I'm not sure if he sold his soul or realised that continually doing the same nonsense in midfield that isn't working is not so good.
Strange take, because he hasn't made our midfield better in any dimension by playing McTominay there. Also, seemed to me like this is exactly the same setup that we've been using whole season - Amrabat alone in midfield (Casemiro has been playing there) and two #8/10s higher up the pitch. We've also had the same issues as always (lack of ball progression through the midfield, as Amrabat was easily marked, McTominay made 9 passes total, and Bruno is in poor form).
I'm not sure if he sold his soul or realised that continually doing the same nonsense in midfield that isn't working is not so good. I think he also rewarded form with McTominay. We continually talk about merit but if it's not backed up by selection it's fairly meaningless. Meritocracy does mean picking the less fashionable names when it is right to do so and judging by the performance he probably just about got it right.
That's the catch 22 with McTominay. His performances and the way he plays football doesn't make me think that he should be in the team based on merit. Basically, he is a good poacher (and a running body) and that's also why ETH played him in such advanced position against Sheffield. That's why I said that Ten Hag sold part of his footballing soul picking McTominay. We knew that playing McTominay will make it worse in terms of ball progression through midfield as he hides from the ball. What happened is exactly what Ten Hag could expect from McTominay. Do you think he stays in the team based on merit, and plays on Tuesday?
Imo McTominay role should be reduced to minimum, can be used as another weapon if we're pushing for the goal in the last 10 mins, or we're defending our box. That's it, there's no universe in which McTominay makes us better in midfield.
I don't think that it means he's sold his idea of how to build a team in the long run. I think It's more the case that we have been fecking appalling and need some points on the board and at that stage you can stand behind a philosophy but if you get sacked trying to implement it then it's no good to anyone. I think he'll go back to the Mount/Bruno thing at some stage, he's fairly stubborn.
I agree with this I general. But again, I'm just pointing out we still played the same one-man-midfield setup which IMO has been the root cause of most issues (like lack of ball progression through 3rds and troubles against runners in midfield). I'd argue that until Ten Hag gets this midfield balance right, nothing will change in our performances (not unless one of Rashford /Bruno hit golden form again).
McTominay is never going to solve out problems, but pushing him high might give us more goals. It's funny because I could say the same about current Bruno, and that's why I don't understand what game Eric is playing. Sometimes it feels like the main idea is to push players forward, hoping the ball will fall to their feet. Casemiro and McTominay having more goals than Bruno, Hojlund and Rashford combined makes this somehow effective I guess?
Going back to your initial post, you used the word "peripheral" in reference to Mount. This is indeed the problem, and it has been the same issue regardless of who is playing this role. It used to be van de beek, Sabitzer, Mount, now McTominay. This is a bigger issue than just personal. Whoever is playing this role has to be in between the #6 and #10. Notice how the team is playing better when Eriksen comes on to do this.
I don't know if Mount can play that role effectively, but I don't think there is any other solution (with current squad). No other player can do it week in week out for us. But we have to find a way to involve Mount more in our game. Either we play him deeper, or we play him in advanced position with 2 real midfielders behind. This #6 and two #10s setup is flawed and is never going to fly, but ETH has been very stubborn with it this season and he will die on this hill if he continues this way.
