Addressing the Bonhof vs Stoichkov flank
He is a good fit for Pep's false fullback role, but I'm not sure that this flank will be able to neutralise Stoichkov.
You have a viable route to goal in Sheva attacking that space and Stoichkov against Bonhof.
I have the feeling that Bonhof is better as a midfielder and is not a pure specialist, which would have been the welcome in his face-to-face with Stoickhov
Firstly, I think the perception that a full back that attacks is automatically going to leak goals is one assumption that the draft games need to lose. Is the risk higher? Of course it is. Apart from the player's own capabilities, that is where the setup comes into picture. The support cast around the player should be able to neutralize any defensive risks during his forays forward. We have Nedved on the right firstly. That is as good a help a full back can get defensively. But one thing we mentioned in the OP but has been overlooked is that Hulshoff was flanked by the attack minded Suurbier at Ajax and covered well for him. This is something which he has done in the past and should come naturally to him. With Hapgood tucking in as well, it should hardly leave any gaps. Just because a wing back is played, lets not be unfair and suggest that the flank is a goal getter, at least when the support cast is sound.
Now coming to Bonhof himself, this is a guy who played CB (libero) in a European Cup final (against Liverpool in 1977), his team lost the final and so good was his performance that he still ended up winning the man of the match. He was not a defensive nut by any sense of the imagination. His mobility and speed is amazing, anyone who has seen his famous assist for Muller will tell you that, and that will help with fast recovery if and when the ball is lost. So we can either drop Bonhof or can make it as defensively sound as we can. We choose the latter
Addressing the lack of width point
Agree with most of your points. On the comparison to a Pep side, what it is missing is genuine width.
That's a good point on the width. That's the one element really missing.
Okay, firstly lets get right what is width for a setup like this and why it is essential. Width is the ability to stretch the pitch and nothing more. Not to say you might not have meant that, but to put our perspective there. In a setup like this especially, it is needed so that there is more space to pass the ball into, more options and grass to maintain possession and of course opening gaps in the opposition to not let it get comfortable in a narrow box. You have had teams with Iniesta/Silva providing exactly that but lets see our team.
1. Firstly, I am not sure why a team with Nedved is being classified as lacking width. He is a genuine winger. Is it the diagonal inward arrow that is confusing people? If it is, that is our bad. We have not been able to convert our thoughts to the picture in that case. As we have mentioned earlier in the thread as well, Nedved is not playing the role of a wing forward constantly trying to cut in. He is going to do a bit of everything and that has providing width and stretching the pitch as one of his main jobs. And then there is Bonhof, his WC final assist came from the flanks. Again, if the inward arrow is confusing with the though process, maybe we need to make our pictures better. The right flank has true genuine width in it. Let me know if you guys disagree
2. Coming to the left flank. Yes, it doesn't have any genuine winger in there. Yes it doesn't have an overlapping full back. But we do have two players who were probably the greatest at drifting in from the left. A lot of their game revolved around taking the ball outwide left, creating a lot of space for them to run into and to gain momentum before reaching around the box and doing their thing. They didn't just pick the ball from the immediate left side of the box. So stretching the pitch on the left side is not a concern here. It depends on the kind of players we have. If we had in layman terms say a wing poacher like Stoichkov in our team, yes that would have been a concern. But Kempes and Baggio were filled with bags full of tricks and could take the ball anywhere they wish and terrorize teams once they got the space. Expecting them to not utilize the width is a bit different from how footballers work in real games. Take Rashford for example. He also almost always cuts in, but knows how to stretch the pitch and then utilize his pace and limited skill set to beat his men once he has the space to run into.
I'd like to know if you lads still feel the width is a problem. Is it the most widest a team has been? No. Is it sufficient for the setup? Yes IMO.
Addressing the direct nature of the team and the midfield's suitability point
Your side looks so much like a Pep-ish Tiki Taka side, yet you don't call it that way. The gegenpressing setup is really good I think, that is not the problem. You say you have this very direct play with high tempo, but your midfield looks nothing like it. For me Xavi is the ultimate Tiki Taka player (insane amount of short passes, sideways passes, movements and dribblings just to keep possession). I know some talk about Xavi at Euros 2008 to say he can be more direct, but I don't think that side deserves to get called "direct" if you actually compare it to other great teams and not to some more tumescent versions of Spain's tiki taka.
This seems like another point where we have failed to get our point through and probably should have written it better in the OP. I blame MJJ and his poor education for it.
Anyways, what do we mean by direct football here? More importantly, what do we not mean to do?
1. We definitely don't mean this to be a grab the ball and smash the opponent as quickly as possible. Why pick someone like Xavi if that is the case.
2. The style is a genuine attempt to mix possession with a quick faster approach of getting the ball forward.
3. What we are trying to avoid is the lack of risks the tiki taka setup took with its side ward and backward passes.
4. We will still try to maintain possession, still have those cute triangles and frustrating short passes for the pressing opponents.
5. But the crux of the idea is to be way more forward passing and getting the ball higher up the pitch faster than tiki taka did.
6. If for example every 1 out of 5 passes in tiki taka was an actual killer forward pass to open up the attack, we plan to increase the frequency to every 1 in 3 passes.
7. Technically, this should be called as increasing the tempo of the game quicker and calling it direct is a blunt way of putting it (fecking MJJ)
8. What this does is increase the risk of losing the ball as obviously not every attack will result in a successful outcome.
9. But then, this is where Gegen pressing comes into the forefront. We wil, try to recover the ball as quickly as possible and go again.
10. One should also remember that Barcelona had really weak defenses and used maintaining possession as a way of defending as well. We have a genuinely good defense to not require doing that.
Let me know if you disagree and if the setup still sounds unclear or not good. One thing I will disagree with you
@Don Alfredo is limiting Xavi to be a ultimate tiki taka player. You are not wrong there, but the greatest midfielder of his generation should be capable of fitting in other similar setups if not genuine tiki taka. Its an unfortunate point which gets repeated and has lead to Xavi's stock being at an all time low in the draft community. Maybe you are right that he won't be his tiki taka best, but he would still be doing an absolutely monstrous job here. We have built the team and chosen players keeping Xavi in mind and his love for controlling the game and the ball. Lets give him a fair chance to perform outside the tiki taka setup as well
Hope you do reconsider your switch as you do seem to agree with a lot of what we have to offer. Cheers.
Addressing the Gegen Pressing point about Hapgood and Baggio not getting involved
Also you have your self realised that Baggio doesn't fit the formula you are trying to employ.
How do you all rate, Hapgood-Passarella in a gegen press side? Hapgood especially feels like a outlier.
I think expecting every player to be involved in the press is a bit too much to expect and a bit too risky in general as well. Cruyff's teams did it in the 70's (some really funny and amazing videos on youtube). But I think if you can have bodies in every zone pressing and at least 80% of the team getting involved, it should get the idea through.
Barcelona for example had Abidal and Messi not helping out a hell lot with the press. The ball is more often than not won in the midfield and that is the most important zone we need to be gegen pressing. You have 3 genuine midfielders here capable of doing that (2 have played in such setups in real life), you have two super hardworking wide men in Kempes and Nedved, you have Passrella joining in, Bonhof pressing and of course Hulshoff helped with the same in that great Ajax team. We have gotten almost 80% of the press players right, you can't deny that. Having one defensive minded player to cover and one offensive player devoid of defensive duties and ready to pounce on the ball is not too unfair a leeway to ask for. On the flip side, if we had a more expansive LB, questions would have been asked of Passarella, so we would have been screwed either ways. Give us a bit of leeway will you, lads
And finally, why Ederson?
Ederson needs one more year to be a proper all-time keeper but what a keeper he is! Comfortably the best passer i ever saw between keepers, feck id have him as one of the best passers in the league, players included. Its like having a Scholes in goal....
I can't put it any better than Sjor, but just to add a couple of points:
Yes Jennings was okay with his feet, but it's thin margins really in setups like these. You'd rather want a better sweeper keeper who is more than a decent goalkeeper with no feck ups in him. Sure, Jennings is a better keeper for now and Ederson has a lot to prove and a lot of time for that, but he was part of one of the best all time PL teams and was so integral that Pep had to ditch a couple of keepers before settling at him. For some setups, it's that important. We have 3 out of four defenders getting involved with maintaining the ball in a team that is banking on holding possession for a major amount of the game against a really well built opposition. In case we do feck up with passing at any time,. I'll take Ederson ahead of Jennings every day of the week. And that is where the requirements of the setup overrule the individuality of the player.
Ask Pep if he would take Ederson or Schmeichel. The answer will surprise a lot of people I think. The answer won't surprise a lot of people too, like me. Think like a romantic lads
P.S: My apologies for the long ass post. I can afford only 3 posts per day
so yeah keep clutching
