What do we need

[Mattster]

I also can't see that the players we've signed are disconnected from the system we're playing. We've only signed two attacking midfielders this summer, and both appear to be players who naturally come off the line rather than holding width. That is also true of Anthony and Edwards. All seem to me on paper equally suited to "wide inside forward" roles as to "winger" roles, and I'm not sure the role is that different to the way Parker set the team up in a 4-3-3 last season. Indeed the only out and out wide player currently in the squad is Koleosho, and he appears out of favour. Walker and Tuanzebe appear to have been signed with this system in mind.

We've signed two wingers this summer. Calling them attacking midfielders is just trying to obscure that. That they like to cut inside is just what modern wingers do, that doesn't make them a 10.

A simple look at the heat map for Anthony last season shows he is more of an out and out winger than Koleosho (in the sense of sticking to the flanks) and the difference in what is being asked of the 10s/attacking midfielders/inside forwards (whatever you want to call them) from what was required of the wingers last season (when, notably, no one referred to them as attacking midfielders or inside forwards).

Screenshot_20250819_123710_Sofascore.jpg (171.68 KiB) Viewed 389 times

[claretspice]

We've signed two wingers this summer. Calling them attacking midfielders is just trying to obscure that. That they like to cut inside is just what modern wingers do, that doesn't make them a 10.

A simple look at the heat map for Anthony last season shows he is more of an out and out winger than Koleosho (in the sense of sticking to the flanks) and the difference in what is being asked of the 10s/attacking midfielders/inside forwards (whatever you want to call them) from what was required of the wingers last season (when, notably, no one referred to them as attacking midfielders or inside forwards).

Screenshot_20250819_123710_Sofascore.jpg

Anthony played from the flank, but coming off the flank last season - and that was increasingly the case as he did his best work. Larsen was the same for us two years ago. Edwards did his best work for Sporting in the 3-4-3 set up. I haven't seen much of Tchoana but what i've read doesn't lead me to believe he's unsuited to the 3-4-3 role. I'm not sure there's any reason why any of them are not suited to playing a slightly (and I mean slightly) narrower role (Luton for example used Chong and Townsend in this system) and I respectfully think you're overstating the point.

[CoolClaret]

Like Charlie, your issue seems to be more with me than the points I'm making. I'm not playing a game, I'm answering the topic. I genuinely didn't think questioning whether the recruitment and the system are joined up would be so controversial - the thread is asking what we need which suggests there's holes and the answers seem pretty consistent in thinking that.

Hannibal played maybe 3 PL games as a 10. The only start there was against us when really he was more of an 8 with Bruno Fernandes playing as a 10. I agree with you that Flemming would be best as a 10 in this system, he came on as a striker though against Spurs - whether he is a PL level 10 is questionable, we didn't even use him there in the Championship. Ramsey's senior football has mostly been on the wing, but his youth career was at 10. Same thing though, fitness and PL level are questions. Edwards is a winger though he was used as a 10 there by Amorim, but playing wider than Hannibal did against Spurs with Pedro Goncalves playing narrower (so the opposite way round we played Anthony and Hannibal).

But let's be generous and say there's 3 who could play as a 10 naturally, are they PL level? Possibly, but surely we strengthen there rather than sign two more wingers? Or one of each if it was felt we needed another winger to replace Sarmiento and we're going to swap formations regularly*

*which I don't think we will, the U21s are playing the same 5-2-2-1 despite it not fitting the players we have particularly well. Seems a top to bottom decision to align the system but I could be wrong.

Ok, I'll take the point in face value then -

Hannibal definitely played as a 10 against us for United when Ramsey also did for us. I recall both players having a great game, now are they PL calibre creative 10s - that's a different question.

I'd hope that we aren't married to the system anyway, I think Anthony is the only player that I far prefer hugging the touchline vs doing his work in the middle of the pitch (as you mentioned in another comment), that's why I, and others, think he could probably play as a wing back with three at the back.

As it stands, I feel we need additions to really make this three at the back system work, where as we could almost plug and play with any varient of 4-2-3-1.

Let's see how it plays out, though I must say if Tchaouna isn't like a nailed on starter every week and we play 3 atb, I'd wonder why he has been signed for such a fee.

[RVclaret]

Mattster the system is fairly fluid, off the ball it’s a flat midfield 4 with the two ‘10s’ in a typical wide position, on the ball one plays a bit narrower and one might stay a bit wider. I think the profile of winger / inside forward / 10 is fairly fine. Tchaouna has played all across the front and so has Larsen. Personally think Larsen will do well there attacking space from the right. Hannibal played there for his pressing and duel winning (won 72% v Spurs). He also played in ‘10 type areas’ last season for the most part. Claretspice said Koleosho is perhaps the one who is a traditional winger, though at the Euros he starred playing as a what you are labeling as a 10 (inside left in a 3-4-3). I also think the system can be hybrid between a 5 and 4 within a game, for instance Tchaouna tucks back into a 5 in a deep block, with Walker coming inside, yet he’s the furthest player forward on the right in attack, with Walker shifting to RB, etc..

[Mattster]

Mattster the system is fairly fluid, off the ball it’s a flat midfield 4 with the two ‘10s’ in a typical wide position, on the ball one plays a bit narrower and one might stay a bit wider. I think the profile of winger / inside forward / 10 is fairly fine. Tchaouna has played all across the front and so has Larsen. Personally think Larsen will do well there attacking space from the right. Hannibal played there for his pressing and duel winning (won 72% v Spurs). He also played in ‘10 type areas’ last season for the most part. Claretspice said Koleosho is perhaps the one who is a traditional winger, though at the Euros he starred playing as a what you are labeling as a 10 (inside left in a 3-4-3). I also think the system can be hybrid between a 5 and 4 within a game, for instance Tchaouna tucks back into a 5 in a deep block, with Walker coming inside, yet he’s the furthest player forward on the right in attack, with Walker shifting to RB, etc..

You spent all last season saying we don't play a 10. Now it suits you're saying Hannibal played in "10 type areas".

Dress it up however you want with Tchouana and Larsen, they're wingers. Wingers who have played some games, almost exclusively as subs, in other forward positions.

And it looks like we're shipping Koleosho out now too. Awesome.

Anyway, the point I was making was that if we wanted to play this back 3(/5) then we're still short at least a couple of players (which is what you've posted earlier on in this very thread) and that by signing more wingers it doesn't seem particularly joined up thinking between manager and recruitment. Simply because it's me that's said it that's got some posters' backs up, despite not being a particularly controversial take.

The fact we're now shipping Koleosho out on loan would back that up - spending money to stand still. It's not even a criticism of Parker, if he wants to play this formation why have the recruitment team spent time, effort and money signing players that don't really fit into it whilst ignoring the very obvious roles in that formation that need filling?

[123EasyasBFC]

Anthony
Edwards
Tchauona
Bruun Larsen

Are 4 great wide options if we play 4-3-3 but if we are playing the 5-2-3 or 5-2-2-1 whatever you want then they aren’t the right players for the two options behind the number 9.

I would say Flemming and Broja are most suited to those positions.

[RVclaret]

You spent all last season saying we don't play a 10. Now it suits you're saying Hannibal played in "10 type areas".

Dress it up however you want with Tchouana and Larsen, they're wingers. Wingers who have played some games, almost exclusively as subs, in other forward positions.

And it looks like we're shipping Koleosho out now too. Awesome.

Anyway, the point I was making was that if we wanted to play this back 3(/5) then we're still short at least a couple of players (which is what you've posted earlier on in this very thread) and that by signing more wingers it doesn't seem particularly joined up thinking between manager and recruitment. Simply because it's me that's said it that's got some posters' backs up, despite not being a particularly controversial take.

The fact we're now shipping Koleosho out on loan would back that up - spending money to stand still. It's not even a criticism of Parker, if he wants to play this formation why have the recruitment team spent time, effort and money signing players that don't really fit into it whilst ignoring the very obvious roles in that formation that need filling?

Hm no I only said he didn’t play as a central 10. ‘10 type areas’ being left / right half spaces between the lines (eek I can feel a few being raged by my modern football language there), so not dissimilar to where he would have been picking up the ball v Spurs.

I think there’s a few assumptions being made, you have decided after 1 game against a tough opponent away, and in a pre season game against a tough opponent, that this is it. He did an interview post Lazio with the Burnley Express where he commented specifically on being flexible on systems (when asked about back 5 v 4), game dependant.

Frank played a 5 v PSG, with barely a flair player in the team, then a 4 against us days later, I personally like that in a manager vs what Postecoglou would have done. I expect Parker to remain pragmatic, he coached a pretty effective 4-4-2 off the ball last season, and that remains an option with the personnel. I suppose time will tell?

[RVclaret]

Anthony
Edwards
Tchauona
Bruun Larsen

Are 4 great wide options if we play 4-3-3 but if we are playing the 5-2-3 or 5-2-2-1 whatever you want then they aren’t the right players for the two options behind the number 9.

I would say Flemming and Broja are most suited to those positions.

Anthony has looked good there so far.

Edwards starred there for Amorim at Sporting.

Tchaouna haven’t seen enough of yet.

Bruun Larsen would suit it really well imo, he isn’t a typical winger, can’t beat a man, but finds space and finishes better than probably all our other attackers.

[KRBFC]

Hannibal played several games as a 10 for Man United, VK deployed Ramsey there, Flemming is also considered a 10, and Amorim played Edwards there for Sporting.

I'm pretty certain we won't be married to 3 at the back, but who knows? Just support the gaffer instead of this little game you've got going on so you can try and say ..."I told you so" if we struggle this year, after you're predictions were wildly off the boil last season!

I like Hannibal he provides energy and is neat on the ball, the problem is can we really play him as a 10 when the side lacks cutting edge and goals? I think his best qualities would be better deeper, legs, tenacious, loves a tackle and neat on the ball. Not sure he has that cute little pass or the goal scoring touch to play 10.

[Mattster]

Hm no I only said he didn’t play as a central 10. ‘10 type areas’ being left / right half spaces between the lines (eek I can feel a few being raged by my modern football language there), so not dissimilar to where he would have been picking up the ball v Spurs.

I think there’s a few assumptions being made, you have decided after 1 game against a tough opponent away, and in a pre season game against a tough opponent, that this is it. He did an interview post Lazio with the Burnley Express where he commented specifically on being flexible on systems (when asked about back 5 v 4), game dependant.

Frank played a 5 v PSG, with barely a flair player in the team, then a 4 against us days later, I personally like that in a manager vs what Postecoglou would have done. I expect Parker to remain pragmatic, he coached a pretty effective 4-4-2 off the ball last season, and that remains an option with the personnel. I suppose time will tell?

With Hannibal/Brownhill last season you were very clear stating repeatedly we don't play a 10, we play two 8s. An 8 is not a 10 or an inside forward any more than a right back making a run down the wing is a winger.

Frank has a different level of player available to him than we do, with a very significant skill gap between us and them they could afford being a bit flexible formation wise because they know they're going to control the game. We don't have that over any opponent in this league.

If we're going to flip between 5-2-2-1 and 4-3-3 on a game by game basis we'll get cut open defensively regularly because the marking, positioning, tracking runners etc is a massive difference for all the defence and the central midfield in those two systems. It won't be second nature for any of the players, opposition players will end up being left wide open.

[Silkyskills1]

Mattster the system is fairly fluid, off the ball it’s a flat midfield 4 with the two ‘10s’ in a typical wide position, on the ball one plays a bit narrower and one might stay a bit wider. I think the profile of winger / inside forward / 10 is fairly fine. Tchaouna has played all across the front and so has Larsen. Personally think Larsen will do well there attacking space from the right. Hannibal played there for his pressing and duel winning (won 72% v Spurs). He also played in ‘10 type areas’ last season for the most part. Claretspice said Koleosho is perhaps the one who is a traditional winger, though at the Euros he starred playing as a what you are labeling as a 10 (inside left in a 3-4-3). I also think the system can be hybrid between a 5 and 4 within a game, for instance Tchaouna tucks back into a 5 in a deep block, with Walker coming inside, yet he’s the furthest player forward on the right in attack, with Walker shifting to RB, etc..

I've read and re-read your post and I have to admit that 90% of it I don't understand. Please don't take that as a criticism its just an observation. I picked up on your stats for Hannibal on Saturday which sound quite good but I was at the game and in much more layman's terms I thought he was poor. Anyway, experience of watching us play since 1958 doesn't obviously count for anything now it seems. That's fair enough, it won't change for me but I'm left wondering are there any other supporters of my generation who genuinely see football in a much simpler way than the poster portrays.

[Steve-Harpers-perm]

It’s certainly become an over complicated game from some on the sidelines. Hopefully a new ‘pivot’ role can be identified and implemented this season to go along with trying to out score the opposition!

[RVclaret]

With Hannibal/Brownhill last season you were very clear stating repeatedly we don't play a 10, we play two 8s. An 8 is not a 10 or an inside forward any more than a right back making a run down the wing is a winger.

Frank has a different level of player available to him than we do, with a very significant skill gap between us and them they could afford being a bit flexible formation wise because they know they're going to control the game. We don't have that over any opponent in this league.

If we're going to flip between 5-2-2-1 and 4-3-3 on a game by game basis we'll get cut open defensively regularly because the marking, positioning, tracking runners etc is a massive difference for all the defence and the central midfield in those two systems. It won't be second nature for any of the players, opposition players will end up being left wide open.

Sure, but an 8 / advanced 8 that we later played can still operate in ‘10 type areas’. I also added the other system which was 4-4-2 with Brownhill usually alongside Flemming.

Take the point on flipping between systems game by game, though I still don’t think it’s as rigid as ‘this or that’ based on pre-defined formations (as described earlier re. hybrid 4/5 etc).

[CoolClaret]

I like Hannibal he provides energy and is neat on the ball, the problem is can we really play him as a 10 when the side lacks cutting edge and goals? I think his best qualities would be better deeper, legs, tenacious, loves a tackle and neat on the ball. Not sure he has that cute little pass or the goal scoring touch to play 10.

If we do we need creativity from other areas on the pitch - I agree with you, he's not a traditional '10' at all.

I'd also like to see him play a bit deeper as a combative midfielder - and as you say with his skills could be one to take the ball out of defense.

An option if we do play with three at the back, so we don't lose the man in midfield is to play three in the middle and two up top... could work.

Hopefully we get a couple of more signings in this week.

[Conroy92]

You spent all last season saying we don't play a 10. Now it suits you're saying Hannibal played in "10 type areas".

It's probably best not to bring up what you were posting last season. But I find this ironic because I think your the one trying to get all of this to suit your overall point. Which is a gripe with either the owners or Parker, before the window has closed, after one result.