3-5-2 for the season?

[Bladeybas]

CW's preference for what can best be described as a 3-5-2 style of formation could be seriously tested in the Championship as the team face better, faster opponents. What do people predict about our back 3 and their speed and general ability to cope?

 

[Pierre's PC]

What do you think?

 

[LoughboroBlade]

CW's preference for what can best be described as a 3-5-2 style of formation could be seriously tested in the Championship as the team face better, faster opponents. What do people predict about our back 3 and their speed and general ability to cope?

I'm not convinced it is his preferred formation when he came it – but it proved its success last season, and Wilder with good sense could see it was the strongest of the alternatives with the personnel we had. 4-4-2 was always going to be a challenge when we were limited with options out wide – I suspect we will add a decent option there this summer.

I've really liked the formation – it's perfectly fitted the strengths of the squad while guarding against its weaknesses. But I've no doubt that if it contributes to a dodgy start and Wilder thinks something else will work better, it'll be ditched without hesitation.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

CW's preference for what can best be described as a 3-5-2 style of formation could be seriously tested in the Championship as the team face better, faster opponents. What do people predict about our back 3 and their speed and general ability to cope?

It should be important to everyone that we get a good start so as not to put pressure on ourselves later in the season when we will hit a bad run of games. I was impressed how Barnsley started last season, and it was no coincidence when they struggled after losing 3 players in the JTW. We need to do the same, with the difference that "our" star players are not poached.

I would definitely start 3-4-1-2 - why on earth should we make problems for ourselves by moving to a 4-2-2? The 2 new full backs we have signed may help to move to 4-4-2, but to do that we MUST have 2 decent centre halves that are quick and can play. We still have centre halves that are comfortable in a 3 and not a 2. Last season we only went to a 4 at the back when we chased games and were a bit more cavalier. Sure it paid off, but it was generally as we were down in a game.

To play 4, we need 2 new centre halves - JOC with his improved confidence could develop into one, but maybe at season start it's a bit soon.

The interesting thing about how CW played at Northampton (where they did play with a 4) was that Northampton STILL pushed the full backs on, in effect leaving 2 CH's to defend. To do that in the Championship, they are going to have to be very good players and I question whether we could afford such players yet.

Stick with a 3 for now and develop the idea.

UTB

 

[LoughboroBlade]

why on earth should we make problems for ourselves by moving to a 4-2-2?

4-2-2 guaranteed to lead to major problems.

 

[Pinchy]

CW's preference for what can best be described as a 3-5-2 style of formation could be seriously tested in the Championship as the team face better, faster opponents. What do people predict about our back 3 and their speed and general ability to cope?

I predict it will be a different back 3 come August, so the question is a little premature.

I believe in good players, not formations.

 

[Aml-blade]

Think Wilder's been shrewd with the players he's signed so far and the players he's been reported as interested in; we will have the flexibility to change formations without disrupting the team too much. We'll end up settling on what suits the players we have on the opening day best.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

4-2-2 guaranteed to lead to major problems.

Agree totally. 4-4-2, might work, it might not. I don't think we can afford to experiment. If we try it and get dumped bottom of the league by mid September (again), I think we we could all guarantee we would not come May, be top !

UTB

 

[Fulwood Blade]

I predict it will be a different back 3 come August, so the question is a little premature.

I believe in good players, not formations.

Good players cost money pinch.........are we actually in a position to sign these players?

UTB

 

[SteveBlade]

 

[Boxer Blade]

I think we will see different formations this season, certainly during games, away from home he may be a tad more defensive minded

 

[snootyfenooty]

I'm worried about 3-5-2, because as good as Freeman is as a goal scoring wingback, he's inadequate as a full back. Laffery is the opposite, he's OK as a full back but a bit iffy going forward. If Brayford stays I envisage 4-4-2 with him and Lafferty as fullbacks and O'Connell plus AN Other as CB's. I can also see the possibility of Freeman playing wide midfield in a 4-4-2, or in his usual position in a 3-5-2 if we need to make a tactical switch during the game.

 

[IdLiketoRogerMoore]

If we are to play 3-5-2 we need a centre CB with pace. As we don't have one at the moment, I'm a little nervous as to how successful we'd be.

It worked last year as it reflected our personnel ideally, so I see no reason for it not to next season.

However, as other have said we need to adapt and evolve to continue this journey. On that subject, I don't see who plays in a back 4 if we go in that direction.

Still think a marquee CB is top of Tufty's shopping list.

In Wilder we trust!

 

[larkymasher]

All this talk of centre backs with pace never really sits with me.

A defenders job is to be physically strong, good in the air, can play good long and short passes and most importantly read the game. If you add raw pace to that you have a Premier League/ International defender.

I think the word we should be looking for is reasonably athletic. JOC for me ticks every box and is reasonably athletic. That makes a really good centre back. Maguire ticks every box and is reasonably athletic, not the quickest but he reads the game so well it helps hide any deficiencies.

What you find is that a centre half with pace needs to use that pace because he cant read the game..... IMO

 

[snootyfenooty]

All this talk of centre backs with pace never really sits with me.

A defenders job is to be physically strong, good in the air, can play good long and short passes and most importantly read the game. If you add raw pace to that you have a Premier League/ International defender.

I think the word we should be looking for is reasonably athletic. JOC for me ticks every box and is reasonably athletic. That makes a really good centre back. Maguire ticks every box and is reasonably athletic, not the quickest but he reads the game so well it helps hide any deficiencies.

What you find is that a centre half with pace needs to use that pace because he cant read the game..... IMO

True that. The best four CH's we've had in the past 20 years were McGrath, Murphy, Morgan and Maguire. None of them were endowed with "pace". Just a thought, our next CB should begin with "M", should narrow it down a bit.

 

[Ricky]

Pace at full back is quite important, pace at centre half isn't. But it's more important in a back 3 than a central pairing. You don't want RCB and LCB to be slow.

Reasonably athletic and combative is what you should aim for.

Most Championship clubs don't have quick centre halves.

 

[Liaminho9]

True that. The best four CH's we've had in the past 20 years were McGrath, Murphy, Morgan and Maguire. None of them were endowed with "pace". Just a thought, our next CB should begin with "M", should narrow it down a bit.

Harrison McGahey!

 

[snootyfenooty]

Harrison McGahey!

Hey, never a truer word spoken in jest. Star man for Rochdale last season apparently, might have missed a trick there!

 

[larkymasher]

I stand by opinion. If you see a centre back charging about like a whippet it usually means they are very poor at reading the game and are forever getting back in a position were they should have been.

Read the game properly and very rarely should a centre back need to use the full pace they have.

 

[Jon Bon II]

Still think a marquee CB is top of Tufty's shopping list.

Then look no further Tuffers...

 

[DronnieBlade]

Being pedantic I know.

But it's 3:4:1:2.

And it's marvellous

UTB

 

[Fulwood Blade]

Being pedantic I know.

But it's 3:4:1:2.

And it's marvellous

UTB

Agreed it is marvelous and with how CW & AK swap it round a bit, I wonder if it might get tweaked at times to 3-4-2-1 - slightly more defensive in midfield to cope with the step up in divisions.

UTB