Too many strikers?

[r_wilcockson]

After witnessing us lose control of midfield against Reading after Will went off, which was partly due to the fact that we had 5 strikers / attacking players on the bench and a defender, it got me thinking about how many strikers we have at the club who want first team football, and it's something that's bugged me for a while. This wouldn't be as big of a problem if we were committed to playing 4-4-2, but if we are defaulting to 4-3-3 we now have around a third of our squad wanting predominantly one striker position. We currently have:

Vydra (1st choice striker atm)

Blackman (prefers CF, but can play on the wing)

Wilson (brought on loan to play 4-4-2, which we no longer are)

Weimann (prefers CF, but can play on the wing)

Bent (can only play CF)

Vernam (should be making the bench this season)

Martin (on loan, but likely to return based on his current form)

Ince (prefers down the middle, but mostly plays on the wing)

Camara (more of a winger)

Russell

Surely something has got to give in January? We can't keep putting 5 strikers on the bench to try and keep the squad happy.

[cannable]

All those options and I'd still trim it down to just Martin, Russell, Vydra, Anya and Ince… one short for me.

We need a link-up winger still. Dawks ?

[Dannyboz1884]

We now play with 2 inside forwards and one center forward so Wilson and Bent with be battling with Vydra and
Blackman, Weimann, Camara and Russell will be battling for Anya and Ince's position. Martin doesn't have any form and will stay at Fulham and Vernam can stay in the under 23's and learn his trade. 

[brady1993]

You're correct @r_wilcockson we do have too many strikers on the books. What worries more though is that out of the current first team strikers is that we have way too many of a similar ilk where they are predominantly interested in making runs in behind and not linking up with the midfield. This was a major reason why we looked unbalanced playing 442 because the both strikers were looking to get in behind there was often no easy forward ball for the midfield/defence so they had pass sideways, backward or have hopeful punt into channels.

It is also why we probably can't play a 433 as effectively as previous years unless one of those strikers can adapt to come short for the ball more and the inside forwards tuck in to provide a short option as well.

[brady1993]

17 minutes ago, cannable said:

All those options and I'd still trim it down to just Martin, Russell, Vydra, Anya and Ince… one short for me.

We need a link-up winger still. Dawks ?

You're absolutely right lacking a link-up winger. With him gone and Martin on loan we chronically lack forward players willing to link-up with the midfield and help in build-up play, and too many players who just want to get on the end of the final ball.

[B4ev6is]

Hey i think your forgetting something there is fa cup games that can give players match time.

[Dannyboz1884]

Yes but the first F.A cup game is Jan the 7th. r_wilcockson is saying we cannot keep having 5 strikers on our sub bench.

[TroyDyer]

8 minutes ago, B4ev6is said:

Hey i think your forgetting something there is fa cup games that can give players match time.

I doubt they would be content playing one game a season. 

[RadioactiveWaste]

I think we've missed a trick, we should reinvent Chris Baird (maybe Chris Wheal too) as hold up, back to goal strikers. 

We can then have a goalie and six strikers on the bench. 

[JW37]

Vydra, Wilson, Bent - Strikers

Ince, Blackman, Camara - Right Inside Forward

Anya, Russell, Weimann - Left Inside Forward 

Not bad depth for 433 just got a couple of underperformers 

And we could really do with Thorne in particularly and Hanson back fit

[TroyDyer]

1 minute ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

I think we've missed a trick, we should reinvent Chris Baird (maybe Chris Wheal too) as hold up, back to goal strikers. 

We can then have a goalie and six strikers on the bench. 

So basically reinventing the Wheal?

[brady1993]

9 minutes ago, JW37 said:

Vydra, Wilson, Bent - Strikers

Ince, Blackman, Camara - Right Inside Forward

Anya, Russell, Weimann - Left Inside Forward 

Not bad depth for 433 just got a couple of underperformers 

And we could really do with Thorne in particularly and Hanson back fit

I think you've perfectly demonstrated we probably have three too many players for those forward roles. Particularly when you consider Russell, Ince and Anya can play right or left comfortably, that Blackman can play up front (and is probably better suited to it than the other three strikers) and that we have talented youngsters who can play these positions coming through . Not to mention that arguably none of the strikers you've listed are suited to play as a one up top due to they all have very limited link up play (Vydra is significantly better than Bent or Wilson at it and his energy makes up for it somewhat but it is still not ideal).

 

[B4ev6is]

You have factore in injuries and suspends.

[r_wilcockson]

1 minute ago, brady1993 said:

I think you've perfectly demonstrated we probably have three too many players for those forward roles. Particularly when you consider Russell, Ince and Anya can play right or left comfortably and that Blackman can play up front (and is probably better suited to it than the other three strikers). Not to mention that arguably none of the strikers you've listed are suited to play as a one up top due to they all have very limited link up play (Vydra is significantly better than Bent or Wilson at it and his energy makes up for it somewhat but it is still not ideal).

My point exactly Brady1993. If you are only allowed 7 subs, no more than 3 should be attacking players, to allow us to have a goalie and one or two defenders / midfielders (i.e. a balanced bench). There is therefore always going to be three of the aforementioned players who aren't going to make the matchday squad, which will likely to lead to unrest etc. Ideally the new manager needs to look at offloading some of these players. In my opinion, I'd start with Bent and Russell.

[cannable]

2 minutes ago, r_wilcockson said:

My point exactly Brady1993. If you are only allowed 7 subs, no more than 3 should be attacking players, to allow us to have a goalie and one or two defenders / midfielders (i.e. a balanced bench). There is therefore always going to be three of the aforementioned players who aren't going to make the matchday squad, which will likely to lead to unrest etc. Ideally the new manager needs to look at offloading some of these players. In my opinion, I'd start with Bent and Russell.

'Keeper, Baird, Hanson, Attacking-Mid, two Wingers and another striker for me. Pretty much everywhere covered with that lot.

[Van der MoodHoover]

Strikers strikers everywhere. 

Just no b****y goals.....

[JW37]

15 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

I think you've perfectly demonstrated we probably have three too many players for those forward roles. Particularly when you consider Russell, Ince and Anya can play right or left comfortably, that Blackman can play up front (and is probably better suited to it than the other three strikers) and that we have talented youngsters who can play these positions coming through . Not to mention that arguably none of the strikers you've listed are suited to play as a one up top due to they all have very limited link up play (Vydra is significantly better than Bent or Wilson at it and his energy makes up for it somewhat but it is still not ideal).

 

Another couple of injuries at the same time and were in the same situation when Thorne and Martin were out together 

[JW37]

17 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

I think you've perfectly demonstrated we probably have three too many players for those forward roles. Particularly when you consider Russell, Ince and Anya can play right or left comfortably, that Blackman can play up front (and is probably better suited to it than the other three strikers) and that we have talented youngsters who can play these positions coming through . Not to mention that arguably none of the strikers you've listed are suited to play as a one up top due to they all have very limited link up play (Vydra is significantly better than Bent or Wilson at it and his energy makes up for it somewhat but it is still not ideal).

 

I do agree with you about the youngsters, I'd rather have an academy product make up the 3rd option in all positions especially out wide 

[brady1993]

1 minute ago, r_wilcockson said:

My point exactly Brady1993. If you are only allowed 7 subs, no more than 3 should be attacking players, to allow us to have a goalie and one or two defenders / midfielders (i.e. a balanced bench). There is therefore always going to be three of the aforementioned players who aren't going to make the matchday squad, which will likely to lead to unrest etc. Ideally the new manager needs to look at offloading some of these players. In my opinion, I'd start with Bent and Russell.

I largely agree your bench should give you cover for most of the pitch, it's why players such as Baird and Hanson are useful to have on your Bench due to being able to cover several positions. 

One thing I'd like to pick you up on is starting the offloading with Russell (completely agree with letting Bent go). Russell is the second most effective wide forward (Ince is the most effective) in the squad and regularly contributes 15-20 goals a season (goals + assists) which a fair bit better than the other wider. Not to mention his energy also helps contribute to a high pressing playing style. We might need to try and get better than him but I do think other players should be let go a lot sooner. If we are going to play a 433 and assuming we can't bring anyone in january I'd look to trim down:

CF - Vydra, Blackman (+Martin if he can come back from loan)

RW - Ince (Although I'd probably be tempted to start him on the left with Russell on the right), Russell

LW - Anya, Wiemann(Would be next out of the door to allow for someone of genuine quality to come in)

[brady1993]

7 minutes ago, JW37 said:

Another couple of injuries at the same time and were in the same situation when Thorne and Martin were out together 

I'm not sure that's entirely comparable. We are arguably in the same situation as when Martin got injured because whilst we have plenty of bodies none of them are effective link up players. And regarding Thorne we were just plain unlucky to have all three specialist DMs get injured.