One striker

[LlayDragon]

4-3-3 = better full-backs.

We won't be bringing in a raft of players so we'll stick with 4-4-2.

Oh, and no to one striker. We wouldn't be able to secure the type of player we would need to make it work.

[pagl]

Originally Posted by LlayDragon

4-3-3 = better full-backs.

We won't be bringing in a raft of players so we'll stick with 4-4-2.

Oh, and no to one striker. We wouldn't be able to secure the type of player we would need to make it work.

I agree and I prefer 442.

It should provide.....

A solid back 4 and should only need cover at CB and a utility player (e.g. Carra) to cover FB. Both FBs dont have to great going forward.

Another solid bank of 4 in front with the 2 CM being able to pass and retain possession and LM/RM both being able to get forward to support the strikers and back to support the FBs. They need to have good engines - as they say.

2 Forwards with pace and power and the ability to hold the ball up and play as a pairing.

A good 442 can be done with a smaller squad and better quality - 433 requires a much better forward line and 451 needs the 5 midfields to support quickly and players who can use the space going forward much better.

[NottsRed]

Bar Holyroyd none of our current crop of strikers are good enough. Our tactics don't suit them as they are not the right build to win and hold up the long ball. We are also badly lacking in any midfield presence which is another which hampers our strikers.

[stanvax]

Always fancied 4-2-3-1 - with the three behind the main striker proving width and support runners into the box but with a very solid platform

[pagl]

Originally Posted by stanvax

Always fancied 4-2-3-1 - with the three behind the main striker proving width and support runners into the box but with a very solid platform

And even more complicated for players at this level.
Nice idea though - like 352 or even as per NLP team of the week 3232 I think!

[krux]

Originally Posted by stanvax

Always fancied 4-2-3-1 - with the three behind the main striker proving width and support runners into the box but with a very solid platform

isn't just 451 with an attacking midfielder?

[John Neals Dynasty]

I don't think Keates is likely to change from 442 why would he change horses in midstream?

He will stick with what he will see has being successful.
Posted via mobile theme

[Willywill]

Totally agree with Notts Red here. We don't possess a target man (like Jim Steele or Danny Wright) so that's our January priority. I am just beginning to see the light with Holyroyd, but he is a touch player who avoids any physical stuff. Even Reid and Massanka have youth as their excuse! However Bowden just doesn't have one good attribute and would not be in my squad.

[standingroomonly2]

Originally Posted by Willywill

Totally agree with Notts Red here. We don't possess a target man (like Jim Steele or Danny Wright) so that's our January priority. I am just beginning to see the light with Holyroyd, but he is a touch player who avoids any physical stuff. Even Reid and Massanka have youth as their excuse! However Bowden just doesn't have one good attribute and would not be in my squad.

Depends what you count as attributes. If you don't count the best finisher with the best touch as an attribute but choose to judge a player on if he chases aimless balls and wasting time jumping for balls that he would never win then BODEN isn't your man
Posted via mobile theme