spt_claret wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 12:04 pm
Prefix: I don't think we should sack Kompany.
I seriously disagree that Dyche inherited a better team than Kompany. Dyche's team were championship journeymen, Charlie Austin (who he lost 6 months later), and 3 unproven youngsters- Ings, Trippier, Mee. Kompany may have lost a number of players before he stepped foot through the door like Bardsley, Pieters, Vydra, Mee, Tarkowski. Plus Cornet, Pope, Collins & McNeil earmarked to go right away, and Weghorst's loan obligation, but he still inherited the following players with multiple years in the Premier League:
Taylor
Brownhill
Gudmundsson
Lowton (chose to move him on rather than use him)
Barnes (aging, past his best)
Jay (aging, past his best)
Cork (aging, past his best)
Westwood (injured, shipped out in January, possibly wouldn't have been able to recover 100%)
Hennessey (aging, past his best, moved him on ASAP)
Kevin Long (never a PL player but had played there, got moved on)
And Roberts had had 1 season in the Prem.
There is no way you can slice it that, even with a number of those players being aging, that doesn't look better than a team of unproven and injured Bournemouth youth Danny Ings, unproven Man City academy fullbacks Ben Mee & Kieran Trippier, graft over talent Dean Marney, et cetera. We were Championship mid table for the previous 3 years. Kompany's decision to overhaul the team radically was a very successful one don't get me wrong, but there is an argument that, while a refresh was needed, a couple of more seasoned heads like Lowton could have been kept in the side to help tide things over, and I still think Weghorst would have been worth keeping this season if he was willing to mend fences and knuckle down (big if).
The concern I have is we are MORE reliant on Dyche's men now, than we were last season. There's even people thinking Cork could be the answer to our woes still.
I also don't get how people still brand us as an attacking team this season. We're not. Attacking teams score goals and create chances. We do neither, we're a possession team. Possession can be defensive as much as offensive- keep the ball and you stop the other team scoring, unless you make a mistake (which we do, a lot). We don't play with much incisiveness, our tempo is often sluggish and slow, we very rarely look to get shots away, we'll overwork or turn back and move back through the zones often, on the occasions we DO step it up going more 'direct' (as in direct for goal, not long ball just not faffing around with possession) we look better but we do it maybe 15 minutes a game if that.
We are ranked 19th in the league for number of shots, despite 10th for touches and 11th for passes. Joint bottom for hitting the woodwork. Bottom for goals, 17th for big chances missed suggesting we've not even squandered all that many opportunities relative to our output. We are 19th on xG, and a long way behind 18th. Those are not the stats of an attacking team, attacking teams have more output in terms of shots and goals. We're a possession hogging team and it's arguably our main defensive tactic- we're only 8th for number of saves made despite having conceded the 2nd most goals only 2 behind Sheffield, we are 19th for tackles only Man City with their constant possession are lower. It's such a myth that we're an attacking team this season.
And 'better football' is and always has been subjective. A lot would say the best football is the style that wins and I'm inclined to agree. I certainly never shared the 'anti-football' sentiment about us from 2017 to 2020 when we made Europe and got a 10th place finish, we weren't full of dynamic flair but we were a ruthlessly efficient wolfpack, you could see how well drilled and tactically sharp every player was and there were times even against big guns like Chelsea I found myself enjoying watching us shut them down and control the game without needing to control possession, it was a different style of enjoyment to the glamorous, flashy goal fest of last year or of Coyle's promotion (or indeed Dyche's title win season), but it wasn't 'bad football' or 'not proper football'.