| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation 08:57 - Aug 18 with 3724 views | ArnieM |
Am I the only one that is becoming concerned at McKenna's insistence on playing this formation, whoever we play against?
I feel McKenna is predictable. Opponents know how we set up. Our midfield is the problem, we either get overrun or outmuscled in midfield in almost every game. But more importantly our forwards get little service, and our defence has little protection.
What is McKenna's problem with playing 3 in the middle? He doesn't try anything different, ever!
What do others feel about playing just two in midfield?
** Prepares for dogs abuse and down votes.. . |  |
| |  |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 10:07 - Aug 18 with 817 views | ArnieM |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 09:47 - Aug 18 by The_Flashing_Smile |
The reason you get downarrows is you make statements like your subject title/opening sentence as if they're true, when they're not. If you framed it more like "it seems to me" you'd probably get more leeway. |
Ah, okay. Thanks for that feedback. | |
| |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 10:20 - Aug 18 with 777 views | itfcsuth |
Formation/system was the foundation of our previous success - Leif flying forward, left side rolling inside - if you snapshotted the formation it would often look like a 3-4-2-1 going forward and then a traditional 4-4-2 against the ball.
I can't see any logic to why we would change, is it not more a case at the moment of the personnel getting used to the system, and secondly finding the flow of form? |  | | |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 11:08 - Aug 18 with 723 views | darkhorse28 |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 09:01 - Aug 18 by thebooks |
Not really. He’s very flexible (we played 4 or 5 different formations last year), but part of the strength is forming the predictable patterns. Different league obviously, so makes sense we try to dominate with our “way” of playing.
I only down vote racists, so yer safe. |
We really didn’t.
I’ve never seen a McKenna team without the double pivot.
We played 3 at the back and two inverted number tens instead of 3 behind a single striker.
Two formations…, and it is VERY predictable.
We play 3 at the back in a long losing run, and when KM first arrived too, to build a stringer platform etc
But 95% of games it’s one formation. What I find odd, isn’t the formation, it can clearly work very well, it’s not bringing in Lakers to make it work…, one CDM to play 50 games for two positions is very odd, because Taylor and even Jens are number 8’s really.
And then Clarke…, loves chalk on his boots, clearly doesn’t like to be inverted…, so we play him for that role instead.., why do we sign players so that McKenna can coach them in to different roles.
It makes no sense.
Buy an inverted wide player - I think mckennna is massively guilty of over thinking and over coaching.
We looked SO much better with wide players getting wide and crossing in the first 15 minutes yesterday, that’s the first time I’ve seen McKenna do that.
Leif is inverted now, so Jack can get wider, and obviously he’s best overlapping in wide areas, so we lost that threat, because Leifs right foot is barely for standing on, so if there’s one player doesn’t want to be on the inside, it’s Leif.
We are predictable - but then we were in 23/24 too and that was fine.
It’s not the formation, we just don’t have the players to play it.., maybe they will change before the end of the window.
A 3 with Jack Taylor and Humphries/Jens would suits Taylor and Jens much better; give them cover and allow them forward.
Why doesn’t KM try it.
Back to back promotions I’m guessing, he’s v bias to what has worked.
Suspect he’s wrong…, Sam and Mass made that system work.., gave us a platform and didn’t want or need to get forward.
We don’t have that.., and unless we bring in the players to make it work.., we will continue to struggle…, we aren’t capable of getting our best players in to games because we don’t win enough ball.., and that’s going to be a theme.
We are poor at getting the ball back and keeping hold of it.., and that’s against any team.
New CDM could fix it.., the new lad looks very good, so there’s hope. |  | | |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 11:14 - Aug 18 with 728 views | BlacknGoldnBlue |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 11:08 - Aug 18 by darkhorse28 |
We really didn’t.
I’ve never seen a McKenna team without the double pivot.
We played 3 at the back and two inverted number tens instead of 3 behind a single striker.
Two formations…, and it is VERY predictable.
We play 3 at the back in a long losing run, and when KM first arrived too, to build a stringer platform etc
But 95% of games it’s one formation. What I find odd, isn’t the formation, it can clearly work very well, it’s not bringing in Lakers to make it work…, one CDM to play 50 games for two positions is very odd, because Taylor and even Jens are number 8’s really.
And then Clarke…, loves chalk on his boots, clearly doesn’t like to be inverted…, so we play him for that role instead.., why do we sign players so that McKenna can coach them in to different roles.
It makes no sense.
Buy an inverted wide player - I think mckennna is massively guilty of over thinking and over coaching.
We looked SO much better with wide players getting wide and crossing in the first 15 minutes yesterday, that’s the first time I’ve seen McKenna do that.
Leif is inverted now, so Jack can get wider, and obviously he’s best overlapping in wide areas, so we lost that threat, because Leifs right foot is barely for standing on, so if there’s one player doesn’t want to be on the inside, it’s Leif.
We are predictable - but then we were in 23/24 too and that was fine.
It’s not the formation, we just don’t have the players to play it.., maybe they will change before the end of the window.
A 3 with Jack Taylor and Humphries/Jens would suits Taylor and Jens much better; give them cover and allow them forward.
Why doesn’t KM try it.
Back to back promotions I’m guessing, he’s v bias to what has worked.
Suspect he’s wrong…, Sam and Mass made that system work.., gave us a platform and didn’t want or need to get forward.
We don’t have that.., and unless we bring in the players to make it work.., we will continue to struggle…, we aren’t capable of getting our best players in to games because we don’t win enough ball.., and that’s going to be a theme.
We are poor at getting the ball back and keeping hold of it.., and that’s against any team.
New CDM could fix it.., the new lad looks very good, so there’s hope. |
When you have better players that are settled then the double pivot works fine, and it secured as back to back promotions.
I think the issue last year was the quality of midfielders was just bigger, stronger, faster and more technical and we couldn't cope.
I thought we looked better in Prem when we have 3 across the back but thats not the way KM ultimately wants to play.
When (not if) we go back up I think we'll field different types of midfielders. |  |
| |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 15:51 - Aug 18 with 637 views | braveblue |
I hope so. | | | |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 18:20 - Aug 18 with 577 views | Swansea_Blue |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 09:03 - Aug 18 by muccletonjoe |
It is total madness playing the same formation against every team. It reflects that we think every opposition sets up the same way .
If we had the right players I think a 3 man midfield would solve alot of our problems. Unfortunately that is not the case at the moment |
Why should we be the ones that have to set up to counter the opposition? Why can’t they be the ones setting up to counter us?
Nothing wrong with having the same formation at all. Many successful sides don’t change. They just get good at what they do. |  |
| |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 18:32 - Aug 18 with 559 views | BlueBoots |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 09:57 - Aug 18 by urbanpenguin |
4-4-2 - hit it up to the big man for the knock on. |
Hate to bring up the bad old days, but we've had that under McKenna too - the Norwood / Bonne "Bash Brothers" pairing  |  |
| |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 22:50 - Aug 18 with 480 views | southnorfolkblue |
There was certainly a case for playing an extra body in midfield last season, but he has enough credit in the bank with me to trust that he knows best | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 03:42 - Aug 19 with 430 views | BrockleyBlue78 |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 10:20 - Aug 18 by itfcsuth |
Formation/system was the foundation of our previous success - Leif flying forward, left side rolling inside - if you snapshotted the formation it would often look like a 3-4-2-1 going forward and then a traditional 4-4-2 against the ball.
I can't see any logic to why we would change, is it not more a case at the moment of the personnel getting used to the system, and secondly finding the flow of form? |
One could make the argument it was good enough for league one and the championship but was completely overpowered and out thought in the premier league? |  | | |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 06:35 - Aug 19 with 390 views | Nutkins_Return |
We've done this before....many times. McKenna doesn't set up or play the same way against every team. | |
| |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 07:18 - Aug 19 with 359 views | PioneerBlue |
I’m not going to down vote this because either you’ve not been paying attention to the matches, this board, or you are presenting a post for deliberate provocation all of which are feasible!
For the twentieth time:
KMcK has principles and is heavy on structure and patterns more so than actual player positions.
The structure encompasses starting positions in and out of possession and never really resembles any identifiable formation except that we might have 4 recognised defenders and 2 midfielders and 3 forward players and a striker. It’s more how each of these players interacts in an area of the pitch and how they use their capabilities to defend attack retain regain the ball. We’ve also seen the deliberate high possession being watered down over the years where possession has fallen from 60s to 50% level as we’ve been a bit more direct in our play. I think we might start to see our possession stats creep up a bit this season as we’ve seen to control more of the game, I might be wrong on that.
If you want to see a more regularly identifiable formation we have the wrong coach or perhaps you are asking for differnt players to execute the roles they are given any one game in a different way. | |
| |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 09:03 - Aug 19 with 307 views | ArnieM |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 07:18 - Aug 19 by PioneerBlue |
I’m not going to down vote this because either you’ve not been paying attention to the matches, this board, or you are presenting a post for deliberate provocation all of which are feasible!
For the twentieth time:
KMcK has principles and is heavy on structure and patterns more so than actual player positions.
The structure encompasses starting positions in and out of possession and never really resembles any identifiable formation except that we might have 4 recognised defenders and 2 midfielders and 3 forward players and a striker. It’s more how each of these players interacts in an area of the pitch and how they use their capabilities to defend attack retain regain the ball. We’ve also seen the deliberate high possession being watered down over the years where possession has fallen from 60s to 50% level as we’ve been a bit more direct in our play. I think we might start to see our possession stats creep up a bit this season as we’ve seen to control more of the game, I might be wrong on that.
If you want to see a more regularly identifiable formation we have the wrong coach or perhaps you are asking for differnt players to execute the roles they are given any one game in a different way. |
so when those principles , structure and patterns are less effective, or simply fail to work, you'd think hes try something else surely ?
6 wins in 45 games suggest somethings isnt quite right or going to plan, no? | |
| |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 09:11 - Aug 19 with 288 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 09:03 - Aug 19 by ArnieM |
so when those principles , structure and patterns are less effective, or simply fail to work, you'd think hes try something else surely ?
6 wins in 45 games suggest somethings isnt quite right or going to plan, no? |
He does try something else. Did you notice how much better we were in the second half on Sunday?
43 of those games were in the Prem when weren't ready for it; didn't have the players to "try something else surely". Nothing to do with formations. The other two are back in the Champ, two of the toughest fixtures we're likely to face, when we haven't got the full squad in let alone gelled.
Have you forgotten we jumped two divisions to the Prem? No formation in the world suddenly means you can beat some of the best teams in the world after such a jump. [Post edited 19 Aug 9:45]
|  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 09:19 - Aug 19 with 267 views | ArnieM |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 09:11 - Aug 19 by The_Flashing_Smile |
He does try something else. Did you notice how much better we were in the second half on Sunday?
43 of those games were in the Prem when weren't ready for it; didn't have the players to "try something else surely". Nothing to do with formations. The other two are back in the Champ, two of the toughest fixtures we're likely to face, when we haven't got the full squad in let alone gelled.
Have you forgotten we jumped two divisions to the Prem? No formation in the world suddenly means you can beat some of the best teams in the world after such a jump. [Post edited 19 Aug 9:45]
|
Well hopefully we'll all see a marked improvement going forward now then, if that is the case. | |
| |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 09:20 - Aug 19 with 265 views | bluefunk |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 09:03 - Aug 19 by ArnieM |
so when those principles , structure and patterns are less effective, or simply fail to work, you'd think hes try something else surely ?
6 wins in 45 games suggest somethings isnt quite right or going to plan, no? |
Are we going to keep scratching the Premier League scab for ever. Last season is gone, lessons have been learned, hence the change in recruitment targets now.
For evidence that KM doesn’t just keep playing the same way, look at how Greaves was deployed in the second half against Saints. We’d frequently allowed them to play out from the back, in the first half, so Greaves frequently stepped forward to pick up in central midfield when their keeper had the ball, leaving O’Shea to mark Armstrong and with Johnson and Davis sitting deeper. |  | | |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 10:10 - Aug 19 with 214 views | Bluemike31 |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 09:20 - Aug 19 by bluefunk |
Are we going to keep scratching the Premier League scab for ever. Last season is gone, lessons have been learned, hence the change in recruitment targets now.
For evidence that KM doesn’t just keep playing the same way, look at how Greaves was deployed in the second half against Saints. We’d frequently allowed them to play out from the back, in the first half, so Greaves frequently stepped forward to pick up in central midfield when their keeper had the ball, leaving O’Shea to mark Armstrong and with Johnson and Davis sitting deeper. |
While it is fair to say that we shouldn't keep "scratching the Premier League Scab forever" neither should anyone be dining out on the Two promotions forever and a day either. | | | |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 10:19 - Aug 19 with 200 views | ArnieM |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 09:20 - Aug 19 by bluefunk |
Are we going to keep scratching the Premier League scab for ever. Last season is gone, lessons have been learned, hence the change in recruitment targets now.
For evidence that KM doesn’t just keep playing the same way, look at how Greaves was deployed in the second half against Saints. We’d frequently allowed them to play out from the back, in the first half, so Greaves frequently stepped forward to pick up in central midfield when their keeper had the ball, leaving O’Shea to mark Armstrong and with Johnson and Davis sitting deeper. |
Ok I get your point...all ill say is its not working particularly well whatever tactic he looks to use in this formation.
We've now played "the two toughest fixtures were likely to have back to back" at the start of the season. One is a league one side promoted side, and the other a relegated PL outfit , that we couldn't beat x2 last season , and again this season. So, are the £20m signings we've brought in, actually better than whats left the club, can they perform the role McK is wanting them too ( the majority of the players in that 11 Sunday have been here a while ) ...So whats not working .
I notice there's an article in EADT from Fuller, raising the same questions ( its not wrong to challenge or ask questions).... I stick my head above the wall and ask them on here , knowing Im going to get the usual rebuffs, and I suspect many more have the same concerns but dont want to get the abuse from a few on this forum, so dont raise these concerns.
Here's hoping all settles down and the team gels quickly and goes on to win countless games with whatever formation/ tactic Mckenna wishes to utilise . I really do. | |
| |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 10:26 - Aug 19 with 193 views | Horsham |
I think and it’s always been the case that the formation that gets written down as 4-2-3-1 or 4-4-2 or whatever has often subtleties and tweaks within it.
I think so far this season, Szmodics has played much more of second striker role than previously Omari and Chaplin did so we look closer to 4-4-2 or 4-2-4 now and I wonder if Akpom has primarily been signed to compete with Szmodics to play alongside Hirst.
That doesn’t really help when we’re saying about being dominant in midfield but maybe sacrificing that having greater goal threat turns a lot more of the possession we do have to into goals and results in a net positive….
There answer to everything has always been 4-3-4 formation of course. |  | | |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 11:54 - Aug 19 with 124 views | Nutkins_Return |
I do think another important thing to clarify is that McKenna doesn't do the formation on the BBC or Sky websites. Just to confirm. | |
| |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 11:56 - Aug 19 with 114 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 10:10 - Aug 19 by Bluemike31 |
While it is fair to say that we shouldn't keep "scratching the Premier League Scab forever" neither should anyone be dining out on the Two promotions forever and a day either. |
No-one's dining out on it, but it is important context to our failed Prem season that quite a few people seem to have forgotten or don't think is relevant. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 11:59 - Aug 19 with 106 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 10:19 - Aug 19 by ArnieM |
Ok I get your point...all ill say is its not working particularly well whatever tactic he looks to use in this formation.
We've now played "the two toughest fixtures were likely to have back to back" at the start of the season. One is a league one side promoted side, and the other a relegated PL outfit , that we couldn't beat x2 last season , and again this season. So, are the £20m signings we've brought in, actually better than whats left the club, can they perform the role McK is wanting them too ( the majority of the players in that 11 Sunday have been here a while ) ...So whats not working .
I notice there's an article in EADT from Fuller, raising the same questions ( its not wrong to challenge or ask questions).... I stick my head above the wall and ask them on here , knowing Im going to get the usual rebuffs, and I suspect many more have the same concerns but dont want to get the abuse from a few on this forum, so dont raise these concerns.
Here's hoping all settles down and the team gels quickly and goes on to win countless games with whatever formation/ tactic Mckenna wishes to utilise . I really do. |
We haven't got the full squad in yet (and those we have got in will take time to get up to speed). That's a big part of it. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 12:10 - Aug 19 with 66 views | Pinewoodblue |
| McKenna's insistence on playing the same formation on 09:20 - Aug 19 by bluefunk |
Are we going to keep scratching the Premier League scab for ever. Last season is gone, lessons have been learned, hence the change in recruitment targets now.
For evidence that KM doesn’t just keep playing the same way, look at how Greaves was deployed in the second half against Saints. We’d frequently allowed them to play out from the back, in the first half, so Greaves frequently stepped forward to pick up in central midfield when their keeper had the ball, leaving O’Shea to mark Armstrong and with Johnson and Davis sitting deeper. |
But surely that only works well if you start with 3 central defenders. Stick Woolfenden between Greaves & O’Shea.
I’m all for have a set structure but that should be based on the known strengths of your squad. Not sure it is currently. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
