Does a move to 3-4-3 suit this squad best?

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

Champagneblade

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
10,385
Reaction score
26,489
It doesn't seem like we are going to be going crazy on the recruitment and it may be a case of 1 in, 1 out.

Looking at the personnel we have it seems clear we are a bit light in central midfield and the centre of defence yet loaded in attack and at wing back.

For that reason, and given certain positions are more costly than others I do wonder if a transition from 3-5-2 to 3-4-3 is in order.

It's a progression which is only gradual but it immediately reduces the need for one central midfield player whilst adding one further spot for the plethora of strikers.

I'd still see a top quality left centre back as a matter of priority but as at right now you could comfortably go with:

Ramsdale
Basham Egan Robinson
Baldock Berge fleck RND
Brewster Sharp McGoldrick

The keeper situation will take care of itself depending on Rammers leaving, and either sourcing internally or externally.

On the right we have Baldock, Bogle and Seriki and could even consider Baldock going if Celtic get real though I'd be happy to keep him as a dependable high level performer.

Out wide Norrington-Davies excites but you've also got Stevens and Lowe as senior pros there, not to mention Osborn.

Egan and Basham in a three is a no brainer and you've got Robinson who did well at the end of the season. You've also got Norrington-Davies who could deputise for the unfortunate O'Connell but clearly he can't be first pick left wing back and first pick left centre back simultaneously so the quest for Davies makes sense.

You then just need to pick 2 midfielders. I put Berge and Fleck, but Norwood and Fleck did well together before at this level. Osborn can also come in and so too Slater. If Berge goes then you can understand the links to Hourihane though he is left footed.

Up front you then open it up to both strikers and wingers.

You could have McBurnie and Sharp competing for the central role. This also removes them working together which simply hasn't worked.

McGoldrick spent a lot of time drifting left and cutting in anyway last season so this remains an option and also opens up an avenue in games for Freeman to play more conventional left side when needed. On the right I think Brewster can play across the line and has shown he's a decent passer of the ball. It would also play more to Burke's conventional game as a winger.

Jebbison provided a huge boost but if he is breaking through then what he needs is games. With so much at stake, are we prepared to sacrifice Sharp or McBurnie to achieve this? I'd say a League One loan would be ideal. Likewise Hackford may benefit from some men's football at either League 2 or even non league. I think Tyler Smith will also move on based on there simply being too much traffic in front of him, though if bids come in for others then this may well change.

It still then leaves Mousset and N'Diaye. The latter is difficult to bank on while his contract remains unsigned though he would seem to be a potential successor to McGoldrick. Hopefully he can sign up.

Then good old Mousse. Potentially the most explosive of the lot but you are a brave man who banks on Mousset to carry you through 46 matches. I just have the feeling he moves on.

But the point here is there the above gets done with minimal recruitment and still puts out a decent XI with depth.

It will still leave questions to be answered if this team went up but in the words of John Maynard Keynes, the celebrated Economist, "in the long term, we're all dead". So let's not get overly concerned with any future seasons!
 

Think our problem was last season we were too rigid in the system we played , need to be able to mix it up & play with some tempo . As long as we are on the front foot again after a season of parking the bus I’d couldn’t give a shit what formation we play ⚔️⚔️
 
No. We should, of course, play a system that suits the players. Priority should be centre backs and central midfielders capable of playing in a four so we have the tactical flexibility we didn't have last year (and previous years tbh). Getting the wide forwards and central strikers capable of playing in a three will be a much more onerous task. Your choice then is square pegs in round holes or a system that suits your players. Certainly our better forward players. The only players we have suitable to the wide role in a three are Burke and possibly Freeman.
 
Last edited:
No. We should, of course, play a system that suits the players. Priority should be centre backs and central midfielders capable of playing in a four so we have the tactical flexibility we didn't have last year (and previous years tbh). Getting the wide forwards and central strikers capable of playing in a three will be a much more onerous task. Your choice then is square pegs in round holes or a system that suits your players. Certainly our better forward players. The only players we have suitable to the wide role in a three are Burke and possibly Freeman.
I take your point on board. I think the issue we have is that we need churn to achieve what you mention and I'm not so sure it is that type of window, with the Euros and just a few weeks until the season commences.

You're effectively asking for a few more midfielders and if only having Freeman and Burke as your wide options, looking for more there too. At the same time, whether you then play a 2 or just 1, you are then sidelining potentially 5 or 6 strikers.

Is it the window to find takers, offload that many in order to bring in the alternatives in midfield and defence? Time doesn't feel upon us to enforce major change. Perhaps style will change a bit but the clock is ticking for a shift in personel.

I certainly think we will need to be patient early on.
 
Judging from when Slav played a 3 at the back at watford and the preseason in Spain, when playing a 3 at the back he appears to like a square 4 in midfield behind the striker and nobody always taking the space the wingback needs to move into

Freeman Goldy
Fleck Norwood

Ideally the 2 who play off the stiker should be able to play centrally and in wide areas. For example you could play Freeman and Goldy behind Mcburnie or whoevever. Osborne at a push can play off the striker like he did at Everton, but I think it's safe to say where we need some players for creativity. Osborn would allow Fleck more freedom.

That being said as Champagne Blade says we have a number of strikers we don't need next season, but we have a squad which needs extra legs, pace and creativity.
 
I'm not convinced how most of out striker fit into a front 3.

McBurnie is the only obvious one in the centre. Obviously Burke can plays as a wide forward, and maybe Freeman, but the rest?
 
I'm not convinced how most of out striker fit into a front 3.

McBurnie is the only obvious one in the centre. Obviously Burke can plays as a wide forward, and maybe Freeman, but the rest?
yeah probably right there unless brewster and mousset can play as wide strikers weve basically got 3 for 1 position
 
I take your point on board. I think the issue we have is that we need churn to achieve what you mention and I'm not so sure it is that type of window, with the Euros and just a few weeks until the season commences.

You're effectively asking for a few more midfielders and if only having Freeman and Burke as your wide options, looking for more there too. At the same time, whether you then play a 2 or just 1, you are then sidelining potentially 5 or 6 strikers.

Is it the window to find takers, offload that many in order to bring in the alternatives in midfield and defence? Time doesn't feel upon us to enforce major change. Perhaps style will change a bit but the clock is ticking for a shift in personel.

I certainly think we will need to be patient early on.

We simply don't have the options to justify a change to 4-3-3. All our better forward options are more suited to a two with the possible exception of Mcburnie. You play the formation that gets the best out of your players; particularly your best players. We need centre backs and midfielders regardless of formation. It'd be foolish to not bring in options that can play in a four or a three. I agree that it'll be extremely difficult to turn the squad over enough to go 4-3-3. If we start like that without the likes of Sharp, Mcgoldrick, Mcburnie, Moose, Brewster etc in the wide areas I'll be worried already. It would take a big turnover of players which seems unlikely to me.
 
We simply don't have the options to justify a change to 4-3-3. All our better forward options are more suited to a two with the possible exception of Mcburnie. You play the formation that gets the best out of your players; particularly your best players. We need centre backs and midfielders regardless of formation. It'd be foolish to not bring in options that can play in a four or a three. I agree that it'll be extremely difficult to turn the squad over enough to go 4-3-3. If we start like that without the likes of Sharp, Mcgoldrick, Mcburnie, Moose, Brewster etc in the wide areas I'll be worried already. It would take a big turnover of players which seems unlikely to me.
i see your point but just dont see slav playing with a basic front 2 his main success at fulham was by playing mitrovic as the main striker with 2 pacey wide strikers either side of him and although im not a fan of mcburnie thats the system he played at swansea scoring 24 its hard to see where brewster and mousset fit in if he plays that system here mousset may be let go leaving mcburnie and brewster to challenge for this role
 
On paper, I'd say what suits the squad best is our old 3-4-1-2, with Freeman in the Duffy role. We have so many forwards but, Burke aside, none of them seem to naturally suit the wide positions in a front 3.
if we go back to that system mcgoldrick and freeman have to be the 2 battling for the number 10 role
 

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

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

Back
Top Bottom