If he doesn't need goalkeepers he sure as hell doesn't need 3 cb's to cover the wingbacks.
Levi Colwill | The next Rio Ferdinand?
- Thread starter Amadaeus
- Start date
If he doesn't need goalkeepers he sure as hell doesn't need 3 cb's to cover the wingbacks.
Its why posting formations is silly in general, people see City lining up with 3 at the back a midfield box and 3 up top, see Herbert Chapman had the same markers in the same positions and declare it tactically the same.
Once again 2 in possession, 3 out of possession. You are struggling to comprehend because I believe you only think a system can only be rigid and static. Football has evolved and it seems many are struggling to comprehend some of the newer tactics and perspectives. When in possession you need as much numbers in midfield to make intricate passes, moreover an anchor who the more advance midfield can pass back to and keep the ball circulating. There are numerous advantages that I already explained before, so you can reread them.
Once again, my main system is a 4 2 3 1. I have seen Pochettino in preseason used 4 3 3, 4 4 2, and some interation of this system in a 2-1-4-2-1 with santos being the anchor instead with Gallagher and carni in front of him, Nkunku main striker and sterling and matsen alongside him. That is very similar with the one I provided, although different players and different approaches
Oh I agree, you cannot compare the 2, it's so well organised today that it's completely different.
Football has evolved apparently from the end of last season, idiots like Pep Guardiola who line their teams up with strict positional instructions are dinosaurs now.
You have genuinely no idea what you're on about. You talk about football like it's FIFA because it's blatantly obvious you have never actually played the sport, otherwise you would consider the fact that you are asking every player in your idiotic system to evaluate and process huge amounts of information before they decide where they should be, and apparently they should be able to both defend and attack simultaneously just by holding down the R2 button a little bit more forcefully.
It's absolute bullshit to say something is "dynamic" as if that's a good thing automatically, when the biggest tactical leap made in football over the past 25 years has been the advent of positional play. Every single analytical study done of football has concluded demonstratively that limiting mistakes from your players has the biggest impact on winning given the huge shifts in game-state probabilities associated with errors - so thus making things more complicated for players such that they are more likely to make mistakes flies in the face of every single comprehensive analysis ever produced. Congratulations, you are trying to argue that 2+2=5.
zzzzzz 
I said football hasn't transformed. How has it? What makes the structure so much different? Is it perhaps the professionalism? Everything that's en vogue in football today is a rehash of old ideas. Pressing, while maybe not to the same degree, was done a long time ago. Possession, again done a long time ago. Using inverted wingbacks? Go back to the 50's and prior. Using half-backs like Pep uses stones? Again go back to the 50's. You can say the amalgamation of these ideas is new, but the ideas themselves isn't. Prove me otherwise.
Yeah formations are fluid, nobody said otherwise. It's silly to think that the way you line up on paper is the same way the team will look throughout the game. You have different formations based on the phase of play. A 4-4-2 can become a 4-5-1/5-3-2 in the defensive phase, while also being a 4-2-4/4-2-3-1 in the offensive phase. A 4-3-3 (which everyone loves) becomes a 5-4-1/4-5-1 in defensive phase, and 3-2-5/2-3-5 in the offensive phase. It all just depends on how you want the team to play. What I said originally is that none of these concepts are new. Anything that is done today is a rehash of what has already been done. Maybe not to the same degree ie. pressing or possession. But a rehash nonetheless. The thing you have latched onto is me saying the WM isn't new. It isn't. Chapman used it in the 30's. Nor is the half-back role that Stones occupies in your team, that people like to make out is new. Same as when you started using inverted fullbacks, or when Brendan Rodgers came out saying he brought the 3-4-3 to England. None of it is new, or revolutionary, and to continue to act like it is, ignores history completely.
The only thing you can say is new is the amalgamation of these concepts.
It’s such a pointless conversation mate. Walls of text for pages and pages. Pretty certain 50% of this entire thread is the two of you splitting hairs about something, which I stopped reading 3 pages ago
It’s such a pointless conversation mate. Walls of text for pages and pages. Pretty certain 50% of this entire thread is the two of you splitting hairs about something, which I stopped reading 3 pages ago
It's like talking to an AI chatbot that has been equipped with the breadth of knowledge of a caveman with a brain tumour
The structure, organisation and tactics have progressed massively. However there is a tendency for people to overcomplicate football for no reason, its a simple game with the same principles.
In possession principles
- Support
- Movement
- Width
- Depth
- Creativity
Out of possession principles
- Pressure
- Cover
- Balance
- Delay
- Compactness
Regardless of how the game will change from tactical or physical performance nuances, these above principles will always remain. Thus football is simple.
Exactly this. I just fail to see this immense revolution that people depict has happened. Is it because what's new is always better? Because, nothing is really new. I would say that football has improved, obviously with the advent of the game being more professional. The whole picture is better than before, but that's not a revolution nor is it a transformation.
The biggest difference tactically between todays game and previous era's (excluding the physical side) is the professionalism and the amalgamation of old ideas. Both of which are good things, you should look back at what has worked in the past and incorporate it into today. But to say that these ideas are new is false.
You seem lost with the current state of football if you think pep system are not dynamic. He typically gives his players jobs to do on the pitch, that more often than not changes in order to counter the opposition strengths, but similiar to my formation and tactics often scripted in order to give his player the maximum ability to keep the initiative and influence the flow of the game. He often ask players doing certain phase of a game to occupy zones in the pitch that helps his team execute his plan. That sort of dynamism is what the game has evolved into, not the rigid system you advocate for where the players only play one position throughout the game and not adapt in real time to the nature of the game.
Here is some homework for you to do, because education seems to be a reason we are at an impass. Read this article
https://breakingthelines.com/opinio...ague-triumph-mastering-the-3-2-4-1-formation/
and write an essay about how a iteration of that formation isn't possible with the roles I have given to the chelsea player aforementioned before. I already indicated which roles these players will play, and also gave you insight to why it would work. So don't recycle things you said before that has been logically countered already as you will sound like a broken record.
It's impasse, not impass.
An iteration of that formula that literally has a different foundation?
Again, you have no idea what you are talking about:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/vVi_hvlFRl8
Anyway, that Levi Colwill looks a decent player eh? Keep him out Liverpool's clutches will you!
Last edited:
Make it stahppp pleaseAn iteration of that formula that literally has a different foundation?
Again, you have no idea what you are talking about:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/vVi_hvlFRl8
This is the colwill thread. Please stay on topic
Music to my ears.
Let’s fecking go!!!
Great news but was it ever really in doubt though?
Back in January I admit I got slightly worried when we signed Badiashile and it looked like Koulibaly would be going absolutely nowhere and the pathway for Colwill would be blocked. But since the season ended it became quite clear Koulibaly was one of the main names on the club's shit list of players we wanted to get rid off. Since the Saudi became involved with KK it was always 100% certain Colwill would stay.
Stupid move from Levi
Yep, he should have at least waited to see whether he was still first choice when all Chelsea's defenders are back fit and available. Badiashile looked very good when fit last season and is a very similar profile to Colwill at LCB, whilst club captain Silva and big money signing Diasi will be hard to displace at RCB. That's without mentioning the situation when Fofana is also back fit.
Colwill could very well find himself chained to the bench for the next 6 years.
I was just going to write the same. The constant misspelling was the cherry on this steaming dog poo
It’s like caf tradition to say this about any good player Chelsea sign or extend
Last time I said it was about Hudson-Odoi.It’s like caf tradition to say this about any good player Chelsea sign or extend
Pathway was blocked at one point and you never know how that impacted Colwill and how he viewed his prospects at Chelsea.
Even after Koulibaly left, there was heavy interest from Brighton and Liverpool and there’s Southgate basically promising him a spot on the plane at the euros if he keeps playing. For me until he signed there was always a chance he saw leaving as the best way to progress his career. Glad to know that wasn’t the case.
New manager already making noticeable difference and keeping on one of their most talented players in the squad.
Do you think it is a good or sensible move for him personally?It’s like caf tradition to say this about any good player Chelsea sign or extend
100% it is. Been at the club since 9 years old. Clear pathway to the team with Koulibaly gone and Badiashile injured. He’ll battle it out with Badiashile eventually but that’s fine.
There's no precedent in the last decade/15 years for that at your club really. Unless I'm missing someone?
Mount, Abraham, James, Chalobah, Gallagher, Hudson-Odoi, Loftus-Cheek all had paths to the first team.
All gone or you want gone. Bar James, who you signed a younger £30m back up option for.
None of them bar James is an example for signing a 6 year deal at Chrlsea a good idea. And this all goes without mentioning the Boehly factor which, nearly 12 months in, looks pretty ludicrous from the outside.
Colwill already had 3 years left in his deal so he was staying here for the foreseeable future anyways. This new contract is just the club assuring him further that there’s a serious plan for him.
That makes it an even worse decision in my opinion. I get the wage increase will help, but from a footballing perspective what was the rush?
See if he follows the path of basically every Chelsea youth product or see if the new £45m back up option plays ahead of him or any of the other expensive defenders Chelsea have signed recently play ahead of him as well?
Now if things go the way they usually do for a Chelsea youth product, he's stuck on a long contract for a considerable wage, which tbf other clubs would match, it just gives them something to think about rather than it being a no brainer.
I think the "pathway" in the past is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is the manager. He's the one that makes the decisions. If you've got a manager that has a history of working with young talent then why wouldn't you sign with the club that made you? Very easy choice I'd have thought.
Then if he earns that spot everything will open up for him in future, irrespective of whether Poch is good or shit.
Then if he earns that spot everything will open up for him in future, irrespective of whether Poch is good or shit.
Why not? Mount spent 4 seasons being untouchable and only left because of contractual issues. James will probably the next club captain. Loftus-Cheek spent 8 years in the first team punctured by terrible injuries and loan spells to recover from said injuries. There’s a good chance AC would probably still be here if it weren’t for the sanctions.
It’s all moot anyway as each individual case is different. Colwill is more talented than every single youth player in the last 10-15 years not named Reece James.
Only way to see is to see what happens right. You have simplified Mount's situation somewhat there but it's a bit of this and a bit of that really.
I hope he has made the right decision because he's from my hometown, I know a little about where he's coming from and he's very talented, which is good for England.
Hopefully he plays enough matches to replace Maguire in the national team.....he and Stones would be a fantastic centre-back combination til the next World Cup.