Jump to content

Team shape, tactics and personnel


MaVilla
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • VT Supporter
1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said:

I think in the immediate, shoring up the centre of the park has to be the priority.

That means either playing three and leaving Ings or Watkins on the bench or going with a five at the back and no wingers.

I'd go either:

----------------------------Martinez--------------------------

Cash------------Konsa----------Mings-------Targett

-----------------------------Nakamba-----------------------

-------------------McGinn---------Luiz--------------------

Buendia---------------------------------------------Bailey

-----------------------------Watkins-------------------------

Or:

----------------------------Martinez--------------------------

------------Konssa------Mings----Hause-------------

Cash---------McGinn--------Luiz------------Targett

----------------------------Buendia--------------------------

-----------------Ings------------------Watkins-------------

But I don't think either of those will happen - I think we'll try to shoehorn all four of the attacking players in and struggle for balance.

 

Yeah this is where I’m at too. I think the option with Ings and Watkins would make us much harder to play against. Our back 3 (or back 5) might struggle positionally at first but it should work after a bit of trial and error. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given his performance yesterday I can’t imagine leaving out Bailey. With the midfield personnel we have available it’s got to be 4-3-3, imo. 

Bailey - Watkins - Buendia

McGinn - Marv - Chuk

Sanson probably eases out Chuk when fit, and any DM we sign with two legs replaces Nakamba. 

If we sign two new CMs that might allow us to go back to 4-2-3-1 and bring Ings into play, but for right now we need the extra body in midfield. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ChicagoVillan1983 said:

-------------------------DM--------------------------

------------DM------DM----DM-------------

DM---------DM--------DM------------DM

----------------------------DM--------------------------

-----------------DM------------------DM-------------

Those DMs are playing a bit wonky, obviously none of those DMs are good enough, we need another DM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
4 minutes ago, ChicagoVillan1983 said:

-------------------------DM--------------------------

------------DM------DM----DM-------------

DM---------DM--------DM------------DM

----------------------------DM--------------------------

-----------------DM------------------DM-------------

11 Diego Maradona's mate? Nah, too old and too dead.

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

I think in the immediate, shoring up the centre of the park has to be the priority.

That means either playing three and leaving Ings or Watkins on the bench or going with a five at the back and no wingers.

I'd go either:

----------------------------Martinez--------------------------

Cash------------Konsa----------Mings-------Targett

-----------------------------Nakamba-----------------------

-------------------McGinn---------Luiz--------------------

Buendia---------------------------------------------Bailey

-----------------------------Watkins-------------------------

Or:

----------------------------Martinez--------------------------

------------Konssa------Mings----Hause-------------

Cash---------McGinn--------Luiz------------Targett

----------------------------Buendia--------------------------

-----------------Ings------------------Watkins-------------

But I don't think either of those will happen - I think we'll try to shoehorn all four of the attacking players in and struggle for balance.

 

Option one would be my approach. I think we’d much better off with that three in central midfield, Nakamba anchoring with DL and SJM both able to get stuck in. It might take some time for the two just mentioned to work out who’s attacking and who’s covering though. Buendia really needs to operate on the right, it’s where he’s been the most successful, and while he’s getting used to Villa it makes sense to play him where he’s most comfortable. Bailey on the left, already looks at home, and Watkins’ energy up front is preferable for me, for now. 
 

I’m looking forward to Newcastle and how Smith sets us up. Just hope he can find a system that suits us, and soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


1 poor performance dosnt define a season  but Smith needs to utilise the signings in their preferred and best positions.

 

AEG for me is finished he's pathetic as a pro he's brilliant for 1 game in 5  kt good enough.

 

Smith also now has to try a new brand of football, Jack leaving allows us to speed our attacks up.

 

4 4 2 is a no no imo with our personal.

 

I think if I was manager yo get all players in I'd go 4 1 4 1. I'd also sign a  big DM with only priority to break up attacks and pass it forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
4 hours ago, villalad21 said:

Delphinho is spot on.

We still haven't replaced Jack.

El Ghazi is currently our only natural left winger. Far from ideal.

We can't replace Jack, it was never on the cards.

We have to build another team.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
18 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

I think in the immediate, shoring up the centre of the park has to be the priority.

That means either playing three and leaving Ings or Watkins on the bench or going with a five at the back and no wingers.

I'd go either:

----------------------------Martinez--------------------------

Cash------------Konsa----------Mings-------Targett

-----------------------------Nakamba-----------------------

-------------------McGinn---------Luiz--------------------

Buendia---------------------------------------------Bailey

-----------------------------Watkins-------------------------

Or:

----------------------------Martinez--------------------------

------------Konssa------Mings----Hause-------------

Cash---------McGinn--------Luiz------------Targett

----------------------------Buendia--------------------------

-----------------Ings------------------Watkins-------------

But I don't think either of those will happen - I think we'll try to shoehorn all four of the attacking players in and struggle for balance.

 

I get what you are saying.....but my guess is, its just a tad short of what you really think.

Edited by TRO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, villalad21 said:

But the team they have assembled is highly imbalanced 

It's not that imbalanced it's just needs a proper destroyer in front of the back 4 

Who that is I don't know preferably 6 foot plus would also help on set plays

Some thing like this would work I think similar to Liverpool formation

                         Emi 

Cash     konsa         mings    targett

                        Dm 

       Emi2                Mcginn 

Bailey           ings         watkins

Front 3 are all interchangeable 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


In one of the videos when ings was at BMH, him and Ollie were chatting whilst stretching in the gym, in the tiny audible bit you can hear around the music ings said ‘ yeah on the shoulder and il float around behind ‘, so that’s sorted that even I know our set up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It isn’t going to be Watkins or Ings, it’s going to be Watkins and Ings 100%. One of them (likely Ings) will drop deeper a little and it will resemble more of a 4231(I think that’s how he worked with Adams at Southampton) is how I’m guessing Smith wants this. 

Bailey and Buendia either side and then it’s the task of sorting the midfield pairing. 

I fully believe this system can work for us. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, VillaFaninLondon said:

Clearly AEG and Young playing yesterday weakened us, that was obvious before the game started, and you would expect Bailey and Traore or Ollie to come in for the next game. 

 

I worry for Smith though. Watford are one of my picks to be down there at the end of the season and I haven't changed my opinion after yesterday. Yet they thoroughly outplayed us and deserved to win. 

 

He has always relied on Grealish ever since he became our manager nearly 3 years ago - even in the Champ he couldn't buy a win without him. And while Nakamba, Luiz and McGinn are good squad players, the fact he still hasn't invested in the CM area since we got promoted (other than on a permanently injured Sanson) is absolutely ridiculous. We have £100m from the sale of Grealish, we could quite feasibly go out and spend £40-50m on a really top player in that position but the vibes I'm getting are we're happy with what we've got. Brainless mentality. 

3 of the 4 midfielders you named there are players he invested in after we got promoted.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Farlz said:

It isn’t going to be Watkins or Ings, it’s going to be Watkins and Ings 100%. One of them (likely Ings) will drop deeper a little and it will resemble more of a 4231(I think that’s how he worked with Adams at Southampton) is how I’m guessing Smith wants this. 

Bailey and Buendia either side and then it’s the task of sorting the midfield pairing. 

I fully believe this system can work for us. 

I fully believe it won’t. Ings as a 10 is a daft idea and our midfield 2 will become more overrun than it would with Buendia playing there. 

People seem to get caught up on the fact that Ings is a number 9 who likes to come a little deeper to get on the ball and assuming he can play as a 10. He’s never played as 10 anywhere he’s been previously. He’s an out and out striker and a very good one at that. 

We’re going to have a few problems this season if the club insists on playing both in the same side, unless Watkins plays on the left and rips it up out there. 

We badly missed Watkins in that no. 9 position against Watford. His pressing and ability to stretch the defence and provide an out ball is key to the way we play and whilst Ings may work hard, he doesn’t have anywhere near the same effect on our performance as a team. 

I’ve flip flopped a lot on the Ings signing. One minute I think he’s a very good player who we should be lucky to have, the next I think it was an unnecessary signing that didn’t need to be made. £25m and £100k a week in wages (I assume) is a lot to spend on a position where one of our best players already plays. 

I eagerly await the Newcastle match where Smith plays them both and we look an excellent, well oiled unit 😉

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, Farlz said:

It isn’t going to be Watkins or Ings, it’s going to be Watkins and Ings 100%. One of them (likely Ings) will drop deeper a little and it will resemble more of a 4231(I think that’s how he worked with Adams at Southampton) is how I’m guessing Smith wants this. 

Bailey and Buendia either side and then it’s the task of sorting the midfield pairing. 

I fully believe this system can work for us. 

Ings isn't a 10 though. 

He would operate more of a second striker. 

I would worry for our midfield 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...
Â