Jump to content

Three at the back


Recommended Posts

The new craze. Conte and all the cool kids in the Premier League are all trying it. Might suit our squad better with a few tweaks. Hunt and Reach seem potentially like good wing-backs with plenty of stamina.

 

Can either go with two up top or one and two attacking midfielders:

 

3-4-1-2

.........................Westwood.........................

...........Lees......Hutchinson.....Loovens.....

Hunt..........Lee............Bannan.........Reach

.......................Foresteri..............................

................Hooper..........Rhodes.................

 

3-4-2-1

.........................Westwood.........................

...........Lees......Hutchinson.....Loovens.....

Hunt..........Lee............Bannan.........Reach

.............Abdi......................Foresteri...........

..........................Fletcher............................

 

Remains to be seen if Foresteri could play as the attacking midfielder, as his best work for us has been on the left. Maybe Abdi as an alternative. Looking at those line-ups I feel we would need another CB (to replace Loovens, or as cover). Pudil could also potentially play as the left sided CB. Most pressingly, I think we'd need someone with pace to play as one of the 2 attacking midfielders or up top. Really, you could argue we'll need this player regardless of what formation we choose. I don't think Wallace is a viable option with these formations, apart form potentially as a central midfielder.

 

Thoughts? Or would others prefer we stick with a back four?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im all for this. It gets the most out of our attacking players for me. 

 

If we played this then we would need to buy less players this summer.

 

2 wing backs, 1 centre back and 1 very special attacking minded player.  

 

Abdi / FF playing behind the strickers and rotating the forwards based on form. So long as the wing backs are good, it could be a very exciting team to watch. 

 

Would CC go this way though, i would say absolutely not. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, milkytheowl said:

Not heard anyone mention this - reckon we have the players to play 3 at back?

 

I'm not sure it would suit Loovens, but I'm not sure he's got a full season left in him anyway. Would suggest we get a new left-sided centre-half. Pudil might be able to play there, when you look at full-backs at a higher level who have adapted, and are arguably better at CB, e.g. Ben Davies, Azpilicueta

 

I think it might suit Hunt and Reach as wing-backs, particularly Reach who doesn't quite seem to suit LB or LM. We'd need to sign at least one more though as I'm not sure players like Fox, Wallace or Pudil could play wing-back. Maybe Palmer at a push.

 

When we play 4-4-2 Hutchinson often drops deep to receive the ball and the full-backs push on, so it's not a million miles away from our current tactics but without the disadvantage of Hutchinson's midfield partner being isolated. I see Hutch's future being in defence, as considering his injury problems I'm just not sure he's got the legs in him to play 40 games in midfield per season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can see it working. Would suit that Carlos doesn't really like out and out wingers. 

 

Reach would be more suited at left wing back. Would think we'd need a stronger right wing back than Hunt. 

 

Suits Nando playing as the key attacking player behind the forwards. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, 1993swfc said:

Can see it working. Would suit that Carlos doesn't really like out and out wingers. 

 

Reach would be more suited at left wing back. Would think we'd need a stronger right wing back than Hunt. 

 

Suits Nando playing as the key attacking player behind the forwards. 

 

Only in so much as, Reach is not particularly impressive as a winger, or a full back Another compromise, and an expensive one at that

Edited by gurujuan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 1993swfc said:

Can see it working. Would suit that Carlos doesn't really like out and out wingers. 

 

Reach would be more suited at left wing back. Would think we'd need a stronger right wing back than Hunt. 

 

Suits Nando playing as the key attacking player behind the forwards. 

 

Reach cannot tackle so im not sure he would be that good as a wing back. He also cannot head a ball. Infact defensively hes gash and going forward he has no pace. Reach would have to be used sparingly in that formation for me unless playing in one of the central midfield roles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Controversial but I would sell Forestieri and Bannan. Squad needs freshening up.

 

Use the funds plus extra to buy the best 3 players we could get in these positions :

 

Quick right wing back with good delivery

Midfield beast

Quality centre half

 

Play something like :

 

 ************************Westwood************************

 

*******Lees***********Hutch***********NEW*************

 

NEW**********Lee*************NEW*************Reach

 

**********************Hooper/Adbi***********************

 

***************Rhodes**********Fletcher*****************

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RichSheffWeds said:

Controversial but I would sell Forestieri and Bannan. Squad needs freshening up.

 

Use the funds plus extra to buy the best 3 players we could get in these positions :

 

Quick right wing back with good delivery

Midfield beast

Quality centre half

 

Play something like :

 

 ************************Westwood************************

 

*******Lees***********Hutch***********NEW*************

 

NEW**********Lee*************NEW*************Reach

 

**********************Hooper/Adbi***********************

 

***************Rhodes**********Fletcher*****************

 

 

 

Why sell 2 of our better players Rich, there's no indication that we have to sell to refresh the squad We refreshed the squad with £20m worth of new talent last season, and that didn't make much difference

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Manwithastick said:

Milky was probably being sarcastic as I hadn't bothered to read the previous threads. I see there has already been 8 pages on this.

 

What I would add to what was discussed there is that it wouldn't necessarily be changing the formation for the whole season. But would be good to see us with the flexibility to try a different formation and change mid-game on occasions. The personnel we already have would seem suited to it, by and large.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brad_owl said:

 

Reach cannot tackle so im not sure he would be that good as a wing back. He also cannot head a ball. Infact defensively hes gash and going forward he has no pace. Reach would have to be used sparingly in that formation for me unless playing in one of the central midfield roles. 

Bang on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

 

Why sell 2 of our better players Rich, there's no indication that we have to sell to refresh the squad We refreshed the squad with £20m worth of new talent last season, and that didn't make much difference

 

I know people will disagree with me but I honestly think we've seen the best of Forestieri and not sure his heart is in it.  I could be wrong and he could smash it for us next season.

 

Whilst Bannan is effective, he is a bit one dimensional for me.

 

Our performances, especially in the play offs were a bit stale and we were easy to play against. Think we need a change. Defo need more pace and creativity from midfield.

 

Picking up £10m for Forestieri and £4-5m for Bannan and buying 3 or 4 quality players to add physical presence and pace would help us improve next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Emerson Thome said:

The new craze. Conte and all the cool kids in the Premier League are all trying it. Might suit our squad better with a few tweaks. Hunt and Reach seem potentially like good wing-backs with plenty of stamina.

 

Can either go with two up top or one and two attacking midfielders:

 

3-4-1-2

.........................Westwood.........................

...........Lees......Hutchinson.....Loovens.....

Hunt..........Lee............Bannan.........Reach

.......................Foresteri..............................

................Hooper..........Rhodes.................

 

3-4-2-1

.........................Westwood.........................

...........Lees......Hutchinson.....Loovens.....

Hunt..........Lee............Bannan.........Reach

.............Abdi......................Foresteri...........

..........................Fletcher............................

 

Remains to be seen if Foresteri could play as the attacking midfielder, as his best work for us has been on the left. Maybe Abdi as an alternative. Looking at those line-ups I feel we would need another CB (to replace Loovens, or as cover). Pudil could also potentially play as the left sided CB. Most pressingly, I think we'd need someone with pace to play as one of the 2 attacking midfielders or up top. Really, you could argue we'll need this player regardless of what formation we choose. I don't think Wallace is a viable option with these formations, apart form potentially as a central midfielder.

 

Thoughts? Or would others prefer we stick with a back four?

I think Pudil often plays in midfield for Czech republic, so I reckon he'd actually be MORE suited to this formation (than in a 4-4-2) at left wing-back, on his day he's a lot more effective than Reach is. Granted his day's have been fleeting recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ellis Rimmer said:

                Westwood

 

          Lees Hutch Loovens

 

Hunt      Lee    McGugan (c)     Reach

 

               Forestieri

 

            Rhodes Hooper

Is this a 'spot the deliberate mistake'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest wilyfox

I can understand why people suggest it, but Carlos was asked about 3 at the back last season and said he had no plan to make the change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brad_owl said:

 

Reach cannot tackle so im not sure he would be that good as a wing back. He also cannot head a ball. Infact defensively hes gash and going forward he has no pace. Reach would have to be used sparingly in that formation for me unless playing in one of the central midfield roles. 

 

Reach played quite often for us at full back last year, where you need to head and tackle a lot more. I think wing back would be his best position as his main attributes are stamina, tidy in possession and crossing. When he plays in defence he looks a little weak defensively, but on the left wing he doesn't beat a man often enough or look like much of an attacking threat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...