3-5-2.

[nickolas]

I know i know!!!!

However, i firmly believe this would suit our current squad and also enable us to get two up top. 

Ive seen enough of Taylor Moore to see him in a back 3 with Flint and Maggers. Mathews and Bryan as wingbacks with 2 of smith, GON and Reid in CM with Tomlin then able to play behind Abraham and potentially Engvall. 

I feel we'd play a 352 in a completely diffrent manner to the Cotterill gung-ho style too. 

Just feel we need two up front but we are too weak to just have two CM's in a 442. 

Yes this leaves Paterson and O'Dowda out of the team but as we saw tonight, O'Dowda aint too shabby more central as is Paterson  

nice option for LJ i reckon but would just be so nice to get two up top!

Oh, and this also ensures Little is never in the team. God awful full back!!! 

[Robin1988]

If we had another striker who was able to play every week (sorry Wilbs) this wouldn't be a bad idea. Engvall has played less than two games in English football and looked off the pace for one of them.

[shelts]

Engvall has very good movement and decent feet. I don't think LJ has got one signing wrong yet and I think the same of this lad. 

[And Its Smith]

.

[Mr Popodopolous]

3-5-2 I think we could play it now for sure. A nice plan B and a good way to have midfield 3 of Smith O'Neil and Reid/Pack. Wouldn't change much but if we do always good from a position of strength- such as now. Best maybe more of a 3-5-1-1 with Tomlin behind Tammy and in front of that midfield 3- he has the technical ability to do that.

[JoeAman08]

We could play it and I think we'll see it but more as a formation change mid game. That is why we've been recruiting versatile players. So we can change formations easier without having to make so many substitutions. Seen it the other day when Brownhill played RB. 

[Unan]

                     Fielding 

             Moore Flint Mags

                         GON 

Matthews Smithy.          Pack.    Bryan

.                           Tomlin

.                  Tammy

 

Meant to be 352 but with GON, only slightly, deeper as he can spray it about from our back 4.

[LondonBristolian]

I think it's important to have options and I think, against Cardiff (from the impression I get although I missed the game) certainly at QPR the thing that was apparent was that we need more options when teams nullify how we want to play.  In all honesty, we're sixth having primarily played 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 and that would be my default formation but I do think we need to have the ability to change where needed and I think 3 at the back is definitely something we need to become comfortabel with.

 

I also disagree on the midfield being too weak to play 4-4-2.  I think 4-4-2 isn't always the best formation these days as teams flood the midfield but I think, particularly once Smith is fit, the five centre-midfielders we have are as good as a selection as most have in the division.

[spudski]

No way has Matthews got the engine or legs to play wing back.

Even Bryan, probably our fittest player, was blowing out his arse playing that position before.

Wing backs in this league don't work on a consistent basis. It's physically too demanding. It leads to lapses in concentration and mistakes. We don't have the quality of players to play this formation on a consistent basis.

What it seems people are failing to notice, is that when we do attack, it's often more offensive than a 352.

At times...we are 343...one of the defenders is always pushing forward into midfield on a flank...and two midfielders moving up again.

 

[REDOXO]

442 352 4141 433 McIness 910 even

We adapt play to the oppositions, the conditions and the circumstances. This is one of the reasons we have the squad we have. 

With the exception of the good old 910 we are adapting pretty well when required. Our problem as of today is not taking the chances we have and not having to many scoring threats outside of Tomlin and The Messiah. However my personal thought is that is temporary and someone will get a right dicking soon

meanwhile im Golbourn fan (cue spelling nazis) and would always have him in the 16 and that in of itself gives us formation options. 

[Offside]

Interesting discussion. What we certainly seem to have now is strength in depth for most positions and LJ has proved adept at adapting systems/formations during games.

[Fat Cigar]

Tempting, but not for me. I understand your logic though.

Anyone know which Champ team uses 3-5-2? 

[LondonBristolian]

2 minutes ago, Fat Cigar said:

Tempting, but not for me. I understand your logic though.

Anyone know which Champ team uses 3-5-2? 

I know that I SHOULD know, if that helps?  

[WRERE]

The problem is we only have 3 fit CBs and 2 fit strikers. If someone from either position is injured we're pretty screwed.

8 minutes ago, Fat Cigar said:

Tempting, but not for me. I understand your logic though.

Anyone know which Champ team uses 3-5-2? 

Preston,  Burton & Wigan off the top of my head.

[pnefcok]

On 26.10.2016 at 15:46, WRERE said:

Preston,  Burton & Wigan off the top of my head.

We play it a lot away but not so much at home. Doesn't really give us enough attacking impetus for home matches. Perfect for sitting back at away games though.

[gl1]

We will do what we always do. Have one formation for the first half which ends nil nil

Then go one nil down. Make a few subs, get a goal back and then play 3-3-4 for the last few until we score then we all go home. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

3-5-2 can be quite a technical, attacking formation- depends on the personnel and the setup really. The mindset too.

[Ashtonwurzel]

Not so sure about us but it is defiantly the way England should set up.

I use it as the default system for my teams.

[Super]

That system is all about the wingbacks don't think we have any at the club good enough to play it. Certainly not fit enough!

[BCFC_Dan]

Against Barnsley we went from a 4-4-2 diamond to a 3-4-3. Tomlin doesn't move from the "Individual Brilliance Zone" so it's pointless calling him a midfielder.

The problem with the initial setup was that all 3 strikers were central and Reid and Smith were expected to offer support to the full backs and width in attack and didn't really do either. There was no width going forward and Matthews and Golbourne were overwhelmed in defence.

The switch to 3-4-3 allowed Matthews and Bryan to operate as wingers (notionally they were wing backs but they didn't do much defending) whilst Moore and Magnusson covered behind them. Smith returned to the central midfield role in which he is comfortable. This worked really well for half an hour in the second half but it's a tactic to switch to when chasing the game, not a way to set the team up.

 

At the end of the day I don't think we can accommodate two strikers plus Tomlin in the team unless the plan is all-out attack. Wilbraham can't play out wide, Abraham is wasted out there and Tomlin wants to be in the middle so there is no width. If we must have two strikers then it should be 4-4-2 with Bryan/Freeman/Patterson/O'Dowda playing out wide and Tomlin up front or on the bench. If Tomlin is to play as an attacking midfielder then we can only have one striker and he should be supported by two of the wingers.

[spudski]

Tomlin has become our new JET Imo...we have to fit a team around him, rather than fitting him into the team...if you get my drift. In saying that...we do attack in numbers, and we play in a style that can win games without being over run.

I actually appreciate we now play. City have always played with 'wingers'....its been our downfall many a time...whilst traditionally thrilling, it was often with no end product and left us weak in other areas of the park.

Playing in a more compact style, makes us a tighter unit, yet still able to score. Hence our GD and 6th place.