An Arsenal supporter calling United "his" team - impersonation automatically carries an F
Thank you to both for your posts.
Non-rhetorical follow-ups:
- So is it generally correct to summarize that apart from Pep, you think no one else in the above list REALLY has had "key patterns of play that are automated" (@adexkola) or "have set moves to attack" (@NZT-One)?
- Do you think Pep would have been able to achieve his success if he didn't have the right players to consistently execute these "set moves"? I see a lot of player names thrown around to describe how/why a system works.
- Is that your gripe with Ole - that there are no easily identifiable repetitive patterns as opposed to not having a system? Because there is a description that can be attributed to how Ole plays - can we call that a system? @NZT-One even describes it to some extent using his/her viewpoint.
- Do you honestly think Ole, McKenna, Carrick, Phelan (from our coaching staff), Fergie, Tuchel couldn't implement "set moves" if they had the players and that philosophy?
Thanks
Good questions but I feel a bit pushed towards a certain conclusion
1. It would be correct to summarize, that Pep is the one most known for set moves or specific patterns of play. Both in attack and defense. With Tuchel you could say that staying close together and moving the whole team as a unit is also pretty structured. We could add Klopps Liverpool to the mix as well, for his relentless pressing, crosses from deep and long balls to Salah and Mane. Patterns of play aren't a normed term, everybody will understand it a bit differently. What is at least mentionworthy is, that all those 3 coaches are able to have their teams playing pretty consistent and with pretty limited changes when switching personnel. Of course this can also be attributed to the high level of players in these clubs, but when compared to Manchester United, the way of playing comes somewhat to a full stop without Bruno (at least last year).
2. There isn't a start and an end to this formula. Without good players, even the best plan will fail. On the other hand a good plan can be the difference between two teams of similar quality (players-wise).
So yes, Pep is just as reliant on his key players as anybody else. The style of play doesn't really change though drastically - if Aguero, Jesus or Torres was playing last year. They also managed to get by without KDB and they are on a good course finalize the transition away from D. Silva. It remains to be seen, if they will replace Fernandinho because Rodri, for all his qualities, isn't giving them, what the Brazilian was able to give. Regarding the output, have a look at fbref, look at the fixture list of Chelsea after takeover or City. They are reliably able to create good chances while also being able to restrict the opposition team, this, to me is a sign, that there is some stability factor in there and while that obviously could be the high level of players, in the case of Chelsea, this factor remained unchanged after takeover while the output changed drastically.
3. Call it system, usual game plan, philosophy. Again terms that are used interchangebly but without a commonly agreed on meaning. I can tell, that I don't want Ole to turn into Pep and to increase his rigidness towards a more repetitive pattern. What I think though, is that most of our players would benefit from having more and/or clearer instruction regarding what to do, when and how. While brave and creative players like Bruno and Pogba might thrive without the leashes, I think, most players benefit from having a structure around them. A layer they can fall back on. I would never ever want to take the creativity and swagger out of Bruno but I think to become a dominant top team, we have to find a way to a) maximize the output of as many of our players as possible and b) to make it as easy as possible to rotate players.
4. That is a weird question. I am sure, Fergie would have found a way to do so if he wanted to. I don't think, he saw the necessity to do so (which is surely connected that back then, not a lot of teams made use of such detailed structures to such a degree). Fergies United was very much able to switch between possession based and transition based, agressive pressing from the front to defending deep. So Fergie, back then had more to his sleeve, you always got the feeling, that we could kick up a gear or two to force something. This is, up to now, something, I can't see in our team.
I am pretty sure, the current Set of coaches could implement "patterns of play" as well, but either they don't see the need to so or they aren't doing a good job in that regard. And to make that clear: I don't think, there is no chance that a more freedom-based approach like Oles current system is able to achieve something, that would be insane looking at the squad we have. My angle is this: what kind of football could this team be able to play if we would adapt a more structured approach? When I see, what kind of football and speed of play Potter is able to get out of his players, wouldn't it be exciting to see, what our players may be able to?
