New formation/setup

[Mr Popodopolous]

Do we need one?

I think ours is too- well what started with versatility, has gradually over time metamorphosed into predictability.

Are Brownhill or Paterson true wingers? Must we play with wingers- and particularly those who are neither one thing or the other, even though that helps defensively?

More than whether we got January right, or whether the Cup run wrecked us- isn't there a big question mark about Plan A?

[Lrrr]

If Pisano can stay fit then with his and Bryan's ability to get up and down the pitch then I wonder if we may see the diamond again.

DM - Pack 

CM's - Brownhill and Smith 

CAM - Paterson (back in his free role)

[Davefevs]

Posted this just now.

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

My dad posed the same question to me yesterday.  I’m not sure we have been sussed out, but there is also no way you can play one style and expect it to work every week....unless you’re Man City.  Even Wolves you could argue might have been sussed out over their last 4 or 5 games, although they’ve been predominantly playing top 6(ish) sides, do bound to get a challenge.  Even Football Manager now kills your killer tactic!!

I mentioned in another post that in the main we’ve played well at home, but for me (tv, radio and highlights....and Olé’s reviews) our away form, style and results has not been good for a while....Sheffield Utd....despite winning, I thought we struggled.  Derby you might argue was a well-fought 0-0.

My issue is we can’t keep the ball away from home, we also don’t control the tempo like we do at home.  I rarely see 3 separate units at home, yet away from home we seem less of a unit.

So, i’m happy with 442, because I don’t believe our formation is rigid, it’s just a "goal-kick set-up", we know Brownhill comes in off the right, Bobby comes short, etc etc.  It works better at home though.

The problem could (just a suggestion) be that our Plan B, is so far removed from Plan A, that it becomes very difficult to move to either all game (Cardiff despite LJ’s post-match presser), or part-game (Burton with Djúric).  Sometimes it comes off (QPR with Flint).  Often it just makes us look disjointed.

So maybe we need a Plan A v2.0....a subtle move away from Plan A, but still involves us playing similarly.  Perhaps Plan A v2.0, was Pato behind Reid for that spell up to Xmas?  Maybe it should be 460, overload midfield and get the ball and keep it, taking the sting out of the home side (I say home side, because as I say above most of the disappointment has been away - we aren’t good enough to expect the odd defeat at home), until we regain our foothold.

Perhaps this will be the pre-season aim, to build on Plan A, but also develop ‘another’ properly.  Also, ensure we recruit for both too!

 

[gordie]

29 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Do we need one?

I think ours is too- well what started with versatility, has gradually over time metamorphosed into predictability.

Are Brownhill or Paterson true wingers? Must we play with wingers- and particularly those who are neither one thing or the other, even though that helps defensively?

More than whether we got January right, or whether the Cup run wrecked us- isn't there a big question mark about Plan A?

Brownhill is a central midfielder who is playing wide right because we don't have a natural wide player, he is wasted out there imho 

[Mr Popodopolous]

21 minutes ago, gordie said:

Brownhill is a central midfielder who is playing wide right because we don't have a natural wide player, he is wasted out there imho 

Would agree about Brownhill.

Wouldn't class Paterson as playing in his best position either, albeit to a lesser extent. A number 10, behind the striker... He even said as much a couple of years ago. 

[Chappers]

I think that the lack of depth in the squad doesn't help. Lately the subs bench has looked very uninspiring, Elliason has not yet delivered, Kent doesn't seem to fit, O'Neill rarely fit, Diony !!!!!!!!!!, Walsh inexperienced, Djuric just coming back from yet another injury. Doesn't give great options to change things when plan A failing.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Injuries and lack of depth 2 different issues IMO.

I also think Kent and Walsh, and maybe Eliason, but especially the first 2, could deliver more in a better setup.

@Davefevs I like the idea of the 4-6-0 type style we had for a time. The overload, the excellent possession and pressing game we had. Plan A v2.0 it was.

Where I disagree is on the current setup. To me, and particularly with the key components who are out, it can leave us inconsistent, leave us patchy and inconsistent.

Only 4 sides I think played a 4-4-2 on the weekend... Ours isn't quite orthodox, but at our level? Birmingham, Burton, Millwall and us. Possible there was a 5th, but that tells a story.

[Mr Popodopolous]

OK, a few potential alternatives.

Reid rightly undroppable so...

1) Walsh- can play attacking midfielder. If we think Paterson is in a bit of a slump, we have alternatives...Walsh behind Reid.

2) Brownhill Smith Pack

Paterson

Reid Diedhiou

3) The above midfield 3.

Kent Paterson

Reid

4-3-3 in attacking phase, 4-3-2-1 in the defensive phase. Or vice versa...

These are 3 potential stopgap solutions while we are missing Flint, Baker, Bryan, let alone  O'Dowda.

The point is, we have the players, the options... Let's utilise them, instead of umming and aahing about a below par window!

[Chappers]

Don't get the Walsh stuff, looks a very promising player, but he has only played 15 games in L2 and a handful in the Championship, so still learning. The bench has potentially good players, but not ones you expect to come on and change a game. Maybe Lois does, but not quite the way we would like!

[Lrrr]

Walsh was bought because he was available at that time, yes he may be able to compete for a first team spot, but with Pack and Smith he isn't going to get regular game time. Two of our players who can regularly play 90 mins week in week out. If we were mid table with no chance of promotion I expect Walsh would be getting a lot more minutes. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

This is one of my big criticisms of LJ.

I had high hopes that he would take the good points of GJ and improve on the weaknesses. In many ways he has...however tactically and in terms of setup, he is just too conservative, slow to change at times. Reluctant perhaps a better term, but he is at times.

I remember pointing out some weaknesses after 2nd half v Barnsley and definitely some after Birmingham away!  Seriously though, I wish he would be a bit bolder in both aspects...

[Fiale]

@Davefevs I agree with you, our 2 tactics are to dissimilar. I have no idea why if against those more physical we don't try for example to pass into space behind the defenders, and wings instead of passing to feet like now (and not the long ball stuff, but weighted passes into the channels we can get to).  Force them to defend deep, and hopefully also creating more space / gaps between their defence and midfield.  Force the large more physical teams to turn and face their goal and cut the ball back or cross to our players coming forward - use our speed / passing around the box where opposition are less likely to try and boss you off the ball creating fouls and giving free kicks. As you said a 4-6-0 with players pushing forward with no easily marked outlet but groups breaking forward and overloading parts of the pitch.

There are numerous things we could try that would match our current style more than a lofting the ball forward like we do atm as plan B - 

We also need to work on our set pieces, and stop giving our CB/Keeper possesion deep in our half seconds from any of our free kick/throw ins in the oppositions half, drives me crazy.... especially when they just then boot it upfield and lose ti anyway.

[Phileas Fogg]

I think people get too hung up about the formation ‘on paper’.

We may technically play a version of a 442 but it’s not often actually that shape - in possession and out of possession the players adopt different roles.

For example Reid is often deeper than most forwards in a 442 when we have the ball and often more advanced than Diedhiou when trying to win possession.

Brownhill often plays quite narrow, almost like an inverted winger who supports the centre midfield whereas Kent/Paterson/Eliasson/Leko have been used quite differently to that.

You often see Pack/Smith carry the ball from centre defence rather than staying in the centre of midfield.

I think our system works fairly well but I agree we do need options. Funnily enough I quite liked @tinman85‘s suggestion of a 352/532 as I feel we have the personnel (when Pisano/Baker/Wright are fit) to pull it off. I think being part of a back 3 would suit Magnússon quite well too. 

The season isn’t over yet, remember how strongly we finished after the Preston game last season which was later than this point. O’Neil, Djuric and Pisano returning is very important. Given their injuries they might actually regain peak fitness and form around the time of the playoffs...

 

[1960maaan]

It seems to me bad luck and injuries both hindered and helped our season.

It seemed to help when our best run of form and style of play came with pretty much all the forwards out. Reid goes up front with Pato in behind and we played some truly brilliant football.  But because we lacked depth and options players ran out of steam, then as other players returned it was almost like we had to re-learn how to play our original formation. Just as we started to see glimpses of a return to form more injuries and suspension. During all this we saw a return to last year, in as much as a loss of confidence saw the team shy away from the passing game that worked so well. You need a confident side to play how we were early on in the season and I think we've lost that a bit. The easiest thing to do if you lack confidence is try and hit the big man, we've tried that more lately but it ain't us. We look better, and more threatening playing to feet.

As for formations, I said elsewhere we have the players for a natural 5-3-2 and we have played with a central 3 this season. We could also play a 4-3-3 , I'd like to see Reid and Patterson either side of FD (sort of free roles) with Smith,Pack and Brownhill central MF.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Agree with @1960maaan ...though in certain circs, Djuric especially, well he can really keep the ball, it can really stick to him as a Plan B. Diedhiou too offers alternate attributes.

I like the idea of a 4-3-3 with the freeish roles either side of Diedhiou too, that would free up a lot and any ball losses by Paterson could be mopped up by a midfield 3, 3-5-2/5/3-2 (I'd even consider a 3-4-1-2) are all viable Plan B's.

@Phileas Fogg I agree our formation isn't a linear, straight line and traditional 4-4-2. Totally I do. Players returning may yet tip the balance a bit again and turn the tide- time will tell. God knows we need a bit of luck and this may be it- not luck as such, but a bit of positive momentum going our way after all the injuries and misfortune since Wolves at home. I just don't see it as our Best Plan A, and certainly don't see the merit of it being persisted with so strongly as it has been. You mention Kent, Paterson and Eliason- I see it that Paterson certainly, and  Kent perhaps could be utilised better- there are quite a few ways to go about it too, instead of playing Kent as a pure winger or Paterson in the left sided role he is.

We all know about Paterson, but Kent I see as a dynamic player who as well as a winger, can play as an attacking mid. Closer to or behind the striker as part of a front 3 I would try. We just are not getting the best out of quite a few players IMO.

[Davefevs]

8 hours ago, Fiale said:

@Davefevs I agree with you, our 2 tactics are to dissimilar. I have no idea why if against those more physical we don't try for example to pass into space behind the defenders, and wings instead of passing to feet like now (and not the long ball stuff, but weighted passes into the channels we can get to).  Force them to defend deep, and hopefully also creating more space / gaps between their defence and midfield.  Force the large more physical teams to turn and face their goal and cut the ball back or cross to our players coming forward - use our speed / passing around the box where opposition are less likely to try and boss you off the ball creating fouls and giving free kicks. As you said a 4-6-0 with players pushing forward with no easily marked outlet but groups breaking forward and overloading parts of the pitch.

There are numerous things we could try that would match our current style more than a lofting the ball forward like we do atm as plan B - 

We also need to work on our set pieces, and stop giving our CB/Keeper possesion deep in our half seconds from any of our free kick/throw ins in the oppositions half, drives me crazy.... especially when they just then boot it upfield and lose ti anyway.

I’ve posted several times this season that in some games chipping a ball down the side of the CBs behind the fullbacks (Boro at home) allowed us to get our runners in behind or at least cause them to be facing own goal of out for a throw....whilst also allow us to squeeze up behind them, allowing a more effective press should they try to play their way out. 

My favourite example of this was Kodjia v Ipswich (2-1 Flint 2) where he unselfishly ran the channels all games. It was a game where we squeezed them and even Korey had 3 very decent goal scoring chances because he was able to get forward knowing we’d pushed up as a team.