No interest in Conte or his brand of football but have thought for a while that our recent signings could be better suited to 3-5-2. Esp with one big signing this summer

*******************Vic**********
*******Cuti********Drag****VDV******
***Porro***Biss**Madders***Sarr***Udodie***
****************Son******Eze*************

Options Off the bench.... Kulu, Johnson, Werner, Gray, Bergvall, Bentancur, Richie, Davies, Royal

do any top teams play 5 at the back these days

Disagree - think this is more or less the squad Ange wants with Eze and probably Toney to come in still.

The thing about developing younger players is that you have to play them - I think Ange will. Gray, Bergvall and Moore will all be getting minutes this season.

We have decent full backs finally, loads of options in midfield and with Eze and Toney a very decent attack.

Our CB’s are class and Vic is a top keeper. For me we have a squad that is in the top 5 in the league.

We won’t win the league, but if we could lower ourselves to taking a cup seriously then we might go far

Conte was despicable!

There is no way he would have accepted Dragusin and VDV as his CBs...too young too inexperienced. He would have ignored them like he ignored Spence and Bissouma.

This is the guy who typically started Dier every game, Davies at LCB and Perisic at LWB.

You cannot look back at the Conte era with any "what ifs" He was an unprofessional shambles of a manager whose ability has been over taken by modern football

comment by Phenom (U20037)
posted 18 minutes ago
do any top teams play 5 at the back these days
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, and sometimes 6 or 7.
Football is a fluid sport.lineups change wit the game.
The kick-off line up has little to do with strategy.

Europa this season is the new format.

36 teams in 1 group, all ranked in to 4 pots.

Each team plays 8 different side, 4 away 4 home games.

You play 2 teams from each of the ranked pots.

Top 8 go through to round of 16.

Ranked 9 - 24 play off to make it to the round of 16.

Then it's 2 legged KO rounds to the final in Munich, 31 May 2025 (book your hotels now )

comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Phenom (U20037)
posted 18 minutes ago
do any top teams play 5 at the back these days
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, and sometimes 6 or 7.
Football is a fluid sport.lineups change wit the game.
The kick-off line up has little to do with strategy.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Conte and Fluid...2 words never seen before in the same sentence

The biggest problem with Conte is that Levy was never convinced by him for whatever reason and wouldn’t loosen the purse strings.

People for whatever reason forget the first half season of Conte where he took a team in 9th place to the CL and destroyed Newcastle, Leeds, Everton and Norwich in the process. He then wasn’t backed that summer, went sulky and had us playing uninteresting football - but he did have us top in October.

I don’t wish to revisit the arguments, and he certainly acted the khunt towards the end, but he was still a top manager when he came here and had ideas that worked.

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 9 minutes ago
Europa this season is the new format.

36 teams in 1 group, all ranked in to 4 pots.

Each team plays 8 different side, 4 away 4 home games.

You play 2 teams from each of the ranked pots.

Top 8 go through to round of 16.

Ranked 9 - 24 play off to make it to the round of 16.

Then it's 2 legged KO rounds to the final in Munich, 31 May 2025 (book your hotels now)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

We won’t play our strongest 11 throughout the competition and will end up getting beat by a half decent outfit come the quarters I reckon.

We actually have a bit of a conundrum in that we have talented youngsters needing game time - clearly we will use the Europa for that, but then that hurts our chances of winning games, finishing in the top 8 and avoiding the first KO round.

Ok, so maybe not Conte 343 but Angeball (🤣) 343.

I think it’s a myth that we play balls-out attacking football. We have a lot of possession but don’t do a lot with it.

We play horseshoe football in the final third until we lose possession and then we’re wide-open because our CBs are inside the oppo half and the fullbacks are playing in midfield. We can sometimes have 9 or 10
Players in their half passing sideways from one side to the other.

Need to mix it up

comment by Striketeam7 - confident for Southgate’s nearly slaaaags (U18109)
posted 57 minutes ago
Disagree - think this is more or less the squad Ange wants with Eze and probably Toney to come in still.

The thing about developing younger players is that you have to play them - I think Ange will. Gray, Bergvall and Moore will all be getting minutes this season.

We have decent full backs finally, loads of options in midfield and with Eze and Toney a very decent attack.

Our CB’s are class and Vic is a top keeper. For me we have a squad that is in the top 5 in the league.

We won’t win the league, but if we could lower ourselves to taking a cup seriously then we might go far
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I don’t think we’re making the best use of the best two attacking wing/ full backs we’ve had in years.

comment by Tarrico_sees_red (U5595)
posted 9 minutes ago
Ok, so maybe not Conte 343 but Angeball (🤣) 343.

I think it’s a myth that we play balls-out attacking football. We have a lot of possession but don’t do a lot with it.

We play horseshoe football in the final third until we lose possession and then we’re wide-open because our CBs are inside the oppo half and the fullbacks are playing in midfield. We can sometimes have 9 or 10
Players in their half passing sideways from one side to the other.

Need to mix it up
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Initially our attacking balls out football surprise many.

Now we see a lot more bus parking and attempted counter attacks against us.

The thing that made the biggest difference to us last season IMO was our lack of a proper striker.

In the early season we made hay as other teams were surprised by our set up and tactics.

We then hit that suspension and injury period but actually, despite missing a lot of players that wasnt our worst period of form and the main reason for that i think was that Richarlison provided a goals scorers instinct in the box and some physical presence.

We he got injured, despite having all our other big players back, our form was hit and miss. We often controlled game but were not scoring as freely and this exposed some defensive issues.

Not saying that Richarlison is the whole answer but our ability to put a ball in the box, the availability of a striker who is lively in the penalty area, looking to get across the defender, to get near post - we have missed those instincts as well as an aerial target which can help counter a low block. Son too easily marked out of the game centrally and no aerial threat whatsoever, as a team, when we don't have Richarlison. That's why for me someone like Toney would be a great choice. Solanke would also bring similar attributes that we miss, although i don't really see him anything different from Richi.

This is the kind of revisionist bullshiiiit I hate from fans.

You're making the same mistake that some fans did when Jose took over from Poch, assuming that the quality you're now seeing from those players would continue under a conservative manager. The truth is that all of the attacking strengths of the players you've listed would be drilled out of them in favour of defensive duty Conte instinctively craves.

Romero and VDV's ability to roam forward would be gone. Porro and Udogie's attacking instincts would disappear because they'd be torn apart for not covering well enough. Maddison wouldn't even get a game in a Conte system and we all know what it was like for Bissouma under him.

In short, we'd be a total feckin mess just as we were with supposedly inferior players. The guy is a complete fraud. His training style is unsustainable long term because players begin to down tools for him and he leaves behind a toxic environment wherever he goes. I don't want him anywhere near my club again, regardless of the marginally better talent that we have now. Those players seem better, by the way, because they have the freedom to express themselves and be brave with the ball. Stick them in a rigid system and we wouldn't believe they're half as good as they are. Just as with Poch, the players are only good under Ange because he's getting the best out of them, rather than him just being blessed with superior talent and not playing to their strengths.

This is the kind of nonsense that got us into the mess with Jose in the first place.

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Tarrico_sees_red (U5595)
posted 9 minutes ago
Ok, so maybe not Conte 343 but Angeball (🤣) 343.

I think it’s a myth that we play balls-out attacking football. We have a lot of possession but don’t do a lot with it.

We play horseshoe football in the final third until we lose possession and then we’re wide-open because our CBs are inside the oppo half and the fullbacks are playing in midfield. We can sometimes have 9 or 10
Players in their half passing sideways from one side to the other.

Need to mix it up
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Initially our attacking balls out football surprise many.

Now we see a lot more bus parking and attempted counter attacks against us.

The thing that made the biggest difference to us last season IMO was our lack of a proper striker.

In the early season we made hay as other teams were surprised by our set up and tactics.

We then hit that suspension and injury period but actually, despite missing a lot of players that wasnt our worst period of form and the main reason for that i think was that Richarlison provided a goals scorers instinct in the box and some physical presence.

We he got injured, despite having all our other big players back, our form was hit and miss. We often controlled game but were not scoring as freely and this exposed some defensive issues.

Not saying that Richarlison is the whole answer but our ability to put a ball in the box, the availability of a striker who is lively in the penalty area, looking to get across the defender, to get near post - we have missed those instincts as well as an aerial target which can help counter a low block. Son too easily marked out of the game centrally and no aerial threat whatsoever, as a team, when we don't have Richarlison. That's why for me someone like Toney would be a great choice. Solanke would also bring similar attributes that we miss, although i don't really see him anything different from Richi.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is some truth to the horseshoe criticism because we do tend to just circulate the ball from side to side before an attack breaks down. I'm not sure it's the system causing our issues though, aside from maybe congesting areas of midfield with full backs. I think it's a personnel issue. In an Ange system, because the full backs enter midfield, the two out wide need to stay out wide to stretch the pitch. We don't. Son has always wanted to cut in, as has Kulu so we play far too narrow to implement Angeball the way he wants it. I think that's why he looks at our front line as the area needing most surgery.

It's interesting that City face a low block week after week but they always cut through. Whether it's because they've got more movement off the ball or not, I'm not sure but they're the masters at doing that, and equally they're not as vulnerable as we are on the transition. Maybe it's just better players and we're overthinking it.

comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Tarrico_sees_red (U5595)
posted 9 minutes ago
Ok, so maybe not Conte 343 but Angeball (🤣) 343.

I think it’s a myth that we play balls-out attacking football. We have a lot of possession but don’t do a lot with it.

We play horseshoe football in the final third until we lose possession and then we’re wide-open because our CBs are inside the oppo half and the fullbacks are playing in midfield. We can sometimes have 9 or 10
Players in their half passing sideways from one side to the other.

Need to mix it up
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Initially our attacking balls out football surprise many.

Now we see a lot more bus parking and attempted counter attacks against us.

The thing that made the biggest difference to us last season IMO was our lack of a proper striker.

In the early season we made hay as other teams were surprised by our set up and tactics.

We then hit that suspension and injury period but actually, despite missing a lot of players that wasnt our worst period of form and the main reason for that i think was that Richarlison provided a goals scorers instinct in the box and some physical presence.

We he got injured, despite having all our other big players back, our form was hit and miss. We often controlled game but were not scoring as freely and this exposed some defensive issues.

Not saying that Richarlison is the whole answer but our ability to put a ball in the box, the availability of a striker who is lively in the penalty area, looking to get across the defender, to get near post - we have missed those instincts as well as an aerial target which can help counter a low block. Son too easily marked out of the game centrally and no aerial threat whatsoever, as a team, when we don't have Richarlison. That's why for me someone like Toney would be a great choice. Solanke would also bring similar attributes that we miss, although i don't really see him anything different from Richi.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is some truth to the horseshoe criticism because we do tend to just circulate the ball from side to side before an attack breaks down. I'm not sure it's the system causing our issues though, aside from maybe congesting areas of midfield with full backs. I think it's a personnel issue. In an Ange system, because the full backs enter midfield, the two out wide need to stay out wide to stretch the pitch. We don't. Son has always wanted to cut in, as has Kulu so we play far too narrow to implement Angeball the way he wants it. I think that's why he looks at our front line as the area needing most surgery.

It's interesting that City face a low block week after week but they always cut through. Whether it's because they've got more movement off the ball or not, I'm not sure but they're the masters at doing that, and equally they're not as vulnerable as we are on the transition. Maybe it's just better players and we're overthinking it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City have better technical players who know when to retain, when to take on a man (and successfully), when to thread a ball and when to cross (successfully and not just driven across the deck).

Buy better footballers

comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 34 minutes ago
This is the kind of revisionist bullshiiiit I hate from fans.

You're making the same mistake that some fans did when Jose took over from Poch, assuming that the quality you're now seeing from those players would continue under a conservative manager. The truth is that all of the attacking strengths of the players you've listed would be drilled out of them in favour of defensive duty Conte instinctively craves.

Romero and VDV's ability to roam forward would be gone. Porro and Udogie's attacking instincts would disappear because they'd be torn apart for not covering well enough. Maddison wouldn't even get a game in a Conte system and we all know what it was like for Bissouma under him.

In short, we'd be a total feckin mess just as we were with supposedly inferior players. The guy is a complete fraud. His training style is unsustainable long term because players begin to down tools for him and he leaves behind a toxic environment wherever he goes. I don't want him anywhere near my club again, regardless of the marginally better talent that we have now. Those players seem better, by the way, because they have the freedom to express themselves and be brave with the ball. Stick them in a rigid system and we wouldn't believe they're half as good as they are. Just as with Poch, the players are only good under Ange because he's getting the best out of them, rather than him just being blessed with superior talent and not playing to their strengths.

This is the kind of nonsense that got us into the mess with Jose in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I said, I couldn’t stand his football. But what I am saying is that our squad suits his system because we are “A manager behind”.

I used to get dog’s abuse on here for saying we were playing sheite and getting away with it before the WC that season. Mainly from Sandy.

I still think Conte was right about Bissouma though. Not a No.6 though, so maybe not his fault.

comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 1 hour, 46 minutes ago
comment by Phenom (U20037)
posted 18 minutes ago
do any top teams play 5 at the back these days
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, and sometimes 6 or 7.
Football is a fluid sport.lineups change wit the game.
The kick-off line up has little to do with strategy.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oof, that told you Phenom

comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 42 minutes ago
This is the kind of revisionist bullshiiiit I hate from fans.

You're making the same mistake that some fans did when Jose took over from Poch, assuming that the quality you're now seeing from those players would continue under a conservative manager. The truth is that all of the attacking strengths of the players you've listed would be drilled out of them in favour of defensive duty Conte instinctively craves.

Romero and VDV's ability to roam forward would be gone. Porro and Udogie's attacking instincts would disappear because they'd be torn apart for not covering well enough. Maddison wouldn't even get a game in a Conte system and we all know what it was like for Bissouma under him.

In short, we'd be a total feckin mess just as we were with supposedly inferior players. The guy is a complete fraud. His training style is unsustainable long term because players begin to down tools for him and he leaves behind a toxic environment wherever he goes. I don't want him anywhere near my club again, regardless of the marginally better talent that we have now. Those players seem better, by the way, because they have the freedom to express themselves and be brave with the ball. Stick them in a rigid system and we wouldn't believe they're half as good as they are. Just as with Poch, the players are only good under Ange because he's getting the best out of them, rather than him just being blessed with superior talent and not playing to their strengths.

This is the kind of nonsense that got us into the mess with Jose in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can’t call revisionist bullschitt and then call him a fraud - the bloke has won the Prem and Serie A - that’s not fraudulent it’s fact.

People hated the style I get it, but it had brought him titles previously.

comment by Tarrico_sees_red (U5595)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 34 minutes ago
This is the kind of revisionist bullshiiiit I hate from fans.

You're making the same mistake that some fans did when Jose took over from Poch, assuming that the quality you're now seeing from those players would continue under a conservative manager. The truth is that all of the attacking strengths of the players you've listed would be drilled out of them in favour of defensive duty Conte instinctively craves.

Romero and VDV's ability to roam forward would be gone. Porro and Udogie's attacking instincts would disappear because they'd be torn apart for not covering well enough. Maddison wouldn't even get a game in a Conte system and we all know what it was like for Bissouma under him.

In short, we'd be a total feckin mess just as we were with supposedly inferior players. The guy is a complete fraud. His training style is unsustainable long term because players begin to down tools for him and he leaves behind a toxic environment wherever he goes. I don't want him anywhere near my club again, regardless of the marginally better talent that we have now. Those players seem better, by the way, because they have the freedom to express themselves and be brave with the ball. Stick them in a rigid system and we wouldn't believe they're half as good as they are. Just as with Poch, the players are only good under Ange because he's getting the best out of them, rather than him just being blessed with superior talent and not playing to their strengths.

This is the kind of nonsense that got us into the mess with Jose in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I said, I couldn’t stand his football. But what I am saying is that our squad suits his system because we are “A manager behind”.

I used to get dog’s abuse on here for saying we were playing sheite and getting away with it before the WC that season. Mainly from Sandy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But my point is that the qualities you're seeing that would work under a Conte system wouldn't flourish in the way you think they would. Do you not think that the attacking strengths of the players you've listed would be coached out of them under Conte? Udogie and Porro would be torn apart for not tracking back. In fact I don't think either of them would get a game because they're too open defensively. I just think the qualities you're seeing in these players are a direct consequence of the way Ange has them playing. They wouldn't be the same under Conte.

comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Tarrico_sees_red (U5595)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 34 minutes ago
This is the kind of revisionist bullshiiiit I hate from fans.

You're making the same mistake that some fans did when Jose took over from Poch, assuming that the quality you're now seeing from those players would continue under a conservative manager. The truth is that all of the attacking strengths of the players you've listed would be drilled out of them in favour of defensive duty Conte instinctively craves.

Romero and VDV's ability to roam forward would be gone. Porro and Udogie's attacking instincts would disappear because they'd be torn apart for not covering well enough. Maddison wouldn't even get a game in a Conte system and we all know what it was like for Bissouma under him.

In short, we'd be a total feckin mess just as we were with supposedly inferior players. The guy is a complete fraud. His training style is unsustainable long term because players begin to down tools for him and he leaves behind a toxic environment wherever he goes. I don't want him anywhere near my club again, regardless of the marginally better talent that we have now. Those players seem better, by the way, because they have the freedom to express themselves and be brave with the ball. Stick them in a rigid system and we wouldn't believe they're half as good as they are. Just as with Poch, the players are only good under Ange because he's getting the best out of them, rather than him just being blessed with superior talent and not playing to their strengths.

This is the kind of nonsense that got us into the mess with Jose in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I said, I couldn’t stand his football. But what I am saying is that our squad suits his system because we are “A manager behind”.

I used to get dog’s abuse on here for saying we were playing sheite and getting away with it before the WC that season. Mainly from Sandy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But my point is that the qualities you're seeing that would work under a Conte system wouldn't flourish in the way you think they would. Do you not think that the attacking strengths of the players you've listed would be coached out of them under Conte? Udogie and Porro would be torn apart for not tracking back. In fact I don't think either of them would get a game because they're too open defensively. I just think the qualities you're seeing in these players are a direct consequence of the way Ange has them playing. They wouldn't be the same under Conte.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Conte loved Alonso roaming forward and attacking at Chelsea

comment by Striketeam7 - confident for Southgate’s nearly slaaaags (U18109)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 42 minutes ago
This is the kind of revisionist bullshiiiit I hate from fans.

You're making the same mistake that some fans did when Jose took over from Poch, assuming that the quality you're now seeing from those players would continue under a conservative manager. The truth is that all of the attacking strengths of the players you've listed would be drilled out of them in favour of defensive duty Conte instinctively craves.

Romero and VDV's ability to roam forward would be gone. Porro and Udogie's attacking instincts would disappear because they'd be torn apart for not covering well enough. Maddison wouldn't even get a game in a Conte system and we all know what it was like for Bissouma under him.

In short, we'd be a total feckin mess just as we were with supposedly inferior players. The guy is a complete fraud. His training style is unsustainable long term because players begin to down tools for him and he leaves behind a toxic environment wherever he goes. I don't want him anywhere near my club again, regardless of the marginally better talent that we have now. Those players seem better, by the way, because they have the freedom to express themselves and be brave with the ball. Stick them in a rigid system and we wouldn't believe they're half as good as they are. Just as with Poch, the players are only good under Ange because he's getting the best out of them, rather than him just being blessed with superior talent and not playing to their strengths.

This is the kind of nonsense that got us into the mess with Jose in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can’t call revisionist bullschitt and then call him a fraud - the bloke has won the Prem and Serie A - that’s not fraudulent it’s fact.

People hated the style I get it, but it had brought him titles previously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's more than the style. Yes, if you have some of the best players in the league, having backed him heavily in the market on overpriced, ageing players, he can win you the league in his first or second season, but the trade off is the knowledge that by the third season (2nd with us), he'll leave a tired, fractious dressing room having publicly blamed them for losses week after week, have fans upset at the quality of the football and will leave a financial trail of destruction having spent big on players with no sell on value putting a massive hole in your future recruitment plans.

At the right club, he'll win something for you, but only really at clubs with a winning pedigree. But at what cost?

No thanks! If I owned a club, I wouldn't want him anywhere near me. Fraud? Maybe not but certainly destructive.

I’m pretty sure most of the attacking was supposed to come from the wingbacks.

Anyway, I don’t want Conte back. I just think Udogie and Porro can be better used. Same with Dragusin

comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - confident for Southgate’s nearly slaaaags (U18109)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 42 minutes ago
This is the kind of revisionist bullshiiiit I hate from fans.

You're making the same mistake that some fans did when Jose took over from Poch, assuming that the quality you're now seeing from those players would continue under a conservative manager. The truth is that all of the attacking strengths of the players you've listed would be drilled out of them in favour of defensive duty Conte instinctively craves.

Romero and VDV's ability to roam forward would be gone. Porro and Udogie's attacking instincts would disappear because they'd be torn apart for not covering well enough. Maddison wouldn't even get a game in a Conte system and we all know what it was like for Bissouma under him.

In short, we'd be a total feckin mess just as we were with supposedly inferior players. The guy is a complete fraud. His training style is unsustainable long term because players begin to down tools for him and he leaves behind a toxic environment wherever he goes. I don't want him anywhere near my club again, regardless of the marginally better talent that we have now. Those players seem better, by the way, because they have the freedom to express themselves and be brave with the ball. Stick them in a rigid system and we wouldn't believe they're half as good as they are. Just as with Poch, the players are only good under Ange because he's getting the best out of them, rather than him just being blessed with superior talent and not playing to their strengths.

This is the kind of nonsense that got us into the mess with Jose in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can’t call revisionist bullschitt and then call him a fraud - the bloke has won the Prem and Serie A - that’s not fraudulent it’s fact.

People hated the style I get it, but it had brought him titles previously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's more than the style. Yes, if you have some of the best players in the league, having backed him heavily in the market on overpriced, ageing players, he can win you the league in his first or second season, but the trade off is the knowledge that by the third season (2nd with us), he'll leave a tired, fractious dressing room having publicly blamed them for losses week after week, have fans upset at the quality of the football and will leave a financial trail of destruction having spent big on players with no sell on value putting a massive hole in your future recruitment plans.

At the right club, he'll win something for you, but only really at clubs with a winning pedigree. But at what cost?

No thanks! If I owned a club, I wouldn't want him anywhere near me. Fraud? Maybe not but certainly destructive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Conte and Jose are similar in that regard - what annoys me about Spurs and Levy is we chose both knowing what they like and what they need to succeed and then didn’t back either.

So we went through the schitt period without having any of the good either because Levy would never commit to it - so why hire in the first place.

I remain sceptical on Ange, I like him but his reaction to the Man City loss showed me a man who is getting agitated already.

I don’t understand why managers keep choosing us believing they will be backed - the evidence has always shown otherwise

comment by Tarrico_sees_red (U5595)
posted 1 minute ago
I’m pretty sure most of the attacking was supposed to come from the wingbacks.

Anyway, I don’t want Conte back. I just think Udogie and Porro can be better used. Same with Dragusin
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m not at all convinced by Dragusin - he has mistakes in him and is a clear step down on Romero and VDV