Shocking analysis from you mate, expect better to be honest. You’re usually quite good.
We definitely don’t have players that suit a 3 at the back. Paterson has the profile to play wingback. Myko will have to show a lot, lot more going forward in general play than we’ve seen. A solid left back but hardly a dynamic attacking wing back with quality delivery - Digne’s quality going forward was far better.
None of our midfield have proven to be either mobile enough or good enough on the ball to effectively play in a two. The defence get left complete exposed and the front thee are left isolated with the support miles behind them.
It’s an attacking formation when you have the better players and control the ball to move up the pitch. If you don’t then, well, you’ve surely seen what happens. Midfield get outnumbered, wingbacks end up forming a back 5, huge gap between midfield and front 3 who get isolated and balls hoofed up to them.
The other issue is when we do get pushed back it means the back three end up defending the penalty box and players like Godfrey and Holgate who are extremely weak in the air and positionally get targeted.
To go through these 1 by one...
Myko has far more energy than Digne and crucially can keep the ball better, while also being superior defensively. Wing backs dont always need to be ultra attack minded...they can be balanced.
Patterson i imagine is suited so for me both fit the back 3.
Ive not mentioned the midfield, only the defence. The midfield needs recycling no matter what formation.
If we sign someone that im championing in Colwill he is used to playing a high line at Huddersfield and regularly camped on the half way line. He can play progressive passes and diagonals. In additon, he has the pace to get back.
Godfrey is of course quick and Holgate looks decent in a back 3 as well.
It also opens up opportunities for Branthwaite who seems to have 'the lot'.
The actual weak links in a back 3 are Keane + Mina who would need to be moved on.
The business done in January, why if Frank is set on his style would he bring in 2 players that dont fit it in VDB and Alli for big wages?
I understand that formation can be attacking and defensive BUT how do we score goals when the only central players are 2 CM that cant get forward and 1 striker! Everyone is out wide and no one in the danger area going forward, if against a 4-3-3 you will have a back 5 as the WBs will be pinned and out numbered in CM in every game.
Delph is the only CM capable of playing 3-4-3, the players I list do not as proven. Have a look at the stats regarding the 3-4-3 v 4-3-3/4-2-3-1, it is plainly obvious IF, I say again IF we continue down the 3 at the back route we will be stuck with a prohibitive system that teams rarely over-achieve with unless you are chucking top level elite players at it.
Moyes over achieved for years using 4-1-4-1/4-3-3 system and still does with West Ham, I`m sorry I don`t except West Ham have far better players than us.
Look at how we do with these formations then look at who uses them and where the ceiling is, we wont ever be successful using the 3/5 at the back but once you go far enough down that route it will be hard to come back from when the new manager comes in and wants a back 4.
Firstly I think youre talking about players Lampard brought in for zero cost. Thats not to say theyre staying, short term or have a different utlity.
Delph was DM. In some games he was good when we were deep...his positioning was there. In others he was poor.
Again, formations mean little in terms of 'winning' or 'losing'. What matters is the players and the style of play.
Clearly playing a high line in a back 4 using Keane, Kenny and Coleman isnt going to make your back 4 better than a 3 with players suited to it....
???
