Summer Transfer Thread and Gustavo Cisneros Type Rumours.

[OCD]

If I could be convinced that it wouldn't quickly become 5-3-2, it would have more merit for me. Atalanta are a bit of an exception though, you would have to have a very high quality set of players to stop it turning it into a defensive set-up.

[Monty]

You have to have Gasperini or Bielsa or someone,  someone who's willing to risk a few hidings for their vision. Otherwise the dreaded back 5 becomes inevitable.

Back on topic, I know we're supposed to be lining up a striker to come in, but given how expensive they are and our seriously glaring weaknesses elsewhere I'd prefer to assess especially Wesley and Louie Barry before making that call. If the two of them can contribute seriously (a Brazil international and La Masia alum, let's not forget) then I'd rather see us focus on our creativity problem, as without Jack we seriously lack reliable options.

[OCD]

Even with Jack we would still need to be able to give opposition other problems to think about otherwise teams just double up on Jack.

[Mister E]

Even with Jack we would still need to be able to give opposition other problems to think about otherwise teams just double up on Jack.

Pereira, Bundia, Trossard,Olise ...  there are players we could add that would give JG more space and / or cover for him when injured. We certainly need to bring in players that cause opponents to think more than simply double-marking JG.

[cdbearsfan]

I have to admit I’m not averse to 3 at the back

Et tu, Nigel?

[nigel]

I have to admit I’m not averse to 3 at the back

Et tu, Nigel?

I’m sorry 😔

[paul_e]

My issue with 3 at the back is very much based on trends. Almost no one plays with 2 up front now, some version of 1 up front and players either wider or deeper moving in to join them is much more common. That means only 1 of you 3 can be marking a forward (who will be moving across the line in most cases) and the other 2 are marking space but as they'll have spent most of their career playing in a 4 they just won't be used to doing that in a 3/5.

If you want to go with it then fine but you need to commit to it and drill the shape into players. throwing players into it as a whim because you're mixing things up just doesn't work and because so many managers 'give it a go' when they're struggling most fans associate it with a manager who has lost the plot. I'm not saying it can't work as an option, I just don't think it works anything like as well as people expect it to.

433 or some derivative of it still gives you the same 5 defensive players and still allows the full backs to get forward but because the DM is a 'spare'it doesn't damage the defensive shape anything like as much.

The back 3 I could get behind is 1 CB and 2 defensive fullbacks with 2 DMs in front then you get the fullbacks to man mark players like Salah, Rashford, etc who are wide forwards rather than wingers. You can even go with inverted or 2-footed fullbacks so they're stronger defending their inside shoulder and can force those players to try to find space out wide where they're less dangerous. I doubt many teams would be brave enough to try that though.

[ChicagoLion]

Agree Paul e .
Very few talk about the tactical limitations of 3 ( it’s pretty easy to make the 3 a 5 and then dominate thae space in the central areas) and how difficult it is for players to adapt to it.
In fact most players don’t like it because they have not been bought up  to play that way.
Our defence is not the problem, so why tamper with the part of the set up that is working?
What happens ahead of the defence is where the problems start.

[Dante Lavelli]

Atalanta play 3 at the back a lot, and are the most exciting team in Europe right now IMO.

Good for them, really, but please stop it.

Stop what? Mentioning Atalanta? Alright then.

No, three at the back. Nothing good will come from it.

Oh good I can still talk about Atalanta, nice.

I've never understood this level of antipathy to 3 at the back. It's a bit particular, sure, but it works sometimes and can do a bunch of different styles. Just because Paul Lambert thought it was a good idea doesn't mean it's bad. Not quite anyway.

That would be a great trip, but have they finished their stadium?  They were using the san Siro the last time I looked.

[Ian.]

Don’t Wolves play three at the back?

[LeeB]

Don’t Wolves play three at the back?

*wipes milk from lips*

Exactly.

[Monty]

Atalanta play 3 at the back a lot, and are the most exciting team in Europe right now IMO.

Good for them, really, but please stop it.

Stop what? Mentioning Atalanta? Alright then.

No, three at the back. Nothing good will come from it.

Oh good I can still talk about Atalanta, nice.

I've never understood this level of antipathy to 3 at the back. It's a bit particular, sure, but it works sometimes and can do a bunch of different styles. Just because Paul Lambert thought it was a good idea doesn't mean it's bad. Not quite anyway.

That would be a great trip, but have they finished their stadium?  They were using the san Siro the last time I looked.

Only for the Champions League for some reason. But we have to wait for full reopening,  but the Bergameschi are great craic.

[Mister E]

.. three at the back is horrendous.

Here we go again ...
The top teams seem to be able to transition between 4 at the back and 3 CB when required. Why not Villa? Klopp, Tuchel, Rodgers, Ancelotti and others are wrong?

my argument is merely for flexibility, which means formations shouldn't be 'a given'.
Whether it's 3-5-2 or 3-5-1-1 or whatever, other successful teams deploy a variation; frequently.

[Ian.]

Don’t Wolves play three at the back?

*wipes milk from lips*

Exactly.

This surely can be put to bed then.

[paul_e]

.. three at the back is horrendous.

Here we go again ...
The top teams seem to be able to transition between 4 at the back and 3 CB when required. Why not Villa? Klopp, Tuchel, Rodgers, Ancelotti and others are wrong?

my argument is merely for flexibility, which means formations shouldn't be 'a given'.
Whether it's 3-5-2 or 3-5-1-1 or whatever, other successful teams deploy a variation; frequently.

How often do teams switch from a back 4 to 3 or 5 though? Here and there in games where they're desperate and sacrifice a defender for another striker and most of the time it has no impact so no one remembers. Much more common is shifting players around in midfield and up front where positioning is less important (and movement is king).