Does our 3-4-1-2work without Coutts?

[Champagneblade]

As the quarterback in the midfield three his is an intrical part of the system, as are:
- O’Connell and Basham bombing on from RCB and LCB to support the wingbacks
- Fleck advancing the ball from our third to theirs
- Duffy looking for openings in the final third
- Billy and Leon firing them in

I’ll be interested to see if Wilder considers more formation changes.

At the end of the day whilst we are all about TEAM, you do ideally want your best XI on the pitch.

If Coutts is out then undoubtedly number 12 is Brooks.

Would Chris consider whatever modern derivation there is to 4-4-2?

He’d still have Billy and Leon.

Having lost Coutts, he’d have a midfield of Bash and Fleck, combative but with Free roles out wide for Duffy and Brooks.

CCV and O’Connell could be a decent pairing and you’d still encourage attacking full back play.

In doind this you acknowledge you’d rather Brooks on the field than say Lundstram. You’d also lose Wright in favour of Baldock.

But you lose the attacking centre back element we’ve cone to love, at least to some extent.

Hope someone can step in to keep 3-4-1-2 working well but this must be a consideration if only to get Brooks involved. Unless Chris goes gung-ho with 3-3-2-2 and just has Fleck deep-lying, plays Brooks and Duffy as 2 number 10s and just goes “we’ll score more than you!”. To go even more attacking would not surprise me in the slightest under Wilder. Let’s see how Kev McDonald goes with Brooks and Duffy all over him for instance.

 

[knowsnowt]

We will see.

 

[bromtom]

Personally think Lundstram will be fine, but the defenders will have to be on their toes for a couple of games while he works out a few issues with vision and possession. He won't be a Rolls Royce straight away like Couttsy, but he'll be a nice Audi, with the potential to be a Bentley by January if we keep playing him.

If they don't go Lundstram long term, if I was the manager, I'd stick with the tried and tested formation and play Fleck in Coutts' position, and then Duffy in Flecks and Carruthers/Brooks where Duffy was, see if that works at all, but I have faith Wilder and Knill will get it right.

 

[SwissBlade]

I have no idea what a quarter back is in football.

 

[Tynemouth Blade]

We will see.

.....on Tuesday

 

[shorehamview]

I have no idea what a quarter back is in football.

He’s the MVP for the winningest franchise in the Steel City, the Sheffield Blades. And it’s big game time next Tuesday under the light at the Bramall Bowl, where the Fulham Cottagers are the visitors. Here’s hoping tight end Billy Sharp and running back Neon Leon Clarke are fully fit, backed up by the nickel formation, and the special team players David “The Kid” Brooks and Samir “The Urinator” Carruthers are primed and ready to go.

Hope that clears things up. Go Blades!

 

[SwissBlade]

He’s the MVP for the winningest franchise in the Steel City, the Sheffield Blades. And it’s big game time next Tuesday under the light at the Bramall Bowl, where the Fulham Cottagers are the visitors. Here’s hoping tight end Billy Sharp and running back Neon Leon Clarke are fully fit, backed up by the nickel formation, and the special team players David “The Kid” Brooks and Samir “The Urinator” Carruthers are primed and ready to go.

Hope that clears things up. Go Blades!

“Neon Leon Clarke”

I can just see his goal celebration being a steelers-esque lights out followed by Gary Sinclair giving it a “scorer for the blades - neon leoooooonnnn Clarke” as Leon celebrates in front of the kop by lighting up his neon shirt, shorts, socks and gloves

 

[Kozzy_is_my_Dad]

For now, I think he'll keep the same formation although you raise good points as always, Champagneblade I don't think Wilder will want to make wholesale changes to formation too at such short notice.

I think the options are:

1. Lundstram and Carruthers to fight it out for a deeper role, although neither would be as class and consistent as Coutts, certainly not yet. Neither are as assured in possession and the back 3 could be exposed.
2. Duffy to drop deep with Fleck and Brooks higher up.
3. CCV, Wright and JOC at the back, Basham into midfield with Fleck and Duffy.
4. Bring back Whiteman in Jan and maybe make a signing. Then let them all contest for a place.

I personally think he'll go for 3.

 

[diode_blade]

I have no idea what a quarter back is in football.

Sick one between a breadcake, add some mustard, onions and ketchup....quarter pounder back...
hope that helps...

 

[DronnieBlade]

Most probable outcome is Lundy comes in, straight swap.

But I wouldn’t put in past him to change it slightly from 3:4:1:2 to 3:4:2:1, especially in away games. Brooks comes in behind the lone striker, Leon. So starting games as we tend to finish them after Sharp gets dragged after about 70 mins.

Maybe !

UTB

 

[8lade]

I don't get to see as much United in the flesh as I'd like but long before we brought Carruthers in he was a 'wanted player', what's changed? Have our standards upped that much? Is he too weak defensively? Or something else?
Whiteman can't find it, may have been on RS but I'm pretty sure Wilder has already said he'll be with Doncaster for the season.
'Neon Leon' I remember hearing that from his Wednesday days and for that reason was glad we'd avoided it so far.

 

[FTPE]

While I still think Carruthers has a part to play, there's no way he can play in that deeper role.
If you're going to have a central midfielder drop all the way back in line with the defence to receive the ball, then you've GOT TO make sure he's unbelievable in possesion.
If you lose the ball trying something creative in their box the worst you will get is a collective groan of frustration, lose it in ours and we are in trouble.
To be honest that's also my worry with Bash and Lundstam but maybe I've just been spoilt with Coutts and a like for like replacement seems almost impossible.

 

[GreasyChipBeattie]

I didn't even realise we played 3 4 1 2
I always thought it was a 3 5 2

 

[Woodwardfan]

Coutts great ability is ball retention, he keeps possession in almost every circumstance with honed skills of touch and control and a sixth sense of getting his body twixt man and ball and turning away the right way out of trouble. He can play adventurous long balls but rarely allows himself that indulgence unless the game is already won or desperately needs recovering. He demands possession from nearby colleagues and mostly just moves the ball on with a relatively safe pass, though he plays much more progressively since Wilder joined us. He takes corners from the left with not too much success and he is involved in dead ball tactical decision making. He is an integral part of the team and as big a vocal leader as anybody out there. He provides few goal assists which mainly reflects the area of the pitch he plays in and presumably his belief that other players are more effective in key goal scoring areas.

How do we replace him?

1st choice: Lundstram will win more tackles, give away more fouls and lose more possession. On the other hand he will provide more goal assists, score more goals and win more headers in both penalty areas. He will probably play slightly behind Fleck rather than alongside him so we might see Fleck being even more prominent in the final third. Lundstram is a leader to and will grow into that role now he has the opportunity to play regularly.

2nd choice: Basham but would prefer to see him at the back.

3rd choice: Carruthers who looks to have a lot to prove to the manager. He is probably most like Coutts but not as reliable and maybe more ambitious and less patient. Lacks the height and physical presence which Lundstram offers. Seems unable to strike any consistency of performance with us as yet.

4th choice: Brooks but surely he should be doing damage further up the field and I detect he would not be that good at tracking back throughout the game with all the concentration needed.

In January how about Whiteman - he has all the attributes of an all round midfield player with a great tackle, strong engine, an eye for a forward pass and for a goal or two.

No need to panic. A fully recovered Coutts can resume his place in the side in the Premier League alongside Fleck, no worries there.

 

[Woodwardfan]

As the quarterback in the midfield three his is an intrical part of the system, as are:
- O’Connell and Basham bombing on from RCB and LCB to support the wingbacks
- Fleck advancing the ball from our third to theirs
- Duffy looking for openings in the final third
- Billy and Leon firing them in

I’ll be interested to see if Wilder considers more formation changes.

At the end of the day whilst we are all about TEAM, you do ideally want your best XI on the pitch.

If Coutts is out then undoubtedly number 12 is Brooks.

Would Chris consider whatever modern derivation there is to 4-4-2?

He’d still have Billy and Leon.

Having lost Coutts, he’d have a midfield of Bash and Fleck, combative but with Free roles out wide for Duffy and Brooks.

CCV and O’Connell could be a decent pairing and you’d still encourage attacking full back play.

In doind this you acknowledge you’d rather Brooks on the field than say Lundstram. You’d also lose Wright in favour of Baldock.

But you lose the attacking centre back element we’ve cone to love, at least to some extent.

Hope someone can step in to keep 3-4-1-2 working well but this must be a consideration if only to get Brooks involved. Unless Chris goes gung-ho with 3-3-2-2 and just has Fleck deep-lying, plays Brooks and Duffy as 2 number 10s and just goes “we’ll score more than you!”. To go even more attacking would not surprise me in the slightest under Wilder. Let’s see how Kev McDonald goes with Brooks and Duffy all over him for instance.

Actually I don't think Coutts is our 'quarterback', he plays less offensively than a quarterback who's main role is to provide ' goal assists' in football parlance.

Fleck and more so Duffy are more our 'quarterbacks'. Coutts feeds those two and the wing backs.

 

[Woodwardfan]

I didn't even realise we played 3 4 1 2
I always thought it was a 3 5 2

I think you are right but Duffy does play an advanced No.10 role within that formation, so it's a bit of both. Incredibly two of our back 3 power on time and again just to add to the mix. This is where the wing backs Stevens and Baldock/ Freeman/ Basham are key to the whole balance of the team and the 'insurance' cover defensively.

 

[GreasyChipBeattie]

I think you are right but Duffy does play an advanced No.10 role within that formation, so it's a bit of both. Incredibly two of our back 3 power on time and again just to add to the mix. This is where the wing backs Stevens and Baldock/ Freeman/ Basham are key to the whole balance of the team and the 'insurance' cover defensively.

So the 3 5 2 effectively becomes a 3 4 1 2?
Genuine question mate. I grew up on 4 4 2 and struggle (in a good way) to keep up with what's happening on the pitch when we're playing.....especially when you end up seeing Magic Hat O'Connell or CC-V bombing down the wings into the penalty areas!!
I've no idea what that's called.....other than f******g awesome

 

[Slim Man]

We were fine against Ipswich, we’ll be fine moving forward. Everyone will step up to the plate - it’s what they do.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Wilder will just do what he always does, make it look easy.

 

[blade too long]

worked second half yesterday won it 1-0 and they didnt get a shot at goal
oconnel and basham will still raid forward

have we coped without Freeman

have we missed Donaldson and Evans being injured

 

[Kozzy_is_my_Dad]

Whatever happens next, I hope we don't deviate too far away from our current system. It really has worked well for us and its interesting and exciting to watch.

Watching most other teams in the division, I'd really loathe reverting back to a boring, flat 4-4-2. Could you really stand to see the lack of fluidity in a midfield two, the need for two centre backs to sit back and not bomb forward? I know I couldn't...

 

[BushBlade]

Whatever happens next, I hope we don't deviate too far away from our current system. It really has worked well for us and its interesting and exciting to watch.

Watching most other teams in the division, I'd really loathe reverting back to a boring, flat 4-4-2. Could you really stand to see the lack of fluidity in a midfield two, the need for two centre backs to sit back and not bomb forward? I know I couldn't...

We played some quite decent football in a 442 under Wilson and H still managed to get forward.

 

[BushBlade]

Duplicate.

 

[Harry's Game]

As it has been pointed out we were without Coutts against Ipswich, didn't change the system and won, it was only one nil but anyone at the game will know it was more comfortable than that.

Also as superb as Paul has been most of the season if you watch the Leeds game back he didn't particularly have a very good game that night but we still won with Duffy and Fleck dominating.

As long as we don't lose another one of threesome I see no reason to change the system.

 

[Ricky]

At the end of the day whilst we are all about TEAM, you do ideally want your best XI on the pitch.

If Coutts is out then undoubtedly number 12 is Brooks.

This is something well worthy of consideration, especially with a player as outstanding as Brooks.

It's not straightforward though is it. Because we really shouldn't deviate from the current system and the personnel within it, in which case there's no way to bring Brooks in for Coutts, which is a shame.

But surely Brooks has to be starting before too long one way or another. It'll be interesting to see how that happens.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

This is something well worthy of consideration, especially with a player as outstanding as Brooks.

It's not straightforward though is it. Because we really shouldn't deviate from the current system and the personnel within it, in which case there's no way to bring Brooks in for Coutts, which is a shame.

But surely Brooks has to be starting before too long one way or another. It'll be interesting to see how that happens.

I think I agree about Brooks starting - but where?

Sharp and Clarke both in the goal scoring charts and Duffy pulling strings behind - it's a difficult problem.

UTB

Edit PS: defo not in the Coutts position for me btw

 

[Ricky]

The best solution I can think of to get them all in the team is this 4-3-1-2.


Blackman

Baldock CCV O'Connell Stevens

Duffy Basham Fleck

Brooks

Sharp Clarke


Demanding role for Duffy but a perfect role for Carruthers, who could regularly replace him there.

But the negatives probably outweigh the positives here because you wouldn't want to change Duffy's role at all, or lose the 3 centre backs.

It would easily switch to the 3-5-2 with Basham moving to RCB. But that would still mean Duffy in a deeper role.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

The best solution I can think of to get them all in the team is this 4-3-1-2.


Blackman

Baldock CCV O'Connell Stevens

Duffy Basham Fleck

Brooks

Sharp Clarke


Demanding role for Duffy but a perfect role for Carruthers, who could regularly replace him there.

But the negatives probably outweigh the positives here because you wouldn't want to change Duffy's role at all, or lose the 3 centre backs.

It would easily switch to the 3-5-2 with Basham moving to RCB. But that would still mean Duffy in a deeper role.

I could actually buy that option.

I really liked the 3-5-2 v the pigs and it worked like a charm having Bash in a 5 stiffening it up.

It might not be as attacking but it would make us very very difficult to beat whilst still having creativity - you can have 10 out of 10 for the thought process

UTB

 

[Fanny magnet]

I think the ideal scenario is baldocks coming back and bash slotting into midfield
I trust him a lot more than lundstram who doesn't seem to keep the ball as well or use it as were effectively this could change if he gets a to in the side or we could slip down the table

 

[GreasyChipBeattie]

Duplicate.

There you go Mate. Let me know if you need anymore