Squad

[metalgear]

What if we change managers every match? Dead cat bounce to the league title baby!

how about one manager for the league, another for the cups and a proper physio who decides which player is available and for how long.

 

[Raziel]

So you wish we had the same bounce in the league as those two teams at the expense of a Europa League win? Not sure you know what you're arguing for any more.

I'm saying any squad (regardless of if you think it is good or not, both that Wolves & Everton squad's are pretty poor), could benefit from even a mid tier manager doing the basics right.

The season is done, we made our choices, we made a bet that paid off, the question is what can this squad do, and my argument is (in the league), it can do a lot better.

 

[Raziel]

Let me try to rephrase my point, maybe that will clear up misunderstandings and/or clarify where we disagree.

The problem isn't numbers (apart from a couple of positions as you say). And it isn't how "good" the players are (apart from a couple of positions perhaps and lacking one or two "elite" players).

We lack balance imo, particularly when we're missing a handful of key players.

Defensively the difference with and without our first choice back 4/5 is massive. A need for better depth. We'll see if Kinsky and Danso help sort that out, I think so, but still a bit short.

We struggled with ball progression. The "solution" was putting Kulusevski (and then Bergvall) in alongside Maddison. Making an already attacking and ambitious team even more attacking and also vulnerable defensively.

Imo we have quality ball progression from Romero, Porro, Maddison. Could add Spence to that. Bergvall, but young and inconsistent. That's not enough. That's too vulnerable.

Add to that having quite a few wide players that need specific forms of service, players that lack creativity. That ups the need for really good ball progression and creativity deeper, which we way too often miss.

Those were big issues in our defensive problems too. Attacks breaking down and getting countered on, not being able to sustain pressure against good teams, not being able to play through pressure losing the ball in the process (counters, and sustained pressure against us).

If we want to play ambitious football we need more players with more ball playing quality, ball progression and creativity. In the squad. With everyone fit we're fine, a bit short. But takes to little to make us far from fine and that point an ambitious style will struggle.

Again, not sure I agree, I think you are not acknowledging where the flaw is the players vs. system.

- Difference between or first choice back line and not, the reason is our system is so fudging bad, it literally requires the fastest footballer in Europe to cover the cracks. While I agree pre Danso, having Gray/Davies in there is not ideal, the way bigger issue is a combined high line with overcommitted FBs that is easily countered by a diagonal ball over the top. My argument is, Romero would be even better if he was in system that didn't have him constantly running back, Danso and VDV similar (you could probably use VDV to progress ball more into space in a "normal" system), and Dragusin (jury is out) would be decent enough cover.
- Ball progression is 100% a system problem, because the philosophy is stay high to create overloads, we are 2-3-5 in possession, that when the opponent sits in mid block just creates too much congested spaces, which seems to suggest you need an elite level player to get through, maybe just don't fudging over congest the area? (pass the ball, pull them apart)
- Defensive problems mentioned in my first point, you can't play a high line, plus overcommit FB's (and the resulting wide open space behind them), plus have 7-8 players so high that a single ball over/through puts them out of the game. The rest of the point re not being able to manage pressure, this is game management, perhaps the second biggest flaw of Ange's system, there is no compensation for momentum, there is no acknowledgment of "ok, opponent has a bit of control of ball, lets sit for 5-10 minutes, lets ride it out until we get back control, lets not concede"
- Every side in the world can improve, the question is when you say "ambitious football" is that getting us 6th in league or 2nd? because I'd argue this side is good enough for 6th

The single biggest problem Ange system has (and I genuinely think this is part of the design) is it isn't built for individuals (and I really don't see how you fix that), let me explain.

- The core of the system is by being high up the field in numbers, with player fluidity (FB can end up in center of opposition box), you create overloads, you create runners that are fundamentally harder to track (PL teams have countered by marking 1:1)
- What it doesn't do is create isolations, i.e. situations where players are 1:1

What that means is the system is actually ok when you have a set of hard workers, average talent players (Aus/Japan/Celtic?), it doesn't allow you to exploit the talent gap between your team and the dross (Ipswich, Leicester, Tamsworth). It's why we have struggled against brick teams, because the system doesn't let you put your better players against the opposition lesser players in a situation where they can make it count.

Contrast to EL (Frankfurt/Glimt), we played 4-2-4, and all of a sudden, you saw Richi/Solanke bullying defenders, you saw much more comfortable Romero/VDV facing attackers and just blocking them out the game, you saw Porro able to ping in crosses, because the system actually gave better players the chance to shine.

 

[Bishop]

I think you articulate what a lot of us feel. Poch's team had Harry, Eriksen, Walker, Toby/Jan, Dembele, Son, Dele etc. Ange's team is still about the collective with a few rising stars.

Interestingly, the only guy that seems to be able to win games on his own is Johnson.

I'm not sure where we find the 2 or 3 signature signings though.

Johnson is able to finish chances in no way whatsoever is he able to grab a game by the scruff of the neck and win them. Even the goals he does score are heavily reliant on the work of others, he isn't doing any of it by himself. His game and results are the exact opposite of the term winning a game by themselves.

 

[Lemonade Money]

I'm saying any squad (regardless of if you think it is good or not, both that Wolves & Everton squad's are pretty poor), could benefit from even a mid tier manager doing the basics right.

The season is done, we made our choices, we made a bet that paid off, the question is what can this squad do, and my argument is (in the league), it can do a lot better.

You have given two examples of where it was slightly better to change manager, and you were given two where it was slightly worse. We benefitted from holding our nerve, prioritising what was important, and wining a bloody cup.

 

[Surfless]

It's been reported this pm that we have saved 15m in wages by releasing whiteman, reguilon Forster and Werner. Have to say that what amazed me about that was we were allegedly paying Forster £75k a week!


How has that ever been value for money?????

 

[Yiddo]

They moan when we don’t pay the wages and they moan when we do.

 

[Lilbaz]

It's been reported this pm that we have saved 15m in wages by releasing whiteman, reguilon Forster and Werner. Have to say that what amazed me about that was we were allegedly paying Forster £75k a week!


How has that ever been value for money?????

Free transfer.

 

[Baleforce]

It's been reported this pm that we have saved 15m in wages by releasing whiteman, reguilon Forster and Werner. Have to say that what amazed me about that was we were allegedly paying Forster £75k a week!


How has that ever been value for money?????

That’s nothing in the PL these days.

The average is probably around double that, admittedly because of City/United paying 3/400k a week.

 

[Bishop]

They moan when we don’t pay the wages snd they moan when we do.

They moan when you pay good wages to poor players like Werner. Jeez, why would you pay him 150k+ a week. That's incompetence.

No one would complain if a top player was on 200k+ just like you'll be hard pressed to find and Spurs complaining about the height of Kane's wages when he was with us.

 

[Muttley]

Johnson is able to finish chances in no way whatsoever is he able to grab a game by the scruff of the neck and win them. Even the goals he does score are heavily reliant on the work of others, he isn't doing any of it by himself. His game and results are the exact opposite of the term winning a game by themselves.

Yeah, perhaps not the best wording from me. Johnson is involved in the stats that matter. He is currently the difference between us being winners and not. He has 20 goals for club and country this last season.

It was Johnson who is on the official scorecard as the guy that got the winning goal. In my mind Brennan was terrific in that final. There were a couple of big moments defensively where he made the difference as well as his obvious winning goal. Brennan didn't take the game by the scruff of the neck and single handedly win it. He just did what Brennan does and nick a winning goal.

Perhaps we should think of it as the Brennan final. That's if we can stop obsessing about it being the Ange final.

 

[Bishop]

Yeah, perhaps not the best wording from me. Johnson is involved in the stats that matter. He is currently the difference between us being winners and not. He has 20 goals for club and country this last season.

It was Johnson who is on the official scorecard as the guy that got the winning goal. In my mind Brennan was terrific in that final. There were a couple of big moments defensively where he made the difference as well as his obvious winning goal. Brennan didn't take the game by the scruff of the neck and single handedly win it. He just did what Brennan does and nick a winning goal.

Perhaps we should think of it as the Brennan final. That's if we can stop obsessing about it being the Ange final.

No problem with all of that just can't be having you saying hes winning games by himself.

Because he bloody isn't he's the exact opposite of that.

 

[Muttley]

No problem with all of that just can't be having you saying hes winning games by himself.

Because he bloody isn't he's the exact opposite of that.

He's definitely drawing games by himself

 

[braineclipse]

Again, not sure I agree, I think you are not acknowledging where the flaw is the players vs. system.

- Difference between or first choice back line and not, the reason is our system is so fudging bad, it literally requires the fastest footballer in Europe to cover the cracks. While I agree pre Danso, having Gray/Davies in there is not ideal, the way bigger issue is a combined high line with overcommitted FBs that is easily countered by a diagonal ball over the top. My argument is, Romero would be even better if he was in system that didn't have him constantly running back, Danso and VDV similar (you could probably use VDV to progress ball more into space in a "normal" system), and Dragusin (jury is out) would be decent enough cover.
- Ball progression is 100% a system problem, because the philosophy is stay high to create overloads, we are 2-3-5 in possession, that when the opponent sits in mid block just creates too much congested spaces, which seems to suggest you need an elite level player to get through, maybe just don't fudging over congest the area? (pass the ball, pull them apart)
- Defensive problems mentioned in my first point, you can't play a high line, plus overcommit FB's (and the resulting wide open space behind them), plus have 7-8 players so high that a single ball over/through puts them out of the game. The rest of the point re not being able to manage pressure, this is game management, perhaps the second biggest flaw of Ange's system, there is no compensation for momentum, there is no acknowledgment of "ok, opponent has a bit of control of ball, lets sit for 5-10 minutes, lets ride it out until we get back control, lets not concede"
- Every side in the world can improve, the question is when you say "ambitious football" is that getting us 6th in league or 2nd? because I'd argue this side is good enough for 6th

The single biggest problem Ange system has (and I genuinely think this is part of the design) is it isn't built for individuals (and I really don't see how you fix that), let me explain.

- The core of the system is by being high up the field in numbers, with player fluidity (FB can end up in center of opposition box), you create overloads, you create runners that are fundamentally harder to track (PL teams have countered by marking 1:1)
- What it doesn't do is create isolations, i.e. situations where players are 1:1

What that means is the system is actually ok when you have a set of hard workers, average talent players (Aus/Japan/Celtic?), it doesn't allow you to exploit the talent gap between your team and the dross (Ipswich, Leicester, Tamsworth). It's why we have struggled against brick teams, because the system doesn't let you put your better players against the opposition lesser players in a situation where they can make it count.

Contrast to EL (Frankfurt/Glimt), we played 4-2-4, and all of a sudden, you saw Richi/Solanke bullying defenders, you saw much more comfortable Romero/VDV facing attackers and just blocking them out the game, you saw Porro able to ping in crosses, because the system actually gave better players the chance to shine.

Yeah, seems like we're in disagreement here.

I acknowledge that Ange's system has flaws. But I don't think the inherent flaws are significantly greater than that of other systems. It depends mostly on the quality of players and as importantly the fit of the players to the system and style. And for us on those qualities in the squad for injuries etc.

By ambitious I mean playing with risk on the ball, wanting to play through pressure, be quite attacking and typically not sitting back much or relying primarily on counter attacking. Imo that will require quality in terms of technical ability, ball progression, creativity. And require that from several players in the team in several areas.

We have more or less enough of that with most players fit and available. We have a shortage of that with a small handful of key players missing. We were around 5th/6th before the injuries got crazy this season. We got 5th last season (with injuries, but fewer games and not an EL run to prioritise). With this system.

I want us to keep building on what I describe as an ambitious style of play, with our without Ange. With or without Ange that requires more quality on the ball, more ball progression and creativity in the squad.

The system does create isolation, mainly for the wide attackers. Part of our problem is having too many wide players who aren't great at exploiting that (creativity, dribbling). Overloads and runners who are difficult to track can create isolations. But you need the technical quality and creativity to turn the overloads and runs to make that happen.

On his day Maddison does that a lot, but we can't rely on him to bring all of that. Over two years now he's had to carry way more of the creative (and ball progression) burden than he can do (inconsistency, injuries and it just being too much to ask of any player that isn't world class).

 

[Legohamster]

Yeah, perhaps not the best wording from me. Johnson is involved in the stats that matter. He is currently the difference between us being winners and not. He has 20 goals for club and country this last season.

It was Johnson who is on the official scorecard as the guy that got the winning goal. In my mind Brennan was terrific in that final. There were a couple of big moments defensively where he made the difference as well as his obvious winning goal. Brennan didn't take the game by the scruff of the neck and single handedly win it. He just did what Brennan does and nick a winning goal.

Perhaps we should think of it as the Brennan final. That's if we can stop obsessing about it being the Ange final.

I am interested to see what Frank does with him, he wanted him at Brentford before we got him, he knows how to spot and develop a forward