Tactical Ramble for 2020/21

[Hasta]

1 hour ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

Just get it in the mixer and win the 2nd ball.

This tactical analysis was brought to you by Championship promotion winners Dyche, Warnock and Allardyce. 

Yep.

You can play a possession based 3-2-2-3-1 whatever systems, but have the option to go direct or get it in the box during the same game.  Again at Luton, for all the faffing around in the second half, it was a ball onto Grahams head that led to the goal.

Unless you can collect the best players in the league, then in order to be a good side you usually needs to be able to mix it up.

Edited July 26, 2020 by Hasta

[joey_big_nose]

7 hours ago, JoeH said:

Bit of a long one, with some seasonal data from 2019/20 to back up some of the thought processes. Not a thread everyone will enjoy but look forward to seeing other people's ideas.

Okay, so here goes. Let's operate now under the assumption, for the sake of this conversation, that we don't have a budget for 2020/21, or at least a very minimal one - what tactical system should we be using going into the new season?

We've operated under a 4-2-3-1 for the best part of four seasons, but with Dack's injury, the loss of Graham and some younger players breaking through - it's clear this style and approach is now no longer the preferred long term option for Tony Mowbray. Side note, this ramble also assumes that Tony Mowbray is the long term manager of the club, so we'll continue under the notion that he's still manager come 2021. We've tried 4-3-3, false nines, 4-1-2-1-2 with no wingers, we've sometimes even looked like we're using a 2-7-1 in some games!

I suggest, based off some of my research into the season, that trying to emulate Sheffield United, rather than a Leeds United, is absolutely the more sane approach. In recent weeks we've heard plenty of talk about how "to get out of this division you have to control the games and have the ball". I would like to propose that this is a load of crap. We've had 60% possession, sometimes 70% possession in games and halves of football this season against some fairly shoddy teams and still not won games. We need a much more potent way of creative chances, that doesn't revolve around this backwards idea that - 'if you have more of the ball you'll get more chances on goal'. Teams like Barnsley, Luton, Wycome, Coventry, Rotherham - all in our division next season - will sit 11 men behind the ball and scrape out draws, sometimes even wins with a goal on the break, against teams like ours. It's been evidenced over the last decade and is going to continue if nothing is changed.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Up first, let's talk Ryan Nyambe. Nyambe is a mainly beloved character by both players, staff and supporters at Blackburn Rovers Football Club - nobody can deny his extreme rise and the development he's made as a football over the last season or two. He's been very important to our back line and continues to show signs of promise. However, as the statistical data shows, Ryan is a sub par attacking threat. With very poor passing, movement in the final third, shooting and some of the worst crossing statistics in the division - the threat being posed down the flanks from our full backs is virtually non-existent. A career with 0 goals and 6 assists in over 150 games is simply put, poor. 

For me, Ryan is a natural born centre-back, with the pace, power and defensive abilities of a one day Premier League star - in the right set up. The loss of Tosin Adarabioyo means one of two things, you either sign a replacement externally or you replace from within. I'd suggest out of all of the candidates, Nyambe would be most beneficial to the team in that role. However, it's my opinion that a weaker defence should be a more solid one, a back five would be a much better fit with the players we have at our disposal than a back four.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - 

A 5-2-3 formation, more eminent of Sheffield United than any other recently promoted side, would help get the most out of the players we do already have.

Do we have any wingers at the club? X
Do we have a pair of top quality CB's at the club? X

Unless we can spend a lot of money, the solution to those problems is for wing-backs in JRC and Downing, who can cross a ball, to operate in an up and down the line role. Against sides who pin us back they can hold and be a five, against sides who sit back we'd effectively be operating a 3-4-3. I believe that both Downing and Joe Rankin-Costello have shown a competent defensive ability, but both possess the attacking talents that a Ryan Nyambe or an Amari'i Bell simply do not.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - 

Now to the front three. The Lewis Holtby "False Nine" trial didn't work, in-fact it failed miserably and likely cost us at least three points in the BCD season. However, Bradley Dack operating in a similar role would probably be much more effective. Almost all of Adam Armstrong's goals have come from the left, cutting inside and shooting from range, Brereton has looked competent running with the ball from a slightly deeper and wider position than he has as an isolated front man. I think this front-three, retaining its rotating - who's actually playing where - personality would cause defences a few problems during matches. Overlaps on the left with Holtby, Downing and Armstrong, on the right with Brereton, Travis and JRC - with a central midfield open with Dack and Holtby picking up those creative spaces down the middle.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - -

Sam Gallagher's seasonal data from 2019/20 suggests he shouldn't be anywhere near the first team. One of the worst performing strikers in the division who played on a regular basis, I think not only does Ben Brereton seem to show a little more promise than him of improving, I think also that his best attributes aren't suited to the tactical style I'm proposing. I also think Joe Rothwell wouldn't get the ball time necessary to warrant his inclusion in the starting XI for this tactic. You could argue the toss between himself and Holtby, but I feel that Rothwell's ability to change a game from the bench is ultimately much more beneficial than bringing on a Holtby for 15 minutes at the end would be.

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - -

Now this is all worst case scenario, no money AT ALL to spend. The chances are we bring in a centre-half, maybe even get a left-back (Maybe Greg Cunningham). But if I had to go into a new season with the exact squad we have right now, that's how I'd go about it as manager.

Anyway what do you think? With no additions what is the best tactical style for us to undertake going into a new season? Who'll come good sooner, Gallagher or Brereton?

God I hope we sign some players  

 

 

 

Wow that's a comprehensive analysis! Thanks for putting together. Where do you get the stats from? Very insightful.

If we don't sign anyone I would agree your proposal makes sense. Only quibble I would have is I don't think Holtby can really play in a central two. I'm sure Evans would be the preferred partner for Travis, then failing that Johnson or Davenport.

All that said if we don't sign anyone we are going to really struggle. In the setup you propose we still need to sign a keeper, and I would not be at all comfortable with four of the players mentioned being regular starters in the positions mentioned - Downing (age and engine), Williams (positioning, heading, pace), Brereton (everything), Nyambe (positioning, heading).

And beyond that a couple of injuries and we would be in all sorts of trouble.

We need to sign some players, principally quality GK, CB, LB and a scoring striker. And we need to try and be a bit more straightforward tactically in my opinion.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, joey_big_nose said:

Wow that's a comprehensive analysis! Thanks for putting together. Where do you get the stats from? Very insightful.

If we don't sign anyone I would agree your proposal makes sense. Only quibble I would have is I don't think Holtby can really play in a central two. I'm sure Evans would be the preferred partner for Travis, then failing that Johnson or Davenport.

All that said if we don't sign anyone we are going to really struggle. In the setup you propose we still need to sign a keeper, and I would not be at all comfortable with four of the players mentioned being regular starters in the positions mentioned - Downing (age and engine), Williams (positioning, heading, pace), Brereton (everything), Nyambe (positioning, heading).

And beyond that a couple of injuries and we would be in all sorts of trouble.

We need to sign some players, principally quality GK, CB, LB and a scoring striker. And we need to try and be a bit more straightforward tactically in my opinion.

Absolutely, you're not wrong. I purposefully left out the goalkeeper scenario because honestly that's its own insane situation that has to be addressed, budget or not. I too have question marks in my head when it comes to Lewis Holtby, some games he goes completely missing - but I do feel he's much better deeper, in a midfield, rather than off the wing or up front in unusual and unfamiliar roles.

[Guest]

15 hours ago, schoey said:

Just got the playoff first leg on and if we’ve got largely the same squad and are looking at 3 CBs then surely Swansea’s current formation of 3-4-1-2 (er even 5-2-1-2) is the way to go?

That way Dack can stay as no.10 as when he was tried as a false 9 earlier in the season looked like a fish out of water, and means we could see Arma and Gallagher as a strike partnership? Could even let Arma drift out wide as and when he likes and have Gallagher as more of a focal point for Dack to play off (granted this is putting a lot of faith in Gallagher being able to properly play up top as a striker).

Yes, do like Swansea's style. I believe quite firmly that with no new additions we'd be better off in any kind of 3 or 5 at the back formation, because the defenders we have aren't capable of competing at the top as a 2.

[Guest]

15 hours ago, dingles staying down 4ever said:

Joe,

As you have the time to look at stats and Im lazy and cant be bothered but how many times did Armstrong not back tracking when playing wide cost us defensively?

Don't have any particular data on that but might be able to find some heat maps which could give some very clear indications. 

[dingles staying down 4ever]

1 hour ago, JoeH said:

Don't have any particular data on that but might be able to find some heat maps which could give some very clear indications. 

If Armstrong is going to play wide though, it is something that needs addressing in his game. I remember one of his reasons for not liking his stint at Bolton was he was played wide and didn't like back tracking.

I still think that the best position is playing off a big No.9 centrally. His pace running down the channels between full back and CB would terrify most CBs. The problem is that when fit this is where Dack wants to play. Brereton, Holtby and Rothwell also seem to favour this position rather than out wide. For his size, Gallagher should be able to play the No.9 role also rather than out wide. Mowbray has a vision that anybody can play wide but all of them as proved that is not the case. So tactically wise we need to sign specialised wide players as well as Chapman to have a chance to play most tactical variations not central players forced out of position.

As Ive said elsewhere this reminds me of the dilemma that Bowyer gave himself because he liked signing players that also wanted to play in this position and could not shoe horn them all into a team and  ended with Cairney and/or King out wide.

Edited July 27, 2020 by dingles staying down 4ever

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

1 minute ago, dingles staying down 4ever said:

If Armstrong is going to play wide though, it is something that needs addressing in his game. I remember one of his reasons for not liking his stint at Bolton was he was played wide and didn't like back tracking.

I still think that the best position is playing off a big No.9 centrally. His pace running down the channels between full back and CB would terrify most CBs. The problem is that when fit this is where Dack wants to play. Brereton, Holtby and Rothwell also seem to favour this position rather than out wide. For his size, Gallagher should be able to play the No.9 role also rather than out wide. Mowbray has a vision that anybody can play wide but all of them as proved that is not the case. So tactically wise we need to sign specialised wide players as well as Chapman to have a chance to play most tactical variations not central players forced out of position.

As Ive said elsewhere this reminds me of the dilemma that Bowyer gave himself because he liked signing players that also wanted to play in this position and could not shoe horn them all into a team and  ended with Cairney and/or King out wide.

I agree with most that. I just tells me that Mowbray has signed players without really settling on a system that gets the best out of them.

[joey_big_nose]

1 hour ago, JoeH said:

Absolutely, you're not wrong. I purposefully left out the goalkeeper scenario because honestly that's its own insane situation that has to be addressed, budget or not. I too have question marks in my head when it comes to Lewis Holtby, some games he goes completely missing - but I do feel he's much better deeper, in a midfield, rather than off the wing or up front in unusual and unfamiliar roles.

Cool - where did you get the stats from? Comparing positions to the Championship mean seems a really good way to do analysis.

[Richard Oakley]

As long as your analysis was JoeH, it missed a great deal. I'm not sure why you felt the need to bash Nyambe and Gallagher. Coyle played Gallagher centrally and got 10 league goals out of him.

Mowbray is under contract for the next two years. That's not long term.4-2-3-1 was never his preferred style. He's indicated that we'll play 4-2-3-1 again over his dead body. That's pity since it brought out the best of Graham and Dack. Since Dack was injured, Mowbray's tried a variety of formations without finding one that works consistently.

Two things about your choice of players for your formation. Bradley Dack is injured and won't start the season. Downing is too expensive a luxury to bring back and certainly hasn't the stamina to last 90 minutes as a wing back.I'd rather his wage went on bringing in Morgan Fox and bringing back Danny Graham.

5-2-3 seems to me to want to morph into 3-4-3.Whilst Damien Johnson successfully used a variant of 3-4-3 to guide the U23s to promotion, whenever Mowbray has tried 3 at the back, it has not ended well for us.

Lewis Holtby is an attacking midfielder. We play 2 holding midfielders in Evans and Travis.There does not seem to be a role for him here.Playing him as a false 9 didn't work.Bradley Johnson appears to have lost all respect for Mowbray after being told to move to the area permanently, when Mowbray hasn't.

Last off-season Nyambe worked on his defensive technique as a right back.This, he may well look at the attacking side of his game,including crossing.We look to have tried to convert Bell into a wing back and not developed him as a left back. Mowbray obviously doesn't see Williams as Lenihan's long term co-centre back, though he seems to prefer Williams over .Wharton.In goal, Fisher has been here the longest, but Mowbray favours Eastham.

Up front, we spent £12m on Brereton and Gallagher. They have to play centrally, pushing Armstrong out on the left.Playing 3 up front doesn't seem to suit us, though. I'd add JRC wide right to provide balance.

I'd play 4 at the back, though Mowbray is likely to go with Bennett, Williams, Lenihan and Bell.That's likely to get Nyambe and Wharton to ask their agents to find them a new playing destination.

I'd transfer list Bell, Williams, Mulgrew, Bennett, Johnson and Holtby.

I am working on the assumptions that Mowbray is still here, that there won't be any money to bring in signings or loanees and only one of the 6 departing contract wages can be used to sign free agents. The formation I'm going with is 4-2-4.

[Guest]

49 minutes ago, joey_big_nose said:

Cool - where did you get the stats from? Comparing positions to the Championship mean seems a really good way to do analysis.

Not my data work. Helping somebody with a project, I just make the graphics. Once the full project, I'm fairly sure they're releasing a card with that data for every squad member, is released I'll ask him.

[Guest]

45 minutes ago, Richard Oakley said:

I'm not sure why you felt the need to bash Nyambe

I don't feel that a bashing of Nyambe is at all a fair reflection of my comments. I merely used the stats to show that he's a great player much better suited to a defensive position. In this proposed system the wingbacks are very attacking based, so I proposed he'd be better at centre-back.

I certainly don't agree that I've bashed him! He's one of my favourite players.

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, Richard Oakley said:

whenever Mowbray has tried 3 at the back, it has not ended well for us.

We've used Three At The Back from kick off Twice, once against Wigan at Home, Won 3-0 and once against Hull City at Home, Won 3-0...

[Richard Oakley]

4 minutes ago, JoeH said:

We've used Three At The Back from kick off Twice, once against Wigan at Home, Won 3-0 and once against Hull City at Home, Won 3-0...

Two exceptions that prove the rule. Bet we didn't finish the games with 3 at the back.

Nyambe won 1.2 aerial duels per game last season as opposed to 3.2 for Tosin and 5.3 for Lenihan. Data from whoscored.com. Stats don't suggest Nyambe is centre back material in the championship. We differ in thinking Wing-backs make best use of our available personnel. I don't.

[roversfan99]

Did we play 3 at the back (or 3atb with its fancy new acronym) v Hull at home? I dont think we did.

We definitely did at home to Millwall. Williams scored a screamer but we looked really laboured until the hour mark, when we took off Adarabioyo, went back to 4 at the back and then really dominated the last half hour and got a second goal.

Its not the sort of formation you can keep changing, you need to really stick at it. I dont think it suits us at all, nor do I think Nyambe is a competent centre back, I would agree with @Richard Oakley

[Dreams of 1995]

We used 3 at the back a few times in League 1 and struggled then too. Never worked out for us, probably down to a lack of full back options. 
 

Whenever I have seen Nyambe I’ve never thought centre half. He’s electric down the flank but needs to work on his crossing. That can be done though, and if we had a striker who wanted to get his head or foot on the ball it becomes a hell of a lot easier. 
 

Gallagher got goals under Coyle working with two wingers crossing the ball in. He has to play centrally, although I can see the benefit of his work rate out wide. I just don’t think it gets enough out of him. In any case, you don’t spent  £5m for work rate.

We need a left back, CB, GK and potentially another starting midfielder and shipping out of Johnson. Don’t rate the bloke at all. 

[joey_big_nose]

12 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

We used 3 at the back a few times in League 1 and struggled then too. Never worked out for us, probably down to a lack of full back options. 
 

Whenever I have seen Nyambe I’ve never thought centre half. He’s electric down the flank but needs to work on his crossing. That can be done though, and if we had a striker who wanted to get his head or foot on the ball it becomes a hell of a lot easier. 
 

Gallagher got goals under Coyle working with two wingers crossing the ball in. He has to play centrally, although I can see the benefit of his work rate out wide. I just don’t think it gets enough out of him. In any case, you don’t spent  £5m for work rate.

We need a left back, CB, GK and potentially another starting midfielder and shipping out of Johnson. Don’t rate the bloke at all. 

Yeah I'd be thinking 442 and try and get Armstrong and Gallagher to form a partnership to get the best out of both of them. But then you're left with what to do with Dack, Holtby, Rothwell and Buckley.

The squads balace is a joke. Too many central players who are compromised by having to play some of them wide.

Edited July 27, 2020 by joey_big_nose

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Richard Oakley said:

Stats don't suggest Nyambe is centre back material in the championship.

90% of the stats say Nyambe is better suited to Centre-back. 

Only this particular one says he isn't. And it's a very unfair analysis as at right-back of course he's going to head the ball less than playing as a centre back.

I'd be berated by @roversfan99 for comparing like that.  

[Guest]

To say CB (A) and CB (B) have got such a stat in heading and RB (A) has a much lower one is unfair. Compare CB (A) and CB (B) but don't throw in the right back like the two positions provide the same opportunity for heading a ball in a game. I appreciate the data based argument, because I love looking at football data, but I don't think that one factor, out of many, can say categorically that a player can't play centre-back, especially when the data set used is skewed massively by positional differences.

[roversfan99]

4 minutes ago, JoeH said:

90% of the stats say Nyambe is better suited to Centre-back. 

Only this particular one says he isn't. And it's a very unfair analysis as at right-back of course he's going to head the ball less than playing as a centre back.

I'd be berated by @roversfan99 for comparing like that.  

I dont need stats and data. He has played CB a few times in the past that I have seen with my eyes and he has looked uncomfortable there. He can be right back in a defence and if he is better defensively than going forward, good!

[Guest]

If we look at Nyambe's data it's clear that his passing and end product are WELL below average. To persist with him playing as a forward playing full back (as Mowbray wants) is silly in my opinion. I'd like to see Nyambe given some game time at centre-back, whether in pre-season or for a few games in the new season. I think JRC provides more end product going forward than Nyambe and with the full backs pushing so high under Mowbray's tactics, I think it's vital to have someone there who can pass a ball and create a chance.

I'm a huge fan of Ryan's but Mowbray wants something from him that he simply doesn't possess, and hasn't showed signs of improving long term. He is L1 quality going forward with the ball, and as of late our wide defenders are doing more attacking than they are defending. 

172 Games with 0 goals and 6 assists simply isn't good enough for a full back in my opinion.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

Did we play 3 at the back (or 3atb with its fancy new acronym) v Hull at home? I dont think we did.

Not this season. Last. My bad, should have specified.

[Guest]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

I dont need stats and data. He has played CB a few times in the past that I have seen with my eyes and he has looked uncomfortable there. He can be right back in a defence and if he is better defensively than going forward, good!

Kind of ignoring the reason I'd tagged you but oh well! When I compared Bennett and Nyambe, a long time ago now, it was a huge deal that I hadn't take into account positional differences. Same thing happening here.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

In any case, you don’t spent  £5m for work rate.

Bang on mate

[roversfan99]

Just now, JoeH said:

Kind of ignoring the reason I'd tagged you but oh well! When I compared Bennett and Nyambe, a long time ago now, it was a huge deal that I hadn't take into account positional differences. Same thing happening here.

Yeah I know, I remember.

I also agree with your reservations about Nyambe going forward. But you would rather a full back could defend first, he has been slightly more effective going forward this season, still miles to go. But especially considering our defensive record, lets leave Nyambe there ie as our only full back who can competently defend, and fix around him to make us more robust. Rankin Costello is not a natural defender, you could see for a Reading goal when he was sliding all over the shop, diving in. Throw in the fact that Nyambe cant head a ball and has always looked uncomfortable at CB in the past, and the change makes no sense at all to me. Mowbray should be looking for a goalkeeper, a CB and a left back, put them in with Lenihan and Nyambe with end aim of conceding far less goals. Converting players we already have, prioritising attacking qualities of defenders, only considering technically gifted defenders, none of that please.

If we are basing it on what we think Mowbray wants, then we may aswell continue planning with Gallagher on the wing and a false 9, but is no good either.

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

If we are basing it on what we think Mowbray wants, then we may aswell continue planning with Gallagher on the wing and a false 9, but is no good either.

Very true.