What i was alluding to in the Serie A example is that Ancelotti seemed to have been at stage 1 of creating something.
To evolve further over a rebuild we would need:
A: Superior defenders in a well drilled system.
B: Midfielders and attackers who were all able to understand the system and position themselves to be able to defend how the manager dictated.
C: A very low goals against column.
D: Cohesive play to switch from defence into attack
E: A plan A + B + C in both defensive setup and attack
F: Easy on the eye attacking play to complement the art of defending.
Now, what Ancelotti had stated was that we basically could only play with a deep defence and not a high line.
He also said he would improve the attractiveness of attacking and make the team more exciting.
This was after 1 full season. So gradually we have a highly experienced Italian pragmatic manager who we would see if he was able to combine the Italian traits with the different style of the premier league.
Therefore, the hope was that he would be able to employ the systems we used last season at the beginning + in the middle in different matches depending on our opponents.
Remember, in serie A in the 90s we didnt only see negative football...it depended on who the teams were and also the opponents...there were tactics changing in game and per game.
Based on his CV, with time and money he could well achieve this....he was given £65mil.
Now we have a manager who has shown he can only play with a plan A. Has not shown any ability to evolve the team over 4 seasons into anything like either a pragmatic interchangeable style or a team which could grow...it has instead stagnated.
If Ancelotti was given 4 seasons would we still see the same negative football -- based on his track record i doubt it.
Now hes gone we need a manager who could either take step 2 and develop the negative style into something like i described above OR a more front foot manager to begin with who also has a strong defensive setup OR something totally unique where a new style of play comes into the league.
Instead we have gone for a manager who is stuck on step 1 after 4 years at the same club....with no plan b. This smacks of having last year on repeat.
I think what you describe in the style of play mate is akin to counter attacking football, that was often the vogue in Serie A in the 90s. I thought Carlo was a good manager who understood the game, he could get results based on tactics often defensive systems. Was he building something here, im not convinced he was really. He made "experienced signings" for the short term and sent high energy young players out on loan. I think he saw us as a cash cow, a rung on the lader to maintain profile and tried to get results to maintain his profile, it worked and he was always a risk to be poached, he was pragmatic manager and ultimately the same as a man. I dont think he looked to here in the long term. I actually find it a bit amusing that people are calling Nunos attacking game boring considering some of the pragmatic stuff we saw last season, id accept it was often required but a lot of it was dire. Did Calro get Everton? not so sure he did, beyond disingenuous soundbites, we were manged. There is no way we should be playing out from the back and we will never win games playing possession based football he tried to implement, with where we are in what could be loosely described as a "developmental cycle" - though i have my doubts there is a plan is in place.
Even before Nuno this week ive been reflecting on what i do with Everton and if im honest, i never believed in what Carlo was trying to do in terms of philosophy or style of play, i think it was limited and we lacked a clear identity. To be honest if it was me, i would do exactly what i think Nuno would do, with a bit of recruitment and what we have. I think counter is the way forward and threat down the flanks from wing back up, based on what we have and what we need to recruit, its bascially what Leeds, Villa, WHU and Mordor do, it offers great balance. We need more balance and an identity.
Ill look at Carlo time here as a bit of an uninspiring stop gap to be honest, im not sure there was the clear direction you see - i actually see very little future proofing in what he tried to do and his style was a poor fit for the club and we lacked an identity. All opinions mind, so all good.
But like i say if Dyce or Allardyce, did what Carlo did last season we wouldn't be as forgiving the "Carlo" label triggered a very forgiving attitude in us toward him. Some of it was awful and frankly insane, especially the playing out from the center halfs, didnt suit us at all.
