Jump to content
IGNORED

New man and Nagy


RedNachos

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Harry said:

Ha ha. 
I actually had no issues at the time with Pack being moved on. So there’s no bitterness. You can probably check his leaving thread on here and I agreed that the time was right and the price was good. 
So, no bitterness or sentimentality from me. 
 

I only comment on Pack when comparing him to what we’ve replaced him with (no different to how many people still say “we haven’t replaced Hartley” or “we haven’t had a good right back since x”. That doesn’t mean I think all those people say they wanna suck Hartley off. 

I had no problem with Pack leaving, but would’ve liked a replacement of a similar or better stature. In Nagy, I’ve not seen any evidence as yet that this is the case. 
He may well prove me wrong. It could indeed be a ‘settling’ issue, an ‘injury’ issue, a ‘management’ issue, a ‘system’ issue or ‘other players around him not on his wavelength’ issue. (There seem to be a number of caveats waved around for him).
Could well be any of those things. I’ve seen no evidence yet though, that he’s a top end champ player. 
I hope he comes back next season, fresh as a daisy, happy and injury free and proves me wrong. 
But I can’t see how. 

So while Nagy plays regularly for us and Hungary (so important to them he gets picked when crocked).....Pack sits on the bench and gets laughed at by Cardiff fans.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Robert the bruce said:

I like this very much indeed...

Someone to bring the ball out at last!

I was hoping that Benkovic and Moore could have each been ball carriers with Kalas alright technically but deepest of the 3.  

Benkovic is a ball carrying CB, or has attributes in this respect anyway- whether LJ mainly got the best of him is another issue!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, spudski said:

Let's be honest here...does anyone think our midfield and attacking players compliment one another?

We've got some good players, but as a team, we don't gel imo

I feel for Nagy. I think he's half decent. He has energy, he is always looking for the ball... never hides....creates angles, gives and goes and can read a game. He can lack concentration and forgets shape sometimes, when chasing down opponents, but that can be addressed.

We have some gifted players who can play football... pass, move, create angles, receive...nice movement with short passing ranges. Nagy, Massengo, Walsh, Morrell, DaSilva, Palmer, Pato all fall into that category. But we don't use them to the best of their abilities. What's the point of having players like that, only to continually be trying to play down the wings with Hunt, Weimann and Eliasson...pinging balls into the box hopefully.

The two don't mix...it's like oil and water...totally disjointed.

Those players I mentioned have a lot of energy and vision and skill. Under the right coaching and structure they could form the nucleus of a decent midfield.

Get rid of the wide play and hopeful crosses...it's dire. We just lose possession and shape when we try it.

It's no surprise we don't get in dangerous areas...because the players have worked out we lose possession and become instantly out of shape and under pressure.

I'd like us to play with 3 defenders...maybe Kala's, Moore, Baker. With Moore being the link to midfield. Then a diamond of 5 midfielders rotating and constantly moving...linked with an attacking midfielder and striker.

Playing in a similar way to when we had Reid up front. Pressing and moving and attacking through the lines through the middle.

Fed up with diagonal long balls, crosses only to keep losing possession from it.

Agree with a lot of this post spudski. Pressing, moving, attacking through and between the lines and through the middle seems to be a way to go.

How would you set us up- team, formation and the like?

Interested in it. 

@Harry Don't think injury has helped Nagy. Nor has playing him in a two, in and out the team probably also less than ideal.

Pack was a strong performer however, so too was Brownhill but the shape didn't really get the best out of them did it. Pack and Brownhill played opening day vs Leeds did they not? Midfield did great that day? 

Wonder how a hypothetical

GK,Back 4

              Pack Nagy

               Brownhill

Two wide midfielders, striker or Left and right attacking midfielders striker or 3 strikers...basic principle, base however is Pack and Nagy double pivot, Brownhill centrally in front. 

May have done well. Bit of a 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 hybrid there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lez said:

So while Nagy plays regularly for us and Hungary (so important to them he gets picked when crocked).....Pack sits on the bench and gets laughed at by Cardiff fans.

 

You do make some strange points. 
“Regular” starter Nagy vs “on the bench” Pack. 
 

Nagy starts : 15. 
Completed 90 mins : 10. 
Minutes : 1,392

 

Pack starts : 31. 
Completed 90 mins : 29. 
Minutes : 2,733

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, spudski said:

Let's be honest here...does anyone think our midfield and attacking players compliment one another?

We've got some good players, but as a team, we don't gel imo

I feel for Nagy. I think he's half decent. He has energy, he is always looking for the ball... never hides....creates angles, gives and goes and can read a game. He can lack concentration and forgets shape sometimes, when chasing down opponents, but that can be addressed.

We have some gifted players who can play football... pass, move, create angles, receive...nice movement with short passing ranges. Nagy, Massengo, Walsh, Morrell, DaSilva, Palmer, Pato all fall into that category. But we don't use them to the best of their abilities. What's the point of having players like that, only to continually be trying to play down the wings with Hunt, Weimann and Eliasson...pinging balls into the box hopefully.

The two don't mix...it's like oil and water...totally disjointed.

Those players I mentioned have a lot of energy and vision and skill. Under the right coaching and structure they could form the nucleus of a decent midfield.

Get rid of the wide play and hopeful crosses...it's dire. We just lose possession and shape when we try it.

You have to have the right players to play it, really good players too.  Goals just aren’t scored from really wide open-play crosses these days (generalisation), goals from crosses are scored from the 18 yard lines, 15-20 yards narrower.  As a team we have been better when we’ve condensed the pitch with and without the ball to within the lines of 18 yard boxes and the distances lengthways.  The halcyon months of 17/18 were with a RM Brownhill who played narrow, a LW Bryan who could drift inside onto his right foot or tuck in defensively.  Flint and Baker kept a decent line too, but it was Pato and Reid, dropping into pockets in between the lines that kept us compact laterally.

It’s almost like this happened by accident, in LJ’s blind spot because he never tried again even with a group of players not hugely dissimilar.

It's no surprise we don't get in dangerous areas...because the players have worked out we lose possession and become instantly out of shape and under pressure.

I'd like us to play with 3 defenders...maybe Kala's, Moore, Baker. With Moore being the link to midfield. Then a diamond of 5 midfielders rotating and constantly moving...linked with an attacking midfielder and striker.

The 5212/532 (whatever you wanna call it) was our most structured set up all season.

This was Derby (a) and look how we kept them away from our penalty area.  Took a wonder goal from Marriott to give them a sniff.  We were so organised that night.

image.png.4f5c812558d4448777e84c3cf4615c61.png
 

Playing in a similar way to when we had Reid up front. Pressing and moving and attacking through the lines through the middle.

Fed up with diagonal long balls, crosses only to keep losing possession from it.

Boring innit!

I like a lot of this post Spud. ?? See above ⬆️⬆️⬆️

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I was hoping that Benkovic and Moore could have each been ball carriers with Kalas alright technically but deepest of the 3.  

Benkovic is a ball carrying CB, or has attributes in this respect anyway- whether LJ mainly got the best of him is another issue!

Kalas I think is decent in the ball, but I think his best role is the non-marker in a three. I’d play Moore on one side and Benkovic / Baker / replacement on the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Davefevs said:

I like a lot of this post Spud. ??

Kalas I think is decent in the ball, but I think his best role is the non-marker in a three. I’d play Moore on one side and Benkovic / Baker / replacement on the other.

I agree, Kalas isn't a carrier. Best as central of the 3? What I mean is technically sound but conservative with it.

Marker? In that shape certainly but I seem to recall he can excel in terms of interceptions. Norwich at home last season IIRC he had the most?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mr Popodopolous said:

I agree, Kalas isn't a carrier. Best as central of the 3? What I mean is technically sound but conservative with it.

Marker? In that shape certainly but I seem to recall he can excel in terms of interceptions. Norwich at home last season IIRC he had the most?

Yeah, Kalas has a good all-round defensive game when he’s on it.  I’m thinking let the two others mark and he can be spare to help out where needed.  I think the other could go ultra-tight with Kalas’s pace covering round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I like a lot of this post Spud. ?? See above ⬆️⬆️⬆️

Kalas I think is decent in the ball, but I think his best role is the non-marker in a three. I’d play Moore on one side and Benkovic / Baker / replacement on the other.

Is that pitch diagram showing Wiemann’s movement in the first and second half? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I like a lot of this post Spud. ?? See above ⬆️⬆️⬆️

I think the conversation around wide crosses is a very good one. 
Dave - you’re a man with access to many stats. I’m interested in the way Leeds play. 
My naked eye seems to think they put a lot of crosses in, but they tend to deliver them from near to the goal line and cut them back, rather than a high ball or wide high ball in. 
I seem to have a picture in my head of the Leeds games that I watch are loaded with ‘cut-back’ crosses. The wide player gets a bit of space beyond the full back, and the defence all retreat to the 6 yard line anticipating a cross, and it’s cut back behind them all to an oncoming player to shoot. 
 

Would be nice to see if Leeds’ stats back up my eye - not sure if there are stats available which say how much they cross from the byline on a cut back and how many goals / chances they create from this. 
 

I’m certain a good proportion of their chances come from the cut back cross. It seems to me to be much more effective than the lofted cross which 99% of the time gets cleared by the CB, claimed by the GK or is overhit for a throw/goalkick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In terms of chances, you can see a real mix, but not hard to pick up pull-backs that ended up as chances....there will of course be charts showing crosses and passes from the byline.  Some will get cut out, not reach an intended target, but I don’t think anyone would suggest Leeds sling crosses in.  Everything they do is with purpose / for a reason.

AD8D91DF-7A45-496C-9FA9-53F0FF982550.jpeg

ABD1ED4D-0921-4342-8116-466003336DDA.jpeg

23983142-22AE-4B61-BB3E-F9AE84CB1481.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Harry said:

You do make some strange points. 
“Regular” starter Nagy vs “on the bench” Pack. 
 

Nagy starts : 15. 
Completed 90 mins : 10. 
Minutes : 1,392

 

Pack starts : 31. 
Completed 90 mins : 29. 
Minutes : 2,733

Wow.... you’d have thought that someone who has constantly bleated that he or she knows “more about football than anyone else on here” would have known those stats before plonking such a “Weston super” of a post on here! @Lez....perhaps not the ‘expert’ after all ... Ashton can confidently cross that name off the list of potential next managers with no fear of being proved wrong ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Wow.... you’d have thought that someone who has constantly bleated that he or she knows “more about football than anyone else on here” would have known those stats before plonking such a “Weston super” of a post on here! @Lez....perhaps not the ‘expert’ after all ... Ashton can confidently cross that name off the list of potential next managers with no fear of being proved wrong ...

I didnt think anyone needed to be told that nagy has been injured for the majority of the season. 

Clearly you've been sleepwalking since August.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Harry said:

I think the conversation around wide crosses is a very good one. 
Dave - you’re a man with access to many stats. I’m interested in the way Leeds play. 
My naked eye seems to think they put a lot of crosses in, but they tend to deliver them from near to the goal line and cut them back, rather than a high ball or wide high ball in. 
I seem to have a picture in my head of the Leeds games that I watch are loaded with ‘cut-back’ crosses. The wide player gets a bit of space beyond the full back, and the defence all retreat to the 6 yard line anticipating a cross, and it’s cut back behind them all to an oncoming player to shoot. 
 

Would be nice to see if Leeds’ stats back up my eye - not sure if there are stats available which say how much they cross from the byline on a cut back and how many goals / chances they create from this. 
 

I’m certain a good proportion of their chances come from the cut back cross. It seems to me to be much more effective than the lofted cross which 99% of the time gets cleared by the CB, claimed by the GK or is overhit for a throw/goalkick. 

Much prefer the cut-back cross...wide crosses, or longer crosses whatever- just feel inefficent for a start IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Lez said:

I didnt think anyone needed to be told that nagy has been injured for the majority of the season. 

Clearly you've been sleepwalking since August.

CA9B0D7B-C52E-4868-9272-95C0DFA7A5FE.thumb.jpeg.77f5c1e3ec81a9b3dbcbfbb325571289.jpeg

Got injured in game 4 (league game no3) and returned in game 17 (league game no16). 

He missed 12 league games for the ankle injury initially sustained at QPR (h).  Missed a couple of others with niggles.

red = start

yellow = subbed on

grey = unused sub

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Much prefer the cut-back cross...wide crosses, or longer crosses whatever- just feel inefficent for a start IMO.

Leeds cross completely different to us.

They break the lines very quickly.

A ball will be played into midfield and already a wide man will be sprinting and timing his run to receive the ball in the space in front of him.

The defence sprint back into the box with the forward, whilst the Leeds midfield hold back their run and time it to receive a cut back cross to the edge of the 18 yard box. It's difficult to defend against.

We on the other hand very rarely get to the bye line and cut back. It invariably gets lofted in from wide and outside and beyond the 18yard box. Usually into a packed box where it's easy to defend.

It's been awful to watch and tactically league 1 standard.

For all the talk of coaching during this season, we've looked very much like a team who've only just met.

It looked made up and totally reactionary rather than planned.

Poorest football I've seen for a long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, spudski said:

Leeds cross completely different to us.

They break the lines very quickly.

A ball will be played into midfield and already a wide man will be sprinting and timing his run to receive the ball in the space in front of him.

The defence sprint back into the box with the forward, whilst the Leeds midfield hold back their run and time it to receive a cut back cross to the edge of the 18 yard box. It's difficult to defend against.

We on the other hand very rarely get to the bye line and cut back. It invariably gets lofted in from wide and outside and beyond the 18yard box. Usually into a packed box where it's easy to defend.

It's been awful to watch and tactically league 1 standard.

For all the talk of coaching during this season, we've looked very much like a team who've only just met.

It looked made up and totally reactionary rather than planned.

Poorest football I've seen for a long time.

Yep.

The infamous ‘random chaos’ approach for when either you’ve run out of ideas or didn’t have any in the first place.

I think, sometime in early Winter, I concluded we ‘weren’t very good’. 

We aren’t. We’re a shambles, with a squad of players that even Pep would struggle to get to play with any fluidity or rhythm. 

This is why we need an experienced old head. Someone who can quickly suss things out and fix it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Much prefer the cut-back cross...wide crosses, or longer crosses whatever- just feel inefficent for a start IMO.

This reminds me of Albert Adomah he was good and always had you on the edge of your seat but not always the end product assist wise. 

Then we signed Brett Pitman and Adomah knew 9/10 to cut it back to him at the front post and it was a pretty deadly combination. 

Cutback crosses do as mentioned above appear to be far more effective and make a team far less predictable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, RedRock said:

Yep.

The infamous ‘random chaos’ approach for when either you’ve run out of ideas or didn’t have any in the first place.

I think, sometime in early Winter, I concluded we ‘weren’t very good’. 

We aren’t. We’re a shambles, with a squad of players that even Pep would struggle to get to play with any fluidity or rhythm. 

This is why we need an experienced old head. Someone who can quickly suss things out and fix it. 

It became broken...disjointed. There was no cohesion or understanding between defence and midfield and none between midfield and the forwards.

Everything looked reactionary rather than planned.

There were times when the movement was either nothing or un natural in footballing terms.

I'd scratch my head thinking has player X actually been asked to move into that position? Because the position was the worst that could possibly happen.

The worst for me was Weimann when he played wider right. Everything he did was in natural.

If for example Hunt had the ball wide just inside our own half with Weimann in front of him. The natural thing to do would be to come inside to create an angle. If he stayed wide to create space, no one dropped into that space to receive the ball. So Hunt could never pass the ball the him or into the space created. What happens next....it's recycled backwards. Or....he would choose to try and turn his man and expect Hunt to pass the ball over his shoulder into a space that wasn't there. Often with Hunt having two opponents in front of him making the pass impossible.

This happened with play all over the pitch. It truly was in natural.

It crossed my mind that these players were instructed to make moves...regardless of what was actually happening on the pitch. Sticking to a game plan and not defering from it regardless. As long as the player did as he was told, went into the areas requested and the stats backed it up, LJ could never moan at the player...as they had done as they were instructed and had the stats to back them up.

I noticed in a few matches where one player in particular took the game by the scruff of the neck and made natural moves that opened the game up. That player was Taylor Moore. He got loaned out ? 

We became a team of players looking to stay where they were told regardless of how the game was moving. It became obvious that's what they were doing in the end.

LJ stuck to these pre meditated game plans and hardly changed them during a match.

Players were shackled to these orders imo....and scared to not tow the party line during a game.

Palmer was a point in case. Being inventive during a game when the opening arose...was not what was planned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, spudski said:

It became broken...disjointed. There was no cohesion or understanding between defence and midfield and none between midfield and the forwards.

totally agree “no cohesion”, but....

Everything looked reactionary rather than planned.
...I think it looked “planned” as in rigid.

There were times when the movement was either nothing or un natural in footballing terms.
yes, that’s a good way of putting it.  I’ve been bleating for months that it’s like LJ had told his players that when you have the ball in position x, player y must be here, player z must be there, etc.  Rigid.  But he forgot about where the opponents need to be.  These aren’t Lg1/2 footballers who might need a bit of theory, these are players earning hundreds of thousand pounds a year, internationals, ex-Prem, etc.

I'd scratch my head thinking has player X actually been asked to move into that position? Because the position was the worst that could possibly happen.

yep, typified by a player being in a position LJ wants him in, but directly behind an opponent blocking his passing lane.

The worst for me was Weimann when he played wider right. Everything he did was in natural.

the wide players, whoever he’s played there have struggled.  In fact the only one who’s looked to play his own game is Watkins, allegedly he’s not the brightest, so perhaps couldn’t assimilate LJ’s instructions.

If for example Hunt had the ball wide just inside our own half with Weimann in front of him. The natural thing to do would be to come inside to create an angle. If he stayed wide to create space, no one dropped into that space to receive the ball. So Hunt could never pass the ball the him or into the space created. What happens next....it's recycled backwards. Or....he would choose to try and turn his man and expect Hunt to pass the ball over his shoulder into a space that wasn't there. Often with Hunt having two opponents in front of him making the pass impossible.

I flicked on the Fulham Forest game the other night.  The first Forest move I saw had Silva get the ball 15 yards inside his own half on the half turn, spinning anti-clockwise onto his right foot.  Cash the RB, runs hard 20 yards infield to receive a shorter pass....but in dragging his man inside, creates acres for Lolley outside him.  In that situation for City, both players would hug the touch line.  I do think Weimann is a bit different because a lot of his movement is “come short as a decoy to then spin in behind”, but I totally agree with what you’re saying.

It’s no wonder we are easily stifled.

The CMs suffer as a result and they can be pressed without fear of the ball being popped off around the corner and then they are out of the game.

This happened with play all over the pitch. It truly was in natural.

unnatural is the word ???

It crossed my mind that these players were instructed to make moves...regardless of what was actually happening on the pitch. Sticking to a game plan and not defering from it regardless. As long as the player did as he was told, went into the areas requested and the stats backed it up, LJ could never moan at the player...as they had done as they were instructed and had the stats to back them up.

yep, been saying this for months.

I noticed in a few matches where one player in particular took the game by the scruff of the neck and made natural moves that opened the game up. That player was Taylor Moore. He got loaned out ?

yep, let’s coach the instinct out of them.

We became a team of players looking to stay where they were told regardless of how the game was moving. It became obvious that's what they were doing in the end.

Very much like bar football.

LJ stuck to these pre meditated game plans and hardly changed them during a match.

Players were shackled to these orders imo....and scared to not tow the party line during a game.

can you imagine a player like Henriksen, who played with 100% instinct and adrenaline v Derby gradually being told to play completely different to how he’s been all his career....and then getting hauled off at h-t v Huddersfield.

Palmer was a point in case. Being inventive during a game when the opening arose...was not what was planned.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, spudski said:

It became broken...disjointed. There was no cohesion or understanding between defence and midfield and none between midfield and the forwards.

Everything looked reactionary rather than planned.

There were times when the movement was either nothing or un natural in footballing terms.

I'd scratch my head thinking has player X actually been asked to move into that position? Because the position was the worst that could possibly happen.

The worst for me was Weimann when he played wider right. Everything he did was in natural.

If for example Hunt had the ball wide just inside our own half with Weimann in front of him. The natural thing to do would be to come inside to create an angle. If he stayed wide to create space, no one dropped into that space to receive the ball. So Hunt could never pass the ball the him or into the space created. What happens next....it's recycled backwards. Or....he would choose to try and turn his man and expect Hunt to pass the ball over his shoulder into a space that wasn't there. Often with Hunt having two opponents in front of him making the pass impossible.

This happened with play all over the pitch. It truly was in natural.

It crossed my mind that these players were instructed to make moves...regardless of what was actually happening on the pitch. Sticking to a game plan and not defering from it regardless. As long as the player did as he was told, went into the areas requested and the stats backed it up, LJ could never moan at the player...as they had done as they were instructed and had the stats to back them up.

I noticed in a few matches where one player in particular took the game by the scruff of the neck and made natural moves that opened the game up. That player was Taylor Moore. He got loaned out ? 

We became a team of players looking to stay where they were told regardless of how the game was moving. It became obvious that's what they were doing in the end.

LJ stuck to these pre meditated game plans and hardly changed them during a match.

Players were shackled to these orders imo....and scared to not tow the party line during a game.

Palmer was a point in case. Being inventive during a game when the opening arose...was not what was planned.

 

I have to say I totally agree with this and all season this has been apparent. I’ve got to say with players we recruit. How is it that they start their first few games looking to have great potential or different class, then after time get steadily worse, lose confidence and play  “unnaturally”?

When Nagy first played he was taking passes, intelligent give and go’s, kept the ball moving. Thought he looked the real deal. Same as Massengo. Came on second half against QPR, broke up play and then MOVED into space into the box and got on the end of a ball with a with a diving header. They both used space to make time for themselves. They looked natural footballers. 

Trouble is all the team don’t seem to play on the same wavelength, they seem on their heels, static, little movement. They seemed to play with fear. Players should take some responsibility, but ultimately the coach seemed to repeat these patterns of performance even when changing personnel.

I think Johnson had to go. I do believe he’s got some decent football ideas but just got too complicated and confused. In any walk of life that will transmit to the workforce. No doubt the best period under his spell in charge was the first half of the 17/18 season. Consistent style, team, instruction. Mates who Man U and Man C fans said I should be proud of that team, they were great. I did feel proud of the team and Bristol (Having lived and worked across the country it was a refreshing change from the usual crap football team piss-take). I really thought that Johnson had cracked it - at least a style - and looked forward to building him on it. Okay, a system that can burn out, so sometimes we might have to compromise/be a bit flexible. But why not stick to this and recruit to build on that successful playing style. Yes we lose players, that’s life. But you can have a style and find players who suit it.

I’ve read with interest your views on here, @spudski and see that you were quite supportive of Lee Johnson, even during some of his poor results. I’d genuinely be interested in your views on his tenure and of some of the points I’ve somewhat clumsily made above, particularly how evidently decent players seem to stop playing their natural game, ie Nagy, Massengo, etc.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, ray savino said:

 

I have to say I totally agree with this and all season this has been apparent. I’ve got to say with players we recruit. How is it that they start their first few games looking to have great potential or different class, then after time get steadily worse, lose confidence and play  “unnaturally”?

When Nagy first played he was taking passes, intelligent give and go’s, kept the ball moving. Thought he looked the real deal. Same as Massengo. Came on second half against QPR, broke up play and then MOVED into space into the box and got on the end of a ball with a with a diving header. They both used space to make time for themselves. They looked natural footballers. 

Trouble is all the team don’t seem to play on the same wavelength, they seem on their heels, static, little movement. They seemed to play with fear. Players should take some responsibility, but ultimately the coach seemed to repeat these patterns of performance even when changing personnel.

I think Johnson had to go. I do believe he’s got some decent football ideas but just got too complicated and confused. In any walk of life that will transmit to the workforce. No doubt the best period under his spell in charge was the first half of the 17/18 season. Consistent style, team, instruction. Mates who Man U and Man C fans said I should be proud of that team, they were great. I did feel proud of the team and Bristol (Having lived and worked across the country it was a refreshing change from the usual crap football team piss-take). I really thought that Johnson had cracked it - at least a style - and looked forward to building him on it. Okay, a system that can burn out, so sometimes we might have to compromise/be a bit flexible. But why not stick to this and recruit to build on that successful playing style. Yes we lose players, that’s life. But you can have a style and find players who suit it.

I’ve read with interest your views on here, @spudski and see that you were quite supportive of Lee Johnson, even during some of his poor results. I’d genuinely be interested in your views on his tenure and of some of the points I’ve somewhat clumsily made above, particularly how evidently decent players seem to stop playing their natural game, ie Nagy, Massengo, etc.

 

 

I can only agree with everything you've said...100%.

We'll never know why it regressed so badly.

For me...it started with the introduction of Famara. I haven't a problem with the lad...but his introduction imo changed the way we played.

He was shoe horned into a side that played one way...and it didn't suit either him or us.

Imo...LJ tried to add some physicality in both boxes. In doing so it undermined his 'busy bee' philosophy. We were no longer busy.

He saw where we were weak, tried to shore that up, but in doing so made us less effective offensively.

It then became trial and error trying to find a way of playing busy whilst keeping in shape and organised defensively.

It never succeeded...we won sometimes, but never really convincingly. 

Our stats this season showed we were overachieving and all pointed towards a downturn which eventually happened.

We could see it with our eyes and the stats backed it up.

LJ imo...was intent on finding that magic mix of defence and offence and lost his way.

The constant referral to players not doing as they were asked, or finding players he could trust rang bells for me.

He referred often to having to get the players believe in themselves and what they were doing. It became apparent they felt shackled...the pressure mounted...you could see the players hesitant in everything they did.

Like you say...we had players come in and they looked the business, only to be shackled.

We have good players...imo, they were over coached. Sometimes on a pitch you have to take advantage of situations that arise as they happen and instinctley do what's natural to take advantage...not worry about what the coach is going to say if it goes outside the game plan.

We had some good times under LJ but his time was up. It was like watching paint dry come the end.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, spudski said:

I can only agree with everything you've said...100%.

We'll never know why it regressed so badly.

For me...it started with the introduction of Famara. I haven't a problem with the lad...but his introduction imo changed the way we played.

He was shoe horned into a side that played one way...and it didn't suit either him or us.

Imo...LJ tried to add some physicality in both boxes. In doing so it undermined his 'busy bee' philosophy. We were no longer busy.

He saw where we were weak, tried to shore that up, but in doing so made us less effective offensively.

It then became trial and error trying to find a way of playing busy whilst keeping in shape and organised defensively.

It never succeeded...we won sometimes, but never really convincingly. 

Our stats this season showed we were overachieving and all pointed towards a downturn which eventually happened.

We could see it with our eyes and the stats backed it up.

LJ imo...was intent on finding that magic mix of defence and offence and lost his way.

The constant referral to players not doing as they were asked, or finding players he could trust rang bells for me.

He referred often to having to get the players believe in themselves and what they were doing. It became apparent they felt shackled...the pressure mounted...you could see the players hesitant in everything they did.

Like you say...we had players come in and they looked the business, only to be shackled.

We have good players...imo, they were over coached. Sometimes on a pitch you have to take advantage of situations that arise as they happen and instinctley do what's natural to take advantage...not worry about what the coach is going to say if it goes outside the game plan.

We had some good times under LJ but his time was up. It was like watching paint dry come the end.

 

Spot on re:Diedhiou, most people were expecting a kodjia like striker.....what we got was a Wilbraham like CF, and as Taylor Moore said on Wednesday, you cant expect a 6'3 strong big physical striker to press the ball as well as previous players we had.

This obviously lead to us becoming more direct as he was seemingly undroppable. Whether deliberate or not that's what happened.

I think Diedhiou is a good player and playing better now than ever before in a city shirt....still think he was a bad signing though considering the impact it has had on the way we play football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, spudski said:

I can only agree with everything you've said...100%.

We'll never know why it regressed so badly.

For me...it started with the introduction of Famara. I haven't a problem with the lad...but his introduction imo changed the way we played.
some comments in @Lez post below ⬇️⬇️⬇️ The re-introduction of Diedhiou post injury in 17/18 was the big difference in my mind.

He was shoe horned into a side that played one way...and it didn't suit either him or us.

Shoe-horned - yep.  Pressure of leaving your £5.3m record signing on the bench, maybe?  Pato’s fatigue following virus possibly a reason to bring him back.  Might Woodrow have been better, the Woodrow at Burton was a pest, good technically, but never given a chance here.  Why not?  Matty Taylor kept getting niggles too.  Woodrow would’ve been a better fit than Diedhiou in that 460.

Imo...LJ tried to add some physicality in both boxes. In doing so it undermined his 'busy bee' philosophy. We were no longer busy.

Reid no longer had Pato, but there were other changes too....Pisano got injured after being rushed back, Wright had to play through injury.  Brownhill, Pack and Smith fatigue with Reid unable to trigger the press without Pato.  Bryan moving back to LB, having played LW (tucking in) as Kent, then O’Dowda failed to reach the heights of Joe.  Even Korey dropping into RB because Vyner has been loaned out.  It all went a bit wrong.

He saw where we were weak, tried to shore that up, but in doing so made us less effective offensively.

It then became trial and error trying to find a way of playing busy whilst keeping in shape and organised defensively.

It never succeeded...we won sometimes, but never really convincingly. 

Our stats this season showed we were overachieving and all pointed towards a downturn which eventually happened.

We could see it with our eyes and the stats backed it up.

LJ imo...was intent on finding that magic mix of defence and offence and lost his way.

The constant referral to players not doing as they were asked, or finding players he could trust rang bells for me.

He referred often to having to get the players believe in themselves and what they were doing. It became apparent they felt shackled...the pressure mounted...you could see the players hesitant in everything they did.

Like you say...we had players come in and they looked the business, only to be shackled.

We have good players...imo, they were over coached. Sometimes on a pitch you have to take advantage of situations that arise as they happen and instinctley do what's natural to take advantage...not worry about what the coach is going to say if it goes outside the game plan.

We had some good times under LJ but his time was up. It was like watching paint dry come the end.

 

 

19 minutes ago, Lez said:

Spot on re:Diedhiou, most people were expecting a kodjia like striker.....what we got was a Wilbraham like CF
in fairness I watched a fair bit of Diedhiou in France for SCO Angers (having been tipped off by @Shtanleyre him at Clermont).  With Kodjia having come from Angers, I took a lot of interest in the. That season.  He most definitely wasn’t a Kodjia, but he wasn’t a target man like Wilbraham either.  He was a bit like the Kevin Campbell from his Arsenal days (Campbell matured into a better all around striker at Everton).

He was mobile, liked playing off the shoulder, in that inside left channel, scored a few headers, but lots of goals having run off the shoulder.  He most certainly wasn’t a player to play back to goal.

I’ve never understood why we paid £5.3m to play a player against his natural game.  Facing a defender up, he’s actually a decent dribbler.

Those early 6-8 games saw him adjust to the pace, but I saw elements of the Angers striker in his performances even if most fans saw him struggle up against physical CBs aerially and when holding it up.  That goal v Derby (h) showed the type of goal he scored for Angers, a little curler when running with the ball.

The problem is, at 6’3, the uneducated assume “target man”.  He isn’t, he wasn’t.  I’d love to hear from LJ what the real plan / system fit for Fam was.

, and as Taylor Moore said on Wednesday, you cant expect a 6'3 strong big physical striker to press the ball as well as previous players we had.

nope.  His running off the ball is inefficient, does not have any team-press structure.

This obviously lead to us becoming more direct as he was seemingly undroppable. Whether deliberate or not that's what happened.

I think Diedhiou is a good player and playing better now than ever before in a city shirt....still think he was a bad signing though considering the impact it has had on the way we play football.

As above would love to know the plan when we signed him.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...