Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

IGNORED

Last chance saloon for Nagy and Massengo?


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, GrahamC said:

I do think this could be an important time for Nagy, he looked to be at the very back of the queue a week ago but with Williams & Walsh still injured, Weimann out for the season & a lot of games in a short period he may well get his chance.

Can’t get exercised by this nonsense about Massengo though, the kid is barely 19 & has already played a lot of football here.

I’m hoping we see him as part of our plans for the long term, he is much younger than loads of those we currently have out on loan in the lower leagues.

Nagy back of the queue but always picked for his country.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bassomylord said:

Should at least 1 of these 2 start on Tuesday?

If everybody was fit they would be behind Bakinson, Walsh, Williams, Pato, Brunt and COD it seems. 

Time for them to have a word with their agents perhaps, the January transfer window will soon be with us.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, chinapig said:

If everybody was fit they would be behind Bakinson, Walsh, Williams, Pato, Brunt and COD it seems. 

Time for them to have a word with their agents perhaps, the January transfer window will soon be with us.

In amazed that Nagy is behind someone like Brunt. But he is you're right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JonDolman said:

Not sure what difference they would have made to our bad defensive display today

Well, Brunt was poor so maybe in his place. But neither is going to be good at protecting our defence today against what we were up against imo

Pressure on the player in possession, that's the difference!!

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, redcard said:

Pressure on the player in possession, that's the difference!!

 

About to say exactly the same. Some great passes from Norwich, but so much time to make them.

I don't know if its only me, but I think a midfield three of Bakinson, Nagy and Massengo would have been so much better today than what we saw.

  • Like 4
  • Flames 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, italian dave said:

About to say exactly the same. Some great passes from Norwich, but so much time to make them.

I don't know if its only me, but I think a midfield three of Bakinson, Nagy and Massengo would have been so much better today than what we saw.

Might’ve been a bit of a duller game, but I don’t think we get opened up again and again.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Might’ve been a bit of a duller game, but I don’t think we get opened up again and again.

If we had an amazing triplet of centre backs for this level or in fact a very tight back 5 you could see why he might gamble with 3 forward thinking midfield players in midfield

To do it whilst trying to bed in or develop an inexperienced two of the three centre backs, who have already shown they will make mistakes and cost goals is a double gamble and very ..... brave reckless brave naive

 

i would be interested in his explanation / thoughts on it 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sheltons Army said:

If we had an amazing triplet of centre backs for this level or in fact a very tight back 5 you could see why he might gamble with 3 forward thinking midfield players in midfield

To do it whilst trying to bed in or develop an inexperienced two of the three centre backs, who have already shown they will make mistakes and cost goals is a double gamble and very ..... brave reckless brave naive

 

i would be interested in his explanation / thoughts on it 

I think that is a very good / fair point.

Ive been saying all season that I didn’t think Weimann was the answer long-term....a sticking plaster, and I’ve been keen for us to player a different “blend” of three.  Could see him and Pato taking one place on a regular basis but no both.  It’s hurt us in the last few games.  Although O’Dowda played well today and decently on Wednesday, we lost both games.  That’s not saying he’s the reason, but possibly that if Dean wanted O’Dowda to replace Weimann’s energy (I see the logic), perhaps he needed to question himself whether Paterson was the right man in there with him?  I don’t know.  Just throwing out questions that I’d be thinking of when putting an eleven together.  You can’t always go like for like.  Sometimes balances get upset.

You are right, you might get away with it if it were Mawson / Kalas / Baker...in which case I hope this is the “take-away” from today and the previous couple.

All sides at this level are capable if you give them encouragement.  Maybe because I was a defender I think that sometimes you have to be prepared to just stifle the opposition, make them get bored....as they wane, you gain control.  Swansea I thought we had good control for decent periods from 25 minutes onwards.  We don’t do that enough.

I’d take a dull 0-0 on Tuesday....and Friday....although think we need to win one to quieten the “noise”.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Might’ve been a bit of a duller game, but I don’t think we get opened up again and again.

It's almost beginning to remind me a little of Cotterill when we got promoted. It was the same thing there where each game felt like it could or should end about 5 - 5, but somehow we were often coming off worse and lamenting missed chances.

I think perhaps it looks good and feels like harsh luck in the short term, but it's not a sustainable way to set yourself up or play through a season in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

It's almost beginning to remind me a little of Cotterill when we got promoted. It was the same thing there where each game felt like it could or should end about 5 - 5, but somehow we were often coming off worse and lamenting missed chances.

I think perhaps it looks good and feels like harsh luck in the short term, but it's not a sustainable way to set yourself up or play through a season in my opinion.

I agree....give me a dull 0-0 or 1-0....you’re always in a game at 0-0.  2-0 down inside 13 mins is no way to build results.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

To me we just don't move the ball quick enough have enough bodies moving forward into good spaces when we have a chance to break.

Norwich looked a good example of what were not. Our play looks so laboured in comparison.

Just don't think we have players with the drive or technique to play the way Holden wants. 

Add that to the injuries, young defence that are making expected mistakes and a midfield without any bite, midtable finish would be a result.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

If we had an amazing triplet of centre backs for this level or in fact a very tight back 5 you could see why he might gamble with 3 forward thinking midfield players in midfield

To do it whilst trying to bed in or develop an inexperienced two of the three centre backs, who have already shown they will make mistakes and cost goals is a double gamble and very ..... brave reckless brave naive

 

i would be interested in his explanation / thoughts on it 

100%. I was thinking earlier that this tactic might work if a/ the young centre backs had more defensive minded midfielders in front of them, or b/ the attack-minded midfielders had experienced defenders behind them...

But rookie defenders being protected by a '6' and two '8's, whose natural positions are an '8' (Bakinson) and two '10's (Paterson/Weimann - not sure what O'Dowda actually is! A winger?!)

It makes no sense to me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stephenkibby. said:

To me we just don't move the ball quick enough have enough bodies moving forward into good spaces when we have a chance to break.

Norwich looked a good example of what were not. Our play looks so laboured in comparison.

Just don't think we have players with the drive or technique to play the way Holden wants. 

Add that to the injuries, young defence that are making expected mistakes and a midfield without any bite, midtable finish would be a result.

Just to throw a tiny bit of balance in (But my overriding thoughts are as in my previous posts on this thread )

I thought for 35-40 mins at Bournemouth we saw the benefits of the attacking midfielders in that they did just that and we passed the ball well and had good movement and forward runs from Pato and COD , and even Bakinson , and broke at Bournemouth impressively on transition.

But even in those 35 mins our frailties in the other direction also showed , and although we were the better side IMHO for that period , Bournemouth looked dangerous on each turnover of possession too.

if you want the 5 of the front two and midfield three to be very forward orientated then you absolutely need the other 5 to provide a secure base / platform to do that

A Flat back , positionally disciplined back 5 ?  Nah , don’t think so

If he wants that forward thinking five , personally I’d look at 4-1-3-2 With a disciplined holder in front of a disciplined positionally back four , forget the full backs getting forward and allowing the 3 and 2 a fair degree of forward thinking freedom

I don’t think he will but Dean sure has some thoughts to have , and decisions to make , but whatever system you go for or stick with , you need the right squad of players and he and the coaches need to understand the system and it’s intricacies inside out , and importantly be able to coach it well.

In his initial interviews after his appointment he made the point several times that he wanted us to be aggressive and on the front foot and look to go for wins.

Thats a great philosophy but I hope he doesn’t feel hamstrung by those statements and obliged to pursue that plan at all costs or at all times

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Sheltons Army
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sheltons Army said:

Just to throw a tiny bit of balance in (But my overriding thoughts are as in my previous posts on this thread )

I thought for 35-40 mins at Bournemouth we saw the benefits of the attacking midfielders in that they did just that and we passed the ball well and had good movement and forward runs from Pato and COD , and even Bakinson , and broke at Bournemouth impressively on transition.

But even in those 35 mins our frailties in the other direction also showed , and although we were the better side IMHO for that period , Bournemouth looked dangerous on each turnover of possession too.

if you want the 5 of the front two and midfield three to be very forward orientated then you absolutely need the other 5 to provide a secure base / platform to do that

A Flat back , positionally disciplined back 5 ?  Nah , don’t think so

If he wants that forward thinking five , personally I’d look at 4-1-3-2 With a disciplined holder in front of a disciplined positionally back four , forget the full backs getting forward and allowing the 3 and 2 a fair degree of forward thinking freedom

I don’t think he will but Dean sure has some thoughts to have , and decisions to make , but whatever system you go for or stick with , you need the right squad of players and he and the coaches need to understand the system and it’s intricacies inside out , and importantly be able to coach it well.

In his initial interviews after his appointment he made the point several times that he wanted us to be aggressive and on the front foot and look to go for wins.

Thats a great philosophy but I hope he doesn’t feel hamstrung by those statements and obliged to pursue that plan at all costs or at all times

 

 

 

 

 

 

Good post 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻.

Aaaarrrgggghhhhh, you know me too well to know I hate getting sucked into formation / system conversations, but I wholeheartedly agree with the concept of some players always “staying at home” and leave the others to do the attacking.

We can all go back to 17/18 where we played 4 CBs.  Occasionally Wright or Magnússon might get forward but never both, and usually with someone else sitting.

It reminded me of Liverpool under Houllier.  Back 4 of Markus Babbel (not Ryan Babel), Sami Hyypia, Stephane Henchoz and Jamie Carragher.  4 CBs, but 4 excellent defenders primarily.  Then let the front 6 do the attacking.  Babbel sometimes joined in but the others didn’t.

Back to City, Pack could be more attack minded than in 18/19 because our defence was solid (in that 3 month spell - not all season admittedly).  He set the attacking depth and we squeezed some teams back that they couldn’t get out and we win games on pressured possession in the final 40 yards of the pitch.

Now I don’t mind whether your attacking 6 are 4 Midfielders and 2 attackers, or 2 fullbacks, 2 wider midfielders and 2 attackers or any other combination....but you have a solid base, and a disciplined base at that.

In your 4132 (something I was in favour of pre-season before we started recruitment and seeing 352 in friendlies) I have no problem if it’s one full-back added to your front 5 to make it a 6.  But the other fullback has to stay home depending on which side of the pitch the ball is on.  At this current moment in time a back 4 would give us a bit of flex with only 3 CBs....as well as cover for Hunt to give him a rest.

Injuries have hamstrung us....Mawson is a huge blow.  Had presence too.

Against Norwich today the 3 in your 4132 press Stieperman into deeper positions where Skipp and Rupp are and if Stiepermann tries to push on he gets picked up by the “1”, but also Norwich find it hard b harder to get balls into him.

Who would you play as the 1 and who as the 3?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/10/2020 at 15:08, Robbored said:

it’s a familiar point from me but the ‘problem’ with Nagy and Massengo is their bulk or rather lack of it.  Both are skilled footballers but to me just too lightweight. 
 

 

Paterson and Weimann are not exactly physical Though, after the run of results would be happy to see Nagy and Massengo start in the midfield  

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Good post 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻.

Aaaarrrgggghhhhh, you know me too well to know I hate getting sucked into formation / system conversations, but I wholeheartedly agree with the concept of some players always “staying at home” and leave the others to do the attacking.

We can all go back to 17/18 where we played 4 CBs.  Occasionally Wright or Magnússon might get forward but never both, and usually with someone else sitting.

It reminded me of Liverpool under Houllier.  Back 4 of Markus Babbel (not Ryan Babel), Sami Hyypia, Stephane Henchoz and Jamie Carragher.  4 CBs, but 4 excellent defenders primarily.  Then let the front 6 do the attacking.  Babbel sometimes joined in but the others didn’t.

Back to City, Pack could be more attack minded than in 18/19 because our defence was solid (in that 3 month spell - not all season admittedly).  He set the attacking depth and we squeezed some teams back that they couldn’t get out and we win games on pressured possession in the final 40 yards of the pitch.

Now I don’t mind whether your attacking 6 are 4 Midfielders and 2 attackers, or 2 fullbacks, 2 wider midfielders and 2 attackers or any other combination....but you have a solid base, and a disciplined base at that.

In your 4132 (something I was in favour of pre-season before we started recruitment and seeing 352 in friendlies) I have no problem if it’s one full-back added to your front 5 to make it a 6.  But the other fullback has to stay home depending on which side of the pitch the ball is on.  At this current moment in time a back 4 would give us a bit of flex with only 3 CBs....as well as cover for Hunt to give him a rest.

Injuries have hamstrung us....Mawson is a huge blow.  Had presence too.

Against Norwich today the 3 in your 4132 press Stieperman into deeper positions where Skipp and Rupp are and if Stiepermann tries to push on he gets picked up by the “1”, but also Norwich find it hard b harder to get balls into him.

Who would you play as the 1 and who as the 3?

At the moment Dave 

Bakinson or Brunt seem the obvious choices for the 1 , but I actually wonder whether Tommy Rowe with his discipline and understanding of the game could do a very decent job there - it’s a screening role with good communication and ability to read the game position for me 

 I guess you could throw Vyner in as a wildcard but I don’t think it would do him any favours to start messing with position for him 

 

The three , right now would include , and suit IMHO, two of  Pato and COD , Semenyo 

I say two because I’d personally still be thinking more an all rounded  midfielder as the third for balance

The third , Nagy probably , Massengo , (or Bakinson / Brunt if not used as the 1) alternatives 

 

Add a Williams , Weimann , Walsh to those options (All in the ‘three’ shake up) and I think you’ve got more players playing to strengths , and a better balance


Still have the permutations in a pair  of Martin / Wells / Semenyo / Fam up top 

I think it’s a positive system with plenty of attacking intent and suits our personnel , possibly better than the 5-3-2

A substitution , or selection can easily change it to a 4-2-3-1 , and more solidity if required in game or for a particular game , 

 

The ‘three’ is the tempter for me in this system as I think it suits  and should get the best from Pato, COD , Weimann , Bakinson if you used him there , and , from the limited I’ve seen of them Williams and Walsh


Just a few drifting thoughts really

 

Edited by Sheltons Army
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Clear to me that we need to revert to a back four.

Vyner and Moore (out of position) either side of Kalas does not work. I’d take Vyner and Kalas. Hunt and Dasilva on the outside. Build a system from that platform.

Never been convinced that a Baker is as good in a three than he is in a two. May as well adopt a back four system until we can recruit some back three specialists if that’s the way we want to go.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fast forward a month and a half and Nagy has won everyone over, what a spell of performances......he has gone from the very back of the midfield queue to surely our number 1 midfielder? First choice? 

Massengo on the other hand looks well out of favour.....I can't see him getting a look in now bar some more injuries.

Will he ever get game time with us? Not convinced.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bassomylord said:

Fast forward a month and a half and Nagy has won everyone over, what a spell of performances......he has gone from the very back of the midfield queue to surely our number 1 midfielder? First choice? 

Massengo on the other hand looks well out of favour.....I can't see him getting a look in now bar some more injuries.

Will he ever get game time with us? Not convinced.

 

Nagy has shown what he can do given the chance, no reason to believe that Massengo could not do the same. Certainly if Nagy or Bakinson not available (and with Walsh & Williams out), FAR better to give game time to Massengo than the well past it Brunt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, old_eastender said:

Nagy has shown what he can do given the chance, no reason to believe that Massengo could not do the same. Certainly if Nagy or Bakinson not available (and with Walsh & Williams out), FAR better to give game time to Massengo than the well past it Brunt.

I actually disagree. Whilst I don't rate Brunt other than his first few weeks Massengo has offered very little other than running around a lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Bassomylord said:

I actually disagree. Whilst I don't rate Brunt other than his first few weeks Massengo has offered very little other than running around a lot.

I take it you didn't see many away games before the lockdown last season then. Massengo put in several excellent performances showing great positional awareness - to cover for team mates bombing forward or to intercept opps play, rarely gave away possession playing simple accurate short passes and drew plenty of fouls to relieve pressure. Massengo's main fault for me is that he can get carried away chasing the ball and then end up out of position, but that's just a question of gaining experience. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is mental! 

Tyreeq Bakinson has just come into the squad as the latest youngster breaking in to the team. HE IS 3 YEARS OLDER THAN MASSENGO!!! He is also much younger than Walsh who has done nothing at this level and yet is being touted by many as the saviour of our midfield after a good season in league one.

Those who have already written him off should be embarrassed. Last season aged 18 as a young lad he moved away from his family to a new country. He came with champions league experience already at such a young age and is still adapting to the championship game. He must have 25+ games championship experience already and in some stages last season he was unplayable, showed true class. 

It could be 10 years before he reaches his prime, and what a player he will be! Why are we desperate to write him off already?!?!? He's already shown he is championship ready, why would we get rid of by far our most talented youth player? 1 good season next year, aged 20 and we have our next 8 figure player

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Flames 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Some people on this forum are idiots, nothing more and nothing less.........all they can see is what is right in front of them, nothing else.

Yep, it has to be binary, if someone is good then someone else must be bad.

It is a tough time for Massengo in terms of being on the bench at present & not playing.

I get that he is still only 19 but in comparison with the Towlers and Bells who will be just grateful to be there, he played 25 times last season so it is an adjustment.

If we were a side that scored a few more then I’m sure we would be looking to give him the last 10 minutes every now & then to keep him involved, perversely the only other time we could do so at present is in a game that has already gone from us.

I certainly won’t be writing him off, look at Nagy now & then read some of the posts on him.

On that note @Ivorguy fair play to you..

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...