You do realize Hoyos did not have a save because Cincy had only 2 shots on target? And that neither goal was remotely his fault? You also didn't even gloss over the fact that Cincy had zero shots from open play in the first half and only one weak attempt from a corner that looped over goal. In fact up until about the 70th minutes, Cincy had a lot of trouble imposing themselves on the game. It was largely a battle of the middle third where Atlanta went blow-for-blow. Given the abject dumpster fire of team we were 5 short months ago playing away to a team who missed the supporters' shield by a point, I do not think this game was nearly as bleak as you make out. We still have real problems mainly up top, but for a team of mainly the same players, they certainly don't look it. Personally, I'm excited to see how much more Tata can get out of them, particularly against teams that don't have Cincy's back line.
I mostly agree. Seems like shifting goalposts from last year, though that's a low bar. We do have a large (small?) problem on set pieces. Both teams looked disjointed going forward, rusty on the ball, mostly cohesive but fairly lucky in defense, and up for the fight. Our press will work, and the transition attack will improve. It will take time, and better players won't hurt.
Concerns:
1) I vote for Pedro. Talent ID still seems mediocre at best, Tata notwithstanding. Pedro is too good of value to waste
2) defenders weren't winning their tackles or clearances to our team
3) transition passing and movement still disjointed (as J Sam showed)
4) am worried ELL and Mira just don't have it, and Saba and Miggy lost it
Still, we looked like we knew how to play soccer and had a plan. I really do appreciate that. The press looked good, with more improvement possible. We played a solid, organized first match against one of the East's top sides with 8 combined starts in midfield, including a 17 year old and an out of position cb, neither of whom looked it.
You do realize Hoyos did not have a save because Cincy had only 2 shots on target? And that neither goal was remotely his fault? You also didn't even gloss over the fact that Cincy had zero shots from open play in the first half and only one weak attempt from a corner that looped over goal. In fact up until about the 70th minutes, Cincy had a lot of trouble imposing themselves on the game. It was largely a battle of the middle third where Atlanta went blow-for-blow. Given the abject dumpster fire of team we were 5 short months ago playing away to a team who missed the supporters' shield by a point, I do not think this game was nearly as bleak as you make out. We still have real problems mainly up top, but for a team of mainly the same players, they certainly don't look it. Personally, I'm excited to see how much more Tata can get out of them, particularly against teams that don't have Cincy's back line.
I mostly agree. Seems like shifting goalposts from last year, though that's a low bar. We do have a large (small?) problem on set pieces. Both teams looked disjointed going forward, rusty on the ball, mostly cohesive but fairly lucky in defense, and up for the fight. Our press will work, and the transition attack will improve. It will take time, and better players won't hurt.
Concerns:
1) I vote for Pedro. Talent ID still seems mediocre at best, Tata notwithstanding. Pedro is too good of value to waste
2) defenders weren't winning their tackles or clearances to our team
3) transition passing and movement still disjointed (as J Sam showed)
4) am worried ELL and Mira just don't have it, and Saba and Miggy lost it
Still, we looked like we knew how to play soccer and had a plan. I really do appreciate that. The press looked good, with more improvement possible. We played a solid, organized first match against one of the East's top sides with 8 combined starts in midfield, including a 17 year old and an out of position cb, neither of whom looked it.