Three at the back

[NWCherries98]

I'm not going to write off 3 at the back just yet. I like that JT has put his own ideas onto the squad, we do look like a much more solid team, and we are also one of the highest scoring teams in the league at present (and unbeaten). Can't really have many complaints results-wise.

However, with regards to the utilisation of the squad, I feel like we're limiting ourselves a bit considering the number of decent creative forward players we have now. We do look reasonably solid at this level but IMO the quality of the performances from Midfield and Attack have been mixed at best, save for some good individual moments. I feel like this setup might make us much easier to plan against as we seem set on rigidly sticking to 3 at the back.

I also feel like the balance of the wingbacks has been a bit off- which is a pretty integral part of the formation. Stacey has looked quite good in attack as he's a bit more explosive and "winger-esque", but Smith has a tendency to cut in and slow everything down in this role, which makes it feel more like a 5 at the back. Personally I think we need to use someone in LWB who is either:
1.) left footed; so Rico, Kelly, Zemura or Daniels(?)
2.) more of a winger; Stanislas maybe, or again, Zemura (or even someone like Pugh tbh)

I would rather we just get to the stage where Smith & Stacey are competing at RB/RWB, and then Rico/Daniels/Zemura are competing at LB/LWB- just makes more sense to me. We have the problem of Rico looking fantastic at CB which might make him feel undroppable from that position, but I'm pretty confident that Kelly will come good there, and I also think that Rico has the athleticism (not necessarily the pace) to be a LWB in this league. Plus, we need to get the balance right sooner rather than later. Personally, on the back of his performances against City and Palace, I'd be more than happy to see Zemura starting league games for us- he's exactly the type of player we need there, it's just whether JT thinks he's ready or not.

I feel like we have the strength in depth in CB, but no real strength in depth out wide in games where I'd like to see us be more attacking. If we're going for a more "Sheffield united" style overlapping CB thing, I'm not convinced Mepham has the ability to do this either. Rico and Kelly certainly do, and maybe it's something that he could learn, but his crossing and passing further up the pitch is very rudimentary IMO. I think this is probably our best lineup with everyone performing at their peak:

------------Begovic------------
---Mepham---Cook---Kelly---
Smith---Cook--Lerma---Rico
Brooks------King------Danjuma

I'm always sceptical of a midfield two, but this is easily our best front 3 on paper, and goals win you games. Plus, you can almost make an entire second team of backups if you wanted too:

--------------Travers--------------
---Ofoborh---CCV---Simpson---
Stacey---Billing--Gosling---Zemura
Riquelme------Solanke------Stanislas

Probably rambling a bit at this point, but just wondering what peoples thoughts were on the formation and how best to utilise the squad. Before we signed CCV and Riquelme I would've said that we have good squad depth in terms of utility, but not personnel- but now that there's a few more bodies in the squad I feel quite confident that we can sustain a top 2 push this season. If the management and players perform, obviously.

 

[LewSwimmin]

To me we end up with too many full backs in the team playing this formation.

 

[BoscombeCherry]

Horses for courses really. Having the squad to be able to play a few different formations effectively is what we need but personally, I prefer a back 4. With the players we've got, we could use a 4231 formation really well.

Begovic

Rico
Kelly
Cook
Smith

Lerma
Cook

Danjuma
Brooks
Stan

King

Doubt we'll see anything like that anytime soon, but I think we've got the players to move away from 3 at the back and look very effective.

 

[SteveJonesLegend]

Lerma seems to be relishing the opportunity of pushing forward and his early goal tally is proving this... Wouldn't make sense to quash that by playing him in a defensive 2 with L.Cook.

On paper NWCherries98's initial formation looks very strong

------------Begovic------------
---Mepham---Cook---Kelly---
Smith---Cook--Lerma---Rico
Brooks------King------Danjuma

The only thing I'd be tempted to change is Stacey in front of Smith... They are both very similar players, so really tough... Stacey has been a great acquisition to the squad.

The Solanke/King/Surridge situation will play out in front of us depending on their ability in front of goal... As I've stated before, if fit, Josh has to start tonight and make that birth his with a couple of goals...

It's great to have these options, and whilst I accept rotation will figure whilst games come thick and fast, JT needs to get a core that is playing week in week out. Starting with the back.

 

[Waz afcb]

I tend to agree, I don’t think we are utilising the resources at our disposal optimally while using the three at the back system. Despite this it is also worth noting that this is a new system for us and that most of our players will still be adapting to it, so there is very much an argument to be made that it needs to be given time. Having said that I think the points you make are very valid:
-If we are to play this way then the LWB simply has to be left footed for it to be consistently successful. The reason being that in this formation the width is provided virtually solely by the wing backs, having a wing back cutting in constantly means that the team starts to look disjointed, and we become very easy to defend against down that side. I actually thought Stacey looked better on the left than Smith and at least tried to hug the touch line in high areas, although still not ideal.
-I think in this system your support centre backs need to be very athletic, as there are moments in the game where they are essentially playing as full backs. I really like Mepham as a player but am doubtful that he has the attributes to be successful in this role.
-I think our midfield also becomes an issue, in that we massively lack a player who is able to dictate the pace of a game. This means that if we are to persist with ‘playing out from the back’ possession based football then in order to get a grip on the game we really need three in the middle. That extra body is vital as teams know to press us high and without that extra option we lose the ability to move the ball up the pitch, the Middlesbrough game is a good example of this. As a consequence this means that there are only two spots available for attacking players, and given that the majority of the quality in our squad comes from the attacking areas, then to me this doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense.

 

[canadiancherry]

Smith has a tendency to cut in and slow everything down in this role, which makes it feel more like a 5 at the back. Personally I think we need to use someone in LWB who is either:
1.) left footed; so Rico, Kelly, Zemura or Daniels(?)
2.) more of a winger; Stanislas maybe, or again, Zemura (or even someone like Pugh tbh)
. . . Personally, on the back of his performances against City and Palace, I'd be more than happy to see Zemura starting league games for us- he's exactly the type of player we need there, it's just whether JT thinks he's ready or not.

Very funny, I have been thinking the exact same thing and just posted something (though not as clearly-thought out) to that effect in the Cardiff match thread, then the next thing I saw was this.

Yes, let's get Zemura starting at LWB. Smith just hasn't done it there the past couple games and, on merit, should probably not be starting.

 

[Waz afcb]

Lerma seems to be relishing the opportunity of pushing forward and his early goal tally is proving this... Wouldn't make sense to quash that by playing him in a defensive 2 with L.Cook.

On paper NWCherries98's initial formation looks very strong

------------Begovic------------
---Mepham---Cook---Kelly---
Smith---Cook--Lerma---Rico
Brooks------King------Danjuma

The only thing I'd be tempted to change is Stacey in front of Smith... They are both very similar players, so really tough... Stacey has been a great acquisition to the squad.

The Solanke/King/Surridge situation will play out in front of us depending on their ability in front of goal... As I've stated before, if fit, Josh has to start tonight and make that birth his with a couple of goals...

It's great to have these options, and whilst I accept rotation will figure whilst games come thick and fast, JT needs to get a core that is playing week in week out. Starting with the back.

Problem with this is that due to our philosophy of playing out from the back, teams will press us high and outnumber us in the middle of the park. Meaning that we are unable to move the ball up the pitch to our attacking players. With the way that we play in this system at least one of the midfielders needs to be able to dictate the pace of the game, none of our midfielders possess this quality.

 

[ChampagneCherry]

Firstly, need to see CCV, how athletic he is etc as he could be the right sided CB.

Next if we play with 2 wingers, then why would you play with wingbacks. Why not just play right and left sided midfielders. Then you don't need two holding centre mids, one can push up in support of the front three.

Finally, why is every formation symmetrical. Lop-sided formations are allowed, i.e one winger that changes wings at varied times and 2 strikers. Creating deliberate overloads especially if the opposition has a weak full back to exploit but no change to get from the other.

 

[SteveJonesLegend]

Problem with this is that due to our philosophy of playing out from the back, teams will press us high and outnumber us in the middle of the park. Meaning that we are unable to move the ball up the pitch to our attacking players. With the way that we play in this system at least one of the midfielders needs to be able to dictate the pace of the game, none of our midfielders possess this quality.

I've said it a million times before, we've never replaced Harry Arter...

OK, he went off-form towards the end but in his day, everything went through him... His ability to play the short pass, the 1-2, the long ball to the wings, and then to roll his sleeves up and get defensive, was second to none...

Unfortunately L.Cook never really turned out to be his replacement ...

 

[ChampagneCherry]

Problem with this is that due to our philosophy of playing out from the back, teams will press us high and outnumber us in the middle of the park. Meaning that we are unable to move the ball up the pitch to our attacking players. With the way that we play in this system at least one of the midfielders needs to be able to dictate the pace of the game, none of our midfielders possess this quality.

Surely if we are speculating on formations and selections, it's not too much of a stretch to speculate we might a) behave differently than the philosophy and b) adapt in game to show variations that give the opposition some uncertainty

 

[punkrockcherry]

I've said it a million times before, we've never replaced Harry Arter...

OK, he went off-form towards the end but in his day, everything went through him... His ability to play the short pass, the 1-2, the long ball to the wings, and then to roll his sleeves up and get defensive, was second to none...

Unfortunately L.Cook never really turned out to be his replacement ...

In fairness to Lewis Cook, I don't think he is that type of player. He is never going to be in the opponents' faces.

But he is becoming more involved - aside from conceding the penalty, he had a good game against Coventry, and although he is now sitting further back and letting Jefferson push forward, it was he who recovered the ball just outside their area, and passed to Stacey in the build up to the second goal

 

[Waz afcb]

Surely if we are speculating on formations and selections, it's not too much of a stretch to speculate we might a) behave differently than the philosophy and b) adapt in game to show variations that give the opposition some uncertainty

Having watched every game so far this season, it is very clear that we are sticking to this philosophy.

 

[Tinpot Club]

Well we are committed to 3 at the back for the foreseeable future, especially with the addition of CCV. The variation is whether we go for the 3rd man in midfield with just the 2 forwards or the more attacking variant with 3 forwards.

There are pros and cons in both.

With the 3-5-2, it allows Jeff to play further forward while I think Lewis Cook is well suited to the deep lying playmaker role. The disadvantage is it lacks width high up the pitch and with a wing back on his wrong side, contests the middle with 9 players.

3-4-3 suits the attacking talent we have in the squad. The dream front 3 is Danjuma, King and Brooks! You would worry about being a man light in midfield and it means Jeff and Lewis need to act as jack of all trades in the middle rather than the specific roles the 3-5-2 allows.

We still have the left sided problem. I think Rico as a superb LCB but I’m not sure about his qualities as an attacking wing back. In fairness I’m evaluating his suitability for LCB on his Championship performances while LWB on the PL.

I actually think Stanislas could make a good RWB. I believe he played that role in a PL game once and we kept a clean sheet. The problem is we are loaded in that position.

Of course 4-3-3 gets the best of both worlds. The dream front 3 and Jeff and Lewis in their best roles too. I’m just not sure JT sees it like that. Anyway at least it seems 4-4-2 is off the agenda so finally we’ve reached the 21st century!

 

[ChampagneCherry]

I've said it a million times before, we've never replaced Harry Arter...

OK, he went off-form towards the end but in his day, everything went through him... His ability to play the short pass, the 1-2, the long ball to the wings, and then to roll his sleeves up and get defensive, was second to none...

Unfortunately L.Cook never really turned out to be his replacement ...

Are you recalling when he was playing in an overall quality Championship side comparing him to others in recent years in the Prem alongside in relative terms a bang average group. I would suggest it was less a lack of form but more case of Arter being good Championship average Prem player hence why Fulham didn't want him.

Lerma's started well for me, but let's judge current group at end of season to see if they match Arter's achievement.

 

[daveyboy19]

It is a shame as we are well equipped to go with a 4-3-3. We have so much attacking talent if you are going to go 3 at the back I feel you have to sacrifice the extra midfielder. When you have half a dozen very strong attacking players for this level we certainly can't stick with 2 up front.

Like others have said above, if the wing back get pinned back in this formation it can become a struggle. So you have to have the 3 attacking players for me to provide extra width (which in turn should release some pressure on full backs) and give more options to go direct when you are pushed back.

If we persist with 3 in the middle and defence though at least have someone like Stan in there for extra creativity. Which we did see briefly against QPR.

 

[hba1]

CCV is the unknown quantity at the moment although he has a good number of Championship games under his belt and is well thought of by the Ass Manager. I prefer Stacey ahead of Smith as wing back.

 

[key]

I really like Mepham as a player but am doubtful that he has the attributes to be successful in this role.

I agree with this, i rate him as a player for sure, but seeing him make a really good overlapping run, then receive the ball and he then looked quite lost on what to do once he had it, i saw that a few times

 

[canadiancherry]

It is a shame as we are well equipped to go with a 4-3-3. We have so much attacking talent if you are going to go 3 at the back I feel you have to sacrifice the extra midfielder. When you have half a dozen very strong attacking players for this level we certainly can't stick with 2 up front.

Like others have said above, if the wing back get pinned back in this formation it can become a struggle. So you have to have the 3 attacking players for me to provide extra width (which in turn should release some pressure on full backs) and give more options to go direct when you are pushed back.

If we persist with 3 in the middle and defence though at least have someone like Stan in there for extra creativity. Which we did see briefly against QPR.

Someone was saying this on the most recent AFCB podcast -- it comes down to, are the wingbacks "wingers" or "defenders"? If you play wingers as WBs, you will tend to end up with more of a 3-5-2 formation, but if you play defenders then it will tend to be 5-3-2. The exciting thing about 3 at the back is that it can turn into "only" 3 at the back, with the other 7 players attacking in one way or another. So it has the potential to be one of the most attacking formations ever. But it depends on the personnel.
Stacey and Smith are both defenders, so we've seen things necessarily more defensive-tilted.
What about Zemura on the left and Stanislas on the right? That would be interesting.
You need a very solid back 3 to do that though.

 

[SteveJonesLegend]

Are you recalling when he was playing in an overall quality Championship side comparing him to others in recent years in the Prem alongside in relative terms a bang average group. I would suggest it was less a lack of form but more case of Arter being good Championship average Prem player hence why Fulham didn't want him.

Lerma's started well for me, but let's judge current group at end of season to see if they match Arter's achievement.

I take your point on board but I wasn't comparing Arter in the actual sense of the person, more that we haven't replaced him with a player of equal calibre... Someone with Arter's qualities as a player.

Lerma is not Harry Arter... He's great but there are still differences in their game... Lerma has the physical characteristics and the work ethic, and we're hopefully starting to see his ability to add goals for midfield, however, he doesn't have the passing ability of a Harry Arter, or the ability to control the midfield and be that central cog we have lacked, and yes I agree that maybe to do with the stifled role Eddie had him in... We'll see I guess.

Looking forward to tonight and hopefully another Coventry display from all involved...

 

[Waz afcb]

Someone was saying this on the most recent AFCB podcast -- it comes down to, are the wingbacks "wingers" or "defenders"? If you play wingers as WBs, you will tend to end up with more of a 3-5-2 formation, but if you play defenders then it will tend to be 5-3-2. The exciting thing about 3 at the back is that it can turn into "only" 3 at the back, with the other 7 players attacking in one way or another. So it has the potential to be one of the most attacking formations ever. But it depends on the personnel.
Stacey and Smith are both defenders, so we've seen things necessarily more defensive-tilted.
What about Zemura on the left and Stanislas on the right? That would be interesting.
You need a very solid back 3 to do that though.

Not sure that is an issue tbh, at times this season Stacey and Smith have been our furthest players up the pitch. Against Norwich for example Stacey arrived at the back post to meet a cross and nearly score with a header, I’d say Stacey and Smith are more natural attackers than defenders. Just a shame one of them isn’t left footed.