@frequentstander I bet you said the same thing about Vokes last season and looked at what happened..... We have managed to find some great players who were classed as "past it" or "haven't lived up to expectation" but have managed to turn it around and be a great signing.
If he doesn't have any income confirmed for next season, he would be getting worried about his income for next year....
I don't think Grigg's that unrealistic a shout, but it seems like he might sign for Rotherham permanently.
I'd still like us to take a look at George Hirst - the Cowleys got something out of him after he'd done nothing elsewhere - but he's not OOC at Leicester until next summer (not that that would necessarily rule him out).
(Big) If Anthony Stewart does leave the club this summer, would it be unthinkable able signing Mark Beevers from Peterborough who has left by mutual consent? I know there is beef between the 2 clubs (I'm not sure why) but he looks like he has the experience and know-how to settle into our back 4....?
He's 33 in Nov - not such an issue with a CB but hardly ideal. I'd be totally confident with Forino then another youngster as his understudy. Stewart going wouldn't be a cataclysmic blow.
Vokes was definitely attainable. We had no striker who was capable of playing 30+ games in a season. He was a perfect fit for our direct style. He hadn't scored more than five goals in one season since 2016/2017.
Grigg will not come to Wycombe to be a second choice striker. It would be a gross misuse of resource if we paid him a large salary to sit on our bench for most of the season.
If we didn't have Vokes, it would be a completely different situation. You could argue it would be fairly likely. Far more sensible use of resource.
I'd quite like us to give Muskwe a second go. I can't see him regularly playing Championship football - and he needs regular football now as he's 23. Time for him to kick on.
Whats to say that we'll only play with one striker up front this season? Also, if Vokes gets injuried, apart from Halan (who is being more developed as a wide attacking player), we don't have any other proven player to play up front? We need another front line forward who can step into the striker's position to take the stress and pressure off Vokes. If Vokes gets a long-term injury OR loses his form in front of goal, we could lose one of our major threats on goal. I think it'll be unfair of GA to have a 32/33 yr old striker playing for 40+ games this season, it just can't happen.
While we have De Barr and Al-Hamadi as "options" if GA thought they had the ability, they would have been more involved last season. We have been blessed that Bayo has played for as long as he did and that we knew he would put in a shift if the team needed him to. However, we NEED another good striker to support and/or take over from Vokes when he needs a rest which is why I think Grigg could be a very good option.
We don't know the wages he will ask for, we don't even want to think about how we are affording Vokes this season but GA has a way of convincing players to come to us for (what we believe) a smaller salary than what they were getting.
Not sure Hanlan is “being developed as a wide attacking player”, I think it was more of a needs must type situation towards the end of the season.
I think it was just more of a case of the formation we were playing (4-2-3-1) and him being adaptable enough to play both roles.
Personally, I think it would suit both Vokes and Hanlan for them to play as a front two. Although sorting out the rest of the team to accommodate that would be more challenging.
I think we can find better value out there than Grigg given the kind of wage he would want. Not worth it for a player who will largely have to play second fiddle.
I must warn you...if any of our players in any position get injured at any point in the season...they won't be able to play. It is down to the management to ensure they have allowed for every single possible twist of fate or the fans will never forgive them. We need two The Players in every position...if we don't the club has no ambition. Rob get that checkbook/billfold/payment method out before it's too late.
Formations come and go as squads change. For example, we started last season playing three at the back because it worked so well in the final three months of the Championship season, when we were terrific. However, it wasn’t working so well by the middle of last season and we were right to change.
I agree playing 4-2-3-1 has worked really well, so far and we should certainly start next season like that.
It didn’t work at Wembley though. Sam Vokes was too isolated against a decent back line and we struggled to offer any attacking threat. It also didn’t really work at Gillingham, Wimbledon or MK away. So quite possible we’ll need to re-think at some point
At Wimbledon we changed to a 3-5-2 - one of the few times we actually played two up front last season - and it worked up to a point. I guess we haven't regularly played two up top since the back end of 19/20?
I wouldn't be ripping it up, but we were too slow to move away from five at the back too. The cracks in the five were showing in:
2-2 against Wednesday away - after the stoppage in play for the fan incident we were battered second half
2-1 home win against a very poor Burton side on the day
2-2 home draw against a very poor Wimbledon side
1-0 home loss to Ipswich
3-3 home draw to Sunderland - very leaky and Forino got rolled around the park that day, albeit against very strong opposition
Of course there were good or very good results in and amongst these, but the cracks were evident earlier than many fans seemed to pick up on. The results were before our very poor run in Jan-March ish.
__
In my opinion, we finished the season with a similar set of cracks:
1-1 away to Gillingham (albeit followed up with one of the best performances of the season at home to Plymouth)
1-1 away to Wimbledon
1-0 win at home to Sheff Wed, but we were arguably the worse side
2-1 win away to Burton, but we were quite poor in the first half
1-0 loss away to MK in the playoffs, but we were utterly played off the park
2-0 loss at Wembley to Sunderland, but we were played off the park
What's preventing us from starting the season too predictably / poorly?
__
If I were Gaz, I'd be strongly considering a third tactic, as most teams will know we have two options (4231 and 5221). I'd be interested to see an old school Gaz 442 - think Kashket & Bayo. Grant & PCH out wide. etc. We've got the option of playing two sitters (Scowen & Thommo/Gape), or we can play with one sitting and one slightly more dynamic (Scowen & Wing/Mehmeti/Young). Out wide you've got options of McCleary, Horgan, maybe even Mehmeti off the left, Hanlan potentially off either flank. Obita could play a defensive winger role. Kai Kai could play in a more familiar left midfield position (similar to his previous role in Blackpool's 442/4411). Parsons could play wide too. Arguably, so could Freeman. Up front you've got the Kashket replacements in the development squad (De Barr & Ali AH). I wouldn't be surprised to see McCleary in that role as he's getting older and potentially can't cover as much ground - probably not in 180 mins a week in a winger position, but more viable in the Kashket pressing striker role.
Wouldn't be surprised if that's why all of our games are behind closed doors. We know we need a third option or we could begin the season too predictably.
There's a reason (well, multiple reasons) why 4-4-2 has largely vanished from the game. Even where it does still exist, it tends to be the Rangnick/Hasenhüttl-style 4-2-2-2 - which I think could suit us well if League One players had the legs for gegenpressing.
Also, aren't most of the best teams predictable in terms of set-up? You know what you're going to get with City or Liverpool - but you're going to struggle to stop it. Being one-dimensional is a different matter and that probably did apply to us too often last season as Gaz is quite stubborn from a tactical POV - his only major weakness.
You can make the argument that the two legs against Milton Keynes are an example of GA being flexible and able to set us up according to what each situation needs.
First leg, high press, disrupt and unsettle their kids.
Second leg, deep press, give Milton Keynes two thirds of the pitch and make them score twice.I don't think it's fair to say we were 'played off the park,' we did exactly what we needed to.
It does come across as if Gaz is slow to react/adapt mid-way through a season, but I think we have to be conscious of how difficult it is to practise an alternative approach when you're playing Saturday/Tuesday most weeks. Very little time in training can be spent on a plan B/C.
442 appears to have vanished at the elite (UCL quarters onward) level on the face of things, but we aren't at elite level. I think tactics have been quite cyclical over the years. Conte arguably brought the trend of five at the back at the elite level. At one point 15+ Premier League teams were using it. Now, you have very few fives at the back, but loads of EFL teams are using it. In the Wenger era, there were loads of 4231s in the Premier League. Now, you've got mostly 433s with pressing forwards or 'link up' forwards in the middle or false nines. There was an era where 442 had a great spell in the Premier League. Papiss Cisse & Demba Ba. Ighalo & Deeney. Vardy & Okazaki/Ulloa. Think about the styles of players in the rest of the positions for NUFC, LCFC and Watford. Kante is a Premier League Scowen. Morgan similar to Tafazolli/Forino. Fuchs similar to JJ. Simpson similar to Grimmer etc. I think it could help protect our fragile areas in defensive play, which in my opinion is full back when against tricky/confident dribblers. Watford, Leicester and Newcastle were all sides which 'overperformed' during that era, playing a style of football which was effective with less technical quality on the ball by being direct and holding strong defensive structure, managing games with much less possession. This feels very similar to our current style against the top sides. What's to say we can't shock the league and bring back 442? I'm not saying we'll start the season in this manner. I think we'll stick with 4231 to begin with, but if we don't start quickly I would hope (and I'd be confident) that Gareth has a plan B and C.
Let's see who signs on first... And who we manage to keep hold of...
Having said that, I think the cycles will become less defined as formations become ever more fluid to the point they're largely irrelevant beyond use as a quick reference tool.
I think the opposite, Gareth trusts the players to get on with it and sometimes they fall short...or have a drop in form, etc etc whereas often he takes too long to make changes during the game. Having said that, I thought he improved on that during the last season.
Comments
@frequentstander I bet you said the same thing about Vokes last season and looked at what happened..... We have managed to find some great players who were classed as "past it" or "haven't lived up to expectation" but have managed to turn it around and be a great signing.
If he doesn't have any income confirmed for next season, he would be getting worried about his income for next year....
I don't think Grigg's that unrealistic a shout, but it seems like he might sign for Rotherham permanently.
I'd still like us to take a look at George Hirst - the Cowleys got something out of him after he'd done nothing elsewhere - but he's not OOC at Leicester until next summer (not that that would necessarily rule him out).
(Big) If Anthony Stewart does leave the club this summer, would it be unthinkable able signing Mark Beevers from Peterborough who has left by mutual consent? I know there is beef between the 2 clubs (I'm not sure why) but he looks like he has the experience and know-how to settle into our back 4....?
He's 33 in Nov - not such an issue with a CB but hardly ideal. I'd be totally confident with Forino then another youngster as his understudy. Stewart going wouldn't be a cataclysmic blow.
I can see Forino growing next year potentially to the point where we will struggle to keep hold of him if we dont get promoted
Vokes was definitely attainable. We had no striker who was capable of playing 30+ games in a season. He was a perfect fit for our direct style. He hadn't scored more than five goals in one season since 2016/2017.
Grigg will not come to Wycombe to be a second choice striker. It would be a gross misuse of resource if we paid him a large salary to sit on our bench for most of the season.
If we didn't have Vokes, it would be a completely different situation. You could argue it would be fairly likely. Far more sensible use of resource.
I'd quite like us to give Muskwe a second go. I can't see him regularly playing Championship football - and he needs regular football now as he's 23. Time for him to kick on.
8 goals in 2019/20 - it's not all about league goals.
They were in a higher tier too.
Whats to say that we'll only play with one striker up front this season? Also, if Vokes gets injuried, apart from Halan (who is being more developed as a wide attacking player), we don't have any other proven player to play up front? We need another front line forward who can step into the striker's position to take the stress and pressure off Vokes. If Vokes gets a long-term injury OR loses his form in front of goal, we could lose one of our major threats on goal. I think it'll be unfair of GA to have a 32/33 yr old striker playing for 40+ games this season, it just can't happen.
While we have De Barr and Al-Hamadi as "options" if GA thought they had the ability, they would have been more involved last season. We have been blessed that Bayo has played for as long as he did and that we knew he would put in a shift if the team needed him to. However, we NEED another good striker to support and/or take over from Vokes when he needs a rest which is why I think Grigg could be a very good option.
We don't know the wages he will ask for, we don't even want to think about how we are affording Vokes this season but GA has a way of convincing players to come to us for (what we believe) a smaller salary than what they were getting.
https://youtu.be/eOpGCGtCVsE
At least there’d be a readymade chant.
Not sure Hanlan is “being developed as a wide attacking player”, I think it was more of a needs must type situation towards the end of the season.
I think it was just more of a case of the formation we were playing (4-2-3-1) and him being adaptable enough to play both roles.
Personally, I think it would suit both Vokes and Hanlan for them to play as a front two. Although sorting out the rest of the team to accommodate that would be more challenging.
I think we can find better value out there than Grigg given the kind of wage he would want. Not worth it for a player who will largely have to play second fiddle.
Why would we switch to two up top when we've got such an effective one-striker system at the moment?
I must warn you...if any of our players in any position get injured at any point in the season...they won't be able to play. It is down to the management to ensure they have allowed for every single possible twist of fate or the fans will never forgive them. We need two The Players in every position...if we don't the club has no ambition. Rob get that checkbook/billfold/payment method out before it's too late.
Formations come and go as squads change. For example, we started last season playing three at the back because it worked so well in the final three months of the Championship season, when we were terrific. However, it wasn’t working so well by the middle of last season and we were right to change.
I agree playing 4-2-3-1 has worked really well, so far and we should certainly start next season like that.
It didn’t work at Wembley though. Sam Vokes was too isolated against a decent back line and we struggled to offer any attacking threat. It also didn’t really work at Gillingham, Wimbledon or MK away. So quite possible we’ll need to re-think at some point
We got 83 points!
It worked pretty well
Obviously you've got to have other options up your sleeve, but there's no reason to rip it up as the default.
At Wimbledon we changed to a 3-5-2 - one of the few times we actually played two up front last season - and it worked up to a point. I guess we haven't regularly played two up top since the back end of 19/20?
I wouldn't be ripping it up, but we were too slow to move away from five at the back too. The cracks in the five were showing in:
2-2 against Wednesday away - after the stoppage in play for the fan incident we were battered second half
2-1 home win against a very poor Burton side on the day
2-2 home draw against a very poor Wimbledon side
1-0 home loss to Ipswich
3-3 home draw to Sunderland - very leaky and Forino got rolled around the park that day, albeit against very strong opposition
Of course there were good or very good results in and amongst these, but the cracks were evident earlier than many fans seemed to pick up on. The results were before our very poor run in Jan-March ish.
__
In my opinion, we finished the season with a similar set of cracks:
1-1 away to Gillingham (albeit followed up with one of the best performances of the season at home to Plymouth)
1-1 away to Wimbledon
1-0 win at home to Sheff Wed, but we were arguably the worse side
2-1 win away to Burton, but we were quite poor in the first half
1-0 loss away to MK in the playoffs, but we were utterly played off the park
2-0 loss at Wembley to Sunderland, but we were played off the park
What's preventing us from starting the season too predictably / poorly?
__
If I were Gaz, I'd be strongly considering a third tactic, as most teams will know we have two options (4231 and 5221). I'd be interested to see an old school Gaz 442 - think Kashket & Bayo. Grant & PCH out wide. etc. We've got the option of playing two sitters (Scowen & Thommo/Gape), or we can play with one sitting and one slightly more dynamic (Scowen & Wing/Mehmeti/Young). Out wide you've got options of McCleary, Horgan, maybe even Mehmeti off the left, Hanlan potentially off either flank. Obita could play a defensive winger role. Kai Kai could play in a more familiar left midfield position (similar to his previous role in Blackpool's 442/4411). Parsons could play wide too. Arguably, so could Freeman. Up front you've got the Kashket replacements in the development squad (De Barr & Ali AH). I wouldn't be surprised to see McCleary in that role as he's getting older and potentially can't cover as much ground - probably not in 180 mins a week in a winger position, but more viable in the Kashket pressing striker role.
Wouldn't be surprised if that's why all of our games are behind closed doors. We know we need a third option or we could begin the season too predictably.
@frequentstander great post, sensible constructive critique. I for one would value a post match analysis from you for next seasons games👍
excellent post @frequentstander that seems to suggest with a few tweaks we've got a decent squad for next season.
There's a reason (well, multiple reasons) why 4-4-2 has largely vanished from the game. Even where it does still exist, it tends to be the Rangnick/Hasenhüttl-style 4-2-2-2 - which I think could suit us well if League One players had the legs for gegenpressing.
Diving Danny Hylton has just signed for Northampton.
Also, aren't most of the best teams predictable in terms of set-up? You know what you're going to get with City or Liverpool - but you're going to struggle to stop it. Being one-dimensional is a different matter and that probably did apply to us too often last season as Gaz is quite stubborn from a tactical POV - his only major weakness.
You can make the argument that the two legs against Milton Keynes are an example of GA being flexible and able to set us up according to what each situation needs.
First leg, high press, disrupt and unsettle their kids.
Second leg, deep press, give Milton Keynes two thirds of the pitch and make them score twice.I don't think it's fair to say we were 'played off the park,' we did exactly what we needed to.
I think he generally adapts well in-game but has been a bit slow to make more sweeping changes when we've been stuck in a rut over a period of games.
That's a very easy observation to make with hindsight isn't it?
*20/21
Thanks all for above feedback.
It does come across as if Gaz is slow to react/adapt mid-way through a season, but I think we have to be conscious of how difficult it is to practise an alternative approach when you're playing Saturday/Tuesday most weeks. Very little time in training can be spent on a plan B/C.
442 appears to have vanished at the elite (UCL quarters onward) level on the face of things, but we aren't at elite level. I think tactics have been quite cyclical over the years. Conte arguably brought the trend of five at the back at the elite level. At one point 15+ Premier League teams were using it. Now, you have very few fives at the back, but loads of EFL teams are using it. In the Wenger era, there were loads of 4231s in the Premier League. Now, you've got mostly 433s with pressing forwards or 'link up' forwards in the middle or false nines. There was an era where 442 had a great spell in the Premier League. Papiss Cisse & Demba Ba. Ighalo & Deeney. Vardy & Okazaki/Ulloa. Think about the styles of players in the rest of the positions for NUFC, LCFC and Watford. Kante is a Premier League Scowen. Morgan similar to Tafazolli/Forino. Fuchs similar to JJ. Simpson similar to Grimmer etc. I think it could help protect our fragile areas in defensive play, which in my opinion is full back when against tricky/confident dribblers. Watford, Leicester and Newcastle were all sides which 'overperformed' during that era, playing a style of football which was effective with less technical quality on the ball by being direct and holding strong defensive structure, managing games with much less possession. This feels very similar to our current style against the top sides. What's to say we can't shock the league and bring back 442? I'm not saying we'll start the season in this manner. I think we'll stick with 4231 to begin with, but if we don't start quickly I would hope (and I'd be confident) that Gareth has a plan B and C.
Let's see who signs on first... And who we manage to keep hold of...
Tactical trends certainly are cyclical, but there's never been a 'second wave' of 4-4-2. Fair point that we're not at the elite level. Yet 👀
Having said that, I think the cycles will become less defined as formations become ever more fluid to the point they're largely irrelevant beyond use as a quick reference tool.
I think the opposite, Gareth trusts the players to get on with it and sometimes they fall short...or have a drop in form, etc etc whereas often he takes too long to make changes during the game. Having said that, I thought he improved on that during the last season.