FC Cincinnati 1-4 New York City FC: Stanko-Curiosity & Role-Playing

Um, OK. Can we look at the other 19?

As I sat down to write this, I’d got it in my head that FC Cincinnati had a long history of scoring the first goal then gradually losing control of the game. As it happens, it’s a recent phenomenon, applicable only to their last three games. So, that’s one discarded frame (and title; I was thinking of going with, “I Got It, I Got It; I Don’t Got It”), but it does accurately describe a game (and a late phenomenon) slipping away one deflating increment at a time.

Related: I’ve fretted over the importance of FC Cincy scoring the first goal in the preview threads I post to twitter; the last few results punched a combined eight holes into that theory (i.e., one hole for each goal allowed), so let’s quietly set that one aside.

The best way I can think to explain yesterday’s 1-4 loss to New York City FC turns on a question: review the starting line-ups that FC Cincinnati and New York City FC fielded yesterday and ask yourself, which team’s player you’d take at each position on the field. At most, I’d take Andrew Gutman over Ronald Mataritta, Kendall Waston over Julian Sands (then Ben Sweat, but not over Maxime Chanot, maybe Mathieu Deplagne over Eric Miller, and one of Cincy’s midfielders (probably Victor Ulloa) over Keaton Parks, but he’s only 22 so that pick could invert in a year or two.

NYCFC picked up a couple lucky bounces – see, Valentin Castellanos’ accidental assist on Heber’s first goal and the way Mikael van der Werff’s heel didn’t do enough to thwart Heber’s cut-back on his second back-breaking goal – but better quality at nearly every position, particularly in the attack, feels like the proper narrative. Cincy posted as many shots as NYC in the end – at least a pair of good ones, too – but when the time came to strike the ball well and true, having Castellanos and Heber on one team versus Darren Mattocks and, say, Roland Lamah on the other decided the result.

It carried over outside the attack, though, and that’s where the cringing really kicks in. With the argument that stats don’t always work in soccer, I want to flag one that I believe gets at something: NYCFC played a total of 505 passes to Cincinnati’s 338. To translate numbers into visuals, NYC’s players played smarter, faster, and more effective passes for most of the game; they looked more sure-footed in their decisions on where they wanted to direct the ball than Cincinnati. And it doesn’t take a series of inch-perfect passes that splits for lines and runs off with the goalkeeper’s wife and kids: NYC played a bunch of one-touch lateral passes across midfield when the ball turned over, and that keeps shifting around the point of entry in Cincy’s defense; Cincinnati defended well for the most part (well, until things fell all the fucking way apart), but NYCFC dictated the direction of play throughout. Once that’s in place, a team just needs a player like Castellanos to, say, freeze four defenders and curl a game-opening goal around Przemyslaw Tyton.

Before wrapping up FC Cincy, I wanted to flag a couple points of interest on NYCFC. For one, it’s interesting to see how deep Maxi Moralez drops to set up the attack; the same goes for Alexandriu Mitrita (who, I have to say, disappointing overall), and those two tripped over one another from time to time. For all the praise above, they didn’t look as sharp as I’d worried over – moreover, this win over Cincinnati appears to continue the same book on their late season, i.e., the thought that they’re capable of pounding on lesser teams (e.g., Cincy, Houston, SKC), while looking something less than league-elite. To float a theory, their defense lets them get away with it – and I’d say that starts with defensive midfielder/Oh, captain, my captain, Alexander Ring, who was dutifully invisible for much of the game, but who also dropped the invisibility cloak as required to make game-saving plays at the back. They’re a solid bunch, NYCFC, but they could use a little more of the spectacular.

Ring offers up one of those damning contrasts with which this post started – i.e., would you rather have Ring on your team or the guy who plays a similar role for FC Cincy, Caleb Stanko? That’s a trick question, in some ways, because I finally saw something from Stanko yesterday that moves me to reconsider my read on him. Whether it really happened or not, I saw him covering more ground and playing a more disruptive role than in games past, and he did solid work with starting the transition defense to offense. I’d call him Cincinnati’s most effective player yesterday, but, just as important, I’d hold him up as a player who has found a clear, sensible role within Cincy’s current set-up. As he improves in that position – and here’s to hoping yesterday was progress – other pieces around him will click into place (or have a better chance of doing so), and that’s how a team improves. If gradually.

This adds to the core of players to potentially carry over into the 2020 season, aka, the next time Cincinnati fans will enjoy reasonable hope of something more than the fleeting gratification of a win here, or a less painful loss there, which is what I’d expect for the rest of this season. And that returns to where this all started – e.g., the players I’d take over the counter-parts in NYCFC’s roster. Cincinnati needs new players, without question, and, for all the pain and embarrassment that come with them, the growing pains were inevitable – at least with Cincy’s initial roster build. A year’s worth of direct comparisons, of going against MLS-level talent week in and week out, has at least revealed where the immediate positional needs are within the team.

In fewer words, consider me “Stanko-curious” with regard to which players stick around for the 2020 roster. Other players I’d include in that are the other ones named above – e.g., Deplagne, Gutman, and Waston (but for how long? Also, it was funny watching him join the attack yesterday, with those lumbering runs up the gut), and probably Ulloa. Because Cincinnati can’t turn over the whole goddamn roster (wait…can they?), I understand some other players will need to stick around – e.g., Emmanuel Ledesma serves a purpose, as does, say, Allan Cruz – and those will be harder questions to answer. To pick on Cruz again (yes, I have a problem), while he’s certainly useful (nice goal, kid (but that assist by Gutman…damn)), I don’t see him evolving into a real strong answer at his current position. An answer, sure, but it’s one of those “how much is too much” when it comes to bourbon kind of things; the only thing you know is when it’s not working (e.g., barfing), but it depends on the night and circumstances, otherwise.

I raise all those questions without reference to key factors like whether or not Cruz is a DP and, therefore, Cincinnati is stuck with him till his contract expires. But, practical limits aside, that’s the question that should hang over nearly every remaining spot on the field: does the player in question make sense for his assigned role? That’s how arrive at the slightly odd position that I’d keep Ledesma in the team before I’d hold onto Cruz. Ledesma’s skill-set better fits his assigned role within the team. Cruz is hardly hurting the team, but, watching play week in and out does nothing to convince me that he’ll ever transcend his five goals and one assist-level contribution and all that implies - i.e., too little of one thing (goals), and not enough of another (assists).

At any rate, all that was too late for this game (around the 70th minute), and too late for 2019. The game slipped away one goal at a time and for all the reason laid out above. Best case, the past year will help FC Cincy’s FO ascertain its needs with a clearer head and on at least one more level.