• 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

Radu Drăgușin

Not just a romanian said:
Radu can play RCB
VdV can play LCB
Udogie and Porro have more quality on attack than defensively

Thus 5-3-2 (on defense) > 3-5-2 (attacking) makes sense, but unlikely to happen.

Will rather be 2 at the back and Radu to step in when injuries / europa / cup.
Don't agree he is a step down from Romero VdV. He lacks experience, but he will be equal if not better than both of them imo.
Click to expand...
Where is the width going to come from in this formation? You're playing two central strikers and 3 CMs. Our FBs invert to the interior so you have 7 players occupying the central areas and nobody outwide!!!

Our central attacking areas are already congested as it is. The system you're suggesting would make even more predictable and incredibly difficult to create from. How would adding another central CB help us?

I get that ppl want to see Dragusin play but playing him along with VDV and Romero is not any kind of solution under Ange.
 
i think gk and CBs are the only roles you can go without subs in a full season. in fact i would prefer if there would be no change to this trio, unless to bleed junior/new players.

maybe not ange, but a more tactically flexible manager (which i like) would accomodate 3 at the back if he had vdv, romoero and radu in his team
NaijaSpurs said:
Assuming we go beyond the third round of the league cup we will have at least 27 matches in 17 weeks. There will be enough minutes for our central defenders, no need to play a back 3.
Click to expand...
 
Not just a romanian said:
Radu can play RCB
VdV can play LCB
Udogie and Porro have more quality on attack than defensively

Thus 5-3-2 (on defense) > 3-5-2 (attacking) makes sense, but unlikely to happen.

Will rather be 2 at the back and Radu to step in when injuries / europa / cup.
Don't agree he is a step down from Romero VdV. He lacks experience, but he will be equal if not better than both of them imo.
Click to expand...
Even if that could work out it doesn't really make sense. Start drilling players in new roles just as we've had a year working on the existing system. All of a sudden you need more central defenders in the squad for cover, what happens then if it doesn't work out.

Romero and VdV have proven themselves, at this level, with consistency (really important for a CB). Dragusin will get chances to do the same, until he does he'll be seen as a step down. I like him though, think he can become really good.
 
metalgear said:
i think gk and CBs are the only roles you can go without subs in a full season. in fact i would prefer if there would be no change to this trio, unless to bleed junior/new players.

maybe not ange, but a more tactically flexible manager (which i like) would accomodate 3 at the back if he had vdv, romoero and radu in his team
Click to expand...
3 at the back doesn't solve the problems we have and just created new ones. Namely the complete lack of width or a lack of numbers in midfield.
 
Bishop said:
3 at the back doesn't solve the problems we have and just created new ones. Namely the complete lack of width or a lack of numbers in midfield.
Click to expand...
I think romero as dm, backed by vdv and radu, means we have more defensive quality in the last 15 mins of the game.

It's also about balance, being solid at the back means more readiness to attack and discouraging quick risky counter attacks by the opposition.

Later half of last season i felt like we were no different from a Harry Redknapp team - anyone could score against us in the second half and everyone tried!
 
metalgear said:
I think romero as dm, backed by vdv and radu, means we have more defensive quality in the last 15 mins of the game.

It's also about balance, being solid at the back means more readiness to attack and discouraging quick risky counter attacks by the opposition.

Later half of last season i felt like we were no different from a Harry Redknapp team - anyone could score against us in the second half and everyone tried!
Click to expand...

Had I been manager I would have been itching to try this, be a Rodri and work with the other cbs to get the ball into positive territory.
 
I did say it was unlikely to happen, was just highlighting that defense-wise that might fit the profile of Porro/Udogie (they are better on attack than defensively). I think a lot of the goals scored by opponents were also due to VdV/Romero having to cover for FBs being caught off position.

Also, there are many options in central midfield and the past season we relied too much on attacking chance coming from the wingers. I feel there should be more attacking options through the middle, running at the defence.

And, as somebody pointed out, in a 3 CB system, you need at least 2 more top quality CBs. So no, unlikely to happen. :)
 
metalgear said:
I think romero as dm, backed by vdv and radu, means we have more defensive quality in the last 15 mins of the game.

It's also about balance, being solid at the back means more readiness to attack and discouraging quick risky counter attacks by the opposition.

Later half of last season i felt like we were no different from a Harry Redknapp team - anyone could score against us in the second half and everyone tried!
Click to expand...
But a Romero in midfield gives us one less midfielder, so whilst we may have more tacklers available, our use of the ball will be worse. We are more likely to be dominated in midfield as we always were under Conte and subsequently the defense will just come under constant pressure.

So I get your thinking, I'm just saying it won't work the way you think it will and will cause other problems that lead to pressure and probably goals conceded.
 
Bishop said:
But a Romero in midfield gives us one less midfielder, so whilst we may have more tacklers available, our use of the ball will be worse. We are more likely to be dominated in midfield as we always were under Conte and subsequently the defense will just come under constant pressure.

So I get your thinking, I'm just saying it won't work the way you think it will and will cause other problems that lead to pressure and probably goals conceded.
Click to expand...
Tough I don't see it as a particularly good option I do think Romero has the technical ability to play that role as well at our current (deep) midfielders. He's composed, good under pressure, consistent with his short and medium range passing and quite ambitious on the ball.

Problem for me is that he would probably need time to adapt. It's a rather different role on the ball, receiving the ball facing your own goal, me frequently being surrounded. One of the most valuable traits for a player in that role is consistency with decision making and that takes time.

It will cause problems elsewhere (need another CB), would come with uncertainty, and moving a (imo) world class player from a position they're thriving in into a position with uncertainty rarely seems like a good idea. Fix the problem at hand, don't create another one.
 
braineclipse said:
Tough I don't see it as a particularly good option I do think Romero has the technical ability to play that role as well at our current (deep) midfielders. He's composed, good under pressure, consistent with his short and medium range passing and quite ambitious on the ball.

Problem for me is that he would probably need time to adapt. It's a rather different role on the ball, receiving the ball facing your own goal, me frequently being surrounded. One of the most valuable traits for a player in that role is consistency with decision making and that takes time.

It will cause problems elsewhere (need another CB), would come with uncertainty, and moving a (imo) world class player from a position they're thriving in into a position with uncertainty rarely seems like a good idea. Fix the problem at hand, don't create another one.
Click to expand...
you mean like southgate with TTA? wise - what is he trying to do, throw a wobbly that oppos won't figure out? Interesting to see Ange on tv as a pundit, saying Gareth should stick to keep players in their best position, don't try to fit a system around them, but pick those best to fit the system.
 
indospurs said:
you mean like southgate with TTA? wise - what is he trying to do, throw a wobbly that oppos won't figure out? Interesting to see Ange on tv as a pundit, saying Gareth should stick to keep players in their best position, don't try to fit a system around them, but pick those best to fit the system.
Click to expand...
Yeah, very different player profiles, but somewhat comparable. It's a big change of role, a role the player could/should be capable of playing from a "attributes" point of view. But adjusting to that usually takes time. More than a couple of weeks of training and a couple of games.

Seems like Ange is spot on again. Even more important at international level of course. At club level it makes more sense to develop a player into a role that fits the system. There's time.
 
braineclipse said:
Yeah, very different player profiles, but somewhat comparable. It's a big change of role, a role the player could/should be capable of playing from a "attributes" point of view. But adjusting to that usually takes time. More than a couple of weeks of training and a couple of games.

Seems like Ange is spot on again. Even more important at international level of course. At club level it makes more sense to develop a player into a role that fits the system. There's time.
Click to expand...
and Ange can speak to international teams better than most - been there, done that, mate. I think it's insane what Gareth is trying to do at the end of a long season, in such a short space of time. He was right to leave some players behind, but we'll see how far the team goes - I hope he is just trying to show others a different formation during the group stage, and come right in the knockout rounds
 
Gutter Boy said:
I thought he was great. Up against probably the best front 3 in the league. 2 awesome slide tackles to boot
Click to expand...
He was great
But your mad if you think that’s the best front 3
And I say that as one who rates their attack but there is better at several clubs
 
Bedfordspurs said:
He was great
But your mad if you think that’s the best front 3
And I say that as one who rates their attack but there is better at several clubs
Click to expand...
Who has better than Isak, Gordon and Barnes in your opinion? Isak is the best alround CF in the league, Gordon has pace, Barnes brains.

Us, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea dont have close to as good as that trio. Some combination of City's players?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back