"City's problems two years in the making" - BP

[Mr Popodopolous]

I wonder about looking back:

Pack-Nagy/Massengo double pivot.

Brownhill wide right able to tuck back in or in front. Prior to Nagy and Massengo, always thought a third man in there- ie not Paterson, O'Dowda, Palmer etc- fit Korey or failing that Walsh or Morrell- would have given us that little more and freed up Pack that little more.

Smith and his injuries- Walsh and Morrell loaned out- Pack-Massengo or Nagy, then Brownhill in front- Brownhill gave us something we have lacked since- goals from midfield.

Even in the brilliant 4-1-4-1 run in 2018/19, thought Pack was a bit restricted- part of the tactical plan of course but e.g.

Pack-Smith/Walsh/Morrell- even had he remained fit Hegeler.

O'Dowda-Brownhill-Paterson

              Weimann

Could have seen it being more fluid for a start. Double pivot can allow Pack to use a bit more of his creativity instead of being in 'the cage'. That 3 can also be more fluid than Weimann-Paterson-O'Dowda in some ways- Diedhiou has his qualities but helping to bring about fluidity not necessarily.

[Jim Davey]

11 hours ago, cityloyal473 said:

Tomorrow's EP headline: Bears defecate in woods. 

Read all about it ,Rose Kennedy owns black dress.

[Mr Popodopolous]

7 hours ago, Davefevs said:

A lot of transfers, both in and out, means a lot of agent’s palms being greased!  I wonder how much money has been spent on the “consultants” like Richard Lee, on top of agents.

The plan was 4231.....versus Leeds, QPR (and pre-season).  352 was the reaction to losing players.  Even then it didn’t last long, ever before Afobe’s injury, he went 442 v Boro (h).  Then flip-flopped several times either pre-game or half-time.  To me it looked like he was winging it, and hoping something would work.

He also said Bailey Wright was a good footballing RB!

Thought so albeit probably for longer- felt from then and probably for longer, maybe even his roll of the dice to the 4-1-4-1 in December 2018 which started with some ship steadying results into a brilliant run, felt like he was throwing a lot of mud at the wall and hoping something- anything- would stick!

I have my 4-3-3 biases let's call them but  I thought that would have been the way to go, albeit a slightly reactive approach given how Leeds had 3 genuine CMs and after the first 20 but certainly between say 20-60/70 mins, they gave us the total runaround in midfield. We had IIRC Pack and Brownhill- much the same setup was it that we ended 2018/19 with and Forshaw-Phillips-Klich...no comparison! Better and outnumbered.

Now you don't play Leeds every week, and I'd even suggest that could have worked for them in terms of a bit more stability in PL with a fully fit Forshaw- too vs better sides certainly it'd be needed, but it showed a gulf.

Off the top of my head?

              Bentley

Hunt Moore Kalas DaSilva

           Nagy-Pack

O'Dowda-Brownhill-Eliasson

                 Afobe

 Subs: Maenpaa, Pereira, Baker, Massengo, Palmer, Weimann, Diedhiou.

Just one of many combinations- Smith to return later in the season, Kalas, DaSilva, Nagy, Afobe injured would have still become a big issue- was Baker also injured for a while that year? Smith started the season injured of course. Maybe swap Weimann and O'Dowda around?

That 18 team could have had control and balance IMO. Forgotten about Szmodics- duplication of players was also a bit of a thing- Szmodics for Palmer on bench?

[mozo]

Just now, JonDolman said:

Just read the article.

I don't think this squad did lack leaders when the season kicked off.

Mawson, Brunt, Williams, Martin. Then Mariappa added. I guess they are all leader types.

I guess it depends on what a leader is

I think there's more to it that just signing an experienced pro and expecting the dynamic to be sorted. 

You need a squad that is cultivated with the right characters not just thrown together. It can take time and game time for players to assimilate and have influence.

I don't like those examples at all to be honest. A bunch of players looking for their last payday, then a good player who didn't play. Sorry!

[Finley_Smith10]

30 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Thought so albeit probably for longer- felt from then and probably for longer, maybe even his roll of the dice to the 4-1-4-1 in December 2018 which started with some ship steadying results into a brilliant run, felt like he was throwing a lot of mud at the wall and hoping something- anything- would stick!

I have my 4-3-3 biases let's call them but  I thought that would have been the way to go, albeit a slightly reactive approach given how Leeds had 3 genuine CMs and after the first 20 but certainly between say 20-60/70 mins, they gave us the total runaround in midfield. We had IIRC Pack and Brownhill- much the same setup was it that we ended 2018/19 with and Forshaw-Phillips-Klich...no comparison! Better and outnumbered.

Now you don't play Leeds every week, and I'd even suggest that could have worked for them in terms of a bit more stability in PL with a fully fit Forshaw- too vs better sides certainly it'd be needed, but it showed a gulf.

Off the top of my head?

              Bentley

Hunt Moore Kalas DaSilva

           Nagy-Pack

O'Dowda-Brownhill-Eliasson

                 Afobe

 Subs: Maenpaa, Pereira, Baker, Massengo, Palmer, Weimann, Diedhiou.

Just one of many combinations- Smith to return later in the season, Kalas, DaSilva, Nagy, Afobe injured would have still become a big issue- was Baker also injured for a while that year? Smith started the season injured of course. Maybe swap Weimann and O'Dowda around?

That 18 team could have had control and balance IMO. Forgotten about Szmodics- duplication of players was also a bit of a thing- Szmodics for Palmer on bench?

Just shows how much our team has declined. That team compared to ours now is so much stronger. Even the season before that. Recruitment recently has been an absolute joke 

[Harry]

Regarding our old friend Mr Ashton - well, I hate to say I told you so. 
 

[Harry]

Re the Pack conversation. 
Welcome to the following post I made following our first game without him. 
 

If I was able to spot their after 1 game, why did it take City 2 years!! It was quite clear that Pack was central to the way we played and was essentially a 3rd central defender, always ‘in the cage’ as it’s been delightfully put. The recruitment of Nagy and Massengo meant we had to play a different way. With the ball we’d be less methodical, without it we’d need to work harder to fill the holes that ‘runners’ leave, whereas Pack was a ‘stayer’ and would make it more difficult to play through us. 
Losing Pack meant we lost the fulcrum of the way we played with the ball as well a the extra solidity off the ball. 
I was probably one of Pack’s biggest fans on here, but even I said at the time that the deal was good and it was probably right that he went - but not without adequate replacements. We failed to bring in a midfielder who could dominate possession and we failed to bring in a midfielder who could shield the centre backs. 
Just one of those things would’ve been nice, but we failed on both counts. Appalling. 

[MC RISK77]

No real surprise in that article, and the rot has been setting in for a while. It was good to see pato/Liam Walsh and Marley Watkins enjoying themselves in slug and lettuce last night...the leaving drinks for this squad will surely be much more than those three players.

I am strangely intrigued about the season ahead for me the biggest changes need to happen off the playing field as much as on it.

[Magicseason]

13 hours ago, archie andrews said:

Not replacing pack been our biggest downfall imo.... 

And Brownhill

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Finley_Smith10 said:

Just shows how much our team has declined. That team compared to ours now is so much stronger. Even the season before that. Recruitment recently has been an absolute joke 

Tbh injuries have played a notable part in our troubles though we've got weaker too. Remember 9 subs this season with Covid etc.

Try:

                 Bentley

 Hunt Kalas Mawson DaSilva

     Williams Massengo?

  Weimann Walsh Paterson

            Wells/Martin

O'Leary, Sessegnon, Baker, Vyner, Rowe, Nagy, Semenyo, Wells/Martin, Diedhiou.

Not so bad suddenly, injuries permitting. Vyner got his versatility, Semenyo too. Case for O'Dowda and Palmer in the 20 but don't even make the bench- Mariappa would he have been signed if not for injury. Bakinson, was he fast tracked due to injury? Moore doesn't make this hypothetical 20 either, would he with a fit Mawson, Kalas, Baker and Vyner.

Wells or Martin, could depend on system or in the case of Martin, not overplaying and stalling, eventually wrecking him.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Thought so albeit probably for longer- felt from then and probably for longer, maybe even his roll of the dice to the 4-1-4-1 in December 2018 which started with some ship steadying results into a brilliant run, felt like he was throwing a lot of mud at the wall and hoping something- anything- would stick!

I have my 4-3-3 biases let's call them but  I thought that would have been the way to go, albeit a slightly reactive approach given how Leeds had 3 genuine CMs and after the first 20 but certainly between say 20-60/70 mins, they gave us the total runaround in midfield. We had IIRC Pack and Brownhill- much the same setup was it that we ended 2018/19 with and Forshaw-Phillips-Klich...no comparison! Better and outnumbered.

Now you don't play Leeds every week, and I'd even suggest that could have worked for them in terms of a bit more stability in PL with a fully fit Forshaw- too vs better sides certainly it'd be needed, but it showed a gulf.

Off the top of my head?

              Bentley

Hunt Moore Kalas DaSilva

           Nagy-Pack

O'Dowda-Brownhill-Eliasson

                 Afobe

 Subs: Maenpaa, Pereira, Baker, Massengo, Palmer, Weimann, Diedhiou.

Just one of many combinations- Smith to return later in the season, Kalas, DaSilva, Nagy, Afobe injured would have still become a big issue- was Baker also injured for a while that year? Smith started the season injured of course. Maybe swap Weimann and O'Dowda around?

That 18 team could have had control and balance IMO. Forgotten about Szmodics- duplication of players was also a bit of a thing- Szmodics for Palmer on bench?

Can’t say I’d noticed……

[Finley_Smith10]

5 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Tbh injuries have played a notable part in our troubles though we've got weaker too. Remember 9 subs this season with Covid etc.

Try:

                 Bentley

 Hunt Kalas Mawson DaSilva

     Williams Massengo?

  Weimann Walsh Paterson

            Wells/Martin

O'Leary, Sessegnon, Baker, Vyner, Rowe, Nagy, Semenyo, Wells/Martin, Diedhiou.

Not so bad suddenly, injuries permitting. Vyner got his versatility, Semenyo too. Case for O'Dowda and Palmer in the 20 but don't even make the bench- Mariappa would he have been signed if not for injury. Bakinson, was he fast tracked due to injury? Moore doesn't make this hypothetical 20 either, would he with a fit Mawson, Kalas, Baker and Vyner.

Wells or Martin, could depend on system or in the case of Martin, not overplaying and stalling  eventually wrecking him.

We defo need a Solid RB, dominant centre half aswell as a new main striker. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, Finley_Smith10 said:

We defo need a Solid RB, dominant centre half aswell as a new main striker. 

Think Kalas and Mawson could have been a very good pair tbh, but moving forward I don't disagree. Especially RB but unit might have performed better with less injuries, Hunt and Sessegnon competing with and pushing each other. Think we need 1 high calibre and one decent depth RB tbh.

Striker? One more would be good but how we deploy or setup doesn't help too.

When we sold Brownhill, Vydra as opposed to Wells, definitely would have preferred him. Maybe loan option.

[SecretSam]

11 hours ago, JonDolman said:

Just read the article.

I don't think this squad did lack leaders when the season kicked off.

Mawson, Brunt, Williams, Martin. Then Mariappa added. I guess they are all leader types.

I guess it depends on what a leader is

"Old" does not mean "Leader"

"Shouting" is not "Leadership"

A leader should be a consistently available player, who is a steadying influence and can may key tactical decisions, quickly, and communicate them to the team. 

[1960maaan]

42 minutes ago, SecretSam said:

"Old" does not mean "Leader"

"Shouting" is not "Leadership"

A leader should be a consistently available player, who is a steadying influence and can may key tactical decisions, quickly,

and communicate them to the team. 

I'd say...
True;
True;
Not sure:

The last point for me is key. We lack communicators , as a team it's hard to organise or help others if no one says anything. Leading by example is fine, but any one player can only see so much, you need people to give them a shout. We have players that work individually, how else can you explain so much open space for the first Goal Vs Millwall. Players concentrate on their own game and nothing else, it looks like my old Junior school team at times.

Being compact is one thing, but 9 players in 25 yards of space 10 yards into the opposition half is questionable .

The outcome is predictable.
With strong vocal players that surely doesn't happen. I think Pack did that to a point, we really need a few more to step up or come in just for the sake of organisation.

As I seem to end every post these day's, Pearson has a big job on.

[steviestevieneville]

11 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

I'd say...
True;
True;
Not sure:

The last point for me is key. We lack communicators , as a team it's hard to organise or help others if no one says anything. Leading by example is fine, but any one player can only see so much, you need people to give them a shout. We have players that work individually, how else can you explain so much open space for the first Goal Vs Millwall. Players concentrate on their own game and nothing else, it looks like my old Junior school team at times.

Being compact is one thing, but 9 players in 25 yards of space 10 yards into the opposition half is questionable .

The outcome is predictable.
With strong vocal players that surely doesn't happen. I think Pack did that to a point, we really need a few more to step up or come in just for the sake of organisation.

As I seem to end every post these day's, Pearson has a big job on.

As the ball goes into midfield & Han & their player fight for the ball , four of our back 5 are stood ball watching. Not one senses any danger . Like you said , no communication, no structure. They must have worked on getting hit on the counter attack 

[pongo88]

14 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

I'd say...
True;
True;
Not sure:

The last point for me is key. We lack communicators , as a team it's hard to organise or help others if no one says anything. Leading by example is fine, but any one player can only see so much, you need people to give them a shout. We have players that work individually, how else can you explain so much open space for the first Goal Vs Millwall. Players concentrate on their own game and nothing else, it looks like my old Junior school team at times.

Being compact is one thing, but 9 players in 25 yards of space 10 yards into the opposition half is questionable .

The outcome is predictable.
With strong vocal players that surely doesn't happen. I think Pack did that to a point, we really need a few more to step up or come in just for the sake of organisation.

As I seem to end every post these day's, Pearson has a big job on.

Communication is important but these  two pictures illustrate another failing. No matter how good players are technically they’ve got think and be tactically and positionally aware. They shouldn’t have to depend on others to tell them where and how to play. This sort of thing must be driving NP crazy and he has commented on players not putting into practice what they are told during training. Sometimes managers such as Neil Warnock, Sam Allardyce and Mick McCarthy go to a struggling club and quickly improve results by just making the team more organised. I’m sure NP has tried to do the same but some of the  players are just brainless and can’t follow a basic game plan. Sometimes watching City is like watching a team of primary school pupils - they roam around the pitch without any regard to positional awareness 

[Cowshed]

1 hour ago, SecretSam said:

"Old" does not mean "Leader"

"Shouting" is not "Leadership"

A leader should be a consistently available player, who is a steadying influence and can may key tactical decisions, quickly, and communicate them to the team. 

Most communication is non verbal. Shouting and lots of shouters, and bellicose Leaders tumbthumping is not leadership. Put two or three of those on the pitch? It will very very likely have negative consequences.  

A term used with increased regularity is cultural architects. A teams architects uphold the teams culture and behaviours on the pitch. Behaviours are the way it plays when flowing and when stressed. That is then the teams culture. 

Its a form of leadership where players consistently uphold the standards by demonstrating them through their behaviour, behaviour that is communication. Each unit of the team should have its architects. Their behaviour, their play, their body language, their intensity, their decision making is the communication .. 

[SecretSam]

33 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

Most communication is non verbal. Shouting and lots of shouters, and bellicose Leaders tumbthumping is not leadership. Put two or three of those on the pitch? It will very very likely have negative consequences.  

A term used with increased regularity is cultural architects. A teams architects uphold the teams culture and behaviours on the pitch. Behaviours are the way it plays when flowing and when stressed. That is then the teams culture. 

Its a form of leadership where players consistently uphold the standards by demonstrating them through their behaviour, behaviour that is communication. Each unit of the team should have its architects. Their behaviour, their play, their body language, their intensity, their decision making is the communication .. 

A key thing is that players should know what is expected of them, and the leader's job is to make sure that they do it. And help make them aware if they are not, and correct it.

[Cowshed]

5 minutes ago, SecretSam said:

A key thing is that players should know what is expected of them, and the leader's job is to make sure that they do it. And help make them aware if they are not, and correct it.

That is the Managers job.

A Leaders influence on the pitch only extends so far. The player cannot drop individuals. Fragility of varying kinds has been rewarded with places in the XI at BCFC. A Leader cannot influence skill sets that are not there. 

A Reid, a Brownhill, a Weinmann, a Massengo effort sets an example in physical effort and mindset. 

A Diedhiou a senior pro going through ever slower motions doesn't. 

If a non negotable behaviour of team is to be workrate recruit the former v latter. 

[SecretSam]

39 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

That is the Managers job.

A Leaders influence on the pitch only extends so far. The player cannot drop individuals.

I didn't say it was the job of the captain to set strategy. I said players need to be clear what's expected of them.

And it's the captain (on pitch leader) who makes sure that they do it.

The manager isn't on the pitch. The captain is. 

Whether we have the right types of people, that's another matter. 

[Cowshed]

1 hour ago, SecretSam said:

I didn't say it was the job of the captain to set strategy. I said players need to be clear what's expected of them.

And it's the captain (on pitch leader) who makes sure that they do it.

The manager isn't on the pitch. The captain is. 

Whether we have the right types of people, that's another matter. 

I was linking posts back to topic. The topic two years in the making .. My opinion it was a longer timescale. Mr Johnson was making the strategy up as he went along. There was no big plan. Players aptitudes could not be synched to his vision.

His high tempo busy bees. What is this Leader on the pitch going to do when confronted with players who cannot carry out tasks because they can't do the workrate? Get centre forwards by the eyeballs? Nothing can be ensured but principles can be put in place by the Manager so players have clear expectations to be met. Players meeting the expectations encourage others to perform, leaders and architects emerge. .. Its a normal positive performance cycle.

Mr Johnson signed (?) 60+ non leaders. 60+ poor mindsets. 60+ not the right types. Its bollocks. 

Look at the mess of ideas at the top from Mr Johnson. He should have gone years ago. 

 

[Numero Uno]

On 06/05/2021 at 09:57, Cowshed said:

Most communication is non verbal. Shouting and lots of shouters, and bellicose Leaders tumbthumping is not leadership. Put two or three of those on the pitch? It will very very likely have negative consequences.  

A term used with increased regularity is cultural architects. A teams architects uphold the teams culture and behaviours on the pitch. Behaviours are the way it plays when flowing and when stressed. That is then the teams culture. 

Its a form of leadership where players consistently uphold the standards by demonstrating them through their behaviour, behaviour that is communication. Each unit of the team should have its architects. Their behaviour, their play, their body language, their intensity, their decision making is the communication .. 

Sometimes communication cannot always be "nicey, nicey" and does need to be sterner than you would like it. There are times when your cultural architects go onto the pitch and with their first three touches of the ball give it away. Yes, they know what behaviours are expected of them (although we are dealing with professional footballers of varying levels of intelligence and whilst some would understand everything you say to others the terms you use would be well over their heads) but they aren't following it through. It would be nice to think you have one or two players alongside them that recognise what is happening and are happy to tell said cultural architect to "liven up a bit" in so many words.

There is also vitally necessary verbal communication and instruction, in the form of shouting, that simply has to happen on a football pitch and has got nothing to do with "Bellicose Leaders Tubthumping". A team that understands it's roles but doesn't communicate verbally will get hammered every week. This is clearly missing from the current team. People also assume that shouting has to be "kick up the arse" when it obviously doesn't need to be that at all. Who says you can't shout encouragement?

[Cowshed]

1 hour ago, Numero Uno said:

Sometimes communication cannot always be "nicey, nicey" and does need to be sterner than you would like it. There are times when your cultural architects go onto the pitch and with their first three touches of the ball give it away. Yes, they know what behaviours are expected of them (although we are dealing with professional footballers of varying levels of intelligence and whilst some would understand everything you say to others the terms you use would be well over their heads) but they aren't following it through. It would be nice to think you have one or two players alongside them that recognise what is happening and are happy to tell said cultural architect to "liven up a bit" in so many words.

There is also vitally necessary verbal communication and instruction, in the form of shouting, that simply has to happen on a football pitch and has got nothing to do with "Bellicose Leaders Tubthumping". A team that understands it's roles but doesn't communicate verbally will get hammered every week. This is clearly missing from the current team. People also assume that shouting has to be "kick up the arse" when it obviously doesn't need to be that at all. Who says you can't shout encouragement?

You have perhaps made a lot of assumptions about my post. 

Communication does not have to be nicey nicey, it has to have depth. Berating individuals in general has little use. Berating individuals very frequently creates poorer performance and resentment. 

Yes verbal communication is necessary, bellicose shouting is not. The information has to have quality. Football speak is limited. Its designed on the training ground and to the pitch to be collectively understood by players of differing intelligence. Team trigger words create specific actions. These words will then become memories to assist players to make better decisions. These words will become shared collective team intelligence. 

95% of communication is non verbal. Any team that relies on the verbal will get hammered every week. Behaviour is communication -  its body language, its intensity, its decision making. 

Who says you can't shout encouragement? I did not but its easier to motivate players who believe in what they are doing, feel confident in roles .. I would go further encouragement can be trained in collectively. Its called bamming. Body (on your toes) Active (scan = body language) Move (yes move) - BAM. The game call or calls create actions far superior to liven it up a bit, get yer head up etc, and clubs with their leaders and architects link these psychological tools to shared identity and model of play. Identity BCFC doesn't have. 

Leaders lead us. What exemplifies the us of BCFC over seasons? What us do players buy into? What has been missing from BCFC is direction and vision. 

 

[Numero Uno]

13 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

You have perhaps made a lot of assumptions about my post. 

Communication does not have to be nicey nicey, it has to have depth. Berating individuals in general has little use. Berating individuals very frequently creates poorer performance and resentment. 

Yes verbal communication is necessary, bellicose shouting is not. The information has to have quality. Football speak is limited. Its designed on the training ground and to the pitch to be collectively understood by players of differing intelligence. Team trigger words create specific actions. These words will then become memories to assist players to make better decisions. These words will become shared collective team intelligence. 

95% of communication is non verbal. Any team that relies on the verbal will get hammered every week. Behaviour is communication -  its body language, its intensity, its decision making. 

Who says you can't shout encouragement? I did not but its easier to motivate players who believe in what they are doing, feel confident in roles .. I would go further encouragement can be trained in collectively. Its called bamming. Body (on your toes) Active (scan = body language) Move (yes move) - BAM. The game call or calls create actions far superior to liven it up a bit, get yer head up etc, and clubs with their leaders and architects link these psychological tools to shared identity and model of play. Identity BCFC doesn't have. 

Leaders lead us. What exemplifies the us of BCFC over seasons? What us do players buy into? What has been missing from BCFC is direction and vision. 

 

Not disagreeing with what you say as principle. The key is, once you have identified what “us” is going to mean, getting that message over in such a way that everyone in a squad of 25-30 players of differing emotional, intelligence and motivational levels, understands the message. That’s man management. Effectively players who might tell you that cultural architects are bullshit are being exactly that without even realising. Easier said than done and takes time.  I often think from the outside that Johnson in particular confused matters with players.

Whilst it is a collective responsibility as Pearson is always mentioning I still think you need further on pitch leadership that takes into account those situations when for whatever reason half your side just doesn’t turn up or where they get distracted by the opposition  (it happens as we know).

On occasion what you call inferior communication such as “liven up a bit” or similar does have it’s place on a football pitch. You can plan all you like, you can get your team playing a style and behaving so everything happens without thinking but there are still days when individuals simply aren’t at it and a reminder is needed.

Whatever communication you feel should or shouldn’t be employed it’s sadly lacking in any form with us right now.

[Cowshed]

51 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Not disagreeing with what you say as principle. The key is, once you have identified what “us” is going to mean, getting that message over in such a way that everyone in a squad of 25-30 players of differing emotional, intelligence and motivational levels, understands the message. That’s man management. Effectively players who might tell you that cultural architects are bullshit are being exactly that without even realising. Easier said than done and takes time.  I often think from the outside that Johnson in particular confused matters with players.

Whilst it is a collective responsibility as Pearson is always mentioning I still think you need further on pitch leadership that takes into account those situations when for whatever reason half your side just doesn’t turn up or where they get distracted by the opposition  (it happens as we know).

On occasion what you call inferior communication such as “liven up a bit” or similar does have it’s place on a football pitch. You can plan all you like, you can get your team playing a style and behaving so everything happens without thinking but there are still days when individuals simply aren’t at it and a reminder is needed.

Whatever communication you feel should or shouldn’t be employed it’s sadly lacking in any form with us right now.

Regarding intelligence.

It was not my inferior. My coaching mentor used a amusing story about a pro player who was being told to repeatedly get his head up .. The player after hearing this frequently stood still then shouted  "I have my ******* head up now what else do you want me to do with it?". Numerous common football phrases were mulled over and they frequently were ambiguous or meant very little to students.  This was used as an example of how easy it is too confuse players without clear messages. 

The overall point was how vastly more efficient communication is when its linked to clear expectation and vision.