What Could Possibly go RIGHT and How Might it happen?

[The Original OTIB]

6 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

It is something I have said before, but ....
That would leave a CMF of Knight & TGH , I like that pairing but we would be light there.
Then add there is a good chance TC might not be here, who do you play up front?

I also take @TDarwall's point , as a supporter Cardiff is one of those games you hate to lose and doing that while experimenting as a new , and some what untrusted coach would be risky.

If we played like that Vs Ipswich and Swansea we could see good results, but that's the problem. Against those teams that battle to restrict space, that don't come out , those that play like Cardiff probably will , we struggle against. We didn't set out to play like we did Vs QPR & SW , they made the game like that and we struggled for answers. Cardiff would have seen that and will probably try t do their version.

One more point on the players leaving.
If we are definitely playing with a 10 next year, why not play Twine and see how that fits ? It may not be him, but if we are playing that way with someone similar, it makes sense. 
If we are likely to rotating TGH, Knight and Bird, start with Knight and TGH .
If Williams is wanted next year add him.

We haven't got the squad to just drop the players that won't be here, we can use the ones that will, more often though , and in the right positions. 

Manning needs wins first because with many more games like the recent 2 , then he won't be here to rebuild. You can see the pressure on him in the recent Presser's . A decent win Saturday buys him time, then two games against more open sides and hopefully we get nearer a Southampton performance .

It's all a balance, but he could really do with some good feeling from the fans. 

Without elite or far superior players, it is hard to implement a one size fits all approach. In short, Manning needs to be adaptable and to an extent pragmatic until the end of the season.

[1960maaan]

6 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said:

Without elite or far superior players, it is hard to implement a one size fits all approach. In short, Manning needs to be adaptable and to an extent pragmatic until the end of the season.

Totally agree, and I've said before , he needs to adapt the style to fit the players. Unless you are Man City and can just buy a squad to fit what you want, you have to be adaptable. 

Even top players have their own skills . Stopping TC's movement for example , is like asking Lineker to drop deep and take long shots.  It isn't getting the best out of him so adapt your ideas a little to suit what you have. 
That is Management IMO.

[Redrascal2]

19 hours ago, OneTeamInBristol said:

Can have the best head coach/manager in the world and they would hit a limit of what they could get out of a lower mid table Championship squad.

Also should expect Liam Manning  to get a hell of a lot more out of the current City squad.

[westonred]

I dont see manning as a man manager he looks too timid and weak. He may be a fantastic coach but not a Manager its just a shame that we couldnt have brought him in as a coach under NP whos was a fantastic man manager

[OneTeamInBristol]

29 minutes ago, Redrascal2 said:

Also should expect Liam Manning  to get a hell of a lot more out of the current City squad.

Why?

The current City squad is a lower - mid table squad which is more than likely where we'll finish.

He doesn't have years of experience of getting more out of squads than expected.

[The Original OTIB]

14 minutes ago, OneTeamInBristol said:

Why?

The current City squad is a lower - mid table squad which is more than likely where we'll finish.

He doesn't have years of experience of getting more out of squads than expected.

Yes, a rookie, so now is the time to do just that. Manage the men and their current, individual and collective talents, don't just rely on textbooks and stats. Time to prove yourself. I wonder how much of the Pro Licence is actually about people and psychology.

[Robbored]

For me Manning has become very hard to listen to. He seems to make generalised comments whether it’s a win loss or draw, not necessarily relevant to the game just played.

Hearing another voice pre match from Hogg or any other coach would break the monotony of hearing Manning say very little of substance.

 Cardiff has become a match in which City need to put it a top performance and win the game. If City lose I predict we’ll see “Manning out” banners at the following home game against Swansea.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, 1960maaan said:

It is something I have said before, but ....
That would leave a CMF of Knight & TGH , I like that pairing but we would be light there.
Then add there is a good chance TC might not be here, who do you play up front?

I also take @TDarwall's point , as a supporter Cardiff is one of those games you hate to lose and doing that while experimenting as a new , and some what untrusted coach would be risky.

If we played like that Vs Ipswich and Swansea we could see good results, but that's the problem. Against those teams that battle to restrict space, that don't come out , those that play like Cardiff probably will , we struggle against. We didn't set out to play like we did Vs QPR & SW , they made the game like that and we struggled for answers. Cardiff would have seen that and will probably try t do their version.

One more point on the players leaving.
If we are definitely playing with a 10 next year, why not play Twine and see how that fits ? It may not be him, but if we are playing that way with someone similar, it makes sense. 
If we are likely to rotating TGH, Knight and Bird, start with Knight and TGH .
If Williams is wanted next year add him.

We haven't got the squad to just drop the players that won't be here, we can use the ones that will, more often though , and in the right positions. 

Manning needs wins first because with many more games like the recent 2 , then he won't be here to rebuild. You can see the pressure on him in the recent Presser's . A decent win Saturday buys him time, then two games against more open sides and hopefully we get nearer a Southampton performance .

It's all a balance, but he could really do with some good feeling from the fans. 

We’re playing “another one of those teams”, aren’t we!

 

Re the no10/Twine, I’d like to see what this looks like without Twine this season.

Is this the “double-10” with Twine and Knight either side behind Tommy that we saw against Watford (and v Wednesday albeit with Mehmeti and Knight)?  This has been built on a back-3 / WBs (hybrid) set-up.

Or is it a more normal no10 that we’ve seen based on the back-4 system, where Knight has played close to Conway?

[The Original OTIB]

13 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

We’re playing “another one of those teams”, aren’t we!

 

Re the no10/Twine, I’d like to see what this looks like without Twine this season.

Is this the “double-10” with Twine and Knight either side behind Tommy that we saw against Watford (and v Wednesday albeit with Mehmeti and Knight)?  This has been built on a back-3 / WBs (hybrid) set-up.

Or is it a more normal no10 that we’ve seen based on the back-4 system, where Knight has played close to Conway?

Time to put the charts away for this week Dave. Man management is the key at the moment, not info overload.

[1960maaan]

59 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

We’re playing “another one of those teams”, aren’t we!

Most definitely.

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Re the no10/Twine, I’d like to see what this looks like without Twine this season.

The more I think about it, the more it feels like a loan to appease the fans.

How likely are we to buy him in the summer ( Cost + availability + wages + etc ) .
So we either go a different way or find another '10' . 
If we are definitely going down the route of playing a 10, then ok , settle the side with it now. In that scenario I don't mind Twine playing.

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Is this the “double-10” with Twine and Knight either side behind Tommy that we saw against Watford

Personally , I hope if we do utilise 2 x10s I don't want Knight to be one of them. I'd much rather try Sykes . 
If Sykes ends up RWB it would be another , like Knight & TC where we are no longer getting the best out of them . 
Just my opinion obviously.

[W-S-M Seagull]

57 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said:

Time to put the charts away for this week Dave. Man management is the key at the moment, not info overload.

Skip to 10:05. The players faces say it all. 

 

[Natchfever]

1 hour ago, OneTeamInBristol said:

Why?

The current City squad is a lower - mid table squad which is more than likely where we'll finish.

He doesn't have years of experience of getting more out of squads than expected.

Expected by who ?

Chairman expected better from THIS squad.

[Super]

3 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Skip to 10:05. The players faces say it all. 

 

You really are desperate to find things aren't you? 

[W-S-M Seagull]

For it to go right with Manning were probably gonna need to sign about 10 of his own players. We're also gonna need him to learn some man management skills and to be able to come up with a plan b,c,d etc. He'll need to stop playing with LJs tombola and the bullshit bingo. He also needs to learn to not play unfit players and stop rushing players back from injury. Probably less emphasis on training well and more on the match. 

Sort all that out and he could be a success here. Not gonna happen tho. 

[The Original OTIB]

17 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Skip to 10:05. The players faces say it all. 

 

Seems to be a decent spirit, Kal a character and c!early a leader. Odd ending, a bit amateurish and not necessary.

 

 

 

[W-S-M Seagull]

11 minutes ago, Super said:

You really are desperate to find things aren't you? 

I make a simple observation about body language and here's you straight on it trying to rubbish it. Wonder why that is? 

 

 

[W-S-M Seagull]

2 minutes ago, The Original OTIB said:

Seems to be a decent spirit, Kal a character and c!early a leader. Odd ending, a bit amateurish and not necessary.

 

 

 

We've got a honest hard working bunch of players and that training session shows that. 

Which makes it even more the ridiculous that Manning called them out. 

[The Original OTIB]

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

I make a simple observation about body language and here's you straight on it trying to rubbish it. Wonder why that is? 

 

 

Think overall it showed a fairly happy camp. Manning is quite wooden though, and an odd ending.

 

 

[Davefevs]

30 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Most definitely.

The more I think about it, the more it feels like a loan to appease the fans.

How likely are we to buy him in the summer ( Cost + availability + wages + etc ) .
So we either go a different way or find another '10' . 
If we are definitely going down the route of playing a 10, then ok , settle the side with it now. In that scenario I don't mind Twine playing.

Personally , I hope if we do utilise 2 x10s I don't want Knight to be one of them. I'd much rather try Sykes . 
If Sykes ends up RWB it would be another , like Knight & TC where we are no longer getting the best out of them . 
Just my opinion obviously.

Imho, not very.  Think Burnley will come down, and they’ll see him as a player they can use…and therefore if anyone wants him, they can pay the premium for him.  It doesn’t matter if we think he’s not worth the alleged £5m Burnley want.

[OneTeamInBristol]

32 minutes ago, Natchfever said:

Expected by who ?

Chairman expected better from THIS squad.

Everyone knows that was absolute rubbish though.

[Ben1980]

3 hours ago, westonred said:

I dont see manning as a man manager he looks too timid and weak. He may be a fantastic coach but not a Manager its just a shame that we couldnt have brought him in as a coach under NP whos was a fantastic man manager

Completely agree with this. Manning as coach learning under Nige could’ve worked a treat. 

[Natchfever]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Imho, not very.  Think Burnley will come down, and they’ll see him as a player they can use…and therefore if anyone wants him, they can pay the premium for him.  It doesn’t matter if we think he’s not worth the alleged £5m Burnley want.

Agreed Dave, just the player to help get them back up. I thought they were nailed on droppers when we signed Twine.

Cant blame Manning for the injury but I do wonder why he was signed unless to help the team mould into Mannings vision before bogging off back north, which is a bit flash for us !

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, Ben1980 said:

Completely agree with this. Manning as coach learning under Nige could’ve worked a treat. 

Everytime I think of this type of option, and things like Kingy under Nige, Fleming with King etc, etc, I just come back to the point that they wanted Nige out…and all of his merry-men too.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, Natchfever said:

Agreed Dave, just the player to help get them back up. I thought they were nailed on droppers when we signed Twine.

Cant blame Manning for the injury but I do wonder why he was signed unless to help the team mould into Mannings vision before bogging off back north, which is a bit flash for us !

Assuming Twine stays fit, LM then has the core players available to show us what “Manning-ball” really is.

I’m not saying that is a single system / formation, but a way of playing.

I’d like to at least see that over half a dozen games or so.  Then I might finally get the true direction of travel under him.

Hopefully it improves us, and we go into the summer knowing exactly what we want…Twine or his Twin(e).

[Natchfever]

4 minutes ago, OneTeamInBristol said:

Everyone knows that was absolute rubbish though.

Can't help that.

He is fronting the regime that spouted such shite.

Maybe he believed it himself until he got a taste of champ standards, hence the negative comments about the players not getting his message.

Very Johnsonesque.

Others will shrug it off but ill judge Manning on what he does with this squad.

[1960maaan]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Imho, not very.  Think Burnley will come down, and they’ll see him as a player they can use…and therefore if anyone wants him, they can pay the premium for him.  It doesn’t matter if we think he’s not worth the alleged £5m Burnley want.

I agree very unlikely , and to my mind a pointless signing and a waste of money.
 So,
It is either (A) To shut the fans up (B) A genuine plan and he wanted a 10 now.  
If it's the second , we already had two players who had played that role in Mehmeti and Sykes. For the shape alone we may as well gone down that route. 

Really not following the Club's strategy at the moment. 
When I remember the rumour circulating about Houghton not getting the job because he wanted to basically buy a new squad ( true or not) , seems like LM will have to do that to get a team to fit him. 

 

[Ben1980]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Everytime I think of this type of option, and things like Kingy under Nige, Fleming with King etc, etc, I just come back to the point that they wanted Nige out…and all of his merry-men too.

True- doesn’t stop us dreaming though! 

[DaveInSA]

I’m not good with footballing parlance or formations.

But we need 4 at the back.

Is 4-1-2-3 a thing? Because based on our players it should be a thing.

or 4-1-3-2?

I want attacking football and solidity at the back. That’s what I’d like to go right.

[cidercity1987]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

We’re playing “another one of those teams”, aren’t we!

 

Re the no10/Twine, I’d like to see what this looks like without Twine this season.

Is this the “double-10” with Twine and Knight either side behind Tommy that we saw against Watford (and v Wednesday albeit with Mehmeti and Knight)?  This has been built on a back-3 / WBs (hybrid) set-up.

Or is it a more normal no10 that we’ve seen based on the back-4 system, where Knight has played close to Conway?

No surprise to see us marooned alone as slow in possession and poor at keeping the ball. Neither one thing nor the other.

Where on that chart is Manning trying to get us? More up with Ipswich/Coventry I hope, not boring everyone with possession football like Swansea or Southampton but retaining it somewhat whilst passing directly through the lines

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, DaveInSA said:

I’m not good with footballing parlance or formations.

But we need 4 at the back.

Is 4-1-2-3 a thing? Because based on our players it should be a thing.

or 4-1-3-2?

I want attacking football and solidity at the back. That’s what I’d like to go right.

In theory you can pick any formation you like.

How would you envisage it however?

Back 4, defensive type midfielder, 2 attacking mids and a wide striker?

Back 4, defensive type midfielder, attacking mid, 2 wide men and 2 strikers?