5 ATB Return?

[mattbianco1]

Already gives an overlapping back 5 of:
Seriki-Walker-Souttar-McCallum-Burrows
Or
Walker-Tanganga-Souttar-McCallum-Burrows

I really hope we're not planning on McCallum as first choice LCB.

We need an actual left-sided CB - Greaves (Ipswich), Burgess (Swansea), Kitching (Coventry), Atkinson (Bristol C), Cashin (Brighton). The ones in bold should be achievable on loan. If we're going 3 at the back, Hjelde again wouldn't be a bad signing.

We were also linked with Riad at Palace last season. He's at the world cup with Morocco, is he now out of reach?

 

[Lord Eddard Muir]

Burrows too inconsistent for me.

McCallum can play LWB surely, unless I'm missing something

 

[DeanLearner'sCat]

We need an actual left-sided CB

 

[Champagneblade]

In my pub before the England game a lad i know told me he'd heard "from a good contact " ( I know) that Hamer is definitely going and Brookes was leaving, which was a surprise, because next season we aren't playing with wingers and Brookes wanted to leave, he also mentioned that Peck could be going as well, Hamer and Peck wouldn't be a shock but I told him, Brookes? No chance, surely not, well who knows?

Any more glad tidings he shared?

Did he reveal the cold harsh reality around Father Christmas and the Tooth Fairy while he was being an all-round mood Hoover?

 

[ancientblade]

Maybe selling Brooks was on purpose so we can go back to playing 5 at the back with Seriki and Burrows pushing further forward?

Not gonna lie, Seriki and Burrows would be the best wing backs in each of their positions in the league having the freedom to go forward.

Brooks wouldn’t fit in a 5 back formation. Maybe that’s why we have decided to sell him?

It’s only a suggestion, don’t get rattled by it.

i think you could well have a point and would tie in with kyle returning as rcb

 

[SUFC Guy]

What I would like for the first game:

---------------------- Cooper

---------- Walker --- Souttar --- Tanganga

Seriki ------------------------------------------ Burrows/McCallum

---------------------- Phillips

-------------Peck ---- Hamer ---- O-Hare

--------------------- Bamford

 

[Champagneblade]

What I would like for the first game:

---------------------- Cooper

---------- Walker --- Souttar --- Tanganga

Seriki ------------------------------------------ Burrows/McCallum

---------------------- Phillips

-------------Peck ---- Hamer ---- O-Hare

--------------------- Bamford

And would you be bringing Margot Robbie to the game or leaving her at home to watch with her on TV?

If we retained all those I’d be delighted!

 

[SUFC Guy]

And would you be bringing Margot Robbie to the game or leaving her at home to watch with her on TV?

If we retained all those I’d be delighted!

What I would like and what I'm likely to recieve are always 2 different things

 

[pollster]

Maybe selling Brooks was on purpose so we can go back to playing 5 at the back with Seriki and Burrows pushing further forward?

Not gonna lie, Seriki and Burrows would be the best wing backs in each of their positions in the league having the freedom to go forward.

Brooks wouldn’t fit in a 5 back formation. Maybe that’s why we have decided to sell him?

It’s only a suggestion, don’t get rattled by it.

Maybe the moon is REALLY made of green cheese?
And about as likely.

It's THREE at the back rather than 5
As it should have been the last three seasons.
When we have basically only had wing backs

As for Brooks our MVP BEFORE last season to people like me
and worth £30 million already if played in the correct position
(like failed forest signings Hutchinson and MCAtee if you doubt my opinion)
rather than the moronic disabling right wing
running backwards to shield the ball
and to retain POINTLESS possession
as demanded by bad managers like Wilder

How about using the MOST SUCCESSFUL formation
343?
What small club has had the success of Crystal Palace recently playing this formation?
Which in the last MOTD was described by one opponent as
'very- difficult to play against as no one else plays that way''

Rather than the endless brain dead Pepshit Cocoa the Clown clones (GOOD RIDDANCE!)_
Like Wilder and Selles who destroy their own teams by copying
boring anti-footbal TOTALLY predictable faux tactics

eg

Cooper
Tanganga McGuinness Zatterstrom
Seriki Peck Arblaster McCallum
Hamer Campbell Brooks

Terrific going forward
Accident waiting to happen at the back

And NO
That does NOT mean overlapping CB's
IT MEANS EARLY FORWARD PASSING TO THE FORWARD THREE

What gets me is that every time we go down to 9 ore 10
WE SWITCH to three at the back
If it is so good for 9 or 10
HTF does it not work with 11?
And I mean 11 players not the ex Leeds crap that Wilder favours
to the point of endless tedium and disappointment
and ridicule in transfer deadline studios.

Let alone the disasters on the pitch of Philips Rothwell
(WTF did ClownsOH agree to his permanent signing????)
and Hjede or whatever he's called.

 

[Berkshire Blade]

Danny hall reported the aim at the end of the season was wingers to come in so unless that's changed...

 

[Newbury Blade]

I’ll follow with interest who we go for.

We aren’t blessed with wingers anyway.

There is an argument as per the OP that the path of least resistance is to go 3-5-2 or 3-4-1-2 or 3-4-2-1.

Let say we’d like Souttar, Walker and Phillips. Not saying we get them all but we’ve been linked and if we don’t get them then you’d expect similar to be targetted.

Already gives an overlapping back 5 of:
Seriki-Walker-Souttar-McCallum-Burrows
Or
Walker-Tanganga-Souttar-McCallum-Burrows

On paper, you’ve got Seriki, Walker, Tanganga, Shackleton/Sachdev/Curtis for the right side 2 positions. You’ve got Souttar backed up by McGuinness and possibly Tanganga in the centre. On the left you’ve got McCallum, Burrows, RND as first drop and then either you use one of those mentioned or likes of Buyabu breaks through, similar trajectory to a Seriki.

At present you’ve got Peck and Phillips. You still have Arblaster and Rothwell. You could then have O’Hare and Gus behind Bamford. You don’t really miss Brooks if that’s how you line up.

Still could lose Peck and then Arblaster would start. Still could lose Gus, but then maybe Campbell, Cannon or One start and you play two up top.

If it’s a season to cash in and remain competitive I’d probably take 8 figures for Peck and not bother losing Gus. The fee won’t be astronomical anyway at 29. See if him and O’Hare can have some fun and get us top 8.

You’ve still got Grbic, Zatterstrom, Baptiste, Ukaki, Chong, Matos, Nwachukwu to make decisions on to either save wages, bring in modest fees or even contribute as back ups. Could Ukaki be a rival for Seriki for instance? Can Chong and Nwachukwu provide back up for Hamer and O’Hare?

No idea how Chris sees the last batch but just as Coutts emerged, just as Lundstram emerged, there is room for one to do just that.

You see McCallum playing at left centre-back in a 5? That’s the plan?

 

[Newbury Blade]

McCallum can play LWB surely, unless I'm missing something

Yes and better than Burrows in that position. Yet someone who claims to have seen our team play thinks he’s a LCB.

 

[Houston_Blade]

Burgess (Swansea)

Shocking footballer based on what I’ve seen, a defence with him, Tanganga and McGuinness would get us relegated.

 

[Champagneblade]

You see McCallum playing at left centre-back in a 5? That’s the plan?

I think he has the attributes to play there.

He’s excellent in the air. He’s quick. If folk are ok with Walker playing as RCB then why not McCallum LCB? It’s the same thing.

 

[wavy-blade]

If getting rid of brooks means getting souttar well I can live with that

 

[LurkerBlade]

IF we go to a 5 I think we have much more work in the CB department.

We know LWB and RWB but I don't think Tanganga can play the CB or LCB role, we have rarely let him play the left of a 2.

So if we bring in Walker we definitely need a LCB and I think we need to add at least 2 CB and get rid of McGuiness.

That seem a lot of work compared to bringing in a winger.

 

[Tony Currie]

Maybe selling Brooks was on purpose so we can go back to playing 5 at the back with Seriki and Burrows pushing further forward?

Not gonna lie, Seriki and Burrows would be the best wing backs in each of their positions in the league having the freedom to go forward.

Brooks wouldn’t fit in a 5 back formation. Maybe that’s why we have decided to sell him?

It’s only a suggestion, don’t get rattled by it.

Great summary for me Seriki is a better player than Brooks - however he isn't a right back so giving him Brooks old role fits perfectly.

 

[Champagneblade]

For me keeping Hamer becomes more of a no brainer as time goes on.

Turkish teams and Hull are going to offer very little, I’d imagine. There comes a point where the saving simply doesn’t justify the impact to the team.

While we have Gus we have a potential match winner. His partnership with O’Hare is always a joy to watch.

Then this is where Chris will lose my support a bit; Jimmy Ramble suggested Chris prefers 4-2-3-1. Maybe sk, but in selling Brooks we have no wingers. So going for a system which needs them makes little sense.

If money is tight, then wasting it on agent fees through multiple transfers also makes no sense.

If we keep Gus and go 5-2-2-1 then we can avoid having to buy forwards, who are more expensive, and focus on cheaper midfield and defensive options.

I’m more than happy to line up with Bamford supported by Gus and Callum. Creative and has goals. At present it give you Cannon and Campbell as alternatives to Bamford and creates a route for One to sub for Gus and Chong and Marsh to support O’Hare. You could still arguably sell Campbell and use Oné and Marsh more, with the former being higher up the pecking order.

If the plan is also to sell Peck then it seems the midfield will be Arblaster and Phillips wit Rothwell backing up. Probably need one more there and I’m not against Choudhury as he can also cover the right side.

The focus then can be on defence. You’ve already got your first choice wingbacks. Main focus would just be on centre back. Might need a couple but it will be much cheaper than buying multiple wingers and it also makes the best out of the wide men.

I think you could make the team decent with as few as 4 signings, no more than 5, something like; Walker, Souttar, Phillips, Choudhury and one more centre half at a push.

 

[RWE]

For me keeping Hamer becomes more of a no brainer as time goes on.

Turkish teams and Hull are going to offer very little, I’d imagine. There comes a point where the saving simply doesn’t justify the impact to the team.

While we have Gus we have a potential match winner. His partnership with O’Hare is always a joy to watch.

Then this is where Chris will lose my support a bit; Jimmy Ramble suggested Chris prefers 4-2-3-1. Maybe sk, but in selling Brooks we have no wingers. So going for a system which needs them makes little sense.

If money is tight, then wasting it on agent fees through multiple transfers also makes no sense.

If we keep Gus and go 5-2-2-1 then we can avoid having to buy forwards, who are more expensive, and focus on cheaper midfield and defensive options.

I’m more than happy to line up with Bamford supported by Gus and Callum. Creative and has goals. At present it give you Cannon and Campbell as alternatives to Bamford and creates a route for One to sub for Gus and Chong and Marsh to support O’Hare. You could still arguably sell Campbell and use Oné and Marsh more, with the former being higher up the pecking order.

If the plan is also to sell Peck then it seems the midfield will be Arblaster and Phillips wit Rothwell backing up. Probably need one more there and I’m not against Choudhury as he can also cover the right side.

The focus then can be on defence. You’ve already got your first choice wingbacks. Main focus would just be on centre back. Might need a couple but it will be much cheaper than buying multiple wingers and it also makes the best out of the wide men.

I think you could make the team decent with as few as 4 signings, no more than 5, something like; Walker, Souttar, Phillips, Choudhury and one more centre half at a push.

I do agree with this I think it’s easier and probably cheaper signing players who fit a back 5 than any wingers. I’ve wanted us to go to a back 5 since the end of last season, would help free up Burrows appalling defending and allow him to be a genuine wingback, both him and Seriki look more like wingbacks then fullbacks anyway.

Would prefer us to get 2 solid CB’s to compliment Tanganga, than 2 wishy washy wingers who would be on a free or cheap. I also agree on your point with having 2 number 10’s behind a main striker, it helps rotate the strikers whilst also having a bit of creativity upfront who can also drop into midfield and make us solid.

 

[pollster]

Maybe the moon is REALLY made of green cheese?
And about as likely.

It's THREE at the back rather than 5
As it should have been the last three seasons.
When we have basically only had wing backs

As for Brooks our MVP BEFORE last season to people like me
and worth £30 million already if played in the correct position
(like failed forest signings Hutchinson and MCAtee if you doubt my opinion)
rather than the moronic disabling right wing
running backwards to shield the ball
and to retain POINTLESS possession
as demanded by bad managers like Wilder

How about using the MOST SUCCESSFUL formation
343?
What small club has had the success of Crystal Palace recently playing this formation?
Which in the last MOTD was described by one opponent as
'very- difficult to play against as no one else plays that way''

Rather than the endless brain dead Pepshit Cocoa the Clown clones (GOOD RIDDANCE!)_
Like Wilder and Selles who destroy their own teams by copying
boring anti-footbal TOTALLY predictable faux tactics

eg

Cooper
Tanganga McGuinness Zatterstrom
Seriki Peck Arblaster McCallum
Hamer Campbell Brooks

Terrific going forward
Accident waiting to happen at the back

And NO
That does NOT mean overlapping CB's
IT MEANS EARLY FORWARD PASSING TO THE FORWARD THREE

What gets me is that every time we go down to 9 ore 10
WE SWITCH to three at the back
If it is so good for 9 or 10
HTF does it not work with 11?
And I mean 11 players not the ex Leeds crap that Wilder favours
to the point of endless tedium and disappointment
and ridicule in transfer deadline studios.

Let alone the disasters on the pitch of Philips Rothwell
(WTF did ClownsOH agree to his permanent signing????)
and Hjede or whatever he's called.

Well any sane person can dismiss 3/5 at the back after Halifax
despite it being essential with
just wing backs
but with the frailties compounded with none defending 'inverted wingers'
2 years of the same Pepshit continued from game 1
But he is going to change?
Still not seen the first half yet
(nor read the match feed beyond a couple of entries on page 1)
BUT
There was no indication that first half selection what formation he had chosen
just the obvious (much better) team that screamed out from the list of substitutes

Davies
Sasnauskas McGuiness Zatterstrom
Seriki Blacker Riedewald, McCallum
Hamer Bamford Campbell

That formation and team did not only not appear
But we persisted with the same failed tactics and anti-football Pepshit copying crap
with those that were selected
With the exception that at least we had a left footed LCB (as first half appeared to be)
and CB height (which was largely irrelevant as they ripped us apart on the wings to create chances)