Our biggest threat into our biggest weakness

[Dave]

Yesterday wasnt great. We all know that. It highlighted a few things about the "reserve" XI and hopefully kicks a few of them up the arse.

However, i think tactically we may have just shown our hand. 3-5-2 works so well with our first team players. Who play it every week, know their roles, know what other players will do etc. Maybe this formation should be kept just for the first XI and when we have to make a series of changes we revert to a 4-2-3-1 or 4-4-2 as the players havent had enough game time together.

As footballers ourselves, we all know which formations are easier to settle into. Just look at Egan's first few games getting used to the way we played.

Just because one formation suits some of the best players in the league, doesnt mean it suits some of the most average players in the league either.

352 for first team, anything else when significant personnel changes are made

 

[FTPE]

5 in midfield means you HAVE TO have your best players as wingbacks. It's such a specialised role. When Baldock, Freeman or Enda are have poor spells it highlights it massively because of the huge responsibility they have to create AND defend.
Your wingbacks being average or poor also stops our centerbacks overlapping, puts extra pressure on the play makers in the middle and gives the strikers a lot less room and chances.

 

[mancunianblade]

Yesterday wasnt great. We all know that. It highlighted a few things about the "reserve" XI and hopefully kicks a few of them up the arse.

However, i think tactically we may have just shown our hand. 3-5-2 works so well with our first team players. Who play it every week, know their roles, know what other players will do etc. Maybe this formation should be kept just for the first XI and when we have to make a series of changes we revert to a 4-2-3-1 or 4-4-2 as the players havent had enough game time together.

As footballers ourselves, we all know which formations are easier to settle into. Just look at Egan's first few games getting used to the way we played.

Just because one formation suits some of the best players in the league, doesnt mean it suits some of the most average players in the league either.

352 for first team, anything else when significant personnel changes are made

Or 352 should become the formation all Sheffield United teams play, create a club identity and that way we are creating and preparing players specifically for positions and they can slot in seamlessly when needed. point in 23s team playing 442 if the First Team play 532

 

[Houston_Blade]

Yesterday wasnt great. We all know that. It highlighted a few things about the "reserve" XI and hopefully kicks a few of them up the arse.

However, i think tactically we may have just shown our hand. 3-5-2 works so well with our first team players. Who play it every week, know their roles, know what other players will do etc. Maybe this formation should be kept just for the first XI and when we have to make a series of changes we revert to a 4-2-3-1 or 4-4-2 as the players havent had enough game time together.

As footballers ourselves, we all know which formations are easier to settle into. Just look at Egan's first few games getting used to the way we played.

Just because one formation suits some of the best players in the league, doesnt mean it suits some of the most average players in the league either.

352 for first team, anything else when significant personnel changes are made

It would be difficult to run 2 sets of training sessions, 1 for the 'A' team and another for the 'B' team. It's also not much of a motivator to say to a player "you piss off over there and learn 4-4-2 and I'll teach the decent players 3-5-2". The problem yesterday was that there were 11 players that haven't really played as a cohesive unit, if he'd have left the odd 'first teamer' in it would have given a bit more substance to the shape we played. Crainie for example did well in the Basham role last week but looked poor in the same role yesterday. We all know Freeman can play RWB well, he just didn't yesterday.

 

[Houso]

I'm split on it. Yesterday was unusual to see such wholesale changes and indeed a mistake by Wilder to do so, all of those players in isolation will slot into our normal system and be fine.

We've won games (in a 3-5-2) with the following playing (and playing well) - Cranie, Stears, Freeman, Coutts, Lundstram, Washington and Clarke. I just think when said players haven't started for a while and are out of form, and then others come into the side for debuts... we're going to find it tough.

Yesterday was a perfect storm of managerial mistakes, out of form players, players who couldn't give a fuck and a couple who simply aren't good enough. Poor all round but I don't think it's worth too much soul-searching.

 

[Harry's Game]

This is being overthought

The problem yesterday was simply a number of the players selected weren’t and aren’t good enough.

They would have struggled whatever system they had played.

 

[bladesadviser]

That's why I was confident yesterday as the first team squad all must train that way and in the 3-5-2 formation. Wilder didn't send them out as 4-3-3 or 4-4-2. Coupled with the fact that that it was a chance to impress it was all a bit strange

 

[8lade]

Didn't we revert to 4-4-2 albeit a man down on the back line against Blackburn? As the OP states it's just easier to play without training, (mind I wasn't there yesterday to see the travesty that was).

 

[pommpey]

Yesterday wasnt great. We all know that. It highlighted a few things about the "reserve" XI and hopefully kicks a few of them up the arse.

However, i think tactically we may have just shown our hand. 3-5-2 works so well with our first team players. Who play it every week, know their roles, know what other players will do etc. Maybe this formation should be kept just for the first XI and when we have to make a series of changes we revert to a 4-2-3-1 or 4-4-2 as the players havent had enough game time together.

As footballers ourselves, we all know which formations are easier to settle into. Just look at Egan's first few games getting used to the way we played.

Just because one formation suits some of the best players in the league, doesnt mean it suits some of the most average players in the league either.

352 for first team, anything else when significant personnel changes are made

Dude. We were playing Barnet, not anyone from the Championship, or even League One or League Two. Theoretically we could have played any formation and given the assumed ability of those professionals out there on the Desso (oops, did I mention that, and us losing in the same breath?) we should have been 3-0 up by half time and brought the academy kids on for the second 45.

We all know that it don't work out that way and clearly, our reserve team isn't even capable of beating non-league sides.

The problem isn't what we play, how we play it. The problem is that our side is paper thin on ability, and has been for some time. We may rejoice at our lofty position, but we are a few injuries, prison convictions or suspensions away from ignominy and downfall, given if we have to bring those lot of soft-headed underperformers in as replacements. I mean, it's not like we had to even use Steven Quinn up front in the playoff final in place of Ched or sign a clearly punching-above-his-weight Lundstram vice Coutts, is it? Or even play any daft fucker in the back four when Harry went.

And it's 'loans only' during the JTW. Seem to recall some or other interview a few seasons ago where McCabe said 'no more loans' because it is counterproductive.

And people talk about the Premiership, too!

pommpey

 

[I should coco]

We were playing Barnet, not anyone from the Championship, or even League One or League Two. Theoretically we could have played any formation and given the assumed ability of those professionals out there on the Desso (oops, did I mention that, and us losing in the same breath?) we should have been 3-0 up by half time and brought the academy kids on for the second 45.

We all know that it don't work out that way and clearly, our reserve team isn't even capable of beating non-league sides.

The problem isn't what we play, how we play it. The problem is that our side is paper thin on ability, and has been for some time. We may rejoice at our lofty position, but we are a few injuries, prison convictions or suspensions away from ignominy and downfall, given if we have to bring those lot of soft-headed underperformers in as replacements. I mean, it's not like we had to even use Steven Quinn up front in the playoff final in place of Ched or sign a clearly punching-above-his-weight Lundstram vice Coutts, is it? Or even play any daft fucker in the back four when Harry went.

And it's 'loans only' during the JTW. Seem to recall some or other interview a few seasons ago where McCabe said 'no more loans' because it is counterproductive.

And people talk about the Premiership, too!

Quality post with a dig at the Desso and McCabe after we've lost.

You only need 'where's the semi final muneh gone' to claim full house in Pommpey Bingo!

 

[pommpey]

Quality post with a dig at the Desso and McCabe after we've lost.

You only need 'where's the semi final muneh gone' to claim full house in Pommpey Bingo!

Well, 'fast, attacking football', wasn't it?

No, it wasn't. Even against a team of amateurs.

pommpey

 

[I should coco]

Even against a team of amateurs.

Semi-pros actually, but we still should have beaten them.

 

[Topplayersleave]

All players from the kids up to the first team should play the same way and in the same formation.

There will always be some better players than others but the formation should be the same to enable changes to be seamless and made without disruption
Every player at every level should know his job and be able to do it properly within the formation that is set up right through the club

Its only then that you'll ever know who is able fit into a system that we want to play.

This doesn't mean they're a bad player, it just means that they're not our type of player

 

[Houston_Blade]

Semi-pros actually, but we still should have beaten them.

They are a professional team not semi-professional. Most conference clubs are even the league below are over 50% professional clubs.

 

[blade too long]

We put out a team that was lacking in game time . And therefore lacking in cohesion understanding and unity. A lot of teams who made 5 to 8 changes also came a cropper . It's no coincidence all the championships top 3 are out of the FA cup after wholesale changes. Liecester too changed too many and also lost to a team 3 divisions below them . Will it cost them in the league. Why would we suffer more than the many other teams thats disrespected the opposition by changes above a safe level