Jump to content

Summer transfer window 2021


zab6359

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, paul514 said:

Not to me, I don't like the system, it lacks width and all you need to do is stop the full back.

 

Not to mention it disregards Smith's attacking philosophy of overloading. Looks like a fantasy manager game setup 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, barry'sboots said:

It has seemed to work ok for Chelski.  The full backs provide the width and I think both Cash and Targett would be ideal for that.

I'm not saying start it every game BUT it would give an option that might work better against certain teams e.g. Citeh where James and Chilwell stopped Sterling and Mahrez and Citeh were forced inside into Chelski's higher energy and numbers.  The two up top, and particularly Werner's pace, was too hard for Citeh to deal with - we have the pace with Ollie but better finishing and a better supply line with Jack. 

We have the option to play 3 at the back whenever we want already it just isn't optimal for the players we have.

Chelsea play 3 at the back because the coach doesn't trust the centre backs enough to play 2.

Man City lost because they set up their team so badly, there was sod all balance to their team sheet

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kiwivillan said:

Not to mention it disregards Smith's attacking philosophy of overloading. Looks like a fantasy manager game setup 

Makes you more boring to watch that is for sure.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jacketspuds said:

I’m not sure Newcastle would have signed Wilson if Joelinton actually played like a £40m striker.

I don't disagree but the OP said Citeh and Chelsea wouldn't spend that sort of money on two options for one position which is just wrong.  Leicester have Vardy (who was obviously very cheap but is equivalent to a 30-40m player) and Inneacho and are still linked with Edouard/a new 9.  They have successfully used two up top in a change from their historic 4-3-3/4-2-3-1/3-4-3.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, barry'sboots said:

I don't disagree but the OP said Citeh and Chelsea wouldn't spend that sort of money on two options for one position which is just wrong.  Leicester have Vardy (who was obviously very cheap but is equivalent to a 30-40m player) and Inneacho and are still linked with Edouard/a new 9.  They have successfully used two up top in a change from their historic 4-3-3/4-2-3-1/3-4-3.

They are looking for a Vardy replacement though as they know when he goes if they haven't replaced him already they will drop at least a few places in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, paul514 said:

We have the option to play 3 at the back whenever we want already it just isn't optimal for the players we have.

Chelsea play 3 at the back because the coach doesn't trust the centre backs enough to play 2.

Man City lost because they set up their team so badly, there was sod all balance to their team sheet

It has worked well for them as it has for Leicester at times this season.

I agree that Citeh set up badly but Chelski have beaten them three times in 6 weeks (they played a DCM in the other two games!!) and they have beaten other big sides in their run to the CLfinal playing a 3-4-1-2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, paul514 said:

They are looking for a Vardy replacement though as they know when he goes if they haven't replaced him already they will drop at least a few places in the league.

Again, I don't disagree but this means that they will have three 9's - Vardy, Ineacho and a third - who are all highly capable.

BTW, I am not convinced that we will go for Tammy.  I'd take Edouard all day long at 20m as competition/a partner for Ollie.  We do need two decent "9"s and I am not convinced that Smith sees Wes as the second - the media coverage suggests not.

I wouldn't mind Tammy though, as long as we could afford him (owner's commitment and ffp considerations) without impacting on key other positions.  None of us, I believe, know where the club/owners are on this (even Kiwivillan who seems so adamant), so it is nice to speculate/hope at this stage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, barry'sboots said:

It has worked well for them as it has for Leicester at times this season.

I agree that Citeh set up badly but Chelski have beaten them three times in 6 weeks (they played a DCM in the other two games!!) and they have beaten other big sides in their run to the CLfinal playing a 3-4-1-2.

I don't know what you want me to say? I don't like the system as it is easy to defend against, we haven't brought the players for that system, I think it is a boring system.
Like the other poster said it ignores the managers philosophy of how to play and would require us to look very seriously at areas of the squad which we currently take for granted is Freddy good enough to be a back up in that system? Are we happy with a young up and coming player to come in at right back? We seem to be at the moment but in that system the full backs are much more important. Are the current first two good enough? Cash doesn't seem to get many assists for example.

We have 4 centre backs 1 of which we all think should be thrown in the bin and have serious doubts about the other. You need 5 if you play 3 centre backs.

We would have zero use for Traore, El Ghazi and Trez (even though I think the last two should be replaced)

It requires two strikers which are the most expensive positions to fill and then a good back up to them as well.

I just think, NO.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, barry'sboots said:

Again, I don't disagree but this means that they will have three 9's - Vardy, Ineacho and a third - who are all highly capable.

BTW, I am not convinced that we will go for Tammy.  I'd take Edouard all day long at 20m as competition/a partner for Ollie.  We do need two decent "9"s and I am not convinced that Smith sees Wes as the second - the media coverage suggests not.

I wouldn't mind Tammy though, as long as we could afford him (owner's commitment and ffp considerations) without impacting on key other positions.  None of us, I believe, know where the club/owners are on this (even Kiwivillan who seems so adamant), so it is nice to speculate/hope at this stage. 

We do need another striker IF Wes is not going to come back as good as he was pre injury but none of us know that situation. 

I'd rather go on the assumption that he is alright now until told otherwise.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, paul514 said:

I don't know what you want me to say? 

You don't have to say anything.  I get that you don't like it.  I wouldn't necessarily play it every game - I just believe that, if we had two decent strikers, it could be an option against certain teams.

3 minutes ago, paul514 said:

We would have zero use for Traore, El Ghazi and Trez (even though I think the last two should be replaced)  

Traore can also play as the 10.

At least we agree on Trez and AEG!!

As I said, it wouldn't be my first choice set up either BUT I do think it could be an option in the same way that Rogers has turned to it at certain points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, barry'sboots said:

You don't have to say anything.  I get that you don't like it.  I wouldn't necessarily play it every game - I just believe that, if we had two decent strikers, it could be an option against certain teams.

Traore can also play as the 10.

At least we agree on Trez and AEG!!

As I said, it wouldn't be my first choice set up either BUT I do think it could be an option in the same way that Rogers has turned to it at certain points.

I believe we have two decent strikers currently, I also believe that we shouldn't change our system throughout the season. 

4-2-3-1 and 443 is the same system you just change the role of the three central midfielders and that is all we have chopped and changed between since we came up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, paul514 said:

We do need another striker IF Wes is not going to come back as good as he was pre injury but none of us know that situation. 

I'd rather go on the assumption that he is alright now until told otherwise.

You are welcome to make that assumption and you may well be right.

The media are suggesting otherwise, saying that he may go out on loan.  This could, as always be pure BS.  However, it could be correct.

Some on here like to use the discussion forum to speculate and look at alternatives - I get that you don't and that's your prerogative.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, barry'sboots said:

You are welcome to make that assumption and you may well be right.

The media are suggesting otherwise, saying that he may go out on loan.  This could, as always be pure BS.  However, it could be correct.

Some on here like to use the discussion forum to speculate and look at alternatives - I get that you don't and that's your prerogative.

I assume everything is BS unless it has a quote, I also think it is safe to assume we don't have information leaks out of the club like we used to so they basically know zero about what is going on inside the club.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, paul514 said:

I believe we have two decent strikers currently, I also believe that we shouldn't change our system throughout the season. 

4-2-3-1 and 443 is the same system you just change the role of the three central midfielders and that is all we have chopped and changed between since we came up.

Just because that is all we have done doesn't make it right.

However, again, I don't necessarily disagree that we shouldn't change and I think Smith would prefer that.  From what I saw of Brentford under him he consistently played the 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 but he had players - at that level - that could slot in seemlessly.  IF we haven't got that, as we haven't had at times this season, after the window, I think you need to be more flexible just as Rogers has been at Leicester when faced with injuries. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Lukas Nmecha shout on here was Brilliantly. This is the kind of clever gambles we need to take.  Would be a great addition for 7-8 million. Kids got potential. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, barry'sboots said:

Just because that is all we have done doesn't make it right.

However, again, I don't necessarily disagree that we shouldn't change and I think Smith would prefer that.  From what I saw of Brentford under him he consistently played the 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 but he had players - at that level - that could slot in seemlessly.  IF we haven't got that, as we haven't had at times this season, after the window, I think you need to be more flexible just as Rogers has been at Leicester when faced with injuries. 

I actually think that is the best and most flexible system in football today and we only need two players to make everything fit together where we are at the moment anyway another wide player and most importantly a DCM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, paul514 said:

Makes you more boring to watch that is for sure.

the most attacking and entertaining team in Europe play 3 at the back, it depends how you do it. We also dont have the players for it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, messi11 said:

The Lukas Nmecha shout on here was Brilliantly. This is the kind of clever gambles we need to take.  Would be a great addition for 7-8 million. Kids got potential. 

Man City own him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...
Â