Blake - Talking Sense

[surge]

Equally can you really just credit a style of football as being more sustainable? There's a bit more to it I suspect. Every team in the Championship passed the ball more than us during our promotion season, including all the relegated and struggling ones. How has this style helped their 5 year plans?

As you say, there is a bit more to it than passing stats despite some lazy pundits obsession - a number of those passes may have come off but would have had their coaches screaming not to pass or to play a safer ball. However, we can also recognise that we need to be more comfortable in possession and would be better placed if we didn't have to spend £6million on a striker that may work either because we'd developed our own and had them ready for first team or we had options of similar players for half the cost due to widened scouting structure.

[splott parker]

Agree with you entirely. In an ideal world, I'd like to see us having 50% plus possession every week, but it's not going to happen with this squad. There has been plenty of proof though in the last few years that you don't need to be dominating possession every game to win trophies, but there surely can't have been many teams that have won automatic promotion to the Premier League that valued possession less than us.

On that point, I'm glad to see one or two others on here sharing my complete bafflement at the tactic when we have possession about fifty yards from our opponent's goal of playing the ball back to Etheridge, whose kicking is the only aspect of his game that gets consistently criticised on here, who wellies it upfield and in nine cases out of ten puts the opposition back in possession with them having done little or nothing to win it back - if someone has an idea of what the thinking is behind this "tactic", I'd be fascinated to read it.

One other thing, I think you mean John Beck with Cambridge United, not John Still.

The big kick out is a throwback to the ‘big man, little man’ days. Very effective it was too in the Toshack/ Keegan (wouldn't say Toshack/Clark as Clarkie was no slouch in the air and couldn’t be regarded as the little man) era. Would be a great retro tactic if a team had a monster of a centre forward with a couple of speed merchants either side of him.
We certainly haven’t got a centre forward of that ilk so every kick out is nigh on a 90/10 in the defender’s favour. Is Warnock that dubious about our players ability to find a bit of space to enable them to receive a throw out? It annoys me immensely when Etheridge does that little ‘throw out’ dummy before the huge kick, surely we’ve got the players to mix it up a bit.

[Bluebirdman Of Alcathays]

The only point of reference I can think of with regard to Warnock's legacy-making is that he wanted Malky Mackay to take over from him at QPR, but that didn't happen because NW was pushed before he jumped. This was said in 2012, so I imagine he was referring to MM's time at Watford. That doesn't suggest he'll saddle us with 'NW mark 2', although this is only one example, of course.

[Baloo]

The way some people go on, it's as if they think that what we're asking for is a replication of Barcelona or Man City, not even close. Like i said, just a bit more method and thought when we do get the ball and the ability to keep it when we have to.

The plan has got to be a bit more than that though hasn’t it? How is that going to set us apart from all the other clubs already doing that, assuming the plan is also to deliver success on the field?

[Tuerto]

The plan has got to be a bit more than that though hasn’t it? How is that going to set us apart from all the other clubs already doing that, assuming the plan is also to deliver success on the field?

It's a good question. I don't think that we have to completely change the way we play in order to gain some sustained success, although that will happen when Warnock goes (which was the original point of the thread) I suppose what's needed to stand out as succeed is a decent recruitment policy and a youth system that can produce a player with ability and value every couple of years or so, the margins are probably quite small. What i do believe is that if we continue to employ the style of play we've witnessed from this team over the past 18 months or so then we will go backwards and somebody is going to have undo it all and start again, unless the club can fuse together what Warnock brings with a lot more belief in keeping the ball at the right times and an ability to play, give players options and support the front man when he's on the ball. I'm not a football purist, i don't mind us playing a bit of long ball, hitting channels etc but we must be able to compose ourselves when we need to and possess the ability to keep the ball for sustained periods, although i can't see that happening under Warnock.

[splott parker]

Trollope was the problem, though. He tried to get a brand of football that didn't suit the players he had at his disposal. He might be a coach of high regard, but he was a rubbish manager. That sometimes happens.

To try and discredit a more passing style of footballl because of what happened under Trollope is stupid. The style itself wasn't to blame - it was the manager himself.

Professional footballers at that level are very adaptable I reckon, they transfer between clubs, clubs that all have different approaches, whether slight or vast. The good manager or coach gets his philosophy across and the players fall in with, they even have to take on board 2 or 3 different plans, plans that are put into place during one match due to circumstances. Our players weren’t daft, they just were badly coached and looked confused and chaotic. So yes, it was Trollope’s fault, people who reckon he’s a good coach but not manager material are way off the mark re. Cardiff City, he was a shite coach with us, a disaster!

[Lawnmower]

Burnley don't play like we do, they don't constantly give the ball back to their opponents, forget the possession stats, teams like us and Burnley are always going to be down the rankings in that category. It's fine to give up possession, it's how you line up when you've not got the ball and how you use it when you get it back, time after time we give the ball straight back, except against United, Wolves, Leicester to a lesser degree, Arsenal away we tried to play Southampton away for the last twenty minutes we were more composed etc, there's a common theme to not giving the ball back easily. Wimbledon and Watford evolved, and your Cambridge comparison must be going back to the early nineties when they had Dion Dublin playing for them and they were managed by John Still, how long did that last for?

You seem to use extremes in order to prove your point, using words like 'tippy tappy' and referring to Trollope as if that's enough evidence to back up your opinion, nobody is asking for Trollope style football which was bereft of pace and end product, neither are they advocating Tippy Tappy football, that's nonsense, we've never been a club like that, we've never had fans who demand that either. What i believe people want is a balance, a bit of the Warnock up and at em' and intensity mixed in with a bit of calculation and thought when in possession, It's not radical.

Our biggest problem (in my opinion) is how we surrender possession, especially when we don't have much in the first place. Time after time we just lump the ball up towards better players who use the ball effectively and we eventually get punished at a higher level. There were so many occasions last season where players were looking for an out, a simple ball, especially in midfield, it wasn't available and it almost always meant that we gave the ball straight back. We can't continue to do that against good players as we'll get punished. If that part of our game can be eradicated to a degree then we have a chance at the highest level. The Warnock wingers can stay, the low level possession wont be a problem. What is a huge problem is that our midfield have no options, dwell on the ball and act desperately in order to get rid of the ball, the rest is history. I don't think anyone wants a revolution, just some serious tweeks in the correct areas.

I think Burnley are what Warnock is aiming for, except they have far better players.

How much would we have to pay for Wood, Barnes, Vokes, Vydra ? All 4 would walk into our side.

3 England international keepers.

2 England centre halfs ..

The Trollope example is definitely relevant. As it shows that if you don’t have the players you can’t change the system.

We have massively over achieved with Warnock and would risk throwing all that away by trying to change philosophy too quickly.

In fact if he was to go the best way forward would be to bring in a similarly pragmatic manager.

We’ve got 2 years to get back up or we love the parachute money. The club makes losses every season on the Championship even with it.

We will face being one of the poorest clubs in the division and those are normally the ones who go down.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

We have massively over achieved with Warnock and would risk throwing all that away by trying to change philosophy too quickly.

But the likelihood is that a new manager will want to change Warnock's philosophy, so that will happen when Warnock finally leaves.

[Penarth Blues]

But the likelihood is that a new manager will want to change Warnock's philosophy, so that will happen when Warnock finally leaves.

The same thing that happens when every manager leaves. Football always moves on and its interest is in its uncertainty.

At present Pep's football model is idolised but I think it is only sustainable when you have some of the best footballers and athletes in the world to implement it. Those same players would make Warnock's approach look magical too.

We play no differently to the Leicester team that won the title - we just don't have skilful enough players to achieve in the same way they did.

I have to disagree with posts on here that thinks it is the style we play that prevents us having success. I am hoping like everyone else that we bring in some decent midfielders who can actually pass a ball properly. I think our same overall style would then bring much better football as we could hold the ball much better from the middle of the park upwards.

Over time we can potentially address bringing the ball out from defence too as an option but for now I'd settle for a better midfield and the defence and attack that we already have. I think our attackers would acquire a new lease of life from this.

[Tuerto]

The same thing that happens when every manager leaves. Football always moves on and its interest is in its uncertainty.

At present Pep's football model is idolised but I think it is only sustainable when you have some of the best footballers and athletes in the world to implement it. Those same players would make Warnock's approach look magical too.

We play no differently to the Leicester team that won the title - we just don't have skilful enough players to achieve in the same way they did.

I have to disagree with posts on here that thinks it is the style we play that prevents us having success. I am hoping like everyone else that we bring in some decent midfielders who can actually pass a ball properly. I think our same overall style would then bring much better football as we could hold the ball much better from the middle of the park upwards.

Over time we can potentially address bringing the ball out from defence too as an option but for now I'd settle for a better midfield and the defence and attack that we already have. I think our attackers would acquire a new lease of life from this.

We do not play like the Leicester side hat won the title, that's a statement and a half. How many times did Leicester pump the ball to nobody, how many times were their midfield devoid of options and ideas? How many positions was Vardy in without any support whatsoever, the closest team mate 20 yards away. We did not play like Leicester.

[Penarth Blues]

We do not play like the Leicester side hat won the title, that's a statement and a half. How many times did Leicester pump the ball to nobody, how many times were their midfield devoid of options and ideas? How many positions was Vardy in without any support whatsoever, the closest team mate 20 yards away. We did not play like Leicester.

I disagree. The style they played is basically a rugged defence with a rapid counter-attack. The reason they didn't pump the ball to nobody is because they had players capable of making the passes. We don't.

[Baloo]

We do not play like the Leicester side hat won the title, that's a statement and a half. How many times did Leicester pump the ball to nobody, how many times were their midfield devoid of options and ideas? How many positions was Vardy in without any support whatsoever, the closest team mate 20 yards away. We did not play like Leicester.

I think it's fair to assume that a team that won the league didn't play like another which was relegated.

I think the reference is probably because Leicester had the 3rd-lowest possession % and number of short passes stats in the PL that season. They also had the 2nd lowest pass success rate %. So highlighting perhaps that it's not exclusively a possession/passing game that gets results in the PL. They were obviously far better though at what they were doing though than City and had better players.

[jamieccfc]

The same thing that happens when every manager leaves. Football always moves on and its interest is in its uncertainty.

At present Pep's football model is idolised but I think it is only sustainable when you have some of the best footballers and athletes in the world to implement it. Those same players would make Warnock's approach look magical too.

We play no differently to the Leicester team that won the title - we just don't have skilful enough players to achieve in the same way they did.

I have to disagree with posts on here that thinks it is the style we play that prevents us having success. I am hoping like everyone else that we bring in some decent midfielders who can actually pass a ball properly. I think our same overall style would then bring much better football as we could hold the ball much better from the middle of the park upwards.

Over time we can potentially address bringing the ball out from defence too as an option but for now I'd settle for a better midfield and the defence and attack that we already have. I think our attackers would acquire a new lease of life from this.

WOW just WOW I’m literally lost for words just when you think you’ve seen it all on here

[CCFCC3PO]

The same thing that happens when every manager leaves. Football always moves on and its interest is in its uncertainty.

At present Pep's football model is idolised but I think it is only sustainable when you have some of the best footballers and athletes in the world to implement it. Those same players would make Warnock's approach look magical too.

We play no differently to the Leicester team that won the title - we just don't have skilful enough players to achieve in the same way they did.

I have to disagree with posts on here that thinks it is the style we play that prevents us having success. I am hoping like everyone else that we bring in some decent midfielders who can actually pass a ball properly. I think our same overall style would then bring much better football as we could hold the ball much better from the middle of the park upwards.

Over time we can potentially address bringing the ball out from defence too as an option but for now I'd settle for a better midfield and the defence and attack that we already have. I think our attackers would acquire a new lease of life from this.

Are you serious? Cardiff play the same as the PL champions from 3 years ago? And, do you really think Warnock managing Man City would make them as good as Guardiola's Man City? There's a reason Warnock has never managed at that level, and it's not prejudice.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

I am hoping like everyone else that we bring in some decent midfielders who can actually pass a ball properly. I think our same overall style would then bring much better football as we could hold the ball much better from the middle of the park upwards.

This. 100%.

[Lawnmower]

I agree. Cambridge had a couple of good seasons with the long ball and Dion Dublin. They went from the 4th Division to close to the top of the 2nd division and they almost made it to the 1st . But they didn't. And it certainly wasn't sustainable.

It was.
A tiny club who had something like a decade in the 2nd tier.

That’s more sustained than most clubs of that size.

[NYCBlue]

It was.
A tiny club who had something like a decade in the 2nd tier.

That’s more sustained than most clubs of that size.

Are you talking about the 70s or the 90s? Because in the 90s they were in the 2nd division for 2 seasons. By 2005 they were in the conference.

That is the very definition of unsustainable.

[CCFCC3PO]

It was.
A tiny club who had something like a decade in the 2nd tier.

That’s more sustained than most clubs of that size.

A decade in the second tier? When was that?

Back to back promotions in 1990 and 1991, then 5th in the second tier (Division 2 it was called) in 1992. Relegated next season.

Why not check facts before spouting off, your examples of Wimbledon, Watford and Cambridge as sustainable is

1) Irrelevant, you are talking a generation ago. It would be as stupid as clubs playing 3-2-5 formations in 1988.
2) Laughable because each of those clubs failed and/or changed style very quickly. Wimbledon played some decent football in the early PL years.

[Lawnmower]

Why is not sustainable? Well, Wimbledon and Cambridge for a start.

Burnley next.

Watford are a good football team.

Watford got to the top through Graham Taylor’s long ball. He kept them in the top 2 divisions for years and years.

It gave them the platform to become what they are now.

Cambridge punched above their weight for years.

Burnley have also been doing that and continue to do so.

Stoke did as well and have only gone backwards since they tried to get pretty.

Anyone who thinks the only way to succeed in football is to play the passing game is just frankly talking crap

[Lawnmower]

Trollope was the problem, though. He tried to get a brand of football that didn't suit the players he had at his disposal. He might be a coach of high regard, but he was a rubbish manager. That sometimes happens.

To try and discredit a more passing style of footballl because of what happened under Trollope is stupid. The style itself wasn't to blame - it was the manager himself.

I think you’ve got the point in the first half of your post and then completely missed it in your second.

The players here aren’t suited to your passing game.

We’d need a completely new squad.

[Lawnmower]

It's a good question. I don't think that we have to completely change the way we play in order to gain some sustained success, although that will happen when Warnock goes (which was the original point of the thread) I suppose what's needed to stand out as succeed is a decent recruitment policy and a youth system that can produce a player with ability and value every couple of years or so, the margins are probably quite small. What i do believe is that if we continue to employ the style of play we've witnessed from this team over the past 18 months or so then we will go backwards and somebody is going to have undo it all and start again, unless the club can fuse together what Warnock brings with a lot more belief in keeping the ball at the right times and an ability to play, give players options and support the front man when he's on the ball. I'm not a football purist, i don't mind us playing a bit of long ball, hitting channels etc but we must be able to compose ourselves when we need to and possess the ability to keep the ball for sustained periods, although i can't see that happening under Warnock.

Why do you assume that a change of style will bring success when it has only brought us failure in the past.

Not just Trollope, but Jones with all the stars we had ?

And also assuming Warnock doesn’t want to play more ‘football’ could it just be that he’s adapted his tactics to suit the players he’s got ?

It’s worked too.

[Tuerto]

Why do you assume that a change of style will bring success when it has only brought us failure in the past.

Not just Trollope, but Jones with all the stars we had ?

And also assuming Warnock doesn’t want to play more ‘football’ could it just be that he’s adapted his tactics to suit the players he’s got ?

It’s worked too.

Do you think that whacking the ball up to nobody is a good tactic? You must've witnessed the countless occasions when we put needless pressure upon ourselves because our midfield didn't have any options so were forced to lump the ball back to the opposition and allow them to come straight back at us. Some of the things Warnock implements is plainly wrong, if it wasn't then we'd witness loads of other teams following suit by giving the ball back to the opposition at the earliest opportunity because there must be something to it. I don't believe he's adapted his tactics to suit the players limitations, rather his own. In fairness, he has been very successful in the championship but isn't able to make that tell in the Premier league, it doesn't take a genius to work out why.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

Why do you assume that a change of style will bring success when it has only brought us failure in the past.

Not just Trollope, but Jones with all the stars we had ?

And also assuming Warnock doesn’t want to play more ‘football’ could it just be that he’s adapted his tactics to suit the players he’s got ?

It’s worked too.

I would argue that it hasn't worked, or we would have secured another season in the PL.

[Elwood Blues]

I would argue that it hasn't worked, or we would have secured another season in the PL.

I'm sure you would say that Fulham play a much better style of football than us Eric.

Yet for all this and their spending £100 million on players to suit this style they finished below us.

Playing the passing game doesn't work either by your criteria!

[the other bob wilson]

I'm sure you would say that Fulham play a much better style of football than us Eric.

Yet for all this and their spending £100 million on players to suit this style they finished below us.

Playing the passing game doesn't work either by your criteria!

To be honest, I was struggling to work out what game Fulham were trying to play for much of the season (I did manage to figure out it involved defending like a League One side mind), but if you go by the criteria you are using, there were seventeen teams who played more of a passing game than us above us, so, surely, that is compelling evidence that we need to change?