as if he was our best keeper all along and was just injured or something doesn't fit.
If Eirik had a bad game Sunday we'd all be giving him shit because he waited all year to give him playing time. To me it's just unheard of to play someone 99% of the season and make a switch with your biggest game next.
If he does start Eirik next week I want to know what happened last week that so strongly convinced him that Saunders who 'is our starter' suddenly isn't.
If it took PV this long to realize that Saunders just doesn't fit then that's a big oversight on his part.
I'm just saying after everything this year to suddenly throw Eirik in there as if he was our best keeper all along and was just injured or something doesn't fit.
If Eirik had a bad game Sunday we'd all be giving him shit because he waited all year to give him playing time. To me it's just unheard of to play someone 99% of the season and make a switch with your biggest game next.
If he does start Eirik next week I want to know what happened last week that so strongly convinced him that Saunders who 'is our starter' suddenly isn't.
Lurch made every save he was supposed to make and then some that saunders couldn't have made. I stand by my opinion that the lone goal was not able to be saved even if we had DeGea
Matt Doyle on the MLS Cup Playoff field. His comments on NYCFC...
Why they'll win: Because in addition to the guys mentioned above, they've got David Villa, and Jack Harrison, and Khiry Shelton, and Steven Mendoza, and Ronald Matarrita, and RJ Allen, and all of them love to attack.
Why they'll lose: They're the worst team in the league defending set pieces, they just had to make a switch in goal, and like the Red Bulls, their risk/reward wagers can tend towards catastrophic errors.
http://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2016/10/25/armchair-analyst-ranking-audi-2016-mls-cup-playoffs-field
Why they'll win: Because in addition to the guys mentioned above, they've got David Villa, and Jack Harrison, and Khiry Shelton, and Steven Mendoza, and Ronald Matarrita, and RJ Allen, and all of them love to attack.
Why they'll lose: They're the worst team in the league defending set pieces, they just had to make a switch in goal, and like the Red Bulls, their risk/reward wagers can tend towards catastrophic errors.
http://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2016/10/25/armchair-analyst-ranking-audi-2016-mls-cup-playoffs-field
Is he being sarcastic that we "just" had to make a switch as in there was no reason to play Lurch, or is he agreeing that a switch was necessary because we're so bad at set pieces?
Vieira said he started because of the hard work he's put in week after week and because he promised him a start. Take that as you will.
I will admit that if Lurch doesn't start our playoff game, I will agree that it was a bizarre move to play him last game in such a crucial spot. That's why I think a Lurch start is the favorite.
Not to beat a dead horse, but if Lurch does start, I think it would be more about Lurch's trajectory of working hard and improving, not poor judgment by PV up until this point (many may disagree with the latter).
It's not apples to apples, but there are countless examples of hockey teams replacing a starting (even franchise) GK for the playoffs after a back-up made a late-season surge/impression, and, more examples of teams replacing a starting GK during the playoffs.
This would be a huge move (maybe gamble) by PV, but I see the logic. This is coming from a guy (me) who thinks that Saunders is not nearly as bad as others think when compared to the MLS GK mean.
Last edited:
"Just" as in "recently". It's a list of three reasons why we'll lose, not a weird run-on sentence.
Saunders is total risk/reward. He might stand on his head and make several great saves, or he might turn the ball over, or misjudge a cross and gift the opposition a goal. From the little that we have seen of Lurch, he is more of an even keel - doesn't have the extreme highs and lows.
Point being, PV can roll the dice in the first game and if Calamity Josh screws up the joint, then he can easily go to Lurch for game 2 no problem. Or he can keep rolling with Saunders if he does well.
I don't think it was bizarre to play Lurch in the last game - it wasn't a "must-win" game (i.e. lose and they are still in the playoffs with a home game) - and Sunday was a home game which gave him favorable conditions for his first start - i.e. why they didn't play him vs DCU.
From what we have seen so far, if Lurch isn't the starter next year, then we all need to question PV. Because if this year was about coaching up Eirik, then he has succeeded by giving him game experience and getting him ready for his system, in a low pressure environment. I trust PV when it comes to developing young players.
Point being, PV can roll the dice in the first game and if Calamity Josh screws up the joint, then he can easily go to Lurch for game 2 no problem. Or he can keep rolling with Saunders if he does well.
I don't think it was bizarre to play Lurch in the last game - it wasn't a "must-win" game (i.e. lose and they are still in the playoffs with a home game) - and Sunday was a home game which gave him favorable conditions for his first start - i.e. why they didn't play him vs DCU.
From what we have seen so far, if Lurch isn't the starter next year, then we all need to question PV. Because if this year was about coaching up Eirik, then he has succeeded by giving him game experience and getting him ready for his system, in a low pressure environment. I trust PV when it comes to developing young players.
The whole "makes no sense" argument is predicated on a static view of both players. I.e., Josh has always been worse and EJ has always been better (or vice versa) so the switch now makes no sense.
But they aren't static. Lurch is young and, one would assume, improving. Either player could have a big confidence swelling or diminishing event.
There is a perfectly logical case to be made for giving Lurch the lone start or for starting him the rest of the way. You may not like it, but it does not defy logic.
But they aren't static. Lurch is young and, one would assume, improving. Either player could have a big confidence swelling or diminishing event.
There is a perfectly logical case to be made for giving Lurch the lone start or for starting him the rest of the way. You may not like it, but it does not defy logic.
I think this is true of so many of the things we debate on personnel, lineup changes, tactics, roster decisions, etc. Like everyone, I have opinions on every decision the team makes.
However, when we are watching from the outside and trying to decide what is "right", we can construct a narrative for both sides of most any debate because we are basing it on something like 25% actual information (and even that is subject to interpretation and many of us often disagree and interpret differently what we see on the field) and 75% filling in the grey space for what we don't know. For that 75%, we could all come up with a whole variety of explanations that sound credible, and which of them one assumes to be true often significantly tilts the conclusion.
I guess that is why, even when I get frustrated when PV keeps running Hernandez/White out at RB and playing Allen on the left, completely cuts Mix out of the team, etc., I do give him a lot of deference because he is presumably better at interpreting the 25% of stuff that I think I know, and inevitably has as more complete picture of the 75%.
But, I'll still keep coming here, making videos, etc. complaining about some of the decisions because its fun.
Similar threads
