Should we be moving to a back five?

[Ewok vs Wolf]

Yes hopefully working on it during the break

 

[Mile End Wanderer]

Why on earth would you go to a back five and then play Toti as a wing back. That would be ridiculous.

A back five is fine by me but it absolutely has to have Doc and RAN if we want to carry any hint of forward play as the onus is on wing backs in this system.

Height advantage Toti is actually good at attacking

Or drop Dawson he’s not been the same this season

Doherty Bueno Kilman Toti RAN

 

[Premier Quality]

formations don’t really matter as much as the way you play - havjng said that, I prefer 4 at the back as I think with 5 we’d be more likely to concede less but score less as well. I think the squad is better suited to pressing than sitting back and playing counter.

People have a rose tinted view of five at the back because we had success with it - but we also had Raul and Diogo Jota, and we don’t have anything like those two now.

 

[northnorfolkwolf]

If played correctly, I think the back five could allow us to be more aggressive. England women are a good analogy here, with Kilman in the Millie Bright role: stepping in to win the ball back high up the pitch, with license to bring it out of defence. Then two covering defenders in case he's caught out of position (as happens in a back four). The weakness then is in behind the full-backs, so Gomes and Lemina will have to cover.

I'd like Neto to start though, and I think we'd be vulnerable with just RAN or Bueno down the left. So I'd go asymmetrical, with a left back and left winger, and a right wing back.

Something like this:

-----------------------Sa-----------------
-----D'son--K'man*--S.Buen--H.Buen/RAN
Doc/Sem‐---------------------------------
---------Lemina----Gomes-----------Neto

*With license to push up

Of course you could invert Neto and drop the right-wing back to full-back.

And then whoever preferred up top (I'd like to see Bellegarde/Sarabia in the 10 behind Kalajdzic, but that's for another thread).

Hi Goldfish, you sound like some tactical guru? Asymmetrical wing backs, inverting Neto? I don't know if you read my post above but unless we have some bloke up top who knows how to stick the ball in the net on a regular basis you can invert who you like and unfortunately it won't make a blind bit of difference!

 

[StaffordWolf]

Hi Goldfish, you sound like some tactical guru? Asymmetrical wing backs, inverting Neto? I don't know if you read my post above but unless we have some bloke up top who knows how to stick the ball in the net on a regular basis you can invert who you like and unfortunately it won't make a blind bit of difference!

Gary needs to learn how to invert players from the pitch to the bench when they're not playing well, that would help!

 

[northnorfolkwolf]

Yes, fair point. Key difference between us and Brentford (and Villa, maybe too, also Fulham with Mitrovic) is they all have out and out proven goal scorers at this level. A focal point you can just hoik the ball in their vague direction and they will do the business for you.

And they all appear to have top level, experienced managers, too. And they keep them. Which probably compensates for most of their squads being, as you say, comparable to ours.

I know you are preaching to the converted with me Contrarian but can you imagine a Bully or a Kevin Phillips in this side up top? We could play a 5 a 4 a 3 or a 2 and I think, even with this squad, we'd win more than we'd lose?

 

[northnorfolkwolf]

I've been really impressed with how Brentford have lost Toney but it does not seem to have phased them all that much.

Fulham remains to be seen with how they'll cope without Mitrovic, however they've got off to a better start than we have with a similar fixture difficulty, probably slightly harder to be honest.

We may just be in a transition period due to loss of players and a new manager with different ideas, however I am not confident that making more changes (i.e. to a back 5) at this moment will make much of a difference.

I just want to be entertained and for a change I'm actually looking forward to the international break.

Me too! My wife mentioned something about this coming w/e and I replied, to her astonishment, we can do what you like on either day as I've got no football commitments! It's like I'm free to do what I please and don't have to work my w/e around a Wolves game (and I'm guaranteed to still be happy on Sunday night!)

 

[northnorfolkwolf]

Gary needs to learn how to invert players from the pitch to the bench when they're not playing well, that would help!

He'll be inverted himself come Xmas!

 

[Sussex Wolf]

If played correctly, I think the back five could allow us to be more aggressive. England women are a good analogy here, with Kilman in the Millie Bright role: stepping in to win the ball back high up the pitch, with license to bring it out of defence. Then two covering defenders in case he's caught out of position (as happens in a back four). The weakness then is in behind the full-backs, so Gomes and Lemina will have to cover.

I'd like Neto to start though, and I think we'd be vulnerable with just RAN or Bueno down the left. So I'd go asymmetrical, with a left back and left winger, and a right wing back.

Something like this:

-----------------------Sa-----------------
-----D'son--K'man*--S.Buen--H.Buen/RAN
Doc/Sem‐---------------------------------
---------Lemina----Gomes-----------Neto

*With license to push up

Of course you could invert Neto and drop the right-wing back to full-back.

And then whoever preferred up top (I'd like to see Bellegarde/Sarabia in the 10 behind Kalajdzic, but that's for another thread).

Yeah, I like that. Would likely need to adapt for different opponents but as a default I could see that working.

 

[Black Country Wanderer]

More important than the back line set up is us having 3 in midfield
Most of the goals conceded have come from losing possession in midfield,or the back line trying to play through the same area
We now have Bellegarde so he needs to be slotted in with Gomes and Lemina to ease their workload and give us some attacking moves from midfield
Nunes to a degree was giving us that before he went now we need to revert to that system again
We can still have Neto/Sarabia, Sasa/Silva ,and Cunha/Hwang in attack

 

[OLDGOLD]

Not sure. Many of our conceded goals have been errors. Now with one more in defence you could argue that there is more cover for the errors. I still think if we were more effective going forward our defence would look better because we would be spending less time defending. The ball just doesn't stick going forward, and for all their good attributes Lemmy and Gomes give the ball away far too cheaply...

 

[bod101]

no i think 5 wouldn't fix a thing, not the way we are conceding goals.

i think we should play 433 at the moment

Silva Sasa
Cuhna
Gomes Bellegarde
Lemina
RAN Bueno Dawson Semedo
Sa​

or variations of the above

Silva Sasa Cuhna
Gomes Lemina Bellegarde
Bueno Kilman Bueno Semedo
Sa

Sasa
Cuhna Sarabia
Bellegarde
Gomes Lemina
Bueno Kilman Bueno Semedo
Sa
​

use full back for width most of the time, get people arriving in the box, one of the 3 midfielders sits and helps cover


thing is if we dont cut out silly mistakes defensively we will struggle to not concede, also keep the tempo p especially moving out of defence and away from trouble, if we are going to, fart about with it the other end of the pitch.

 

[DJLWolf]

I think there's a huge argument for going to 5 at the back, yes.

Not least because it will give us more protection at the back, but also because it utilises Doc in his best position.

We are so goal shy generally, that we absolutely must get all the players on the pitch that can get us goals and that's Doc, Hwang and Sasa.

I would also look at Neto as left wing back.I appreciate that seems a bit maverick but I don't see why it can't be done when you're playing with 3 centre backs and two deep sitting mids.

My team would be

Sa

Doc/Dawson/Kilman/Bueno/Neto

Lemina/Gomes

Cunha

Hwang/Sasa

I also think that team is full of 'units' and will be very dangerous from set pieces.

You've then got great options off the bench in Toti, Bueno, Semedo, Bellegarde, Doyle, Silva, Ait

 

[hambaps]

I think there's a huge argument for going to 5 at the back, yes.

Not least because it will give us more protection at the back, but also because it utilises Doc in his best position.

We are so goal shy generally, that we absolutely must get all the players on the pitch that can get us goals and that's Doc, Hwang and Sasa.

I would also look at Neto as left wing back.I appreciate that seems a bit maverick but I don't see why it can't be done when you're playing with 3 centre backs and two deep sitting mids.

My team would be

Sa

Doc/Dawson/Kilman/Bueno/Neto

Lemina/Gomes

Cunha

Hwang/Sasa

I also think that team is full of 'units' and will be very dangerous from set pieces.

You've then got great options off the bench in Toti, Bueno, Semedo, Bellegarde, Doyle, Silva, Ait

Key thing is to have someone who can deliver a set piece, so we have to always have one of Doyle or Bellegarde on the pitch (Jury still out on Sarabia).

 

[WickedWolfie]

Kick it - hard.

Hoof, lol....

 

[WickedWolfie]

Winning !!! That is all. Just winning. For about 98% of us, anyway. The other 2% just haven't realised it yet. They will, if ever we regularly lose games with 5 goals in them.

Who felt better after losing a 5 goal, open game, then winning a scrappy, low quality 1-0 at Everton? Not me, for sure.

Constantly being on the wrong end of "hard luck stories" is not only draining but normally leads to relegation. As does, as happened for the last two games, regularly having your keeper as man of the match....

 

[Westbakejazz]

We should go back to a back five and employ a manager who has proven success with the formation!

If only we could of had someone like Nuno . I hear he’s a great counter attacking coach. Oh well we can dream

 

[DJLWolf]

Key thing is to have someone who can deliver a set piece, so we have to always have one of Doyle or Bellegarde on the pitch (Jury still out on Sarabia).

Neto?

Agree though - set pieces would be critical with that team given Dawson, Bueno, Kilman, Cunha and Sasa all between 6'2 and 6'7!

 

[hambaps]

Neto?

Agree though - set pieces would be critical with that team given Dawson, Bueno, Kilman, Cunha and Sasa all between 6'2 and 6'7!

After his set pieces on Sunday I think it's best lets someone else take over.

 

[Glow69]

After his set pieces on Sunday I think it's best lets someone else take over.

Got 2 assists didn't he?

 

[Darvo]

I’m all for it. Think it’s a sensible approach for a struggling premier league team.

That’s what we are.

 

[TheConcourse]

5atb doesn’t have to be defensive. Kilman and Bueno can both step out with the ball. The WB’s can become way more adventurous and we still have two defensive minded CM’s behind Cunha who are capable with moving forwards with a football.

In answer to the OP: 100% yes.

If O’Neil wants to save his job, he has to make this change immediately. If he carries on sleepwalking into the Liverpool game with a back four, it’s going to get real messy real quick.

 

[bod101]

5atb doesn’t have to be defensive. Kilman and Bueno can both step out with the ball. The WB’s can become way more adventurous and we still have two defensive minded CM’s behind Cunha who are capable with moving forwards with a football.

In answer to the OP: 100% yes.

If O’Neil wants to save his job, he has to make this change immediately. If he carries on sleepwalking into the Liverpool game with a back four, it’s going to get real messy real quick.

4 at the back isn't what is leaking goals though, individual errors and poor communication/concentration seems to be the culprit

 

[Darvo]

4 at the back isn't what is leaking goals though, individual errors and poor communication/concentration seems to be the culprit

Someone put up a couple of great screen shots on the verdict thread yesterday. They highlighted Dawson getting pulled out of position higher up the pitch for their first goal. The gap that he left behind played a huge part in that goal. Much less likely to happen with a back 5 cos of the extra body.

 

[MolineuxMixer]

We should be moving to a back 10!

 

[bod101]

Someone put up a couple of great screen shots on the verdict thread yesterday. They highlighted Dawson getting pulled out of position higher up the pitch for their first goal. The gap that he left behind played a huge part in that goal. Much less likely to happen with a back 5 cos of the extra body.

But three in midfield with one sitting could also stop that from happening.

 

[WickedWolfie]

But three in midfield with one sitting could also stop that from happening.

You could perhaps call it the Neves position.....

 

[Darvo]

But three in midfield with one sitting could also stop that from happening.

Yep - fair point. I think there’s an over simplification made by many when analysing systems. Man City players could play any old system and still come out on top. It’s the players on the pitch that are the main consideration. Having said that, I would still go 3 at the back.

 

[AndyY]

4 at the back isn't what is leaking goals though, individual errors and poor communication/concentration seems to be the culprit

Sure, but 3/5 atb gives more cover to mitigate those mistakes

 

[Wolf 82]

Yes please - I am utterly bored of the dross we have served up since moving to possession based with a back 4.. we’ve been crap the entire run.

 

[groundhogwolf]

With the signing of Santiago Bueno, who appears clearly far more than just a backup centre back from his experience in La Liga, I am wondering if we’ll start playing with a back five again, especially against the top six (seven?) sides.

Conceding eight goals in four games isn’t a good look, and without Sa’s heroics against Everton and Palace, it could have been far more. It’s not sustainable long term to concede that number of goals, especially when we already struggle to create, and finish, clear cut chances at the other end of the pitch.

The makeup of our team I would argue also suits a back five. Our full backs are better positioned as wingbacks due to their attacking nature, our centre backs will be less exposed with the insurance of an extra defender, and counter attacking has always suited this group of players far more than trying to play high pressure, possession based football.

It doesn’t necessarily have to be viewed as a less attacking system either, with the insurance of the extra centre back it would release the shackles from our full backs, RAN/Bueno and Doc/Semedo have more freedom to get forward and support the front three. In essence we’d be swapping a front four for a front five, with the support of the wingbacks constantly getting forward.

Assuming Sasa is struggling to play 90 minutes and will continue to come off the bench for the foreseeable future, a starting XI in a 3-4-3 could look like this:

Neto/Hwang - Cunha/Silva - Bellegarde/Sarabia
RAN/Bueno - Gomes/Traore - Lemina/Doyle - Doherty/Semedo
Kilman/Toti - Dawson - Bueno
Sa/Bentley
​

Would fans prefer GON continues to try and make the 4-2-3-1 (or 4-4-2 as some prefer to call it) work, or should GON consider changing to a tried and trusted formation?

Agree, build from the back, to quote Mourinho “if you can’t win, don’t lose”.
We appear to be gambling in every game we have played, we do not have a single stand out solid defender in the squad, yes Dawson was impressive last season but only compared to what we already had (Kilman, Toti and Collins plus full backs)
We need to stop conceding CHEAP

Burnley 4-0

Towards the end of Nuno’s reign and when the players available were struggling

 

[WickedWolfie]

Agree, build from the back, to quote Mourinho “if you can’t win, don’t lose”.
We appear to be gambling in every game we have played, we do not have a single stand out solid defender in the squad, yes Dawson was impressive last season but only compared to what we already had (Kilman, Toti and Collins plus full backs)
We need to stop conceding CHEAP

Towards the end of Nuno’s reign and when the players available were struggling

Conceding cheap because we bought cheap?

 

[groundhogwolf]

formations don’t really matter as much as the way you play - havjng said that, I prefer 4 at the back as I think with 5 we’d be more likely to concede less but score less as well. I think the squad is better suited to pressing than sitting back and playing counter.

People have a rose tinted view of five at the back because we had success with it - but we also had Raul and Diogo Jota, and we don’t have anything like those two now.

Could we even score less

 

[WickedWolfie]

Could we even score less

GON says hold my beer....

 

[groundhogwolf]

GON says hold my beer....

This really isn’t a laughing matter, but thanks for cheering me up.

 

[WickedWolfie]

This really isn’t a laughing matter, but thanks for cheering me up.

Laugh or cry.... See:

Ian Burchnall

And they say Jeff doesn't plan ahead?

www.molineuxmix.co.uk

Which cracked me up....

 

[peter&thewolf]

Yes it suits us better

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

It shouldn’t be fixed

Some games we need 3 at back, others 4

For the next 3 I would go 3 at back . City and Liverpool for obvious reasons, and Luton as any threat from them will be balls into the box

 

[SmiffyWolf]

I personally would go back six but the sixth would be a second keeper .

 

[Munro Munro]

Yes would try 5 at the back as said doc on right Alt on the left hopefully Bueno can bring the ball out like Boly, Kilman and Dawson would benefit