Dean Smith

[Tomaszk]

Whatever you want to call it, it was the same identical shape IMO for that grim run. We setup the same way week after week and looked poor every time.

We will improve with better players absolutely, I think it's worth having a different shape we can try if we've gone four games without a "good" performance.

[Teale's 'tache]

4 minutes ago, Tomaszk said:

Whatever you want to call it, it was the same identical shape IMO for that grim run. We setup the same way week after week and looked poor every time.

We will improve with better players absolutely, I think it's worth having a different shape we can try if we've gone four games without a "good" performance.

I think in that run the players learnt how difficult a formation it can be to play, I think before Grealish was injured he papered over the cracks of a team learning an entirely new style. He's so good at keeping the ball when most wouldn't, moving it on quickly, making himself available, and picking the right pass that when he wasn't there we couldn't seem to get it forward through the lines quickly enough, and we were losing the ball more often and in dangerous areas.

I don't think that has really been fixed, if Jack isn't there we will likely struggle, maybe Jota is the answer, he's nowhere near as good as Jack but I think he can fill that kind of roll.

My main concern is that with so many players coming in and not knowing the system we could be off to a slow start, and depending on how the fixtures land it could hurt our chances of staying up. There's not really anything we can do about it other than getting as many of the loan guys in as we can.

It won't hurt to have a plan B, you're right in that respect, but the plan B might just be a variation of what we already do rather than an outright change.

[Adam2003]

26 minutes ago, Teale's 'tache said:

It just depends on if you count the El Ghazi/Adomah positions as forwards or midfielders, and if you count one of the center midfielders as being entirely defensive, technically you could call it a 4-1-2-2-1.

Either way it's flexible and it worked! 

Agreed, I would say 4-1-4-1 as I think Grealish and McGinn played just as far forward as the wingers, and all four tracked back as much as each other.

[cyrusr]

With 4-3-3 you can play a lot of variations with some ease: 

4-1-4-1 (wingers drop back with DCM)

4-5-1 (Wingers drop back)

4-2-3-1 (1 CM plays higher up behind striker)

4-4-2 (1 winger alongside striker; 1 drops back)

4-4-1-1 (1 winger drops behind striker; 1 drops back)

4-3-2-1 (both wingers drop in behind striker)

Like what has been said, it is more about the players and their capacity to change their role in game as it develops. Good players/the right players can do this. If you had, for example, a DCM that was well equipped to play CB and FBs that were really WBs, you could go 3 at the back with WBs. There is really no limit, subject to the players, of course. 

[carewjust4u]

Please don't underestimate how difficult it is to implement fluid formations and tactical approaches when you join mid-way through the season.

This is especially true when you overhaul the style of play from defensive to offensive, and espeically true in the Championship were you barely get any respite between games and minutes on the training pitch are limited.

I am sure now he has his philosophy embedded he will now use the pre-season to implement a number of tactical approaches.

[Brentfordnylons]

1 hour ago, Tomaszk said:

Hope so, it will benefit us. 

Brentford played 433 every time we played them. We played 433 every match except one last season, I think we might even have switched back to it towards the end of that Swansea game. 433 has been 100% his plan A in the past. 

Player ability, workrate and attitude is definitely more important than any discussions like this btw. I think Dean will get that side right and it'll help if he's got some formation flexibility to go alongside it.

Not when we beat you 1 0 back in February,Thomas Frank changed the formation at the turn of the year to a back 3 and continued to play that till the end of season.

[Tomaszk]

16 minutes ago, Brentfordnylons said:

Not when we beat you 1 0 back in February,Thomas Frank changed the formation at the turn of the year to a back 3 and continued to play that till the end of season.

I meant under Smith sir.

Did he play this shape for most of his time at Brentford? You lot ever experiment with 3 CBs under him?

[MaVilla]

Part of me wonders if formations are all they are cracked up to be in the modern era.

How I would look at it now is you have a general defensive formation, like a 4 5 1, and a formation when in the attacking third, like a 3 4 3 or some variant, and everything else is just transition, rotation and pressing through transition.

I honestly think that a hard formation these days is just for the pre match line-up, if you look at all the best coaches and teams they have a defensive formation and them in attack everything becomes fluid, even transitioning from attack to defence can be quite fluid depending on how you press and if you defend high up the pitch.

Takes good players and good coaches, but I honestly think a hard formation is out dated for the better teams.

Edited June 6, 2019 by MaVilla

[Mazrim]

Anything that is inflexible inevitably breaks.

[Teale's 'tache]

10 minutes ago, carewjust4u said:

Please don't underestimate how difficult it is to implement fluid formations and tactical approaches when you join mid-way through the season.

This is especially true when you overhaul the style of play from defensive to offensive, and espeically true in the Championship were you barely get any respite between games and minutes on the training pitch are limited.

I am sure now he has his philosophy embedded he will now use the pre-season to implement a number of tactical approaches.

I agree, although the Championship games coming thick and fast was probably a good thing, as much as you can do on the training pitch it's competitive games where the changes are really enforced.

Although the philosophy is embedded in the few players we have left, we have half a squad full that will need to come in and learn it quickly! Will be interesting to see how we start, pre-season and getting those signings in early could be vital for a good start.  

[Teale's 'tache]

4 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

Part of me wonders if formations are all they are cracked up to be in the modern era.

How I would look at it now is you have a general defensive formation, like a 4 5 1, and a formation when in the attacking third, like a 3 4 3 or some variant, and everything else is just transition, rotation and pressing through transition.

I honestly think that a hard formation these days is just for the pre match line-up, if you look at all the best coaches and teams they have a defensive formation and them in attack everything becomes fluid, even transitioning from attack to defence can be quite fluid depending on how you press and if you defend high up the pitch.

Takes good players and good coaches, but I honestly think a hard formation is out dated for the better teams.

I'd agree with that, but it's good to have a shape to begin with, and it can help having starting points to reset to.

You're right though no formation is really set in stone anymore.

[MaVilla]

4 minutes ago, Teale's 'tache said:

I'd agree with that, but it's good to have a shape to begin with, and it can help having starting points to reset to.

You're right though no formation is really set in stone anymore.

Oh I agree you need a formation as a starting point, but that all it is foe the really good modern teams, the first 1%, the starting point.

[dont_do_it_doug.]

We more or less played 3 at the back in the 4-2 Vs Blues, with Whelan dropping into the centre. So he has shown flexibility. 

[Brentfordnylons]

2 hours ago, Tomaszk said:

I meant under Smith sir.

Did he play this shape for most of his time at Brentford? You lot ever experiment with 3 CBs under him?

Ok, no he always played back 4.

[Tomaszk]

Hope he's got his thick skin ready. Isn't one of the old guard, media pals so if we have a tricky first few months he'll be getting plenty of bunkum criticism to go along with whatever is happening on the pitch. Won't be surprising to hear Bruce getting brought up by Lawro, Holloway et al.

Plenty about today about "doing a Fulham" with so many buys, when the reality is we're going to have to pretty much. We must bring in 7/8/9 squad players as we're so low on numbers. This won't stop idiot pundits comparing us to Fulham and saying we should have kept on PL experience like Whelan, Jed and Elphick. No chance, this overall can sort us out for years in theory. Relegation won't be welcomed but we should have the squad in a place where it'll be manageable to deal with.

So much depends on Suso, and our network. Hope the scouts are up to the job because I don't know anything of their ability to judge a player.

[hippo]

On 06/06/2019 at 12:59, carewjust4u said:

Please don't underestimate how difficult it is to implement fluid formations and tactical approaches when you join mid-way through the season.

This is especially true when you overhaul the style of play from defensive to offensive, and espeically true in the Championship were you barely get any respite between games and minutes on the training pitch are limited.

I am sure now he has his philosophy embedded he will now use the pre-season to implement a number of tactical approaches.

How many managers take over mid season ...and get promotion that same season....I can only think of Roy Keane at Sunderland.

I wasnt convinced by DS for a long time. But having turned that around...held his nerve with injuries and through the play offs..there no knowing where he could take us.

You could see in those wembley celebrations, when DS wanted to say a few words.. the players instantly switched into professional mode and listened in total silence. 

To me its as much as the team we create rather the individuals that gives me hope.

 

[DaveAV1]

On 06/06/2019 at 13:17, MaVilla said:

Part of me wonders if formations are all they are cracked up to be in the modern era.

How I would look at it now is you have a general defensive formation, like a 4 5 1, and a formation when in the attacking third, like a 3 4 3 or some variant, and everything else is just transition, rotation and pressing through transition.

I honestly think that a hard formation these days is just for the pre match line-up, if you look at all the best coaches and teams they have a defensive formation and them in attack everything becomes fluid, even transitioning from attack to defence can be quite fluid depending on how you press and if you defend high up the pitch.

Takes good players and good coaches, but I honestly think a hard formation is out dated for the better teams.

Your Steve Bruce impression started so well, but then you spoilt it with all the technical mumbo jumbo. 

[carewjust4u]

On 06/06/2019 at 13:17, MaVilla said:

Part of me wonders if formations are all they are cracked up to be in the modern era.

How I would look at it now is you have a general defensive formation, like a 4 5 1, and a formation when in the attacking third, like a 3 4 3 or some variant, and everything else is just transition, rotation and pressing through transition.

I honestly think that a hard formation these days is just for the pre match line-up, if you look at all the best coaches and teams they have a defensive formation and them in attack everything becomes fluid, even transitioning from attack to defence can be quite fluid depending on how you press and if you defend high up the pitch.

Takes good players and good coaches, but I honestly think a hard formation is out dated for the better teams.

You'll find this interview with Henry on Guardiola very interesting, the amount of thought that goes into tactical shape and decision making is crazy in the modern game.

 

 

 

[terrytini]

Nah.

Get it Forward !

Edited June 12, 2019 by terrytini

[terrytini]

On 06/06/2019 at 13:19, Mazrim said:

Anything that is inflexible inevitably breaks.

Is that a flexible or inflexible rule ?