United States vs Paraguay: How Tempo, Movement and Interior Runs Broke Paraguay’s Defensive Habits

Post-Match Tactical Notes #04 — USA’s positional control, McKennie’s complete performance and Paraguay’s failed adjustment

The first half was a clear example of United States dominance.

From the opening minutes, the USA controlled both the ball and the rhythm of the match. This was not only about possession. It was about how quickly they moved the ball, how well they occupied the width, and how much movement they created between and behind Paraguay’s defensive lines.

Paraguay are a team that usually accepts long periods without the ball. In South American qualifying, their average possession was around 36%, so it was not surprising that they were comfortable defending for long stretches. Against the USA, however, their first-half possession dropped to around 28%, which showed how strongly the USA controlled the opening 45 minutes.

This was not only a reflection of Paraguay’s natural tendency to play without the ball. It also showed how effectively the USA imposed their own rhythm. Paraguay could not create a stable attacking presence, while the USA kept recovering the ball, sustaining attacks and forcing the match to be played almost entirely in Paraguay’s half.

Paraguay tried to defend with physicality, jump aggressively toward the ball and escape through direct balls into their striker. But the USA’s structure and tempo made that extremely difficult. Every time Paraguay tried to clear or play forward, the ball seemed to come back quickly. The USA’s counter-pressing and rest-defence allowed them to sustain attacks and keep the match in Paraguay’s half.

The key figure in that dominance was Weston McKennie. He connected defence and attack, attacked spaces with intelligent runs, carried the ball when needed and gave the USA both physical presence and creative unpredictability. Malik Tillman and Folarin Balogun also had major attacking influence, but McKennie was the player who best represented the USA’s complete control of the match.

Data snapshot

The numbers strongly support the eye test: the USA dominated territory, final-third access and attacking quality.

The data shows two things at the same time.

First, the USA had huge territorial dominance. They played far more passes in Paraguay’s half and final third, entered the penalty area much more often and maintained a strong level of accuracy even in advanced zones.

Second, this was not passive possession. The USA were not simply circulating the ball in front of Paraguay. They repeatedly found players between the lines and behind the defensive line, while also using dribbling to disturb Paraguay’s compact shape.

That combination passing tempo, movement and individual carrying, was the foundation of the performance.

1. USA’s build-up structure gave them control from the start

In possession, the USA built with a clear and effective structure.

The right back often moved inside or stayed deeper to create a back three with the centre backs. That gave the USA stable circulation in the first line and helped them control Paraguay’s first pressure.

Ahead of that, Dest held the width on the right, while Robinson provided width on the left. Their positioning was important because it stretched Paraguay’s defensive block horizontally. By keeping the wingers and full backs wide, the USA opened gaps between Paraguay’s defenders and midfielders.

Inside, the USA had a very mobile central unit. Pulisic often moved into midfield, joining Weston McKennie, Tyler Adams and Malik Tillman to create a fluid four man structure. This was one of the most important tactical features of the first half.

USA’s 4 man central structure

Paraguay’s defensive habit is to be aggressive toward the ball. They like to make contact, close the receiver quickly and disrupt rhythm through pressure and physicality. But against this USA midfield, that approach became risky.

Because the USA’s central players were constantly rotating, Paraguay were repeatedly forced to decide whether to jump toward the ball or protect the space behind them. When they jumped, spaces opened. When they stayed, the USA could circulate and accelerate the tempo.

This was where the USA began to take full control.

2. Movement between and behind the lines broke Paraguay’s defensive rhythm

The USA’s movement was particularly effective because it attacked Paraguay’s defensive reactions.

Whenever Paraguay stepped toward the ball, the USA looked to exploit the space behind that pressure. McKennie and Tillman repeatedly made runs beyond the midfield line or into the spaces between Paraguay’s midfield and defence.

The numbers are very clear here:

• Receptions between midfield and defensive lines: USA 159 — Paraguay 44
• Receptions behind the defensive line: USA 21 — Paraguay 4

These are huge gaps. What makes them even more significant is that Paraguay spent long periods defending in their own half. Finding this many receptions between and behind the lines against a team that defends deep is not easy.

It shows that the USA were not just dominating possession in harmless areas. They were finding access into valuable spaces.

The width from Dest and Robinson played a major role. By stretching Paraguay’s back line, they created larger gaps for interior runs. Once those spaces appeared, McKennie, Tillman and Pulisic had the freedom and timing to exploit them.

This constant movement made Paraguay uncomfortable. Their defensive aggression was no longer enough to disrupt the USA. Instead, it often created the very spaces the USA wanted to attack.

3. Passing tempo was the engine of USA’s dominance

The USA’s positional structure was important, but the speed of their ball circulation made it dangerous.

They moved the ball with high tempo and rarely allowed Paraguay to settle into comfortable defensive positions. The USA could rotate positions, exchange roles and attack different zones without losing control of the overall structure.

This is one of the reasons Paraguay struggled so much. Their defensive identity is built around intensity and direct pressure on the ball carrier. But when the ball moves quickly and the receivers are constantly changing positions, that type of defending becomes much harder.

The USA did not rely only on one pattern. They could switch play, combine inside, find wide players early, rotate through midfield or attack the spaces behind Paraguay’s line. That variety forced Paraguay to defend too many questions at once.

This was also reflected in the final-third data:

• Final-third passes: USA 197 — Paraguay 46
• Final-third passing accuracy: USA 72.1% — Paraguay 37%

Normally, against a physically aggressive team like Paraguay, you would expect the defending side to reduce the opponent’s accuracy in advanced areas. But the USA maintained a very high level of technical security in the final third.

That was one of the clearest signs of their dominance.

4. Paraguay’s direct exits could not relieve pressure

Paraguay’s main first half escape route was direct play.

They often looked to play early balls into their number nine and move forward from there. This fitted their overall approach: they did not want to build long possession sequences, and they were more interested in territory, second balls and transitions.

But the problem was that these long balls did not give them control.

The USA pressed high, but they also had good structure behind the press. When Paraguay played forward, the second ball often dropped to a USA player. It almost looked as if the ball was being pulled back toward the USA midfield.

That allowed the USA to keep attacking again and again.

The passing numbers also show the difference between the two teams’ approaches:

• USA: 598 total passes, 48 long passes
• Paraguay: 319 total passes, 59 long passes

Despite having far fewer total passes, Paraguay played more long passes than the USA. This reflects their first half approach clearly. They were much more direct, while the USA were more systematic and controlled through shorter passing sequences.

The USA did not need to force long balls. They could progress through structure, movement and tempo.

That is why their dominance felt so complete.

5. Dribbling gave the USA another way to break Paraguay

One of the most important details in the performance was that the USA did not depend only on passing combinations.

They also used dribbling to break Paraguay’s defensive structure.

The successful dribble numbers are striking:

• Successful dribbles: USA 22 — Paraguay 6

This matters because Paraguay’s defensive plan was built around contact and pressure. Against that type of defending, passing alone can sometimes become predictable. The USA added another layer by carrying the ball past pressure and forcing Paraguay’s block to shift.

Pulisic was especially important in this area. His dribbling repeatedly disturbed Paraguay’s defensive shape and forced defenders to react. Robinson also contributed with successful carries from wide areas, helping the USA destabilise Paraguay before attacking the next line.

This made the USA harder to defend. Paraguay could not simply protect passing lanes. They also had to deal with players who could beat pressure individually.

That combination of passing speed and dribbling threat was one of the reasons the USA created such a strong territorial advantage.

6. McKennie was the player who connected everything

Weston McKennie was arguably the best player on the pitch.

His performance was not defined by one action. It was defined by how many different phases of the game he influenced.

He was one of the main players receiving the ball from deeper areas and helping the USA progress into attack. He also attacked advanced spaces with well timed runs, especially when Paraguay stepped toward the ball and left gaps behind their midfield line.

But what made McKennie’s performance stand out was the combination of physicality and technical quality. He did not only run into good positions. When he received the ball, he had the quality to pass forward, carry the ball, combine with teammates and continue the attack.

He gave the USA aggression in midfield, but also creativity around the box.

This is why he felt like the player who connected defence and attack most clearly. Tyler Adams gave balance, Pulisic gave freedom and creativity, Tillman offered movement and forward threat, but McKennie connected all of those elements into one complete performance.

Even with Balogun scoring twice and Tillman having a strong second half, McKennie was the player who had the greatest overall influence on the USA’s game.

7. Balogun gave the USA a constant attacking reference

Folarin Balogun also deserves a separate mention.

His first half performance was very effective because he consistently appeared in the right attacking zones. He positioned himself well, connected with the movements around him and made good use of the balls he received.

Against a team defending deep, the striker’s role can easily become isolated. Balogun avoided that. He did not simply wait between centre backs. He contributed to the attacking rhythm and helped the USA turn territorial dominance into penalty-area threat.

His two goals naturally stand out, but his overall involvement was also important. He gave the USA a reliable reference point while the midfielders and wide players rotated around him.

That balance between a fixed attacking presence and fluid movement behind him made the USA much more difficult to defend.

8. Paraguay tried to change the match after half time

The second half brought a clear change from Paraguay.

They adjusted both their structure and their mentality. Their previous two forward shape became less fixed, and Almirón started to operate more centrally. Paraguay also moved away from simply dropping into their own half and playing long balls forward.

Instead, they tried to press higher and disrupt the USA earlier.

They also attempted to build from the back more often, rather than immediately going long as they had done in the first half. The idea was understandable. Paraguay needed to change the rhythm of the game and prevent the USA from sustaining attacks so easily.

But this created a new problem.

Playing out from the back was not Paraguay’s natural strength in this match. Because it was not their main game model, their execution lacked security. The USA took advantage of those mistakes and created several chances from Paraguay’s build-up errors.

In other words, Paraguay tried to become more proactive, but the adjustment also exposed them to the USA’s pressing and transition quality.

9. USA controlled the second half without needing full intensity

The USA also changed in the second half.

They removed Pulisic and did not play with the same constant intensity as in the first half. The tempo dropped slightly, and the USA looked more interested in controlling the match without overextending themselves.

But even at a lower gear, they still created chances.

Paraguay’s higher press did not really trouble the USA. The USA continued to pass through pressure, escape with short combinations and exploit the spaces Paraguay left behind when they tried to step forward.

This was a sign of control. The USA did not need to dominate the second half in the exact same way as the first. They could manage the rhythm, conserve energy and still punish Paraguay’s mistakes.

McKennie also adjusted his role in this phase. At times, he played more like a wide player and took on some of the responsibilities Pulisic had carried earlier. His ability to adapt again showed why he was so important to the team’s performance.

10. Tillman became the second-half accelerator

If McKennie was the player of the match overall, Malik Tillman was probably the USA’s most influential second half player.

He pressed aggressively, won balls high and managed transition moments extremely well. When Paraguay tried to build more often, Tillman’s pressing and anticipation became especially valuable.

He also continued to contribute with off ball runs and advanced receptions. His movement gave the USA a way to attack spaces even when the overall tempo was lower than in the first half.

This was important because the second half was not just about possession. It was about using Paraguay’s mistakes quickly and effectively. Tillman was one of the players who best connected ball-winning moments with forward attacks.

His performance showed another layer of the USA’s midfield quality. Even without Pulisic on the pitch, the USA still had enough movement, pressure and technical ability to create problems.

11. Final third control became meaningful progression

The USA’s dominance was not only visible in possession. It was visible in where the game was played and how often they turned territory into progression.

They recorded 349 passes in Paraguay’s half and 197 passes in the final third, while Paraguay managed only 117 and 46 respectively. More importantly, the USA completed their final-third passes at 72.1%, compared to Paraguay’s 37%.

That gap matters. The USA were not just arriving in advanced areas; they were able to keep the ball, combine and continue attacking once they got there.

The Layer-Breaking Score gives the clearest summary of that control. At half-time, the USA led 56–6 in LBS. By full-time, the gap had grown to 107–21.

The first half number is especially telling. Paraguay were not only struggling to keep the ball; they were barely threatening the USA’s defensive structure at all. The USA, on the other hand, were repeatedly breaking Paraguay’s midfield and defensive lines through rotations, interior runs, quick combinations and dribbles past pressure.

This was the difference between possession and domination. The USA did not simply have more of the ball. They used it to move Paraguay, access valuable spaces and sustain pressure almost every time the game came back to them.

Analyst takeaway

This was a complete USA performance because their dominance came from multiple sources at once.

Their back-three build-up gave them stability. Dest and Robinson stretched Paraguay’s defensive block. The mobile midfield of Pulisic, McKennie, Adams and Tillman constantly attacked the spaces between the lines. Balogun gave the attack a reliable reference point, while the team’s counter pressing made sure Paraguay’s direct clearances rarely became real attacks.

Paraguay’s defensive identity is built on aggression, contact and quick forward play after regains. But the USA made those habits difficult to apply. When Paraguay jumped to the ball, spaces opened behind them. When they cleared long, the USA recovered the second ball. When they tried to press higher after half time, they created new spaces and made build-up errors.

McKennie was the clearest symbol of the performance. He gave the USA physicality, progression, creativity and connection. Balogun finished the attacks, Tillman accelerated the second half and Pulisic helped set the first-half rhythm, but McKennie was the player who tied the game together.

The numbers confirm the scale of control: 107–21 in Layer-Breaking Score, 197–46 in final-third passes, 37–14 in penalty-area entries, and 159–44 in receptions between the midfield and defensive lines.

This was not just a possession-heavy win. It was a demonstration of how tempo, spacing, interior movement and counter-pressing can break a team whose defensive identity depends on aggression and contact.

Originally published at https://footballtacticalnotes.substack.com.