If you were a manager, how would your team set up and play?

[Rich]

Hopefully a bit of light relief following the torture of last night, but let's see if it bombs.

 

After all the debate over formations, personnel, and philosophy since Howe joined, I was interested to find out what everyone on here would do if they were manager of Imaginary F.C. with an unlimited budget in modern-day football? (Not NUFC and definitely not this NUFC.)

 

• What formation would you play?
  • 4-4-fucking-2? 4-2-3-1? 3-5-2? And why?
• What would your playing style be?
  • How would you want to attack? How would you defend?
• What type of personnel would you need to make it work?
  • Doesn't need to be specific players, but might make it more interesting/understandable if you have some in mind.

 

I've half-arsed this a bit and not come up with my own answers just yet, but I'm keen to see where people on the forum sit philosophy-wise.

[Billy Pilgrim]

Formation would depend on who we were playing but for the most part I’d be playing with two technical forwards and at least one winger. 
 

Style would be a direct team that murders other teams for pace all over the pitch. I want everything happening at light speed. 
 

I would recruit a combination of pace lords and technical passing midfielders, and everyone has to be a bit nasty and to live for the wum like Wilson. 

[SUPERTOON]

Are we talking about it as if we had the current crop of players we have ?

[Shearergol]

4 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

Are we talking about it as if we had the current crop of players we have ?

No.

[HaydnNUFC]

4-2-3-1 gegenpress. /FM

[joeyt]

Do like a 4-2-3-1 with a proper number 10 and preferably a mercurial French-North African left footed right winger

[Guest HTT II]

To (always) win…

 

 

Edited December 2, 2021 by HTT II

[Rich]

3 minutes ago, HTT II said:

To win…

 

Writes a million words of shite a month about his bairn(s), his missus, his business, his mates, his area, etc. and gives me two.

[Guest HTT II]

9 minutes ago, Rich said:

 

Writes a million words of shite a month about his bairn(s), his missus, his business, his mates, his area, etc. and gives me two.

Have 3, you’re worth it!

 

 

Edited December 1, 2021 by HTT II

[Guest HTT II]

In all seriousness, this is a thread years back I’d have lapped up, but I’m so clueless these days even with our squad, tactics, new trends and so forth. I’ll enjoy reading everyone’s views though and it’s so good we can talk, debate and write pithy lines about this kind of stuff after the last 14 years.

[Guest HTT II]

7 minutes ago, Rich said:

 

Writes a million words of shite a month about his bairn(s), his missus, his business, his mates, his area, etc. and gives me two.

And I’ve cut down my word count massively over the last year or so I’ll have you know, doing my bit for the environment innit!

[Abacus]

I think just kick it to the big man, whilst the crowd make air raid siren noises.

 

(I actually do idly wonder that, because I don't know what other team does it now. If everyone is passing like Pep or pressing like Klopp then you can't do the same or they'll win since their players are better man for man at doing the same thing.

 

I still remember how prime Stoke used to constantly rattle Wenger by sticking ten big men on the pitch, hoofing in corners and doing long throws.

 

It's often the team that does something different that means the rest don't know how to react. Like how Japan played in the Rugby World Cup a few years back, by inventing a completely different style that nullified their opponents' strengths.

 

That's the longest thing I've ever written in brackets.)

[Rich]

To actually contribute myself, instead of just shit-posting:

I've always been a 4-3-3 fan, probably due to Cruyff, and I think for a decent team it's probably the most effective shape in the modern game for pressing purposes (along with the 3-4-3/5-2-2-1 that's been quite prominent since Conté's Chelsea won the league). It's hard to knock the 4-4-2, though, especially when it's done in a 4-4-1-1/4-2-3-1 sort of way ala Leicester under Ranieiri.

 

To get off the fence, though, I'd say a 4-3-3 with a high press in terms of basic formation/philosophy. As Billy said above, pace would be critical, along with size, strength, and stamina.

 

As far as personnel goes, something like:

Goalkeeper: Has to be at least 6'2", decent with his feet, and a good communicator.

 

Full-backs: More attackers than defenders, with pace top of the priority list, closely followed by technique as far as ball control/passing goes, and a bit of shithousery ala Robertson.

 

Centre-backs: Ideally just a carbon-copy of each other. Again, nobody under 6'2", with good reading of the game, aerial ability, and mobility all critical. Not that bothered about them being able to play.

 

Defensive midfielder: If you could give me prime Tioté with more size and aerial ability I'd be a very happy man.

 

Central-midfielders: I'd want a blend here, sort of a Lampard/Essien combination to use a real example. One responsible for goals above all else, and the other an athletic all-rounder, again ideally 6'2" (think I've got a Vince McMahon size fetish)

 

Wingers: Both inverted, one speed/dribble merchant and one more cultured. More of a ten playing wider, I suppose. HBA and Riquelme types would do here.
 

Striker: Drogba, but less of a diving cunt. Someone with the ability to bully defenders, great in the air, can run in behind, and who isn't afraid of helping out at the other end with set pieces.

 

Having written this out, it seems Chelsea 2008 is my favourite non-NUFC team of all-time in terms of style. Who knew?

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Monopolise the ball, keep it and tiki taka it where possible. But important to have the ability and instinct to transition to deadly fast football in the right moments to create breakthroughs. 
 

I like 3-man midfields with a DM and a couple of passers. Kind of like the current Chelsea. Ideally a couple who can carry the ball and break away from an opponent to create gaps. Iniesta/Kovacic style. 
 

Not sure about formation, I like back 3 but the CBs have to be exceptional. Helped out by the midfield. Possibly a number nine who can hold the ball and bring people in, with two wide forwards to do the real damage. 
 

Overall emphasis on input rather than pure results, and keeping calm and patient always. Only exception being the frantic few seconds after you win the ball, to try and snatch it back as quickly as possible. 
 

On FIFA I usually play with a purely defensive unit and a purely attacking unit, with just a pass from the DM to bridge the two. But not sure that works in real life

 

 

 

Edited December 1, 2021 by AyeDubbleYoo

[Rich]

7 minutes ago, HTT II said:

In all seriousness, this is a thread years back I’d have lapped up, but I’m so clueless these days even with our squad, tactics, new trends and so forth. I’ll enjoy reading everyone’s views though and it’s so good we can talk, debate and write pithy lines about this kind of stuff after the last 14 years.

 

I thought this was made for you tbh, but I'm in the same boat. Having just written out my answer, I do appear to be stuck in 2008.

[Kaizero]

Not sure what to call it, but I'd want to be doing what Bodø/Glimt are doing where the system is what works - not really the players (though them being good helps as well ). Essentially, if the LW drops out/gets sold, the reserve/replacement LW will know exactly what the LW role is meant to do and as such there won't really be an issue plugging the hole as everyone pulls in the same direction. Last season their front tree seemed irreplaceable, they sold them all and this season their new front tree seem irreplaceable - but they're not, which has been proven when injury has struck. They just play like an absolute unite with everyone pulling in the same direction and leaving everything on the pitch, even against shit opponents. If you break down their squad on an individual level, there's some obvious talent in there - but also a lot of mediocre, leaning towards not very good, players. Their top scorer, Erik Botheim, failed at Rosenborg and then went on to fail to score in an entire season at Stabæk before ending up at Bodø/Glimt and just scoring for fun.

 

At first each time they missed some players I was certain they would be shit as the missing players seemed to have an incredible understanding for their positioning and sending pinpoint passes/crosses to each other. But, as it turns out, it's not an understanding of each other more so than an understanding of where the player in that position is meant to be at any point in time in the different phases of play, and therefore they can just send the passes to where they'd always send the passes, as the player (first teamer or replacement) will know where to position themselves to receive the pass.

 

So that, but with better players   

 

 

Edited December 1, 2021 by Kaizero

[Guest HTT II]

2 minutes ago, Rich said:

 

I thought this was made for you tbh, but I'm in the same boat. Having just written out my answer, I do appear to be stuck in 2008.

I’ll give it a bash, but I’ve hardly watched any of us nor any real football outside of international football for a decade or so probably. Not in person anyway!

 

 

Edited December 1, 2021 by HTT II

[McDog]

I'd have Wing backs that can pass and cross. Hope for the best defensively.

 

Center backs need to be bigger stronger type, at least some pace not the primary thing.

 

I'm a fan of a playmaker/very strong passer paired with a more defensive ball winning midfielder.

 

I like two inverted wingers and two strikers up top. More of a keep the ball then strike fast style.

 

 

[Mikky]

I’d play a 3-4-1-2

 

The “1” covering that gap we always give opposing teams to pass around us - pisses me off 

 

Dubravka in goal 

2 wing backs with licence to push forward (Murphy and Lewis)

 

3 at the back (Fernandez, Lascelles and Schar on the left)

 

Hayden and Willock in the centre 

 

Joelinton just in front 

 

Wilson and ASM up top with ASM playing slightly towards the left allowing Murphy to push up on the right 

 

 

 

[joeyt]

Rich is gonna hate that post

[gjohnson]

3-4-1-2

 

Three hard as nails centre backs, two purely wide players, two cm, one defensive one a creator. A withdrawn striker/playmaker and two out and out strikers.

 

Would get torn to shreds in the real world but works without fail in FM

 

 

 

[Tiresias]

You know what in an ideal world I still don't think you can go wrong with a proper 4-3-3 not too many in defense, a lovely balanced midfield 3 of an explosive ball carrier, a defensive passer and a mercurial creative midfielder then 3 forwards like the peak pep barcalona

[ElDiablo]

433, low block, counter attack. Prioritise pace and technique. Couple of savages in CM alongside a David Silva artist type.

[Kid Icarus]

As a system I don't think I'd look much further than Borussia Dortmund around 2011-13. Fantastic to watch. Kloppball basically, just with the ideal combination of players from his Dortmund and Liverpool teams. The counter press, the attacking full backs, and the quick transitions. Maybe that mixed with some utopian total football, little triangles of passing and position swapping as well. 

 

 

Edited December 1, 2021 by kisearch

[Deuce]

31 minutes ago, Rich said:

 

Writes a million words of shite a month about his bairn(s), his missus, his business, his mates, his area, etc. and gives me two.

love HaycheTT