Jump to content

brady1993

Member
  • Posts

    3,597
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Haha
    brady1993 reacted to sage in Why Knight should start at RB   
    You do know @brady1993 isn't LR don't you?
    He has excellently explained why Knight is playing there under LR and is currently the best option. 
  2. Like
    brady1993 reacted to LERam in Why Knight should start at RB   
    I don't disagree with Knight being the best option we have at RB
    But in my opinion we lose more in midfield than we gain by having him out of position. I think any downside of having the others at RB is outweighed by what Knight can offer in the middle 
  3. Clap
    brady1993 got a reaction from Dethorn in Why Knight should start at RB   
    So I'm putting this post together because since the start of the season there have been question marks on Knight starting at RB which have ranged from mildly questioning to outright ridiculing. 
    But very frequently what gets missed is why Knight is starting there, why he's good at it and why it actually relies on his skillset. So I'm going to play devil's advocate and argue for Knight should start there.
    Tactics
    I think that Rosenior identified that a few things going into the season; we have talent in midfield, we likely have technical superiority and teams are likely going to sit back and try to counter or press and try to counter. And so he's built tactically from that point.You can see this in how our flanks are set up.
    Wingers play high and wide and are both fast, phsyical and good 1v1. A compact opposition has to stretch or leave a man free. A team that presses always has to be wary of that threat in behind if they overcommit. Also it helps provide space in the centre for our midfield to take advantage of.
    Meanwhile our fullbacks essentially play as midfielders when we have the ball. They tuck right into the middle operating from a much more central postion and given the responsibilities of a deep midfielder in getting the play going and supporting the play. This provides extra functional bodies in the build up play making it theoretically easier to pass through a press and it allows other midfielders to go take up dangerous positions further up field as they don't have to worry so much about the build up. Same applies to the wingers who can play high and wide because the fullbacks are functionally midfielders.
    This isn't something revolutionary that Rosenior has done. In fact it's almost identical to what Guardiola has done in the past (who often would play midfielders like Delph at fullback).
    Inverted fullback
    The demands on this role are different that was is typically called for. They need to very comfortable on the ball in central areas, their passing needs to be good, they need to know what to do positionally when they are in midfield and they need that high energy to cover ground, support the attack and quickly get back into position. Functionally it operates a lot more like a wide midfield role on the ball.
    Why Knight ? 
    Simply put he excels at all of the above qualities is the primary reason whilst being sound defensively. There is a good reason why most our success in attacking has happened down the right. Playing him there essentially allows us to cheat and play another midfielder
    The second reason is with a decent number of midfielders going into pre-season but no right back in sight with restricted dealings in the window. It made sense to coach someone into the role and Knight ticked the most boxes.
    Why not X instead of Knight ? 
    Odurah - Seems a decent prospect but looked a touch raw and shaky in pre-season. Likely isn't ready just yet.
    Smith - This could work but Knight has more energy and crucially Smith hasn't had the same coaching time to coach him into the role.
    Thompson - isn't as phsyical as Knight which could get exposed defensively and would need coaching into the role.
    Stearman - This is a joke right ? He looks too awkward at CB on the ball never mind in midfield areas and would get exposed for pace.
    Roberts - The role benefits from someone playing on their stronger side so they can open their body easier. Also needed at LB as Fozzy can't really play that role reliably.
    New Right Back - Well yeah... but that's increasingly unlikely to happen but it won't be for a lack of trying.
    Should he play midfield anyway ? 
    Now that's a tricky question. Because we have a balance problem in midfield (at least some of the time) that you can point to Knight as a fix. And Id agree with that to a large degree that Knight as one of the three would help. The two counterarguments I might make are that problem might be better solved by playing either Sibley or a fit McGoldrick and by moving Knight from there you might be just shifting a problem rather than fixing it overall.
    TLDR; The way we play calls for someone comfortable in midfield at right back. And Knight is likely the best at it we have.
    (PS you may be able to tell I'm bored because I'm ill at home) 
  4. Like
    brady1993 got a reaction from ramit in Why Knight should start at RB   
    I feel like I mostly laid out the why in the post but I get that some of things can get lost in a big post. 
    - So that the midfielders who aren't Bird can push right up looking to exploit space 
    - So that wingers can take up aggressive positions high and wide
    - So we have more bodies in build up play to play through a pressing team (Also helps the couple CBs we have who may not be the best on the ball)
    - To have cover against the counter and so possession can be recycled to keep up pressure.
    Is it necessary? Yes and no. As with any set of tactics it's a choice. It's necessary for what we are trying to do but it wouldn't be necessary if we set up differently. And we've set up this because it will likely pay off against we shall face week in week out once its properly embedded and we've found the right balance.
  5. Clap
    brady1993 got a reaction from Comrade 86 in Why Knight should start at RB   
    So I'm putting this post together because since the start of the season there have been question marks on Knight starting at RB which have ranged from mildly questioning to outright ridiculing. 
    But very frequently what gets missed is why Knight is starting there, why he's good at it and why it actually relies on his skillset. So I'm going to play devil's advocate and argue for Knight should start there.
    Tactics
    I think that Rosenior identified that a few things going into the season; we have talent in midfield, we likely have technical superiority and teams are likely going to sit back and try to counter or press and try to counter. And so he's built tactically from that point.You can see this in how our flanks are set up.
    Wingers play high and wide and are both fast, phsyical and good 1v1. A compact opposition has to stretch or leave a man free. A team that presses always has to be wary of that threat in behind if they overcommit. Also it helps provide space in the centre for our midfield to take advantage of.
    Meanwhile our fullbacks essentially play as midfielders when we have the ball. They tuck right into the middle operating from a much more central postion and given the responsibilities of a deep midfielder in getting the play going and supporting the play. This provides extra functional bodies in the build up play making it theoretically easier to pass through a press and it allows other midfielders to go take up dangerous positions further up field as they don't have to worry so much about the build up. Same applies to the wingers who can play high and wide because the fullbacks are functionally midfielders.
    This isn't something revolutionary that Rosenior has done. In fact it's almost identical to what Guardiola has done in the past (who often would play midfielders like Delph at fullback).
    Inverted fullback
    The demands on this role are different that was is typically called for. They need to very comfortable on the ball in central areas, their passing needs to be good, they need to know what to do positionally when they are in midfield and they need that high energy to cover ground, support the attack and quickly get back into position. Functionally it operates a lot more like a wide midfield role on the ball.
    Why Knight ? 
    Simply put he excels at all of the above qualities is the primary reason whilst being sound defensively. There is a good reason why most our success in attacking has happened down the right. Playing him there essentially allows us to cheat and play another midfielder
    The second reason is with a decent number of midfielders going into pre-season but no right back in sight with restricted dealings in the window. It made sense to coach someone into the role and Knight ticked the most boxes.
    Why not X instead of Knight ? 
    Odurah - Seems a decent prospect but looked a touch raw and shaky in pre-season. Likely isn't ready just yet.
    Smith - This could work but Knight has more energy and crucially Smith hasn't had the same coaching time to coach him into the role.
    Thompson - isn't as phsyical as Knight which could get exposed defensively and would need coaching into the role.
    Stearman - This is a joke right ? He looks too awkward at CB on the ball never mind in midfield areas and would get exposed for pace.
    Roberts - The role benefits from someone playing on their stronger side so they can open their body easier. Also needed at LB as Fozzy can't really play that role reliably.
    New Right Back - Well yeah... but that's increasingly unlikely to happen but it won't be for a lack of trying.
    Should he play midfield anyway ? 
    Now that's a tricky question. Because we have a balance problem in midfield (at least some of the time) that you can point to Knight as a fix. And Id agree with that to a large degree that Knight as one of the three would help. The two counterarguments I might make are that problem might be better solved by playing either Sibley or a fit McGoldrick and by moving Knight from there you might be just shifting a problem rather than fixing it overall.
    TLDR; The way we play calls for someone comfortable in midfield at right back. And Knight is likely the best at it we have.
    (PS you may be able to tell I'm bored because I'm ill at home) 
  6. Like
    brady1993 got a reaction from LeedsCityRam in Why Knight should start at RB   
    I feel like I mostly laid out the why in the post but I get that some of things can get lost in a big post. 
    - So that the midfielders who aren't Bird can push right up looking to exploit space 
    - So that wingers can take up aggressive positions high and wide
    - So we have more bodies in build up play to play through a pressing team (Also helps the couple CBs we have who may not be the best on the ball)
    - To have cover against the counter and so possession can be recycled to keep up pressure.
    Is it necessary? Yes and no. As with any set of tactics it's a choice. It's necessary for what we are trying to do but it wouldn't be necessary if we set up differently. And we've set up this because it will likely pay off against we shall face week in week out once its properly embedded and we've found the right balance.
  7. Clap
    brady1993 got a reaction from Donkey Derby in Why Knight should start at RB   
    So I'm putting this post together because since the start of the season there have been question marks on Knight starting at RB which have ranged from mildly questioning to outright ridiculing. 
    But very frequently what gets missed is why Knight is starting there, why he's good at it and why it actually relies on his skillset. So I'm going to play devil's advocate and argue for Knight should start there.
    Tactics
    I think that Rosenior identified that a few things going into the season; we have talent in midfield, we likely have technical superiority and teams are likely going to sit back and try to counter or press and try to counter. And so he's built tactically from that point.You can see this in how our flanks are set up.
    Wingers play high and wide and are both fast, phsyical and good 1v1. A compact opposition has to stretch or leave a man free. A team that presses always has to be wary of that threat in behind if they overcommit. Also it helps provide space in the centre for our midfield to take advantage of.
    Meanwhile our fullbacks essentially play as midfielders when we have the ball. They tuck right into the middle operating from a much more central postion and given the responsibilities of a deep midfielder in getting the play going and supporting the play. This provides extra functional bodies in the build up play making it theoretically easier to pass through a press and it allows other midfielders to go take up dangerous positions further up field as they don't have to worry so much about the build up. Same applies to the wingers who can play high and wide because the fullbacks are functionally midfielders.
    This isn't something revolutionary that Rosenior has done. In fact it's almost identical to what Guardiola has done in the past (who often would play midfielders like Delph at fullback).
    Inverted fullback
    The demands on this role are different that was is typically called for. They need to very comfortable on the ball in central areas, their passing needs to be good, they need to know what to do positionally when they are in midfield and they need that high energy to cover ground, support the attack and quickly get back into position. Functionally it operates a lot more like a wide midfield role on the ball.
    Why Knight ? 
    Simply put he excels at all of the above qualities is the primary reason whilst being sound defensively. There is a good reason why most our success in attacking has happened down the right. Playing him there essentially allows us to cheat and play another midfielder
    The second reason is with a decent number of midfielders going into pre-season but no right back in sight with restricted dealings in the window. It made sense to coach someone into the role and Knight ticked the most boxes.
    Why not X instead of Knight ? 
    Odurah - Seems a decent prospect but looked a touch raw and shaky in pre-season. Likely isn't ready just yet.
    Smith - This could work but Knight has more energy and crucially Smith hasn't had the same coaching time to coach him into the role.
    Thompson - isn't as phsyical as Knight which could get exposed defensively and would need coaching into the role.
    Stearman - This is a joke right ? He looks too awkward at CB on the ball never mind in midfield areas and would get exposed for pace.
    Roberts - The role benefits from someone playing on their stronger side so they can open their body easier. Also needed at LB as Fozzy can't really play that role reliably.
    New Right Back - Well yeah... but that's increasingly unlikely to happen but it won't be for a lack of trying.
    Should he play midfield anyway ? 
    Now that's a tricky question. Because we have a balance problem in midfield (at least some of the time) that you can point to Knight as a fix. And Id agree with that to a large degree that Knight as one of the three would help. The two counterarguments I might make are that problem might be better solved by playing either Sibley or a fit McGoldrick and by moving Knight from there you might be just shifting a problem rather than fixing it overall.
    TLDR; The way we play calls for someone comfortable in midfield at right back. And Knight is likely the best at it we have.
    (PS you may be able to tell I'm bored because I'm ill at home) 
  8. Like
    brady1993 got a reaction from ariotofmyown in Why Knight should start at RB   
    So I'm putting this post together because since the start of the season there have been question marks on Knight starting at RB which have ranged from mildly questioning to outright ridiculing. 
    But very frequently what gets missed is why Knight is starting there, why he's good at it and why it actually relies on his skillset. So I'm going to play devil's advocate and argue for Knight should start there.
    Tactics
    I think that Rosenior identified that a few things going into the season; we have talent in midfield, we likely have technical superiority and teams are likely going to sit back and try to counter or press and try to counter. And so he's built tactically from that point.You can see this in how our flanks are set up.
    Wingers play high and wide and are both fast, phsyical and good 1v1. A compact opposition has to stretch or leave a man free. A team that presses always has to be wary of that threat in behind if they overcommit. Also it helps provide space in the centre for our midfield to take advantage of.
    Meanwhile our fullbacks essentially play as midfielders when we have the ball. They tuck right into the middle operating from a much more central postion and given the responsibilities of a deep midfielder in getting the play going and supporting the play. This provides extra functional bodies in the build up play making it theoretically easier to pass through a press and it allows other midfielders to go take up dangerous positions further up field as they don't have to worry so much about the build up. Same applies to the wingers who can play high and wide because the fullbacks are functionally midfielders.
    This isn't something revolutionary that Rosenior has done. In fact it's almost identical to what Guardiola has done in the past (who often would play midfielders like Delph at fullback).
    Inverted fullback
    The demands on this role are different that was is typically called for. They need to very comfortable on the ball in central areas, their passing needs to be good, they need to know what to do positionally when they are in midfield and they need that high energy to cover ground, support the attack and quickly get back into position. Functionally it operates a lot more like a wide midfield role on the ball.
    Why Knight ? 
    Simply put he excels at all of the above qualities is the primary reason whilst being sound defensively. There is a good reason why most our success in attacking has happened down the right. Playing him there essentially allows us to cheat and play another midfielder
    The second reason is with a decent number of midfielders going into pre-season but no right back in sight with restricted dealings in the window. It made sense to coach someone into the role and Knight ticked the most boxes.
    Why not X instead of Knight ? 
    Odurah - Seems a decent prospect but looked a touch raw and shaky in pre-season. Likely isn't ready just yet.
    Smith - This could work but Knight has more energy and crucially Smith hasn't had the same coaching time to coach him into the role.
    Thompson - isn't as phsyical as Knight which could get exposed defensively and would need coaching into the role.
    Stearman - This is a joke right ? He looks too awkward at CB on the ball never mind in midfield areas and would get exposed for pace.
    Roberts - The role benefits from someone playing on their stronger side so they can open their body easier. Also needed at LB as Fozzy can't really play that role reliably.
    New Right Back - Well yeah... but that's increasingly unlikely to happen but it won't be for a lack of trying.
    Should he play midfield anyway ? 
    Now that's a tricky question. Because we have a balance problem in midfield (at least some of the time) that you can point to Knight as a fix. And Id agree with that to a large degree that Knight as one of the three would help. The two counterarguments I might make are that problem might be better solved by playing either Sibley or a fit McGoldrick and by moving Knight from there you might be just shifting a problem rather than fixing it overall.
    TLDR; The way we play calls for someone comfortable in midfield at right back. And Knight is likely the best at it we have.
    (PS you may be able to tell I'm bored because I'm ill at home) 
  9. Like
    brady1993 got a reaction from duncanjwitham in Why Knight should start at RB   
    I feel like I mostly laid out the why in the post but I get that some of things can get lost in a big post. 
    - So that the midfielders who aren't Bird can push right up looking to exploit space 
    - So that wingers can take up aggressive positions high and wide
    - So we have more bodies in build up play to play through a pressing team (Also helps the couple CBs we have who may not be the best on the ball)
    - To have cover against the counter and so possession can be recycled to keep up pressure.
    Is it necessary? Yes and no. As with any set of tactics it's a choice. It's necessary for what we are trying to do but it wouldn't be necessary if we set up differently. And we've set up this because it will likely pay off against we shall face week in week out once its properly embedded and we've found the right balance.
  10. Cheers
    brady1993 got a reaction from IslandExile in Why Knight should start at RB   
    Thing is I do pretty much agree. 
    On the recruitment I suspect from what Rosenior has said we have tried to get a RB in and are probably still trying. But it's likely just a case with our financial situation we just can't find the right person if anyone at all. 
    And so if you aren't getting a RB this window you've got to think about your options.
    Knight is doing well there. So it becomes a series of questions:
    Does moving him into midfield fix the issues there?
    Can we solve the midfield issues without moving him? 
    Does moving him from right back create more problems than it solves?
    Thats what Rosenior needs to try to answer. My post was mostly to argue its not as simple as people are making it out to be and that he is playing well there.
  11. Like
    brady1993 got a reaction from sage in Why Knight should start at RB   
    I feel like I mostly laid out the why in the post but I get that some of things can get lost in a big post. 
    - So that the midfielders who aren't Bird can push right up looking to exploit space 
    - So that wingers can take up aggressive positions high and wide
    - So we have more bodies in build up play to play through a pressing team (Also helps the couple CBs we have who may not be the best on the ball)
    - To have cover against the counter and so possession can be recycled to keep up pressure.
    Is it necessary? Yes and no. As with any set of tactics it's a choice. It's necessary for what we are trying to do but it wouldn't be necessary if we set up differently. And we've set up this because it will likely pay off against we shall face week in week out once its properly embedded and we've found the right balance.
  12. Clap
    brady1993 got a reaction from Grimbeard in Why Knight should start at RB   
    So I'm putting this post together because since the start of the season there have been question marks on Knight starting at RB which have ranged from mildly questioning to outright ridiculing. 
    But very frequently what gets missed is why Knight is starting there, why he's good at it and why it actually relies on his skillset. So I'm going to play devil's advocate and argue for Knight should start there.
    Tactics
    I think that Rosenior identified that a few things going into the season; we have talent in midfield, we likely have technical superiority and teams are likely going to sit back and try to counter or press and try to counter. And so he's built tactically from that point.You can see this in how our flanks are set up.
    Wingers play high and wide and are both fast, phsyical and good 1v1. A compact opposition has to stretch or leave a man free. A team that presses always has to be wary of that threat in behind if they overcommit. Also it helps provide space in the centre for our midfield to take advantage of.
    Meanwhile our fullbacks essentially play as midfielders when we have the ball. They tuck right into the middle operating from a much more central postion and given the responsibilities of a deep midfielder in getting the play going and supporting the play. This provides extra functional bodies in the build up play making it theoretically easier to pass through a press and it allows other midfielders to go take up dangerous positions further up field as they don't have to worry so much about the build up. Same applies to the wingers who can play high and wide because the fullbacks are functionally midfielders.
    This isn't something revolutionary that Rosenior has done. In fact it's almost identical to what Guardiola has done in the past (who often would play midfielders like Delph at fullback).
    Inverted fullback
    The demands on this role are different that was is typically called for. They need to very comfortable on the ball in central areas, their passing needs to be good, they need to know what to do positionally when they are in midfield and they need that high energy to cover ground, support the attack and quickly get back into position. Functionally it operates a lot more like a wide midfield role on the ball.
    Why Knight ? 
    Simply put he excels at all of the above qualities is the primary reason whilst being sound defensively. There is a good reason why most our success in attacking has happened down the right. Playing him there essentially allows us to cheat and play another midfielder
    The second reason is with a decent number of midfielders going into pre-season but no right back in sight with restricted dealings in the window. It made sense to coach someone into the role and Knight ticked the most boxes.
    Why not X instead of Knight ? 
    Odurah - Seems a decent prospect but looked a touch raw and shaky in pre-season. Likely isn't ready just yet.
    Smith - This could work but Knight has more energy and crucially Smith hasn't had the same coaching time to coach him into the role.
    Thompson - isn't as phsyical as Knight which could get exposed defensively and would need coaching into the role.
    Stearman - This is a joke right ? He looks too awkward at CB on the ball never mind in midfield areas and would get exposed for pace.
    Roberts - The role benefits from someone playing on their stronger side so they can open their body easier. Also needed at LB as Fozzy can't really play that role reliably.
    New Right Back - Well yeah... but that's increasingly unlikely to happen but it won't be for a lack of trying.
    Should he play midfield anyway ? 
    Now that's a tricky question. Because we have a balance problem in midfield (at least some of the time) that you can point to Knight as a fix. And Id agree with that to a large degree that Knight as one of the three would help. The two counterarguments I might make are that problem might be better solved by playing either Sibley or a fit McGoldrick and by moving Knight from there you might be just shifting a problem rather than fixing it overall.
    TLDR; The way we play calls for someone comfortable in midfield at right back. And Knight is likely the best at it we have.
    (PS you may be able to tell I'm bored because I'm ill at home) 
  13. Like
    brady1993 got a reaction from YouRams in Why Knight should start at RB   
    Thing is I don't think we entirely need to replace him as a midfielder. I think we have options there namely in Sibley and Thompson. And with McGoldrick fit we likely play him as a 10.
    And maybe maybe Smith if I'm to give him the benefit of the doubt in that Rosenior sees something there that I've not so far.
  14. Cheers
    brady1993 reacted to IslandExile in Why Knight should start at RB   
    I think it's a reasonable argument @brady1993. Nevertheless, I think a bigger issue that we have at the moment is creating and taking chances. I believe a better balanced midfield would greatly help in that regard. And I would put Knight as a key element in that midfield.
    Perhaps, they're all still relatively young, compared to Smith and Hourihane, but they all now have sufficient experience. Therefore, I like the balance offered by:
    Knight - legs, box-to-box-midfielder Bird - passing ability Sibley - creativity and goal threat Therefore, the recruitment process should have focused - could still focus, if there is time and money - on bringing in a right back to play that role. Byrne would have been great but he screwed us over.
  15. COYR
    brady1993 got a reaction from i-Ram in Why Knight should start at RB   
    So I'm putting this post together because since the start of the season there have been question marks on Knight starting at RB which have ranged from mildly questioning to outright ridiculing. 
    But very frequently what gets missed is why Knight is starting there, why he's good at it and why it actually relies on his skillset. So I'm going to play devil's advocate and argue for Knight should start there.
    Tactics
    I think that Rosenior identified that a few things going into the season; we have talent in midfield, we likely have technical superiority and teams are likely going to sit back and try to counter or press and try to counter. And so he's built tactically from that point.You can see this in how our flanks are set up.
    Wingers play high and wide and are both fast, phsyical and good 1v1. A compact opposition has to stretch or leave a man free. A team that presses always has to be wary of that threat in behind if they overcommit. Also it helps provide space in the centre for our midfield to take advantage of.
    Meanwhile our fullbacks essentially play as midfielders when we have the ball. They tuck right into the middle operating from a much more central postion and given the responsibilities of a deep midfielder in getting the play going and supporting the play. This provides extra functional bodies in the build up play making it theoretically easier to pass through a press and it allows other midfielders to go take up dangerous positions further up field as they don't have to worry so much about the build up. Same applies to the wingers who can play high and wide because the fullbacks are functionally midfielders.
    This isn't something revolutionary that Rosenior has done. In fact it's almost identical to what Guardiola has done in the past (who often would play midfielders like Delph at fullback).
    Inverted fullback
    The demands on this role are different that was is typically called for. They need to very comfortable on the ball in central areas, their passing needs to be good, they need to know what to do positionally when they are in midfield and they need that high energy to cover ground, support the attack and quickly get back into position. Functionally it operates a lot more like a wide midfield role on the ball.
    Why Knight ? 
    Simply put he excels at all of the above qualities is the primary reason whilst being sound defensively. There is a good reason why most our success in attacking has happened down the right. Playing him there essentially allows us to cheat and play another midfielder
    The second reason is with a decent number of midfielders going into pre-season but no right back in sight with restricted dealings in the window. It made sense to coach someone into the role and Knight ticked the most boxes.
    Why not X instead of Knight ? 
    Odurah - Seems a decent prospect but looked a touch raw and shaky in pre-season. Likely isn't ready just yet.
    Smith - This could work but Knight has more energy and crucially Smith hasn't had the same coaching time to coach him into the role.
    Thompson - isn't as phsyical as Knight which could get exposed defensively and would need coaching into the role.
    Stearman - This is a joke right ? He looks too awkward at CB on the ball never mind in midfield areas and would get exposed for pace.
    Roberts - The role benefits from someone playing on their stronger side so they can open their body easier. Also needed at LB as Fozzy can't really play that role reliably.
    New Right Back - Well yeah... but that's increasingly unlikely to happen but it won't be for a lack of trying.
    Should he play midfield anyway ? 
    Now that's a tricky question. Because we have a balance problem in midfield (at least some of the time) that you can point to Knight as a fix. And Id agree with that to a large degree that Knight as one of the three would help. The two counterarguments I might make are that problem might be better solved by playing either Sibley or a fit McGoldrick and by moving Knight from there you might be just shifting a problem rather than fixing it overall.
    TLDR; The way we play calls for someone comfortable in midfield at right back. And Knight is likely the best at it we have.
    (PS you may be able to tell I'm bored because I'm ill at home) 
  16. Like
    brady1993 reacted to Ghost of Clough in Why Knight should start at RB   
    We don't need an extra mid. Bird, Hourihane, Smith, Tommo, McGoldrick and Sibley cover those central 3 positions. We then have Rooney, DRobinson and Aghatise coming through to provide additional cover.
  17. Clap
    brady1993 got a reaction from FlyBritishMidland in Why Knight should start at RB   
    So I'm putting this post together because since the start of the season there have been question marks on Knight starting at RB which have ranged from mildly questioning to outright ridiculing. 
    But very frequently what gets missed is why Knight is starting there, why he's good at it and why it actually relies on his skillset. So I'm going to play devil's advocate and argue for Knight should start there.
    Tactics
    I think that Rosenior identified that a few things going into the season; we have talent in midfield, we likely have technical superiority and teams are likely going to sit back and try to counter or press and try to counter. And so he's built tactically from that point.You can see this in how our flanks are set up.
    Wingers play high and wide and are both fast, phsyical and good 1v1. A compact opposition has to stretch or leave a man free. A team that presses always has to be wary of that threat in behind if they overcommit. Also it helps provide space in the centre for our midfield to take advantage of.
    Meanwhile our fullbacks essentially play as midfielders when we have the ball. They tuck right into the middle operating from a much more central postion and given the responsibilities of a deep midfielder in getting the play going and supporting the play. This provides extra functional bodies in the build up play making it theoretically easier to pass through a press and it allows other midfielders to go take up dangerous positions further up field as they don't have to worry so much about the build up. Same applies to the wingers who can play high and wide because the fullbacks are functionally midfielders.
    This isn't something revolutionary that Rosenior has done. In fact it's almost identical to what Guardiola has done in the past (who often would play midfielders like Delph at fullback).
    Inverted fullback
    The demands on this role are different that was is typically called for. They need to very comfortable on the ball in central areas, their passing needs to be good, they need to know what to do positionally when they are in midfield and they need that high energy to cover ground, support the attack and quickly get back into position. Functionally it operates a lot more like a wide midfield role on the ball.
    Why Knight ? 
    Simply put he excels at all of the above qualities is the primary reason whilst being sound defensively. There is a good reason why most our success in attacking has happened down the right. Playing him there essentially allows us to cheat and play another midfielder
    The second reason is with a decent number of midfielders going into pre-season but no right back in sight with restricted dealings in the window. It made sense to coach someone into the role and Knight ticked the most boxes.
    Why not X instead of Knight ? 
    Odurah - Seems a decent prospect but looked a touch raw and shaky in pre-season. Likely isn't ready just yet.
    Smith - This could work but Knight has more energy and crucially Smith hasn't had the same coaching time to coach him into the role.
    Thompson - isn't as phsyical as Knight which could get exposed defensively and would need coaching into the role.
    Stearman - This is a joke right ? He looks too awkward at CB on the ball never mind in midfield areas and would get exposed for pace.
    Roberts - The role benefits from someone playing on their stronger side so they can open their body easier. Also needed at LB as Fozzy can't really play that role reliably.
    New Right Back - Well yeah... but that's increasingly unlikely to happen but it won't be for a lack of trying.
    Should he play midfield anyway ? 
    Now that's a tricky question. Because we have a balance problem in midfield (at least some of the time) that you can point to Knight as a fix. And Id agree with that to a large degree that Knight as one of the three would help. The two counterarguments I might make are that problem might be better solved by playing either Sibley or a fit McGoldrick and by moving Knight from there you might be just shifting a problem rather than fixing it overall.
    TLDR; The way we play calls for someone comfortable in midfield at right back. And Knight is likely the best at it we have.
    (PS you may be able to tell I'm bored because I'm ill at home) 
  18. Clap
    brady1993 got a reaction from David Graham Brown in Matchday Thread - Shrewsbury Town v Derby County (16/08 19:45)   
    We started the season with barely any players, a short pre-season and transfer restrictions. Any players coming in would have been aware that a promotion this season is far from a guarantee. Pushing for it for sure but not nailed on at all. 
    The primary reason we targeted the players we did was to stabilise, which was vital in the postion we found ourselves. In the window we have been largely limited to experienced players who've perhaps fallen out of favor or not quite at the level they were or players who are wholly untested. What we've tried to do is bring in experience according to how we want to play, with the idea they could do a job in the championship and can hit the ground running. They will allow us to rebuild structure and more quickly build a firm tactical plan from which we can have continuity. Whilst targeting young players to support the team and develop.
    There is a gap between results at all cost and slowly developing. And whilst I don't think we are planning on sticking around in league 1 it's important to note that large sections of the club need/needed rebuilding.
    My overall point about focusing on philosophy and tactical identity right now is that ultimately it will lead to better results over the full course of the season and beyond. The quibbles people have had so far are not really a problem with the tactical ideas at play and more than as a club/squad we are still pretty undercooked. I.e. it looks iffy at times because we aren't fluent at it yet. This would be the case with any tactical identity we tried to pursue most likely. 
    If we switched to solely focusing on results right now, it might (its a big might as well) result in better results in the short term. But that kind of thinking only ever works short term because your squad never really develops as a squad. It's why every poohouse team you see tends to have a very hard limit on how far they can go.
    Ultimately the results really aren't bad right now either. 7 out 12 puts us on target for top 6. If we can hold our nerve, maintain that pace and focus on what we need to do better then my bet is that it clicks around the winter and we see a surge in form. Which leaves us in a better place for subsequent because we'd have something rock solid to build from. 
     
  19. Clap
    brady1993 got a reaction from jono in Matchday Thread - Shrewsbury Town v Derby County (16/08 19:45)   
    I actually this is the wrong way to think. 
    If we embed the philosophy now at this point in the season then it will be the bedrock of success later in the season and going into the championship.
    If we focus on results at all cost now we will end up a tactical mess of a team and probably looking back at a middling to average season and nothing to build on.
    We have to look beyond short-termism right now, it's what lead to us being in league 1.
  20. Like
    brady1993 got a reaction from Quagga in Matchday Thread - Shrewsbury Town v Derby County (16/08 19:45)   
    I actually this is the wrong way to think. 
    If we embed the philosophy now at this point in the season then it will be the bedrock of success later in the season and going into the championship.
    If we focus on results at all cost now we will end up a tactical mess of a team and probably looking back at a middling to average season and nothing to build on.
    We have to look beyond short-termism right now, it's what lead to us being in league 1.
  21. Clap
    brady1993 got a reaction from RodleyRam in Matchday Thread - Shrewsbury Town v Derby County (16/08 19:45)   
    I actually this is the wrong way to think. 
    If we embed the philosophy now at this point in the season then it will be the bedrock of success later in the season and going into the championship.
    If we focus on results at all cost now we will end up a tactical mess of a team and probably looking back at a middling to average season and nothing to build on.
    We have to look beyond short-termism right now, it's what lead to us being in league 1.
  22. Clap
    brady1993 got a reaction from LeedsCityRam in Matchday Thread - Shrewsbury Town v Derby County (16/08 19:45)   
    I actually this is the wrong way to think. 
    If we embed the philosophy now at this point in the season then it will be the bedrock of success later in the season and going into the championship.
    If we focus on results at all cost now we will end up a tactical mess of a team and probably looking back at a middling to average season and nothing to build on.
    We have to look beyond short-termism right now, it's what lead to us being in league 1.
  23. Like
    brady1993 got a reaction from ariotofmyown in Matchday Thread - Shrewsbury Town v Derby County (16/08 19:45)   
    I think that's partly coming down to our situation right now. 
    Players aren't super match fit for the most part what with the short pre-season. They are also getting accustomed to what we are doing tactically and their team mates.
    All of which leads to a player playing safer than they should because they aren't quite backing their ability, they don't instinctively know the role and the roles of the players around them and they don't instinctively know their teammates for the most part.
    It's easy for us to sit back and say "oh you should have played a 40 yard switch to NML as he'd made a run and was open". But a player has a split second to make that decision more often than not and so unless they are either very good, very confident or at least very aware of everyone on the pitch they will often play safe.
    The other thing I don't think people realise is that defaulting to playing directly is often the absolute safest thing for a player to do in a given moment.
  24. Clap
    brady1993 got a reaction from BramcoteRam84 in Matchday Thread - Shrewsbury Town v Derby County (16/08 19:45)   
    I actually this is the wrong way to think. 
    If we embed the philosophy now at this point in the season then it will be the bedrock of success later in the season and going into the championship.
    If we focus on results at all cost now we will end up a tactical mess of a team and probably looking back at a middling to average season and nothing to build on.
    We have to look beyond short-termism right now, it's what lead to us being in league 1.
  25. Like
    brady1993 got a reaction from Kathcairns in Liam Rosenior   
    Overall I'm more positive about Rosenior now than when he was first announced. 
    I think there is a few things people should be keeping in mind. 
    First is that using average xG to compare us to the rest of the league is premature to draw any conclusions. It's a noisy statistic and I highly doubt 4 games is enough to draw a meaningful conclusion from or to compare us to the rest of the league.
    Secondly is that we are tactically trying to embed something new with a largely new squad and with a really short pre season. It takes time for these to properly embed and gain fluidity. And we likely haven't even seen the true plan A yet what with the lack of a RB and McGoldrick not being fit so far. So any talk of plan b or shifting things is premature because frankly we need this time to properly embed what we are trying to do for this season and beyond. People talk about lack of bravery but ultimately that comes from the above. It's much easier to be brave when match fit, tactically clued up and familiar with your teammates.
    To be honest with all that said I think 7 from 12 points is a really good return. It's positive because we are picking up points at a good rate whilst misfiring a bit as things embed tactically. And I don't expect we will be in full flow at least for another month or two.
    I think the plan tactically at an abstract level is a good one and if well executed will see us being able to dominate games and break down teams that play a low block more comfortably than last season. Two physical fast wingers stretch the pitch and provide a option to go long. They can stay forwards almost the entire time which keeps the opposition wary as we can break easily if they overcommit. They can do this because of the inverted fullbacks who support the midfield. Both of these factors also lead in turn to allowing a lot of space and attacking freedom to the two 8s or the 8 and the 10 in midfield so they can in theory hurt teams. Its a good plan with solid tactical thinking behind and we've only seen glimpses of it firing so far.
    My only concern is the persistence with trying a midfield with Smith and Hourihane as the advanced options which has looked unbalanced and stagnant since the friendly with Leicester. This is the part that I just don't see Roesnior's think aside from a misguided attempt to keep things tight, go with experience when in doubt and play the new players. Its just not working though and needs addressing going forwards. Especially as I think we have the players to fix the problems. Any of Sibley, Knight, McGoldrick or Thompson played over one of them likely sees a better balance.
    If nothing else I think the time has come to evaluate whether we are actually going to get a RB before the window closes and if not perhaps it's time to move Knight from that position and convert Smith to it.
    TLDR; It takes time to set a team up from nothing, time we haven't had. Whilst there can be concerns so far this is better than expected for this point in the season.
×
×
  • Create New...