2 loans

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

robbiez666

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
7,817
Reaction score
8,828
Why would you need to defend deeper with a slow back 2 than you would with a slow back 3?

Because with a back 3 you have more cover? If one misses a header another can sweep up.
 

SUFCinks

Active Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2011
Messages
1,302
Reaction score
1,774
I understand why people would want to address the defence as its not been to the standards of last season but even if we managed to improve it we still wont be scoring goals/winning games.

For this reason i think the midfield needs addressing to inject more creativity for goals, create chances and more possession, composure to give us more influence in games and in turn more chance of scoring.

More possession should also correlate with less goals conceded as instead of giving the opposition 70% possession (about 65minutes to score) we can aim to reduce it to 50% (45 mins) giving us on average an extra 20 mins to score a goal per game and the opposition 20 less.

Thats my theory anyway.
 

FriethBlade

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2015
Messages
2,629
Reaction score
3,514
Robinson isn't rhe problem, we arent shipping goals, we've lost 7 games 1.0 this season. We cant bring in a left centre back and expect them to be immediately overlapping down the wing so it will be very difficult to upgrade that position meaningfully.

The problem clearly is lack of creativity and thats down to our shit midfield so I agree with those who say both loans should be in that area.
 

ancientblade

Active Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2020
Messages
1,113
Reaction score
1,092
Against world class pacey strikers? We've seen how Egan deals with the high straight ball. Neither has the acceleration to keep up with PL strikers. They would run passed or down the sides of them. There's no way, I'm afraid. It would be like playing two Harry Maguires together. Championship they'd probably be fine, but no higher.
for what good robinson and bryan are robbie we might as well be playing 4 at the back but you are right egan and joc would be fine in a back 4 in the championship but thats if their both still here of course
 

Sam64

Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2019
Messages
827
Reaction score
1,859
its not worked at all without joc so whats the point our wing backs dont get high enough up the pitch plus weve looked better in most games when weve gone to a back 4
you not just think that's because we're behind and teams are sitting in more?
 

Yogi

Active Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2019
Messages
1,101
Reaction score
1,276
Why would you need to defend deeper with a slow back 2 than you would with a slow back 3?
Because with 3 up against a front two one of the centrehalves can act as a sweeper covering for the short coming of their partners or one of the wingbacks can do this job allowing one of the centrebacks to push into midfield creating overloads. If we play with a 4 against 2 strikers then each of the centrehalves has to be able to individually deal with their man on an island. If they cannot do this then the fullbacks have to stay back to cover the centrehalves leaving the opposition with an overload somewhere as we have 3 or potentially 4 players covering just 2
 

Yogi

Active Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2019
Messages
1,101
Reaction score
1,276
Wow. That’s a statement. I’d say we have two very good central defenders who could easily manage in a two.
I’d have an issue with Egan in a two aswell. It’s my only concern about him as I rate him very highly but he’s susceptible to the long ball over the top when playing a high line he’s been exposed by it several times this season and last. This would be amplified without and extra centreback to help sweep for him.
 

andy m

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2014
Messages
804
Reaction score
1,295
Because with 3 up against a front two one of the centrehalves can act as a sweeper covering for the short coming of their partners or one of the wingbacks can do this job allowing one of the centrebacks to push into midfield creating overloads. If we play with a 4 against 2 strikers then each of the centrehalves has to be able to individually deal with their man on an island. If they cannot do this then the fullbacks have to stay back to cover the centrehalves leaving the opposition with an overload somewhere as we have 3 or potentially 4 players covering just 2
We play with a back 5.
 

Yogi

Active Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2019
Messages
1,101
Reaction score
1,276
We play with a back 5.
When we’ve been successful we’ve played with a 5 without the ball and a 3 with the ball. With the outside centrehalf and wingback pushing on on the side we’re attacking and the other wingback dropping in to make a 3. The point being this wouldn’t be possible at this level in a 4. The wingbacks would have to stay back to help the centrebacks sweep against what are supreme athletes on the break. I wouldn’t want our centrehalves on an island against most of the strikers at this level.
 

andy m

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2014
Messages
804
Reaction score
1,295
When we’ve been successful we’ve played with a 5 without the ball and a 3 with the ball. With the outside centrehalf and wingback pushing on on the side we’re attacking and the other wingback dropping in to make a 3. The point being this wouldn’t be possible at this level in a 4. The wingbacks would have to stay back to help the centrebacks sweep against what are supreme athletes on the break. I wouldn’t want our centrehalves on an island against most of the strikers at this level.
We don't have the personnel to keep a clean sheet so we need a way to score more goals, which means losing a defender and adding another midfield player in my opinion.
 

From the pig end

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
6,656
Reaction score
10,991
I will throw a few of these out which I would need to consider.

Do we have the centre backs that can play as a 2? Probably.

Are our LB and RB good enough Defenders to play as a flat back 4? Yes.

Will we lose much pulling our wing backs into a back 4? Not currently.

Do we have any decent wingers? In Burke and Bogle, maybe.

Do we have a commanding midfield pairing to govern a 2 man CM? Absolutely not.

Would it help us create more chances? Only losing Baldock and Enda offensively whilst having the option of 2 up top with Burke and Bogle on the wings...it has to. Why pack the middle of the park where we are weakest?

Can we look any worse at the back?
Than the Jags/Bryan/Ampadu back 3? No.
Than a Robinson one? Yes.

Can we be in a worse position than we currently are? No, why not give it a go.
 

robbiez666

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
7,817
Reaction score
8,828
Has

That doesn't prevent the problem of a ball over the top as we have seen on numerous occasions. Preventing the ball being played under no pressure is the best way of combating it.

Agreed that closing down from midfield is nowhere near good enough but quite a few balls over the top are dealt with fine because there's that extra man so even if the first defender makes a hash of it there is another one to cover.
 

Yogi

Active Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2019
Messages
1,101
Reaction score
1,276
We don't have the personnel to keep a clean sheet so we need a way to score more goals, which means losing a defender and adding another midfield player in my opinion.
Whilst ever we don’t have a functioning left centreback I can’t disagree.
 

ancientblade

Active Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2020
Messages
1,113
Reaction score
1,092
We don't have the personnel to keep a clean sheet so we need a way to score more goals, which means losing a defender and adding another midfield player in my opinion.
agree were playing a back 5 now anyway why not push another body further forward its the offensive side of our game from midfield and strikers that are letting us down this season
 

Tops

Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
164
Reaction score
327
Personally I would look to get 2 Midfielders in, IMO we need an older head in the middle of the park with Prem experience, someone who can break up play and hold on to the ball and calm things down, A Leader who can help the young lads.
Then we need someone who has that spark, someone who can create something from Nothing to give himself a chance to score, and who can make that killer pass for others to have a chance to score.
But it's easier said than done to find 2 of that caliber to come in on Loan.
 

ancientblade

Active Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2020
Messages
1,113
Reaction score
1,092
Personally I would look to get 2 Midfielders in, IMO we need an older head in the middle of the park with Prem experience, someone who can break up play and hold on to the ball and calm things down, A Leader who can help the young lads.
Then we need someone who has that spark, someone who can create something from Nothing to give himself a chance to score, and who can make that killer pass for others to have a chance to score.
But it's easier said than done to find 2 of that caliber to come in on Loan.
well lingard could be your 2nd player there its just a question of if its worth spending the money for whats looking like an almost impossible job to stay in the prem
 

From the pig end

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
6,656
Reaction score
10,991
If we went 4-4-2
Could Matic run a midfield with Sander? Could be a better loan than Lingard.
 

Tops

Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
164
Reaction score
327
well lingard could be your 2nd player there its just a question of if its worth spending the money for whats looking like an almost impossible job to stay in the prem
Not convinced with Lingard, he's shown glimpses, but comes across very self absorbed, not the kind of player we need IMO
 

ancientblade

Active Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2020
Messages
1,113
Reaction score
1,092
Not convinced with Lingard, he's shown glimpses, but comes across very self absorbed, not the kind of player we need IMO
no im not totally but he might just put a bit of spark in to our midfield just think its a bit too late to be honest
 

AdamSufc1997

Active Member
Joined
May 15, 2016
Messages
1,473
Reaction score
1,262
If we went 4-4-2
Could Matic run a midfield with Sander? Could be a better loan than Lingard.
Struggling to create chances and you think bringing in a defensive midfielder instead of an attacking midfielder is a better option?
 

From the pig end

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
6,656
Reaction score
10,991
Struggling to create chances and you think bringing in a defensive midfielder instead of an attacking midfielder is a better option?
He might be defensive but he's a class act, and if that stabilised us so we could have 2 up top with Bogle and Burke on the wings, yeah I definitely think we'd create more.
 

Tops

Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
164
Reaction score
327
no im not totally but he might just put a bit of spark in to our midfield just think its a bit too late to be honest

Agree think it's just a little too late, Unless we can go on a 5-6 game winning run which would give us a glimmer of hope, BUT can't see that with Spurs, Man utd Man city 3 out of our next 5.
 

Jord_Blade

S35 Blade
Joined
May 22, 2016
Messages
301
Reaction score
461
Location
Sheffield
It’s blatantly obvious that reverting a back four would be a much better option than shoehorning players into a back three that is no longer working. We’ve looked more fluid in transitional play when we’ve changed mid-game, instead of sticking with the 3-5-2 where we’ve been ponderous and slow on the ball.

I’d disagree that having two centre halves would leave us isolated at the back, because in a 4-3-3 for example, the holding midfielder drops back to create a three-man defence when we’re on the attack. Thus meaning when the other team inevitably counter, we have at least three players back covering.
 

Kevincarterversion2.0

Active Member
Joined
May 17, 2015
Messages
1,244
Reaction score
1,151
If it is just two loans it absolutely has to be a midfielder who is better than Fleck, Norwood, Berge, Lunny, Ozzy and a LCB who is better than Robinson, Ampadu, Bryan etc.

Players are out there, we just have to be prepared to pay them more than peanuts.
 

ancientblade

Active Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2020
Messages
1,113
Reaction score
1,092
It’s blatantly obvious that reverting a back four would be a much better option than shoehorning players into a back three that is no longer working. We’ve looked more fluid in transitional play when we’ve changed mid-game, instead of sticking with the 3-5-2 where we’ve been ponderous and slow on the ball.

I’d disagree that having two centre halves would leave us isolated at the back, because in a 4-3-3 for example, the holding midfielder drops back to create a three-man defence when we’re on the attack. Thus meaning when the other team inevitably counter, we have at least three players back covering.
been saying same on here for last month but got plenty of abuse for even suggesting it get ready 🤨
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Top Bottom