• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Definitely not an out of car window Transfer Thread

I think most of us would love a Maddison’s type of player but generally they are a big investment and would want playing time
I think someone like that would get plenty, but convincing them….
For this window kulu cover is key as we have seen
 
Bedfordspurs said:
So change the system that conte has brought all his other players for… would need a left back too
Would this player be in the 3 or the 2?
Click to expand...
I think it works with our current set of players. Bring Regullion back for LB if needed. Bentancur gives enough going forward for the dembele role, so its more the ACM we are short, although Kane or Kulu could do a job there short term once Richarlison is back
 
Gutter Boy said:
I think it works with our current set of players. Bring Regullion back for LB if needed. Bentancur gives enough going forward for the dembele role, so its more the ACM we are short, although Kane or Kulu could do a job there short term once Richarlison is back
Click to expand...

For me much better to continue building on what has already been worked on for some time now.

Sure, a 4-2-3-1 could work with some new signings and tweaks. But why would it be better than what we're already doing?

ACM, left back, but also centre back (Dier not great as LCB in a four imo, Lenglet untested in that role in this league). Doherty is at his best as a wing back, Emerson probably better as a full back, but still limited when attacking.

And we'd still be left with a lack of cover/options. That would have to be fixed too. Where will the money for that come from if we spend on fixes for a 4-2-3-1 starting 11?

Then when that change of style/formation fails to get the success we want because these things take time do another change in a year?

Fully fit team we actually have a very good team right now in the 3-4-3 imo. We just haven't seen that fully fit team in a long time. Even one very good signing for the starting 11 and a couple of good options would do us a world of good imo.
 
Whenever we've struggled people have been asking for this formation or that formation at the solution. I'm sure I've done the same.

It's rare for a change in formation to bring lasting positive changes unless that's followed up by time building/re-building the squad to fit those needs.

When we've had success it's imo been because a manager has been "stubborn" with his style, built a team for that style and formation over time. Through transfers and player development. Sure, tweaks and smaller changes, but rarely a big revamp of the system.

Same with other teams. How many Arsenal fans wanted Arteta to change the style or formation in recent years? Klopp at Liverpool at first? Pep at City? Part of what brought success was being "stubborn".

We can never be sure of counterfactuals, but for me a change to a 4-2-3-1 now would most likely be the beginning of the end for Conte here. The best chance of success is to continue building what is already here. It will either work or break, the chances of failure are clearly there. But that's where the chances of success are the best.
 
braineclipse said:
Whenever we've struggled people have been asking for this formation or that formation at the solution. I'm sure I've done the same.

It's rare for a change in formation to bring lasting positive changes unless that's followed up by time building/re-building the squad to fit those needs.

When we've had success it's imo been because a manager has been "stubborn" with his style, built a team for that style and formation over time. Through transfers and player development. Sure, tweaks and smaller changes, but rarely a big revamp of the system.

Same with other teams. How many Arsenal fans wanted Arteta to change the style or formation in recent years? Klopp at Liverpool at first? Pep at City? Part of what brought success was being "stubborn".

We can never be sure of counterfactuals, but for me a change to a 4-2-3-1 now would most likely be the beginning of the end for Conte here. The best chance of success is to continue building what is already here. It will either work or break, the chances of failure are clearly there. But that's where the chances of success are the best.
Click to expand...

But that is the crux of the issue, simple summary ->

- Conte plays effectively 2 in midfield, this almost every game leaves us outnumbered there (sometimes 5v2), makes control of the game harder, makes creativity harder and puts more pressure on the defense because there is less protection from midfield.
- The system is intended to compensate for that by have 2 WBs that effectively act as attacking wide players (why you described it as 3-4-3)

Like Klopp's system (that often leaves CBs exposed) only worked consistently (interesting?) when Pool got VVD, we need very good midfielders (hence Bentancur's impact) and we need better WB's than we have and probably another top level CB to partner Romero to pull it off.

It requires a lot of investment in the right players and time to get it right, you are also likely to have to get rid of decent players on the books today that don't fit the system and is Conte in for the long haul?
 
Raziel said:
But that is the crux of the issue, simple summary ->

- Conte plays effectively 2 in midfield, this almost every game leaves us outnumbered there (sometimes 5v2), makes control of the game harder, makes creativity harder and puts more pressure on the defense because there is less protection from midfield.
- The system is intended to compensate for that by have 2 WBs that effectively act as attacking wide players (why you described it as 3-4-3)

Like Klopp's system (that often leaves CBs exposed) only worked consistently (interesting?) when Pool got VVD, we need very good midfielders (hence Bentancur's impact) and we need better WB's than we have and probably another top level CB to partner Romero to pull it off.

It requires a lot of investment in the right players and time to get it right, you are also likely to have to get rid of decent players on the books today that don't fit the system and is Conte in for the long haul?
Click to expand...
It worked absolutely fine with most of these players for the second half of the season though, so what’s changed?
 
Why are people talking about players to cover? We have a clear issue in the first team squad that needs addressing first. We need 2 top class wing backs, a cb or 2, and a midfielder to replace hojberg in the middle of the park.
 
Raziel said:
But that is the crux of the issue, simple summary ->

- Conte plays effectively 2 in midfield, this almost every game leaves us outnumbered there (sometimes 5v2), makes control of the game harder, makes creativity harder and puts more pressure on the defense because there is less protection from midfield.
- The system is intended to compensate for that by have 2 WBs that effectively act as attacking wide players (why you described it as 3-4-3)

Like Klopp's system (that often leaves CBs exposed) only worked consistently (interesting?) when Pool got VVD, we need very good midfielders (hence Bentancur's impact) and we need better WB's than we have and probably another top level CB to partner Romero to pull it off.

It requires a lot of investment in the right players and time to get it right, you are also likely to have to get rid of decent players on the books today that don't fit the system and is Conte in for the long haul?
Click to expand...

All formations and systems have strengths and weaknesses. There is no inherently better or worse formation (apart from the absurd one's). There's success to be found playing in various ways.

It's all about the fit to the players available, and to the manager's preferences, strengths and weaknesses.

I see no system or formation that fits our squad better than the current one. Changing it would only highlight other issues currently less exposed by the current system.

There are clear benefits to working on a system over time. Building a squad over time that fits those requirements. Getting the players well integrated into their roles within that system. That to me is the main path to success.

Had we started a year ago down a different path that would have been equally fine. We had no one system that squad was suited to. Now we're part way down this path with this system, it's not the time for big changes. Smaller one's, definitely fine, but a move to a 4-2-3-1 would be a rather big change imo, even though style of play is more important than formations.
 
Yiddo said:
Why are people talking about players to cover? We have a clear issue in the first team squad that needs addressing first. We need 2 top class wing backs, a cb or 2, and a midfielder to replace hojberg in the middle of the park.
Click to expand...

Those players were good enough to secure fourth last season.

I think our issue this season has been less about our starting 11 and more about the players coming in when players are missing.

If we could sign 4-5 players that would be a direct upgrade for our best 11 that would also give us depth with the current starters becoming rotation/backup options. That would be preferable, but I don't think that's particularly likely. Whereas rotation options for key areas where we have no suitable options could be doable.

Just buy top class players for the positions where we don't currently have top class players is also a bit boring and obvious as well as unrealistic.

I would like to see us get someone that could at least in theory become first choice at RWB though.
 
braineclipse said:
Just speculation on my part, but I think we may look to sell Sanchez if we can get in another right footed centre back.

Conte has essentially tried all other options at RCB with Romero out. Tanganga. Dier at RCB with Lenglet in the centre.

Seems rather obvious that he doesn't particularly rate Sanchez, but doesn't have any other good options when Romero is out.
Click to expand...
100% we'd be selling Sanchez if we acquire a new RCB.

It can't be hard to find someone who'd be just as comfortable slitting in at CCB as well as RCB. Then Dier can rotate as well in both those positions as required. Dier was good at RCB when dominating teams before the WC.
 
braineclipse said:
Those players were good enough to secure fourth last season.

I think our issue this season has been less about our starting 11 and more about the players coming in when players are missing.

If we could sign 4-5 players that would be a direct upgrade for our best 11 that would also give us depth with the current starters becoming rotation/backup options. That would be preferable, but I don't think that's particularly likely. Whereas rotation options for key areas where we have no suitable options could be doable.

Just buy top class players for the positions where we don't currently have top class players is also a bit boring and obvious as well as unrealistic.

I would like to see us get someone that could at least in theory become first choice at RWB though.
Click to expand...

They may have secured top 4 last season but the same players have all been part of us conceding a stupid amount of goals and not turning up in the first half of games.
 
braineclipse said:
There are clear benefits to working on a system over time. Building a squad over time that fits those requirements. Getting the players well integrated into their roles within that system. That to me is the main path to success.
Click to expand...
Quite often the moment when the team becomes stronger than the sum of its parts.
That's one aspect I don't feel is happening here?

(Caveat....we are only just over one year in)
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
100% we'd be selling Sanchez if we acquire a new RCB.

It can't be hard to find someone who'd be just as comfortable slitting in at CCB as well as RCB. Then Dier can rotate as well in both those positions as required. Dier was good at RCB when dominating teams before the WC.
Click to expand...

I think if the club can get Inter to release Bastoni then thats the move still, apparently the club were told to wait till this summer hence the loan for the lad from Barce. Inters season looks shot TBH so maybe that works but who knows.

I would feel alot more comfortable with him and Romero flanking Dier and then looking at CB in summer

Also for this system to flourish and us to take the burden off Son, Kane and Kulu we desperately need to sort our WBs out
 
braineclipse said:
All formations and systems have strengths and weaknesses. There is no inherently better or worse formation (apart from the absurd one's). There's success to be found playing in various ways.

It's all about the fit to the players available, and to the manager's preferences, strengths and weaknesses.

I see no system or formation that fits our squad better than the current one. Changing it would only highlight other issues currently less exposed by the current system.

There are clear benefits to working on a system over time. Building a squad over time that fits those requirements. Getting the players well integrated into their roles within that system. That to me is the main path to success.

Had we started a year ago down a different path that would have been equally fine. We had no one system that squad was suited to. Now we're part way down this path with this system, it's not the time for big changes. Smaller one's, definitely fine, but a move to a 4-2-3-1 would be a rather big change imo, even though style of play is more important than formations.
Click to expand...

In theory yes, but most people would agree that modern football is won/loss in midfield, a system that constantly gives the opposition an advantage in that area (one of the reasons imo that we struggle against "lesser" sides as they often have 5 in midfield) is a high risk setup.

The club is in an interesting place, yes we have made a lot of investment in this system but we are still short CB, LWB, RWB and probably some kind of CM (goal scoring threat option)

A switch (which I agree with previous comments is likely only with coaching change) is really that different in terms of total player change?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back