An Introduction To 3-5-2

[Guest]

 Notice the Post didn't give 3 4 3 (or even 3 4 5) as an option.  3 4 3  is a tweak whereby we keep our basic shape, but make it more compact, play to the strengths of our main striker, and allow a bit more creativity on the pitch. Spudski mentioned it as an option earlier and with the right coaching, we have the ingredients to make it work.

It's clear to me that Kodjia is a lone striker. He needs to have the space around him to work. With Wilbs next to him, they are getting in each other's way. Either SC goes back to Agard and Wilbs or he drops Wilbs and plays to Kodjia's strengths. This would require players either side of him. We've lots of options here - Robinson, Burns, Agard, Freeman, Reid. The manager has the option of gile, pace, directness to suit whichever scenario. Defensively, the 3 of them have the responsibility of the opposition back four. An important change as their full backs would no longer have the time and space they've had up to now. This would also mean our wing backs will be less inclined to get dragged forward to close down, leaving them closer to the wide defenders behind them.  

In terms of attacking, the main difference is that the path through the middle is less cluttered.  At the moment Wilbs and Freeman are in between the central midfield and Kodjia, making it harder to thread balls through. The wide attackers can be free to drift in but initially when the midfield get the ball, it should be a lot easier for them to get their heads up and see Kodjia's runs. This simply isn't happening at the moment. 

 

 

yep I think this would work better. I'd still rather play 4 at the back though as whenever Baker is back, he is a flint type centre back, so those two in a pair would really make us more solid.

 

[Mad Cyril]

For me the only difference this season is the opposition score much more of their chances at this level.

Their finishing is lethal. Few teams have generated many more chances than goals against us.

[Major Isewater]

So how do you make it work when the only right wing back you have is injured ?  When I saw Jose and rest adopting 3-5-2 i might be convinced otherwise, but it won't happen. It is a surprise tactic only, and has no sustained success. Holland did not win did they, the came third, and no one recalls who came third in anything. The video above is lovely, but look at the players being used. 3-5-2 not attacking ? seriously ? Or are you confusing 5-3-2 ? Then what happens is your midfield gets run over and you create nothing. As every single Prem club employs 4 at the back, and variations of 3-3 , 2-3-1 or 1-2-2-1 in front of it, I am inclined to think we are barking up the wrong tree. I am not convinced by your arguments, and whilst I respect the opinion, I cannot see how we can make 3-5-2 work with only one fit wing back, and against opposition who know exactly how to break us down. If we are struggling in the Championship with t, goodness knows how we would get on in the Prem. Well apart from ever getting there in the first place, it is a tactic that is not going to hold us in good stead for the future, and we should be working on setting the club up to work with a fluid group of 6 in front of a back 4. Be interesting to see how Ipswich approach us. 

Good post , except you just recalled that Holland came third . Hoist by your own petard !

[Mad Cyril]

Did I just read 'bristol City' and 'world class' in the same post?

[Aizoon]

Is this 3-5-2 101?

[spudski]

I would also add, if you are bored, watch the re run of MOTD, and see how fast defence turns into attack with the best teams. It is frightening. But not just 2 or 3 , most have 4 or 5 on the counter, at great speed. When the ball is turned over, the move forward at huge speed. To an extent exactly what we are seeing at our level, and no surprise with the number of ex Prem teams around. I should add, I am not advocating getting rid of SC , far from it, but I believe we are setting up the club incorrectly , tactically and with the signings, to compete at the top end of the Championship and certainly the Prem. I also believe, with the loan signings, we do actually have players to play a strong back 4, no problem. Where we fall apart, and only a little, is in midfield, where we need a power house player that can break through going forward. Bryan, IMHO can become such a player. Up front we are miles off, as again IMHO the only one worth a place at this level is Kodja. Nothing against Wilbs, but end of career and served his purpose in L1. you need mobile forwards who hold the ball and keep possession high up the field. Enabling overlapping players to join in. I am not a coach, and am not in the know, just have far too much time to watch different games and analysis. What I see is that we are not currently building a side with the current system that will get us promoted or last in the Prem. In fact I see a side leaking goals, and unless a huge change in performance happens, we will be bottom 3 by end of October and facing a relegation battle. SC has to make changes, or he will be out of a job. It is simple. He is very hard working, very passionate, but I am worried he is more Garry J than a forward thinking innovator. (or Harry Redknapp style)

I also should add, I think we are far too light on backroom staff, on performance and opposition analysis, and don't get me started on the Academy, where we either need to shut it, or go for tier 1 (outside of FFP) and start to fill it with the highest quality coaches. 

I see no point to spending 40million on a ground, and then not putting in place a world class structure.

If you doubt it, look at what Southampton have done. For me they are the closest model to BCFC 

So no, I think 5-3-2 is folly , and is not getting BCFC ready for anything but a season of huge struggle. I actually expected better from SC, as he does actually study the game with passion. 

Fantastic post BW...exactly how I feel too...although as you have probably read in my other posts...I would get rid of SC... because I personally think he's not the man to take us forward....even if he was to change the system we play.

What has crossed my mind...is who's decision was it to play 352 throughout the Club?

Was this decision purely down to SC...or a joint decision between SC and Burt....or something spoke about and agreed on by SC, Burt and the Board, as to a way this Club will play...a Club footprint so to speak.

What concerns me...is the development teams. These youngsters in the U18's and U21's are all playing the same way as the first team. Now in theory...that seems a good idea. The majority of these kids are way off the first team...so all their development it seems, is based on our present formation. Is this something the Club have decided to do...or just SC? If the latter...surely this is wrong? To let one man have that much power on how the whole Club is run!!!

What I'm getting at...is this purely SC's idea or the Clubs?

If SC were to go...would the Club ask the next manager to continue in the same vein...as in 'this is our footprint and philosophy'....or would the next manager come in and change everything to how he wants?

If the latter, it's a short term fix again...or purely for the length of tenure of the next manager.

I'm all for creating a 'Club philosophy and footprint' and a 'Bristol City way' of playing throughout the Club...that's what a lot of Clubs do.

That way you create longevity, and when managers change it's seamless and less fractious to the Club.

If I were to think this is something the whole Club have agreed on...then I think it would be a good idea for our long term future.

If it's just a whim on SC's part, then I'd be more concerned.

If the Club were able to tinker with this formation, and find a way of playing and making it work and making it 'Our way' then i'd fully support that idea.

Changing tact slightly.... your quote...'' I also should add, I think we are far too light on backroom staff, on performance and opposition analysis, and don't get me started on the Academy, where we either need to shut it, or go for tier 1 (outside of FFP) and start to fill it with the highest quality coaches. ''.......... I totally agree with and it's something I've also said before. If I had the Billions SL has, I'd be investing heavily in all of that. The future is in developing your own teams, rather than buying them. Something Sir Alex recently alluded to.

[Nogbad the Bad]

For me the only difference this season is the opposition score much more of their chances at this level.

Their finishing is lethal. Few teams have generated many more chances than goals against us.

Agreed, and several wonder goals at that.

The formation may need tweaking but in general it seems certain SC intends to hold his nerve and make this work. Our squad has been assembled with this system in mind and it seems to me there will be no turning for a manager who's provided us with such great quality football that most of us want him to be here for a very long time.

Don't forget that in his 2 recent short spells out of the game (post Forest, and again after leaving QPR) SC spent much of his time visiting numerous successful clubs abroad, talking to their managers and coaches, studying their training methods and tactics, and absorbing the fundamental reasons for their success in preparation to returning to management in England. Having been branded - at times perhaps lazily and unfairly - as a negative, long ball manager earlier in his career it seems he was determined to forge his future in management on expansive, attacking football with the emphasis on always going for the win, and of course it came to fruition superbly last season. Now there's no doubt we're in something of a blip results wise, but equally - poor Reading performance apart - that we're not miles away from things coming good. Cotts.evidently believes wholeheartedly this remains the way forward for this club and from everything he says there will be no major changes to his approach.

Just as well some might say. We've seen what happens when City just try to survive at this level - turgid football in GJ's latter years for instance - we end up in wars of attrition and struggle to the extent any point is seen as a good result and the entertainment value becomes near zero, a sure way of building up frustration in the stands and eventually emptying the ground to well below successful 3rd division levels.

Very small margins except Reading so far. All agree we could easily have gained enough points to be very comfortably mid table, but Freeman's sending off, key injuries, some outrageous long range opposition goals, not taking numerous chances, and unfortunate refereeing decisions have all counted against us to give a false representation in terms of points gained. Plus of course a significant number of players collectively performed poorly last week, but for the moment at least that level of performance and being outclassed like that remains a one off.

He knows City will never thrive in this division by reverting to a negative mindset, we have to do something different this time or it'll just be another slow and tedious slide to inevitable relegation. Cotterill means BCFC to make it's mark in the Championship by being recognised as stylish advocates of entertaining and attacking football, something no doubt we'd all like to see.  A balance has to be struck, and has to be struck soon, but the intention will always be there to take the game to the opposition. Getting sufficient points at the same time is a basic necessity of course, and taking more of the many chances we've created is paramount, but it's absolutely reasonable to point out that things really have conspired against us repeatedly so far and if we get back to consistently playing as we did against Brentford, Middlesbro' and PNE, and get the rub of the green a little more, then there's every reason to think enough goals and wins will come to justify the system.

That's why Cotts. was so unexpectedly buoyant after PNE , not because of the result but because our style of play dominated the opposition on their own ground to such an extent that on another day we would have been worthy 5-1 away winners.

I don't see much changing formation wise - perhaps a tweak or 2, but that's it - he is 100% committed to making this system work.

 

[spudski]

Agreed, and several wonder goals at that.

The formation may need tweaking but in general it seems certain SC intends to hold his nerve and make this work. Our squad has been assembled with this system in mind and it seems to me there will be no turning for a manager who's provided us with such great quality football that most of us want him to be here for a very long time.

Don't forget that in his 2 recent short spells out of the game (post Forest, and again after leaving QPR) SC spent much of his time visiting numerous successful clubs abroad, talking to their managers and coaches, studying their training methods and tactics, and absorbing the fundamental reasons for their success in preparation to returning to management in England. Having been branded - at times perhaps lazily and unfairly - as a negative, long ball manager earlier in his career it seems he was determined to forge his future in management on expansive, attacking football with the emphasis on always going for the win, and of course it came to fruition superbly last season. Now there's no doubt we're in something of a blip results wise, but equally - poor Reading performance apart - that we're not miles away from things coming good. Cotts.evidently believes wholeheartedly this remains the way forward for this club and from everything he says there will be no major changes to his approach.

Just as well some might say. We've seen what happens when City just try to survive at this level - turgid football in GJ's latter years for instance - we end up in wars of attrition and struggle to the extent any point is seen as a good result and the entertainment value becomes near zero, a sure way of building up frustration in the stands and eventually emptying the ground to well below successful 3rd division levels.

Very small margins except Reading so far. All agree we could easily have gained enough points to be very comfortably mid table, but Freeman's sending off, key injuries, some outrageous long range opposition goals, not taking numerous chances, and unfortunate refereeing decisions have all counted against us to give a false representation in terms of points gained. Plus of course a significant number of players collectively performed poorly last week, but for the moment at least that level of performance and being outclassed like that remains a one off.

He knows City will never thrive in this division by reverting to a negative mindset, we have to do something different this time or it'll just be another slow and tedious slide to inevitable relegation. Cotterill means BCFC to make it's mark in the Championship by being recognised as stylish advocates of entertaining and attacking football, something no doubt we'd all like to see.  A balance has to be struck, and has to be struck soon, but the intention will always be there to take the game to the opposition. Getting sufficient points at the same time is a basic necessity of course, and taking more of the many chances we've created is paramount, but it's absolutely reasonable to point out that things really have conspired against us repeatedly so far and if we get back to consistently playing as we did against Brentford, Middlesbro' and PNE, and get the rub of the green a little more, then there's every reason to think enough goals and wins will come to justify the system.

That's why Cotts. was so unexpectedly buoyant after PNE , not because of the result but because our style of play dominated the opposition on their own ground to such an extent that on another day we would have been worthy 5-1 away winners.

I don't see much changing formation wise - perhaps a tweak or 2, but that's it - he is 100% committed to making this system work.

 

You make some great points their fella...and I do like a manager who has belief in a system.

It obviously needs a tweak or two.

If you are into coaching, tactics and systems...you will obviously know the pros and cons of the formation we play. Plus how organised and the total understanding players need to have of it.

The wing back positions, and their work rate and understanding with the defence is paramount.

Imho....this system could work.

What makes me think it's likely to fail over the course of a whole season, is that Bryan doesn't have adequate competition for his place...he can't be expected to play every game....it's the most knackering of positions to play.

The same goes for Little and his place...plus he is no where near fit.

The lack of a commanding experienced DM player in the Spine of the team is also missing.

It's great having formation ideas...but you need the players and squad to effectively compete over the whole season, for it to work.

The failings this summer in the transfer market, make me think SC's ideas could fail on the pitch.

We all hope it doesn't....but you need the players and squad available for it to work.

[Curr Avon]

Of course, its not just the formation, but the movement within it and the speed of passing.

For example, Reading's first goal last weekend was a result of Kodja losing possession after attempting to beat three defenders high up the pitch and that wasn't the only time he was guilty of this.

Keep it simple and don't take chances when the opposition press up.