Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Petriix

The Evolution of Farkeball

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I haven't read all through but the one thing we categorically  should not have done (which has been suggested before and again here) was to spend (comparitively) big on two or three players to fill crucial positions. Do that and have only something approaching the kind of injury crisis we had last time in the Premier League, and this message-board would have shown a rare unanimity in denouncing Webber and Farke.

Was the squad that lacking in depth though? I don't think you can assemble a squad on the basis of 'what if 7 players all get injured at once.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, king canary said:

Was the squad that lacking in depth though? I don't think you can assemble a squad on the basis of 'what if 7 players all get injured at once.'

I think the squad was a little thin in certain areas, particularly the spine: Striker, AM, CDM, CB. I think we needed those four signings as a priority and maintain that we could (should?) have spent bigger on fewer players. If we'd have concentrated the money from Rashica, Tzolis and Sargent into just two players then we would likely be in a better position. Likewise PLM, Gilmour and Normann is probably one too many midfielders when we really needed that Skipp replacement.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Petriix said:

Regardless of the formation, I'd hope to see three (and certainly never less than two) from Cantwell, Dowell, Tzolis, Rashica and Sargent on the pitch at any given time. They would, of course, need to work hard defensively. But they would give us the threat which we've been lacking

Thanks for the reply. Agree entirely with this and I'd hope this is DF's wish too. Going to be fascinating to see how we can get there. I think we'll end up with two of them in a 3421, which might give us the best chance of finding this elusive balance.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Petriix said:

I think the squad was a little thin in certain areas, particularly the spine: Striker, AM, CDM, CB. I think we needed those four signings as a priority and maintain that we could (should?) have spent bigger on fewer players. If we'd have concentrated the money from Rashica, Tzolis and Sargent into just two players then we would likely be in a better position. Likewise PLM, Gilmour and Normann is probably one too many midfielders when we really needed that Skipp replacement.

This is a really good summary of the problem we have at the moment. I think you're right in theory, but is it also the case that a £15M player (with the concomitant salary demands) would probably have better offers from elsewhere? We got Normann so late in the window because he was hoping for a better option, for instance. Not sure if we were seriously interested in Armstrong but Southampton are currently a more tempting prospect than us. It may be the case that attracting £10M players is our limit at the moment. In which case, giving the manager options is probably the best available solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Petriix said:

I think the squad was a little thin in certain areas, particularly the spine: Striker, AM, CDM, CB. I think we needed those four signings as a priority and maintain that we could (should?) have spent bigger on fewer players. If we'd have concentrated the money from Rashica, Tzolis and Sargent into just two players then we would likely be in a better position. Likewise PLM, Gilmour and Normann is probably one too many midfielders when we really needed that Skipp replacement.

But that is four players, and if we had been able to attract (and that is by no means certain) a 24- or 25-year-old quality replacement for, say, Skipp with Premier League experience who would not have needed time to bed in then that would have been the whole of the non-Buendia transfer budget gone in one go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

I haven't read all through but the one thing we categorically  should not have done (which has been suggested before and again here) was to spend (comparitively) big on two or three players to fill crucial positions. Do that and have only something approaching the kind of injury crisis we had last time in the Premier League, and this message-board would have shown a rare unanimity in denouncing Webber and Farke.

Absolutely agree with this, especially concerning CBs which is where we went wrong two years ago. The new players are also new to the PL, with the exception of Gunn, Gilmour and Williams and the six months Kabak had at Liverpool. It's a big adjustment to the league, the tactics and the new teammates. Fortunately we've not had many injuries and players who were injured, are now available. It can go the other way very quickly though and PL teams prey on any weakness. With quality in depth we can respond to that when injuries happen, which they will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Yelloow Since 72 said:

Absolutely agree with this, especially concerning CBs which is where we went wrong two years ago. The new players are also new to the PL, with the exception of Gunn, Gilmour and Williams and the six months Kabak had at Liverpool. It's a big adjustment to the league, the tactics and the new teammates. Fortunately we've not had many injuries and players who were injured, are now available. It can go the other way very quickly though and PL teams prey on any weakness. With quality in depth we can respond to that when injuries happen, which they will.

By where we went wrong do you mean not upgrading the central defenders or not having enough depth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, king canary said:

By where we went wrong do you mean not upgrading the central defenders or not having enough depth?

Not having enough depth, especially when Klose was ruled out for the season before it began. I know we didn't have the money for major upgrades but we could have brought in a loan or free-agent. Having 5 CB options now at least shows that we learned from that and have increased the depth throughout the squad so the same doesn't happen in other positions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Petriix said:

I think the squad was a little thin in certain areas, particularly the spine: Striker, AM, CDM, CB. I think we needed those four signings as a priority and maintain that we could (should?) have spent bigger on fewer players. If we'd have concentrated the money from Rashica, Tzolis and Sargent into just two players then we would likely be in a better position. Likewise PLM, Gilmour and Normann is probably one too many midfielders when we really needed that Skipp replacement.

When last season ended we all knew we needed those 4 positions filled. Webber came out and said publicly we would wait for Skipp until the end of the window - I thought at the time that was a very bad strategy and it has hampered our recruitment. We chased Billing for too long as well; plus Ajer and Armstrong, without putting adequate bids in.

If we had landed Ajer (who I've been consistent about not rating very highly, but that's incidental), Billing, Armstrong and Skipp for  our total of £50m, (£13m/£15m/£20m and a £2m loan fee) would we be in a better place now, and was that really plan A which Mr Webber was unable to achieve?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, sgncfc said:

When last season ended we all knew we needed those 4 positions filled. Webber came out and said publicly we would wait for Skipp until the end of the window - I thought at the time that was a very bad strategy and it has hampered our recruitment. We chased Billing for too long as well; plus Ajer and Armstrong, without putting adequate bids in.

If we had landed Ajer (who I've been consistent about not rating very highly, but that's incidental), Billing, Armstrong and Skipp for  our total of £50m, (£13m/£15m/£20m and a £2m loan fee) would we be in a better place now, and was that really plan A which Mr Webber was unable to achieve?

This just shows how hard it is, doesn't it?

I know what you mean about Billing, but we pursued Normann all summer too, and I bet most fans are happy we did rather than settling for an inferior player earlier in the window.

Armstrong has made a very underwhelming start, and if he was out of our financial league then it suggests "just buying 3 or 4 top players" is not as simple as some people seem to think.

Is Ajer better than Kabak? I don't know. Certainly having him here in July rather than Kabak in September would have been helpful, but £15m worth of helpful? Not convinced

Some posters (not you, I hasten to add) talk about signing players as if they're just getting a new sticker for their Panini album.

Edited by Robert N. LiM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Farke's first season used the 352/532 set up. But he had Maddison in the AM role with 2 DM's behind him. 

I like the 3 CB's and 3 CM's but it comes at a price, dropping 2 wingers from a 442, 433 or 4231. 

Each version of the 352 has its own twists.

#1 Both are fullbacks whilst attacking are not infamous for their goals and assists. At times both seem uncertain what to do when receiving the ball, either run/pass/cross. 

#2 We don't have any powerful runners with the ball (centrally), that can commit opponents and make space for other players

#3 We play a Deep-Midfielder and 2 CM's. Think the set up can allow for a No. 10 to play in the free role (whether that is Gilmour, Cantwell)  

#4 Sargent is more of a defensive striker, someone that will drop off and help the midfield when we don't have the ball. (Maybe he can drop to the AM role and allow Tzolis/Rashica upfront)

But most of the above is par for the course, change of tactics and style will take time for players to adjust (passing lanes, players position), and will continue to evolve over the coming weeks. On the face of it, 352 can be very good for passing football and it doesn't necessarily need to be defensive.  

The Brighton game on another day, the chances Pukki and Sargent had, we could/should have scored 2 or 3 goals. 

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...