Parma’s State of the Nation

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,243]

On 04/01/2023 at 08:44, BigFish said:

A number of things spring to mind if we are to learn from our mistakes and move on. Firstly, @Parma Ham's gone mouldy early argument that you don't sell your weapons, or at least not readily. Secondly, that this resulted in running a squad that was uniformly average in talent but broad in number. It wasn't money, Brentford scrapped their academy and instead ran a smaller, but averagely better squad over a number of seasons. It was risky but the risk came off. Thirdly, ISO9001 continual improvement requires a patience that our fans don't have. Leading to fourthly, sacking Farke was a mistake for this very reason. Lastly, exciting though it is, MoneyBall is a complete Red Herring. I am reminded of how the Economist blogger Gary Stevenson who famously won his first job in a card game. His opponents were some of the brightest Mathematicians/Physicists of their generation. Really the best of the best. As he puts it, he won not by playing the odds/numbers/data because they all could do that brilliantly. He won by playing his opponents. That is the Holy Grail we are looking for, a marginal edge in recruitment when compared to our competitors. We need to be playing them.

Excellent post @BigFish …

Our self-sustaining financial model - which we had to adhere to absolutely - was the framework within which we have-had to operate. That is a fixed point. For Webber too (in his defence).

Thus weapons are usually all but irreplaceable (for us). Finding them is brilliant, but also lucky. Not easily repeatable, even with a ‘Midas touch’. 

The nature of modern football finance at the top level is that there is a fundamental, dramatic change in circumstances for the business upon promotion and following relegation. That simply cannot be ignored. 

Thus Brentford did not follow ISO9001 type gradual-incremental development as it is not ‘the market we operate in’.

Furthermore our belief -that you basically need to play a different way and have different players at the top level -  was a overriding and driving operational factor. It destabilised the sporting side and removed the momentum (even without the Buendia sale and Skipp loss) as @Petriix has repeatedly stated. 

We got out calculations wrong given the parameters we had. It isn’t that it didn’t work. It’s that it couldn’t have. Brentford calculated differently, followed the ideas we discussed proctor hoc and it did work. That is not ‘why aren’t we Brentford?’ Or hindsightery. It is foresight and something to learn from.

Unfortunately we do not have the finances or the sporting quality now to achieve the required standards to learn those lessons. 

QED Attanasio.

Parma 

Edited January 5, 2023 by Parma Ham's gone mouldy

[Petriix 2,853]

2 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

Unfortunately we do not have the finances or the sporting quality now to achieve the required standards to learn those lessons.

Except that it's not beyond our wildest dreams that we could stage a late run to the playoffs and then anything is possible. Promotion with this squad would provide the finances but not the sporting quality so it would be another 'free hit'. Then we could look at building again with a more pragmatic and long-term focus.

[nutty nigel 7,619]

53 minutes ago, Petriix said:

Except that it's not beyond our wildest dreams that we could stage a late run to the playoffs and then anything is possible. Promotion with this squad would provide the finances but not the sporting quality so it would be another 'free hit'. Then we could look at building again with a more pragmatic and long-term focus.

You're turning into me😂

Here's an interesting question...

If we managed to go up with this squad would we fare better or worse than the last two times?

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

34 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

You're turning into me😂

Here's an interesting question...

If we managed to go up with this squad would we fare better or worse than the last two times?

We could only be better or the same. If we stayed up we would be better but if relegated then no different.

[nutty nigel 7,619]

7 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

We could only be better or the same. If we stayed up we would be better but if relegated then no different.

Exactly, which is why I don't lament about Emi anymore. I appreciated him from the very first game. We used to call him 'Emi the Ox' because of his strength. That attribute added to the skills that later became apparent made him one of the greatest. But even with Teemu, one of the greatest ever goalscorers, we were soundly relegated.

That's why, if we have PL ambitions, we have to find another way.

 

Edited January 4, 2023 by nutty nigel

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,243]

Whilst this interim period will not be remembered for long or with any great affection, there is a key point that it has clearly shown that was often referred to in the old masterclasses. 

Alan Russell, a specialist attacking coach (and now set piece coach) who worked with England, set us up with 3 fairly direct, fairly classic strikers in a very attacking looking 433 that included Nunez and Sara, both of whom are not very positionally disciplined.

What happened?

We managed 1 shot on target.

We didn’t play badly against Watford, they have been a thorn in our side with their power and pace in recent years, we did ok, competed, were strong. 

Though the key tactical phrase from the Masterclasses that kept coming to mind - and which was writ large throughout - was ‘there is no inherent reason why 3 up front is any more attacking than playing with no striker at all’.

Formations - as Russell commented in his press conference - are really more for fans and ‘outsiders’ because ‘it depends where and how players (typically) move’. This is absolutely correct. 

Though Sargent-Idah-Pukki chasing relatively low rent forward passes onto corners is only ‘exciting’ for a very brief period in my eyes. 

The price - as always - is the lack of control elsewhere, the lack of precision, the lack of overloads and the corollary ‘handbrake’ in other deeper players. 

3 out-and-out forwards. 1 shot on goal. Not a bad performance. No lack of effort. 

As we have noted so many times, it just isn’t that simple….

Parma 

 

[Taiwan Canary 145]

In light of Vialli passing, R.I.P , I'd love a masterclass in how and why him and Mancini worked as a pairing (I'd guess it's much more complicated than the much loved British big guy, little guy forward paring). Re. Norwich,  the systemic change off the pitch, which we all hope is forthcoming,  needs to matched with systemic changes on it. How does @Parma Ham's gone mouldy invision Wagner might be able to make this squad competitive in this division?

Edited January 6, 2023 by Taiwan Canary

[repman 635]

23 minutes ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

Whilst this interim period will not be remembered for long or with any great affection, there is a key point that it has clearly shown that was often referred to in the old masterclasses. 

Alan Russell, a specialist attacking coach (and now set piece coach) who worked with England, set us up with 3 fairly direct, fairly classic strikers in a very attacking looking 433 that included Nunez and Sara, both of whom are not very positionally disciplined.

What happened?

We managed 1 shot on target.

We didn’t play badly against Watford, they have been a thorn in our side with their power and pace in recent years, we did ok, competed, were strong. 

Though the key tactical phrase from the Masterclasses that kept coming to mind - and which was writ large throughout - was ‘there is no inherent reason why 3 up front is any more attacking than playing with no striker at all’.

Formations - as Russell commented in his press conference - are really more for fans and ‘outsiders’ because ‘it depends where and how players (typically) move’. This is absolutely correct. 

Though Sargent-Idah-Pukki chasing relatively low rent forward passes onto corners is only ‘exciting’ for a very brief period in my eyes. 

The price - as always - is the lack of control elsewhere, the lack of precision, the lack of overloads and the corollary ‘handbrake’ in other deeper players. 

3 out-and-out forwards. 1 shot on goal. Not a bad performance. No lack of effort. 

As we have noted so many times, it just isn’t that simple….

Parma 

 

Just to add to this, I think Russell is a very interesting coach and I'm pleased the club have chose to keep him around, on top of the fact he was seemingly chosen by the club instead of being Smith's choice. I think it should be pointed out that his role with England was as 'striker coach' and if you look up on youtube some of the drills they seem to be more centred around individual improvement rather than team attacking patterns say. Can't help but think he must have had some sessions with Sargent leading into this season, who seems has to have much more confidence and clarity in front of goal. His role as set piece coach also paints him as somewhat of a forward thinker in the game and I haven't been as down as some on here with our set pieces this season. Our main problem from an attacking perspective seems to me to be that we simply don't win headers, as opposed to deliveries being poor.

Russell's interim period in charge wasn't particularly special and I'm not sure he really had time to make any impact on the training ground either. He did lay the groundwork somewhat for what we will come to expect from Wagner, sending the players out to run hard and focus more on keeping the play in the final third, as opposed to maintaining possession of the ball.

[Badger 2,412]

17 minutes ago, repman said:

... His role as set piece coach also paints him as somewhat of a forward thinker in the game and I haven't been as down as some on here with our set pieces this season. Our main problem from an attacking perspective seems to me to be that we simply don't win headers, as opposed to deliveries being poor.

I believe that we have conceded fewer goals from set pieces than any other team in the league.

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,243]

On 01/01/2023 at 18:26, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

@Petriix… do you think if Webber appoints Wagner he would be tacitly accepting your point?

As I have stated elsewhere, the criticisms of 'old mates…lack of imagination…one trick pony‘ would be so strong that I feel he would genuinely believe it to be the best option. I would certainly respect such a decision in that context. 

It would be something of a return to the counter-cultural thinking of Webber at his finest. 

It would definitely be redressing the 'insanity‘ of ripping up so much of what was good (that Webber was instrumental in creating too let us not forget).

I think it would also place Smith 'sensibly‘ in our history (and Webber‘s) as a temporary pragmatic appointment for a particular job at a particular moment in time. 

Wagner would be placing the train back onto the more coherent and previously ingrained methodology tracks.  

Parma 

I am pleased at the appointment of Wagner and I admire Webber for making that choice. I think it is a brave decision as it is open to easy criticism. 

It is interesting to note that the counter-cultural phrase that I used above is perhaps rather more how Webber himself  would like to be seen. 

Now that we have Wagner, Buhler, Weaver, Iga and Webber himself, he really has ‘got the band back together’ …so not really counter-cultural at all then. 

As with coaches and players, the reason this pattern is so often replicated - and Webber has now too come full circle - is that pressure is high, short term and long term meld into one and - above all - you simply must have ‘fixed points’ around which to work tactically and structurally. 

Not even necessarily the best. You must have fixed points you can rely on, that you know will do a certain job, even - and in fact especially - under pressure. 

I think that Wagner is a good, logical and sensible move in the circumstances. I look forward to seeing what there is of Farke, Klopp, Huddersfield, of young players, of contacts, of tomorrow and of today about the new tactics, strategies and methodologies….let’s see….

OTBC 💛💚

Parma 

Edited January 6, 2023 by Parma Ham's gone mouldy

[Monty13 2,251]

On 04/01/2023 at 14:21, nutty nigel said:

Exactly, which is why I don't lament about Emi anymore. I appreciated him from the very first game. We used to call him 'Emi the Ox' because of his strength. That attribute added to the skills that later became apparent made him one of the greatest. But even with Teemu, one of the greatest ever goalscorers, we were soundly relegated.

That's why, if we have PL ambitions, we have to find another way.

 

Not sure anyone laments him not being here now. I think all of us knew he’d be gone by this point. The issue is purely one of timing.

I agree we need to find another way, to do that you need to learn from your mistakes.

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,243]

4 hours ago, Taiwan Canary said:

In light of Vialli passing, R.I.P , I'd love a masterclass in how and why him and Mancini worked as a pairing (I'd guess it's much more complicated than the much loved British big guy, little guy forward paring). Re. Norwich,  the systemic change off the pitch, which we all hope is forthcoming,  needs to matched with systemic changes on it. How does @Parma Ham's gone mouldy invision Wagner might be able to make this squad competitive in this division?

I think in answer to your second question Taiwan, he will certainly start - as Webber has done and we noted above - by looking for where the fixed points in the team are. What he can - for sure - rely on happening on the pitch in certain areas and scenarios. 

As coaches we all have different views on what this is and what it looks like. I start from what I see in front of me and build from that, others have a template and try to get buy in (I am less convinced by that method personally).

In the case of our current squad, we have a few obvious fixed points:

1. Pukki has world class movement and will score if presented with appropriate chances

2. Nunez has the right technique score direct free kicks 

3. Sara is a very nice corner taker

4. The squad is big so can maintain its level largely regardless of injuries 

5. Hanley is grizzly and reliable

6. Aarons can beat a man and drive into dangerous spaces from deep

7. Omobamidele is pretty classy and solid 

8. Goalkeeper is sewn up: Gunn and Krul are remarkably strong for this level 

The question is: how much of that is game-changing?

Pukki yes…. If you can regularly  get him the right service. Can you?

Nunez ok..is he good enough to start every week? How weak is the rest of his game? Who do we have who is good at winning free kicks in dangerous areas?

Sara fine…though that is a cherry on top of what kind of cake?

The rest? Meh…..not sure the opposition coach is that bothered by any of it. 

‘Heavy metal’ football and ‘high intensity pressing’ sounds super, until you ask whether Cantwell can do it, whether Onel is bright enough to run the right lines, whether Sargent does it and still gets into the box, whether you really want Pukki straying too far from the centre, whether Sara and Nunez have the positional discipline to cover the right spaces if the press is beaten.

I can see how many of our current players fitted Farkeball, less so what Smith tried to do, heavy metal football? Let’s see…

I think Wagner is a really good, well timed appointment and exactly the kind of character that Norwich likes, warms to and supports. 

I’ll Wait a while and watch…..🤗

Parma 

 

 

 

Edited January 6, 2023 by Parma Ham's gone mouldy

[Indy 3,315]

1 minute ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

I think in answer to your second question Taiwan, he will certainly start - as Webber has done and we noted above - by looking for where the fixed point in the team are. What he can - for sure - rely on happening on the pitch in certain areas and scenarios. 

As coaches we all have different views on what this is and what it looks like. I start from what I see in front of me and build from that, others have a template and try to get buy in (I am less convinced by that method personally).

In the case of our current squad, we have a few obvious fixed points:

1. Pukki has world class movement and will score if presented with appropriate chances

2. Nunez has the right technique score direct free kicks 

3. Sara is a very nice corner taker

4. The squad is big so can maintain its level largely regardless of injuries 

5. Hanley is grizzly and reliable

6. Aarons can beat a man and drive into dangerous spaces from deep

7. Omobamidele is pretty classy and solid 

8. Goalkeeper is sewn up: Gunn and Krul are remarkably strong for this level 

The question is: how much of that is game-changing?

Pukki yes…. If you can regularly  get him the right service. Can you?

Nunez ok..is he good enough to start every week? How weak is the rest of his game? Who do we have who is good at winning free kicks in dangerous areas?

Sara fine…though that is a cherry on top of what kind of cake?

The rest? Meh…..not sure the opposition coach is that bothered by any of it. 

‘Heavy metal’ football and ‘high intensity pressing’ sounds super, until you ask whether Cantwell can do it, whether Onel is bright enough to run the right lines, whether Sargent does it and still gets into the box, whether you really want Pukki straying too far from the centre, whether Sara and Nunez have the positional discipline to cover the right spaces f the press is beaten.

I can see how many of our current players fitted Farkeball, less so what Smith tried to do, heavy metal football? Let’s see…

I think Wagner is a really good, well timed appointment and exactly the kind of character that Norwich likes, warms to and supports. 

I’ll Wait a while and watch…..🤗

Parma 

 

 

 

Is Cantwell the key? He’s certainly capable to create the chances needed for Pukki & others, can we motivate Cantwell to get him back to his best? If we can I really believe we have a shot at getting up, if not we need to loan that number 10 in, Wagner has a good history of getting good loans in.

[Robert N. LiM 4,482]

4 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

Now that we have Wagner, Buhler, Weaver, Iga and Webber himself, he really has ‘got the band back together’ …so not really counter-cultural at all then. 

I agree with you about Wagner and am happy to see him here 

But I thought it was interesting that in his interview with Eadie he talked a lot about getting people out of their comfort zone, then moved on to making it clear how familiar he was with Norwich and many of his staff. Seems in one sense both he and Webber have gone back to their comfort zones ...

[littleyellowbirdie 2,594]

12 hours ago, Robert N. LiM said:

I agree with you about Wagner and am happy to see him here 

But I thought it was interesting that in his interview with Eadie he talked a lot about getting people out of their comfort zone, then moved on to making it clear how familiar he was with Norwich and many of his staff. Seems in one sense both he and Webber have gone back to their comfort zones ...

You want players out of their comfort zones expanding their skill set. Ronaldo's success was built on his focus on getting better at the weak parts of his game instead of simply resting on his positive attributes. It therefore seems reasonable that any good manager would seek to encourage players they're developing to get out of their comfort zones.

On the other hand, in terms of working relationships between decision-makers collectively responsible for setting the overall direction of the club, I would say the more comfortable everybody is with each other, the better as that's an environment where they can challenge and question each other's thoughts without egos getting in the way.

[Robert N. LiM 4,482]

26 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

You want players out of their comfort zones expanding their skill set. Ronaldo's success was built on his focus on getting better at the weak parts of his game instead of simply resting on his positive attributes. It therefore seems reasonable that any good manager would seek to encourage players they're developing to get out of their comfort zones.

On the other hand, in terms of working relationships between decision-makers collectively responsible for setting the overall direction of the club, I would say the more comfortable everybody is with each other, the better as that's an environment where they can challenge and question each other's thoughts without egos getting in the way.

Yes, absolutely agree that would be the ideal and I very much hope that's the case. 

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,243]

Further weight if it were needed….

Michael Brown talking about the effects on squad-player psychology on not signing anyone in January Transfer window: 

1. 'Some players will be thinking their club is doomed'

   

   Michael Brown

   Former Manchester City midfielder for BBC Sport

    

   Getty ImagesCopyright: Getty Images

   Not signing a player in a transfer window can leave players thinking "we are doomed", says former Fulham and Sheffield United midfielder Michael Brown.

   With only a few hours left in the transfer window, he argues that making no moves can have a detrimental impact.

   "There could be some dressing rooms watching everyone else making late moves and wondering whether they have enough," he told BBC Sport. "Or they will be asking, 'Why does nobody want to come to us? Why have we not bought anyone?'

   "You can see the gaps in your team, you see you have been linked with 10 people and it can be really demoralising."

   …and selling Buendia at the point of promotion?

   Parma

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,243]

In Italy we focus very closely on what is not said, what is left out. We are searching to answer the things that have key information missing..things that non quadra…

Early indications are that David Wagner does not need such cryptic analysis, I think he says what he means and signposts what he is going-trying-intending to do. He and Webber get on well. He has described Webber as quite ‘German’ in that regard.

So what does it tell us so far?

Well we don’t have to guess if we can read the book. He hasn’t said such a lot, so let’s analyse what he has said. Particularly in regard to the squad, any rebuilding or otherwise  and who might be a key ‘punto di riferimento’ going forwards…

Firstly Wagner said clearly that Sargent should play centrally. 

He has said that Adam Idah has all the raw attributes to be a top player. Idah has also signed a long term contract in the meantime. 

He has endorsed-encouraged-brought back Tzolis from Twente - and the metaphorical sporting cold - and spoken of him repeatedly. 

My recollection is that he referenced Sargent’s central role as a sequitur to a question that was predominantly about Pukki. My feeling is that he has on different occasions redirected points about Pukki onto musings on others including Sargent and Idah.

He has very recently begun talking in glowing terms about Rowe. He is ‘excited’ to work and develop these (still) young talents.

Most external observers would pinpoint recruitment at the top level as a failing of Norwich. Many internally might well (quite fairly) feel this is an inevitable consequence of lack of finance. Others in between might observe you don’t have to buy poorly just because you can’t buy well. 

Anyhoo, Wagner is surely somewhat signposting the future. 

Is it too Italian to suggest that playing Sargent centrally, promoting Idah indicates a fairly immediate future that is likely to be without Pukki?

Is embracing, engaging, nurturing Tzolis managing the team or managing upwards? Assisting your boss in doing everything you can to camouflage-repair his mistakes is rarely bad politics. Our respective outlays on Rashica-Tzolis-Sargent is contextually where we bet the farm, it was our ‘pissed up the window’ moment or our Maddison-Godfrey moment.

That Wagner is using all his resources to tilt it towards the latter is perhaps also borne of the fact that the Sterling  kitty is empty, awaiting a Dollar refill. There is no buying our way out yet. 

So there we are. The near future is big on Idah, Tzolis, Sargent and Rowe (and one must assume not Pukki then). That how it looks to Wagner. How does that look to you?

Parma 

Edited February 7, 2023 by Parma Ham's gone mouldy

[Indy 3,315]

12 minutes ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

So there we are. The near future is big on Idah, Tzolis, Sargent and Rowe (and one must assume not Pukki then). That how it looks to Wagner. How does that look to you?

Parma 

If by some miracle Wagner and his team can extract the full potential of that foursome, the future would be very bright! All have raw ability and the potential to be a menace. Tzolis & Rowe can both create chances both have bulk and both still very young, Idah such an enigma, he’s the sort of player I bet who on the training pitch does things which he struggles with on game day, you can see it in his game he’s almost trying too hard! Sargent is very good at playing just behind Pukki, his passing has looked far better and he’s looked a player this season.

Trouble is potential has to be realised on the pitch on game day!

Edited February 7, 2023 by Indy

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,243]

My Dad likes to use the phrase ‘what’s the alternative?’

I think it might indicate that we are approaching a ‘necessity is the mother of invention phase’ Indy. There can be some clarity in that of course. 

None of the four are new. None have yet really shown that they capable technically-mentally-physically (apply as appropriate) of being a ‘reference point’ player tactically or as a ‘first name on the team sheet’. 

Coaches tend to work with - and buy, and support in the face of mistakes or criticism - players who they know what they’ll get from. Not necessarily the best or most liked players.

Such players fit into what I call fixed points. Fixed points can can be players, though also certain shapes, certain roles, particular spaces on the pitch and ‘things that can be built around’ like the keystone in architecture.

Do any of the four strike you as that?

Parma

Edited February 7, 2023 by Parma Ham's gone mouldy

[ricardo 7,401]

42 minutes ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

 

So there we are. The near future is big on Idah, Tzolis, Sargent and Rowe (and one must assume not Pukki then). That how it looks to Wagner. How does that look to you?

Parma 

Well lets hope Wagner is right but to me it all looks a bit thin on the ground.

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,450]

3 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Well lets hope Wagner is right but to me it all looks a bit thin on the ground.

I’d say mid table championship at best . 

[Barham Blitz 661]

I think that Sargent - although demonstrably not Pukki standard yet - could be a perfectly adequate striker for the level that we operate at which is top end championship / lower end Premiership.  We have been spoilt with Pukki - he is frankly too good a player to have stayed with us for the length of time that he has and the only explanation for it is that he has been a relatively late bloomer and his age has probably put off serious enough interest for his transfer value to exceed his value to us. 

But we can't continue to build around a player who even if he stays is surely only going to provide diminishing returns.  His intelligence and movement will mask the increasingly evident loss of pace but not for too many more seasons.  Wagner's is a pragmatic view there.

Sargent is capable of being a 20 goal a season championship striker if played as a #9.  Although he has done relatively well in his new 'Stiepermann' role it is still not really the position which gets the most out of him, albeit demonstrably more than shoehorning him in as a pseudo-winger.

The rest of it I agree is what you have previously termed collegiate speak.  We can't afford to replace so it makes sense to big up the great intangible of potential, particularly in the great pinkun tradition of feting players we haven't seen much of.  It is noticeable that the players identified pretty much all fall into that category.

Rowe may have something about him although I'd prefer the assessment to be be based on something more than eye contact.  Wagner may well have seen something in Tzolis not evident so far to us Saturday afternoon observers - it seems many did at one point - but I personally can't see it being as a wide player.  Possibly a 10 if he realises that a lot more hard work is required.  Idah needs a run of games somewhere to see if there is anything there - I suspect he'll be the perennial second choice striker for ever more here though so I think that needs to be a loan somewhere even if it leaves us a bit short for a while. He is no more a wide attacker than Josh but Wagner does have a somewhat chequered affection for a big mobile striker - Steve Mounie 17 goals in 89 games anyone ?

The one I really don't understand is the absence of Gibbs though.  I thought he looked like a player capable of being moulded into a number of roles within central midfield.  The sort of player our midfield is currently crying out for - good on the ball, dynamic, tactically astute for one of his age.  I find his recent complete omission somewhat mystifying.

 

 

[nutty nigel 7,619]

39 minutes ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

I’d say mid table championship at best . 

Next season beardo?

Roll on 2025 then.

At least the years come around quicker as we get older.

Well,

until they stop...

[Indy 3,315]

1 hour ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

My Dad likes to use the phrase ‘what’s the alternative?’

I think it might indicate that we are approaching a ‘necessity is the mother of invention phase’ Indy. There can be some clarity in that of course. 

None of the four are new. None have yet really shown that they capable technically-mentally-physically (apply as appropriate) of being a ‘reference point’ player tactically or as a ‘first name on the team sheet’. 

Coaches tend to work with - and buy, and support in the face of mistakes or criticism - players who they know what they’ll get from. Not necessarily the best or most liked players.

Such players fit into what I call fixed points. Fixed points can can be players, though also certain shapes, certain roles, particular spaces on the pitch and ‘things that can be built around’ like the keystone in architecture.

Do any of the four strike you as that?

Parma

Not on their own, but good coaches get decent players playing in a system which gets the best out of the players he has to work from.

I allude to Kane, he never looked anything, yet his attitude encouragement and coaching helped to make him a player you would build a team around.

If Wagner thinks Idah has all the right attributes to be a top striker then it’s down to him and his team to get that out of him, build around him and hopefully bring on other players too.

There’s no doubt Tzolis & Rowe have bags of potential and if they can be encouraged to have that drive and desire then who knows they can be a front line to build on?

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,243]

39 minutes ago, Barham Blitz said:

I think that Sargent - although demonstrably not Pukki standard yet - could be a perfectly adequate striker for the level that we operate at which is top end championship / lower end Premiership.  We have been spoilt with Pukki - he is frankly too good a player to have stayed with us for the length of time that he has and the only explanation for it is that he has been a relatively late bloomer and his age has probably put off serious enough interest for his transfer value to exceed his value to us. 

But we can't continue to build around a player who even if he stays is surely only going to provide diminishing returns.  His intelligence and movement will mask the increasingly evident loss of pace but not for too many more seasons.  Wagner's is a pragmatic view there.

Sargent is capable of being a 20 goal a season championship striker if played as a #9.  Although he has done relatively well in his new 'Stiepermann' role it is still not really the position which gets the most out of him, albeit demonstrably more than shoehorning him in as a pseudo-winger.

The rest of it I agree is what you have previously termed collegiate speak.  We can't afford to replace so it makes sense to big up the great intangible of potential, particularly in the great pinkun tradition of feting players we haven't seen much of.  It is noticeable that the players identified pretty much all fall into that category.

Rowe may have something about him although I'd prefer the assessment to be be based on something more than eye contact.  Wagner may well have seen something in Tzolis not evident so far to us Saturday afternoon observers - it seems many did at one point - but I personally can't see it being as a wide player.  Possibly a 10 if he realises that a lot more hard work is required.  Idah needs a run of games somewhere to see if there is anything there - I suspect he'll be the perennial second choice striker for ever more here though so I think that needs to be a loan somewhere even if it leaves us a bit short for a while. He is no more a wide attacker than Josh but Wagner does have a somewhat chequered affection for a big mobile striker - Steve Mounie 17 goals in 89 games anyone ?

The one I really don't understand is the absence of Gibbs though.  I thought he looked like a player capable of being moulded into a number of roles within central midfield.  The sort of player our midfield is currently crying out for - good on the ball, dynamic, tactically astute for one of his age.  I find his recent complete omission somewhat mystifying.

 

 

Very good @Barham Blitz

Parma

[PurpleCanary 5,580]

1 hour ago, Barham Blitz said:

I think that Sargent - although demonstrably not Pukki standard yet - could be a perfectly adequate striker for the level that we operate at which is top end championship / lower end Premiership.  We have been spoilt with Pukki - he is frankly too good a player to have stayed with us for the length of time that he has and the only explanation for it is that he has been a relatively late bloomer and his age has probably put off serious enough interest for his transfer value to exceed his value to us. 

But we can't continue to build around a player who even if he stays is surely only going to provide diminishing returns.  His intelligence and movement will mask the increasingly evident loss of pace but not for too many more seasons.  Wagner's is a pragmatic view there.

Sargent is capable of being a 20 goal a season championship striker if played as a #9.  Although he has done relatively well in his new 'Stiepermann' role it is still not really the position which gets the most out of him, albeit demonstrably more than shoehorning him in as a pseudo-winger.

The rest of it I agree is what you have previously termed collegiate speak.  We can't afford to replace so it makes sense to big up the great intangible of potential, particularly in the great pinkun tradition of feting players we haven't seen much of.  It is noticeable that the players identified pretty much all fall into that category.

Rowe may have something about him although I'd prefer the assessment to be be based on something more than eye contact.  Wagner may well have seen something in Tzolis not evident so far to us Saturday afternoon observers - it seems many did at one point - but I personally can't see it being as a wide player.  Possibly a 10 if he realises that a lot more hard work is required.  Idah needs a run of games somewhere to see if there is anything there - I suspect he'll be the perennial second choice striker for ever more here though so I think that needs to be a loan somewhere even if it leaves us a bit short for a while. He is no more a wide attacker than Josh but Wagner does have a somewhat chequered affection for a big mobile striker - Steve Mounie 17 goals in 89 games anyone ?

The one I really don't understand is the absence of Gibbs though.  I thought he looked like a player capable of being moulded into a number of roles within central midfield.  The sort of player our midfield is currently crying out for - good on the ball, dynamic, tactically astute for one of his age.  I find his recent complete omission somewhat mystifying.

 

 

Good post, BB. My very amateur view, based on often following matches via the pink un minute-by-minute, is that there is a lack of obvious natural striking talent in those mentioned. Perhaps so far kept hidden but about to explode. Actually that could be just the case with Tzolis.

However, as your last paragraph indicates, I would suggest Wagner’s most basic need is to get a properly balanced midfield for next season. With Gibbs probably being a part of that balance but perhaps with at least one new element.
 

[nutty nigel 7,619]

54 minutes ago, Indy said:

Not on their own, but good coaches get decent players playing in a system which gets the best out of the players he has to work from.

I allude to Kane, he never looked anything, yet his attitude encouragement and coaching helped to make him a player you would build a team around.

If Wagner thinks Idah has all the right attributes to be a top striker then it’s down to him and his team to get that out of him, build around him and hopefully bring on other players too.

There’s no doubt Tzolis & Rowe have bags of potential and if they can be encouraged to have that drive and desire then who knows they can be a front line to build on?

Wagner is the latest in a long list who think that Idah has those attributes. He certainly looked the part in the PL in those few games between injuries. My biggest worry being Smith's remarks about him being a "joint compromised athlete' but hopefully that's something that can be managed. Though it could well be something that would affect any future transfer fee.

 

[shefcanary 2,451]

@Parma Ham's gone mouldy thanks for your first update on Wagner's approach.

You have addressed the attacking weapons option that Wagner seems to be pursuing, but I think you would accept also that until we have solved the issue of defensive midfield control we are not progressing fast at all. And then there is the issue of on field leadership.

I know that it is probably too early to draw any definitive clues at this stage as to where Wagner is heading, but given how we lost against Burnley I think these two areas are more important to resolve at this stage than the attack. The attack has shown against lesser sides it can provide solutions, but elsewhere we continue to struggle, badly!

[Barham Blitz 661]

2 hours ago, shefcanary said:

@Parma Ham's gone mouldy thanks for your first update on Wagner's approach.

You have addressed the attacking weapons option that Wagner seems to be pursuing, but I think you would accept also that until we have solved the issue of defensive midfield control we are not progressing fast at all. And then there is the issue of on field leadership.

I know that it is probably too early to draw any definitive clues at this stage as to where Wagner is heading, but given how we lost against Burnley I think these two areas are more important to resolve at this stage than the attack. The attack has shown against lesser sides it can provide solutions, but elsewhere we continue to struggle, badly!

I'd agree with all of that.  But part of it does stem from his formation (whether you call it a 4-2-3-1 a 4-4-1-1 or a 4-3-3) which is predicated upon getting the fullbacks as high as possible with cover being provided by the CDM pivot dropping back into a 3 with the centre backs (or at least just in front of them.)

One of the differences between Pep and Klopp is that the latter uses the fullbacks to provide width and overload whereas the former has them tuck inside in front of the centre-backs to cover any counters.  Wagner very much veers toward the Klopp end of that spectrum !  But if following concession the initial press doesn't result in another turnover there is a very large hole in front of that back three with essentially only Sara in it (and occasionally not even him ...)  Not helped by the naturally attack minded Onel, Sargent and Dowell as the other midfield or 3/4 players.

At Huddersfield he had the quality of a younger Mooy who can be both destructive and creative and one of Dean Whitehead or Billing both of whom could also play a bit but don't shirk the defensive side.  I'm not sure that Sara and McLean quite fulfil that role for him yet (assuming he is trying to instil a similar approach of course.)

So I'm not sure what the answer is with this approach and the available players to be fair.  Maybe the plan is to just to score a lot whilst not losing the ball, and if we do to win it back very quickly indeed.  At the moment that seems to have worked fine against lesser teams that have been blown away by overloads in the first 20 minutes but less fine against a Burnley side who are good enough to play through that initial press and then exploit the gaps.

As an alternative perhaps everybody shuffles forward one place leaving McLean in the Sara role and Sara in the Sargent role with Lunghi or Gibbs (or even Hayden if ever fit) in the CDM role.  At which point we do lose one of Sarge or Pukki or end up shoving them out wide instead of Dowell or Onel  and then we turn into Dean Smith which nobody wants to happen ...

Either way, tactically this squad seems to always be like an Ikea wardrobe - you think you've cracked it but are always either missing a piece or holding one with a nagging feeling that it is very important and should definitely be in there somewhere ...

Whatever it is, I can't see many 0-0 scorelines coming up.

Edited February 8, 2023 by Barham Blitz