Ryan Broom - £500k fee

[Green Flash]

Broom has been great for us but like most players at this level can’t maintain it consistently. If he could he would not be in league one. Pan also a bit off the boil at the moment as has Mayor been in the past. He is a valuable asset in my view

 

[Shoenice]

Im talking minutes per goal this season.
Mayor currently on 384 mins per goal
Broom on 638 mins per goal.
If you swapped that stupid Bolton goal between the two, which could easily have been the case you'd be looking at
Mayor on 256 per goal and Broom lagging some distance behind on 957.5 per goal (1 goal in every 10 games)

At least be consistent.

Mayor had, quite literally, a goal line tap-in at Accrington. Not 5 or 10 yards out. Goal line tap in.

 

[MGM]

4-3-3? The club's whole philosophy is 3-5-2 right through the age groups is it not? Why would they change that to accommodate these 2 in the same team?

l know.

But then why buy players that don’t fit the system. Mayor and George Cooper are wide men. Or wingers.

Yet we had the situation before Cooper got injured of him playing lef wing back even though he can’t defend that well.

Buy players that fit the system. Instead of shoe horning them in.

 

[MGM]

We have been wide open for 2 and a half seasons now, playing 3 ATB. Apart from the early part of this season, when Galloway was playing, our ability to be opened up like a can of beans has been painfully obvious. Even in League 2, people still refer back to the Mansfield game at home, when we should have been 0-4 down at half-time. Other examples spring to mind like Northampton away, and obviously Exeter away. Even when we eventually win games by a relatively convincing scoreline, we cough up enough chances for the opposition for them to have got something out of it- our conceding of very good chances on goal (and one on ones especially) must be one of the highest in the division in each of the last 3 seasons, even when we ended up 3rd in the curtailed promotion season!
Yes, the personnel have changed but the problem has returned with a vengeance- Wednesday could have had 10 at Hillsbrough recently, and we need to look at changing the system, and not leaving so much wide open space behind our wing-backs.
I think Scarr, Wilson and Bolton (possibly) are good defenders, so can we play them in a system where they can face and defend the direction we are playing, rather than forever being pulled left and right to cover raiding opposition attacks into acres of green space?
The argument about it being 3 ATB across all the age groups is almost illogical. The first team has to be the priority and if the system isn't working in the first team then the system has to change- for the first team. By the time anyone from our existing youth team makes the first team, the system will probably have been changed by a new manager anyway, so what's the point of coaching all the youth team into the first team's way of playing?! For the Papa John's Trophy? Really?
It certainly won't cure all our current ills but I would like to see Schuey change the formation, even if it's just to demonstrate that he's his own man. I haven't seen much evidence of that yet, to be brutally honest.

If I was picking the team for Saturday (and assuming everyone bar George Cooper is fit) I would play 4-3-3 and go with the following;

Cooper

Edwards
Scarr
Wilson
Grant

Houghton
Randell
Camara

Garrick
Jephcott or Ennis
Mayor

l agree with the sentiment of your post.

The point l wanted to raise though is about the youth system and the club philosophy.

l believe they are doing it this way so they know those young players know the positions inside out. So the idea is that they can slot into the team. That’s the logic.

The problem l have is does this mean every manager from now on has to play this 3-1-4–2 system? If the answer is yes, l find it daft. That would surely mean you are going to rule number of potential managers out in the future because that may want to play a different system. If the answer is no, then why structure it like this if a new manager in 4-5 years wants to play 4ATB system? Suddenly you don’t have any youth players your developing that understand the art of playing full back. What about us developing wide players when the only width role in the team is wing back. We might have some great wide attacking players at the club but they just might not be suited to the industrious nature of the wing back role. Are we then going to shoe horn them in elsewhere?

Hopefully the youth team is coached to play a number of different systems and not just the 3-1-4-2, day in, day out. It’s not like results matter more than developing the player at that level.

Gareth Ainsworth has now got his Wycombe side play a 3ATB system. Except his system has two players flanking a lone forward in a 3-4-3, which creates the width. This is a guy that is traditionally been a 4ATB man.

I understand this is the system of choice. I just don’t get the tactical inflexibility.

 

[Steve Evans]

Not "Argyle Green" then.

my youthful memory of when i started going mate.we are in very good hands.

 

[mervyn]

l agree with the sentiment of your post.

The point l wanted to raise though is about the youth system and the club philosophy.

l believe they are doing it this way so they know those young players know the positions inside out. So the idea is that they can slot into the team. That’s the logic.

The problem l have is does this mean every manager from now on has to play this 3-1-4–2 system? If the answer is yes, l find it daft. That would surely mean you are going to rule number of potential managers out in the future because that may want to play a different system. If the answer is no, then why structure it like this if a new manager in 4-5 years wants to play 4ATB system? Suddenly you don’t have any youth players your developing that understand the art of playing full back. What about us developing wide players when the only width role in the team is wing back. We might have some great wide attacking players at the club but they just might not be suited to the industrious nature of the wing back role. Are we then going to shoe horn them in elsewhere?

Hopefully the youth team is coached to play a number of different systems and not just the 3-1-4-2, day in, day out. It’s not like results matter more than developing the player at that level.

Gareth Ainsworth has now got his Wycombe side play a 3ATB system. Except his system has two players flanking a lone forward in a 3-4-3, which creates the width. This is a guy that is traditionally been a 4ATB man.

I understand this is the system of choice. I just don’t get the tactical inflexibility.

In the recent podcast on here (can’t remember where) when Simon Hallett was interviewed about his plans for Argyle he stressed two important things. Firstly that a key to coaching management and management succession was that he would only recruit a manager who was passionate about playing the game the right way, mainly on the ground, no hoof ball. Secondly, he said he would never impose tactics or playing strategies on the coach, because this was outside his area of expertise. So I don’t get the impression that 3 atb is being forced on our manager and coaching staff, and it is definitely their decision to change as and when they feel appropriate.

 

[MGM]

In the recent podcast on here (can’t remember where) when Simon Hallett was interviewed about his plans for Argyle he stressed two important things. Firstly that a key to coaching management and management succession was that he would only recruit a manager who was passionate about playing the game the right way, mainly on the ground, no hoof ball. Secondly, he said he would never impose tactics or playing strategies on the coach, because this was outside his area of expertise. So I don’t get the impression that 3 atb is being forced on our manager and coaching staff, and it is definitely their decision to change as and when they feel appropriate.

Then why are we hoofing the ball down the pitch to Hardie or Garrick continuously?

This all started last season under Lowe.

My only logic to this question is because we simply can’t penetrate in wide areas of the pitch.

Its ok saying you want a philosophy. It’s another thing implementing it.

If we are flexible with formations, and it’s all about the style of play, then l don’t get the rigid way we stick to 3-1-4-2 if lm honest and have no plan B.

 

[JannerinCardiff]

Then why are we hoofing the ball down the pitch to Hardie or Garrick continuously?

This all started last season under Lowe.

My only logic to this question is because we simply can’t penetrate in wide areas of the pitch.

Its ok saying you want a philosophy. It’s another thing implementing it.

If we are flexible with formations, and it’s all about the style of play, then l don’t get the rigid way we stick to 3-1-4-2 if lm honest and have no plan B.

We are hoofing it long because we don’t have the CB’s who can play through the thirds. Apologies, we have 1 defender who can do this in Galloway, but he is currently injured.

I believe the system works but it is most effective when we have the right players to implement it. For me Edwards offers no width and our CB’s don’t posses the passing skills. We need to recruit the right players in these positions to make the system work effectively imo.

Our current defensive plight also isn’t being helped by people not defending very well.

 

[Cult Of Personality]

I like Scare and Wilson as they are proper defenders . They get head foot and everything onto the ball. But with Scarr you can see he not comfortable on the ball. And especially as he the middle center back he tends to find himself on the ball and with space to run into . Teams have worked out he not confident and tend not even to press him now but actually cut out his passing lanes so they he has to hoof the ball upfield where we don't have anyone who can hold the ball up on a regular basis. Unless Scarr improves his passing range or we get a hold up striker . We will carry on seeing what is happening. Balls into channels for striker's to chase .