Exactly. To my eye, Cherondolo is one of the few US players worthy of starting for a contending champions league side. He’s a strength that we should play to, or in this case, lean on. I feel the 4-3-3 formation opens up to him by design in attack but should support him amply in defense with O’Brien (or Maestroni if he isn’t fit) as you outlined.

As for Arena, we know he loves his backs to provide some attacking spark, and this formation suits that, but I have to admit, he seems to be a pretty conservative guy. If I had to bet, I’d say he stays with the 4-4-2 but with Donovan, not Johnson upfront.

On that note, I liked what the discussion in some of the other threads I read: basically, 4-4-2 with Convey and Beasley alternating on the wings. Again, we gotta start Convey. I feel like he will be for this years team what Donovan and Beasley were in 2002.

The right side in a 4-3-3 for the US could be covered ably by Cherundolo, allowing the nominal right midfielder to play closer to a central role. This would be an ideal spot for O’Brien. Donovan would be required to provide minor cover, but Cherundolo would have to handle a huge burden. I think he’s one of our most solid players and could do the job in that formation. Do you think Arena will experiment with different formations?

With all the references to Duff, Robben, and J.Cole why don’t we take the Chelsea comparison a step further. The special one’s fall from grace was solidified against Barca when he abandoned the 4-3-3 that suited his team so well. I question whether this isn’t the right formation for the US.

Consider: Beasley/Donovan in the attack flanking McBride the way Robben/Cole do with Drogba or Crespo. Reyna in the middle of course. Convey, as was mentioned, is red hot and should start on the left, and this formation allows for him and Beasley at the same time which could give opponents fits. This still leaves the conundrum on the right, but now you have the choice of O’Brien or Maestroni. I’d rather have them playing out of position than to rely on quality minutes from Dempsey against the likes of Italy, Ghana and the Czechs.

I would love to see Beasley on the right because of his experience over Convey. Have Convey start on the left. I think either of our wingers can have a tournament similar to Damien Duff in 2002. Watch a couple of the Republic’s matches again. He lined up on both sides and constantly ran at people. Both of our wingers are capable of that.

Dempsey could play a central midfield role if needed and push Donovan further forward as a withdrawn striker, just behind McBride. Although I’d still like to see more from Dempsey. Best case scenario for me would be a fully fit O’Brien paired with Reyna in central midfield, but if O’Brien isn’t ready, I could live with a Dempsey/Reyna midfield for a more offensive look than Reyna/Mastroeni…

C. Ronaldo and Robben can play either side but they are special, special players. Unfortunately Beasley and (especially) Convey aren’t in the same class. I’d like to see Bruce try it though.

Do you think it’s true that Convey and Dempsey are battling for the same midfield spot?

As for it “never being a good idea” to play Convey or Beasely “out of position,” what is playing Dempsey or Donovan on the right or Lewis at left back other than playing them “out of position. Many wingers play both sides as long as their off-foot is servicable. C. Ronaldo, Robben, Duff, J. Cole alternate sides constantly. The US can easily field Convey (L) and Beasely (R) and have them alternate sides during the game. Wingers who can play their opposite wing and take the ball inside against fullbacks–attacking the fullbacks weaker foot–can open up plenty of attacking options.