Tooling up: The summer 2024 transfer thread

[Prufrock]

Why is our press much more ineffective than oxfords

It's not.

At the start of the season we were far and away the best pressing outfit.

Where that fell down was when we lost Dion and Vic. None of the replacements could do the work. Without one key pressing player it worked, without both it didn't.

It was personnel, not structure. Oxford without two of their front three would be exactly the same story with their counter attacking football.

If we go into next season with Dion, Vic, Collins and Dan that's 4 who can do the work (hamstrings allowing). Rather than the two we had this season due to Dan's injury and then zero for a while whilst Collins learnt it.

I think it's a bit of both. It's a lot harder to do it with two, but not impossible if you have the right people.

[GhostoftheBok]

The reality is that anyone on a 2025 deal is available unless and until they sign a new contract.

Anyone on longer than that leaves on our terms.

Whatever formation/system Ian picks some business will just be business.

[BWFC_Insane]

Why is our press much more ineffective than oxfords

It's not.

At the start of the season we were far and away the best pressing outfit.

Where that fell down was when we lost Dion and Vic. None of the replacements could do the work. Without one key pressing player it worked, without both it didn't.

It was personnel, not structure. Oxford without two of their front three would be exactly the same story with their counter attacking football.

If we go into next season with Dion, Vic, Collins and Dan that's 4 who can do the work (hamstrings allowing). Rather than the two we had this season due to Dan's injury and then zero for a while whilst Collins learnt it.

Can honestly say hand on heart I’ve never once seen us press as effectively as Oxford did against us. They shut the game down completely. The closest is arguably Barnsley away but even that at times was more one going. The Oxford press was a whole team, executed perfectly with that narrow front three.

It didn’t rely on individuals running themselves into the ground…not saying there wasn’t a lot of work in it but felt very much more effective than when we have done it.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Two teams. Oxford pressed well but we didn’t ask any different questions. They could have done it for hours on end.

On another topic du jour - I would not be confident of top two if our RWB options are Cogz, Matheson, Jones. If we go back four, maybe (although we’d need a tall LB as none of those are grrrrrreat in the air).

FYI I will update Contract Expiry thread tomorrow - not on the computer today and I ain’t doing that fiddly shite on a phone

[Worthy4England]

Why is our press much more ineffective than oxfords

It's not.

At the start of the season we were far and away the best pressing outfit.

Where that fell down was when we lost Dion and Vic. None of the replacements could do the work. Without one key pressing player it worked, without both it didn't.

It was personnel, not structure. Oxford without two of their front three would be exactly the same story with their counter attacking football.

If we go into next season with Dion, Vic, Collins and Dan that's 4 who can do the work (hamstrings allowing). Rather than the two we had this season due to Dan's injury and then zero for a while whilst Collins learnt it.

The problem is not that our press is more ineffective than Oxfords' - as Ghost says over the season, it's not - our Opta PPDA still has us as top, Oxford 4th bottom. But that's where the lies, damned lies and statistics come into play. In a one-off game, or even across the play-off, they might have been better than us on those occasions. Our problems are not about generalities, they're about specifics - which is why the 121 goals doesn't actually count for much (nor necessarily the 51 against).

Our problems are about things like "why did we go on holiday vs Wigan at home?" "How the feck do you get gubbed by the bottom team in the league at home?" "How do you have 69% possession and only one more shot on target against Wigan away, losing 1-0." "How do you have 60% possession against Derby and they have more shots, more on target than you do"

[officer_dibble]

On another topic du jour - I would not be confident of top two if our RWB options are Cogz, Matheson, Jones. If we go back four, maybe (although we’d need a tall LB as none of those are grrrrrreat in the air).

Iredale

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Totals (goals scored, goals conceded) and averages (PPDA etc) will always be generalised. As you say, one-offs can be different - IF the manager has flexibility.

Over the last two years we have got better at being different teams on different occasions - home to low blocks, away to big nasty teams. But again, as with the big rare switches between back three and back four, that feels “systemic” and closely planned rather than cleverly adapting on the hoof. Better than nothing but we still seem paralysed by surprise, and it’s something we have to get better at.

[GhostoftheBok]

Every expert who talks about us (managers, techy pundits, etc) praise Evatt's press. I'm not wasting time on that topic. If you think the whole of football is wrong then I'm hardly going to convince you otherwise.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

On another topic du jour - I would not be confident of top two if our RWB options are Cogz, Matheson, Jones. If we go back four, maybe (although we’d need a tall LB as none of those are grrrrrreat in the air).

Iredale

Yep, decent for that, but then that’s four “defenders” rather than three.

Say we play a low block long ball team at home… are we hobbling ourselves?

[Worthy4England]

On another topic du jour - I would not be confident of top two if our RWB options are Cogz, Matheson, Jones. If we go back four, maybe (although we’d need a tall LB as none of those are grrrrrreat in the air).

Iredale

Yep, decent for that, but then that’s four “defenders” rather than three.

Say we play a low block long ball team at home… are we hobbling ourselves?

That question sits well both ways with 51 leaked at our end. Does a three hobble us? Sorta touche

[GhostoftheBok]

The problem is not that our press is more ineffective than Oxfords' - as Ghost says over the season, it's not - our Opta PPDA still has us as top, Oxford 4th bottom. But that's where the lies, damned lies and statistics come into play. In a one-off game, or even across the play-off, they might have been better than us on those occasions. Our problems are not about generalities, they're about specifics - which is why the 121 goals doesn't actually count for much (nor necessarily the 51 against).

Our problems are about things like "why did we go on holiday vs Wigan at home?" "How the feck do you get gubbed by the bottom team in the league at home?" "How do you have 69% possession and only one more shot on target against Wigan away, losing 1-0." "How do you have 60% possession against Derby and they have more shots, more on target than you do"

Bucks set up ideally to beat us and Evatt didn't to beat Oxford.

I got stick for saying that after the game, but it's the reality.

The main thing that has me occasionally leaning "sack him" is his bullshit instance he set the players up properly to beat that Oxford side, playing that way.

[Worthy4England]

The problem is not that our press is more ineffective than Oxfords' - as Ghost says over the season, it's not - our Opta PPDA still has us as top, Oxford 4th bottom. But that's where the lies, damned lies and statistics come into play. In a one-off game, or even across the play-off, they might have been better than us on those occasions. Our problems are not about generalities, they're about specifics - which is why the 121 goals doesn't actually count for much (nor necessarily the 51 against).

Our problems are about things like "why did we go on holiday vs Wigan at home?" "How the feck do you get gubbed by the bottom team in the league at home?" "How do you have 69% possession and only one more shot on target against Wigan away, losing 1-0." "How do you have 60% possession against Derby and they have more shots, more on target than you do"

Bucks set up ideally to beat us and Evatt didn't to beat Oxford.

I got stick for saying that after the game, but it's the reality.

The main thing that has me occasionally leaning "sack him" is his bullshit instance he set the players up properly to beat that Oxford side, playing that way.

Abundantly clear that Oxford had the drop on us. As it was on other occasions in the main season.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

On another topic du jour - I would not be confident of top two if our RWB options are Cogz, Matheson, Jones. If we go back four, maybe (although we’d need a tall LB as none of those are grrrrrreat in the air).

Iredale

Yep, decent for that, but then that’s four “defenders” rather than three.

Say we play a low block long ball team at home… are we hobbling ourselves?

That question sits well both ways with 51 leaked at our end. Does a three hobble us? Sorta touche

Sure but the season before, we broke low concession records with a back three. Besides, I’m not advocating against the back four, just saying the personnel balance within it needs a lot of careful consideration. Same of any formation of course (can we please stop playing Toal LCB?) but we do at the moment have a good balance of CB options. Not sure same is true of FB (and definitely not WB).

[BWFC_Insane]

We conceded very few goals the season before but we had Bradley who defensively is premier league level, when he didn’t play Jones would play there who is a more defensive option, often Iredale on the left till he got injured another sort of defensive type. We had a more physical shield for the back three with Morley or MJ Williams and were a more defensively robust team at the expense of our attacking play.

The issue is whether you can play a back three high line and have wing backs who do the business going forward and can ensure you don’t concede a bagful at this level. I don’t really think it’s likely.

Even Bradley an outstanding footballer struggled to be consistent going forwards here with his delivery.

[GhostoftheBok]

Abundantly clear that Oxford had the drop on us. As it was on other occasions in the main season.

Evatt's ability to organise a team is first rate for this level.

His ability to react when his gameplan doesn't work is not.

At least we know where he needs to improve.

[officer_dibble]

The problem is not that our press is more ineffective than Oxfords' - as Ghost says over the season, it's not - our Opta PPDA still has us as top, Oxford 4th bottom. But that's where the lies, damned lies and statistics come into play. In a one-off game, or even across the play-off, they might have been better than us on those occasions. Our problems are not about generalities, they're about specifics - which is why the 121 goals doesn't actually count for much (nor necessarily the 51 against).

Our problems are about things like "why did we go on holiday vs Wigan at home?" "How the feck do you get gubbed by the bottom team in the league at home?" "How do you have 69% possession and only one more shot on target against Wigan away, losing 1-0." "How do you have 60% possession against Derby and they have more shots, more on target than you do"

Bucks set up ideally to beat us and Evatt didn't to beat Oxford.

I got stick for saying that after the game, but it's the reality.

The main thing that has me occasionally leaning "sack him" is his bullshit instance he set the players up properly to beat that Oxford side, playing that way.

What I keep coming back to is he refused to change it at half time. feck me if that wasn’t the time to go all Bruce Rioch when is? Should have put Victor and probably Dempsey on for jones and Sheehan and made them think. But we did not. We said ‘do plan a better’. Arghhhhhhhhhhh!

[Worthy4England]

On another topic du jour - I would not be confident of top two if our RWB options are Cogz, Matheson, Jones. If we go back four, maybe (although we’d need a tall LB as none of those are grrrrrreat in the air).

Iredale

Yep, decent for that, but then that’s four “defenders” rather than three.

Say we play a low block long ball team at home… are we hobbling ourselves?

That question sits well both ways with 51 leaked at our end. Does a three hobble us? Sorta touche

Sure but the season before, we broke low concession records with a back three. Besides, I’m not advocating against the back four, just saying the personnel balance within it needs a lot of careful consideration. Same of any formation of course (can we please stop playing Toal LCB?) but we do at the moment have a good balance of CB options. Not sure same is true of FB (and definitely not WB).

This season, had we gone up, we'd have been the second highest GA (by 2) out of the last 5 years' promoted teams - I didn't look further back. We need to look at the game in both dimensions, not just the one. Our GD improved by 9, which is commendable, but not good enough in the final analysis.

[GhostoftheBok]

What I keep coming back to is he refused to change it at half time. feck me if that wasn’t the time to go all Bruce Rioch when is? Should have put Victor and probably Dempsey on for jones and Sheehan and made them think. But we did not. We said ‘do plan a better’. Arghhhhhhhhhhh!

Tactically the game should have changed after about 20-30 minutes. 2 subs and a basic midfield tweak removes a lot of the impediments our lot faced, mentality notwithstanding.

Evatt has "learnt from the best", but he's not gone beyond the book. He can do the multiple choice, but struggles with the essay questions.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Indeed, which is why (like I said) we need balance in both formation and personnel. Last two seasons we’ve moved the dial from “good defence but attack not good enough” to “(intermittently) good attack but defence not good enough”. Does a back four fix that? Might depend who’s in it.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

What I keep coming back to is he refused to change it at half time. feck me if that wasn’t the time to go all Bruce Rioch when is? Should have put Victor and probably Dempsey on for jones and Sheehan and made them think. But we did not. We said ‘do plan a better’. Arghhhhhhhhhhh!

Tactically the game should have changed after about 20-30 minutes. 2 subs and a basic midfield tweak removes a lot of the impediments our lot faced, mentality notwithstanding.

Evatt has "learnt from the best", but he's not gone beyond the book. He can do the multiple choice, but struggles with the essay questions.

Yep. Pep might well have made a change. Upsetting for the subbed lad(s) but it’s a team game.

Also speaks to the lack of flexibility. Had we been well versed in a back four system then it would be relatively simple to slip into a well-practised alternative. Not that it’s all about formations but it helps ask different questions.