Footballing Culture and Identity

The long term vision in terms of having a strategy is welcome. Its something we haven't had since the BFG days and i'm confident Sparks understands whats needed for the aim. On the pitch we have progressed in a short space of time and exceeded expectation when McCall left. The last four games have put a more realistic angle on where the club currently is and there is a lot more work to do with this squad before we can be truly confident of a promotion push. T and S are probably vicitms of their own success, with the good run came a different type of pressure and expectation that in fairness was maybe too demanding in the short term.
In the short term the playoffs are still achievable, albeit a long shot, and every effort should be made to get into them with the squad available with whatever formation possible. Long term i agree with the philosphy that the managers stick with a preferred formation and the clubs aim should be to run that mantra throughout the club. It will take more than one transfer window to build a squad capable of the aim of automatic promotion and this team is some way short of that. An interesting summer lies ahead with recruitment.

 

Wow @JonButterfield that must be one of the longest opening post I've ever read....

Seriously though, by introducing a formation as standard throughout the club you not only,

A) Restrict yourself in the recruitment stakes by only bringing in managers with the same preference for that formation.

B) Put yourself behind the 8 ball when clubs find ways to stop you as we're seeing now.

C) Need to convince supporters that playing on the counter attack, at pedestrian pace is entertaining to watch at home.

I personally don't see the need to run any formation throughout the club. We need to be able to change shape successfully during the course of a game and that should be taught throughout the club. The ability to put 2 up front or switch to a 3 at the back if the opposition have 1 up front. Bring enough talent into the club that are good enough to play multiple systems and not be one dimensional. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result....

Leeds have done well since Bielsa introduced the high energy philosophy throughout the club. That would be my preference. Football played at pace, high press, each player knowing where the other will be. They've been praised by most pundits for the entertainment value and as a supporter it must be great to watch. That's something that can be introduced throughout the club.

 

@JonButterfield what you are not understanding is that we need to go up next season.

4–2-3-1 is a defensive formation. It’s a boring formation. It’s a safe formation. Playing with a defensive 6. It only really looks good if you play on the counter. Trouble is when your midfield lose control then teams like Oldham can make you look silly.

Think what most are saying is that if Cooke is so vital to the formation but out then you need to change it because other players can’t do what he can.

As for what Sparks, the associate directors want etc I don’t know. Why would they want to commit to anything but winning?? I don’t think they will care as long as we win!!

I think you are getting a little confused. Currently the mindset at the club is wrong. The jumping up and down by. T & S because we got a point against Bolton highlighted this. Yes, a playing identity would be good but we need to change or mindsets to winning ones first. Only winning will do! Draws need to feel like defeats not victories.

Then we have the fact of are T & S really good enough to take us up? Really? We don’t know! It’s been disappointing since they got the new contracts. They got backed like no other yet still seems like we are struggling.

Cooke isn’t bloody Messi or Gerrard. He shouldn’t be a big miss. He seems one because T & S are lacking ideas at this moment. Hopefully, we create an identity but high press, attacking football not safe Bowyer boring football.

Automatic position next season has to be the aim. Has to be. How we get there! For one I don’t care!

 

I don't think formation is something you have to stick with when recruiting managers, but style of play is absolutely essential. Agree with @JonButterfield that we can't be doing 180s anymore in terms of the style of play we bring into the club with managerial appointments. All that leads to is yearly clear outs of players because they're not suitable for the new managers style.

Agree with the premise that the younger age groups should be playing the same system and style as the first team. Pretty obvious that it will make their transition to senior level as seamless as possible as they won't have to be performing in a way that's unfamiliar to them. Although I've often wondered how the younger coaches feel about that as they're effectively being told how to do their job rather than letting them come up with their own ideas. But I suppose its about recruiting staff who can also buy into this idea and are happy with it.

 

But what Butterfield has alluded to is exactly what Bielsa has done, they play one way and train accordingly. Virtually every club has a set way of playing, it's what managers do. And if T and S believe in the 4-2-3-1 or a variant of it then that is what they should stick with.

 

Top post Jon, one of the best I've read on here all season

 

You can (and should) develop a style and culture that you want throughout the club, but we cannot be wedded to one formation. Tactics constantly evolve and in 10 years time 4-2-3-1 as it is now could well be obsolete (it's been quite common for at least a decade already, with evolutions like inverted wingers moving it on).

 

Any formation can be attacking or defensive depending on how it actually operates on the field.

One of the reasons our 4-2-3-1 isn't working as well going forward is because I don't think we have the right full-backs for it - with two deep lying midfielders the full-backs need to be getting forward more to support the wingers knowing there is some security behind them. The most effective teams playing this system will have full backs who can overlap (or underlap) the wingers creating overloads and effectively turning it into 5 or 6 attacking players when on the front foot. I believe our current full back options are limited when it comes to this and it is exposing our wide players and preventing us from imposing ourselves as an attacking force.

 

Sticking to just one formation rigidly, come what may is not a "footballing identity", it's poor management.

I'm all for have a preferred set up and signing players to fit into that plan but adaptability and fluidity can be just as important at times.

 

You can have a culture and an identity and you appoint a head coach or a manager whatever you call it to fit into that.

For me at this level, you have a recruitment team, a style of play you want so you sign players to that style, a focus on youth where they are good enough and then if the manager goes you still have that intact and you replace one piece and the rest carries on.

that’s all we need and we seem to have it slowly but surely. If the manager or managers are not working , long term, you can replace them. It’s not such a sin.

Currently talk of replacing them is nonsense. If you are consistent in this league you get promoted. That’s all there is to it. Look at bolton dead and buried in November and now looking like they may even win the league. We don’t need to be special next season. Just consistent

 

Bolton were always going up. I said this throughout the start of the season. Bolton were just getting us Div 2.

Talk of replacing T & S isn’t nonsense. It’s understandable because they are new to first team management and we have no experience to support them. In my eyes I wouldn’t get rid but I would be seeing who is about come the end of the season and maybe keep them as back room staff.

I would be vastly disappointed on how our performances have dropped off since they got the job.

The key is next season and if we think they can’t take us up we have to get a man in that we think will.

 

I’m a fan on 4231 but it needs to be done right and we aren’t atm, we’re fine from a defensive point of view but useless going forward. It maybe in part due to personnel, but when I see us pass it round the back for a minute then hoof it to an isolated striker I think it maybe more. I’m not calling for the managers heads, like with young players they will frustrate and make mistakes and hopefully learn and improve but it’s important to criticise when needed.

That said you can’t just have a rigid formation and stick by it to the death, a plan A, B, C and D are required in modern football even Man City have back up plans of it’s not going right and they’re world class, so if teams like that have to adapt then we sure need to because it’s obvious we have become easy to play against which is probably one of the causes of us booting it long all the time.

A footballing identity/Philosophy isn’t about sticking to a set formation (although you may start every game in that system, it doesn’t mean you don’t have to learn to adapt) it’s more about style of play, which we have no identity on atm in my opinion. Last time we did was under McCall actually in 16/17, which is why it was so disappointing we saw none of it when he came back.

I think the last 12 games will be frustrating, which is why I said on another thread, just play attacking and try introduce one or two kids like Scales and FCD. Because other than entertainment we’ve not much to play for, we’ll lose games just don’t do it meekly.

 

Great post with some very good points.

With regards to our current set up on the field, I was completely tired of watching us roll over at the first sign of trouble game after game. We have been a weak and timid team for a long time. It was the key theme of our L1 relegation season and has been a part of the club ever since, up until around December time. That is why I had sympathy with Trueman's post-match comments on Saturday about it being important that we didn't lose that match. Yes its frustrating not to win any match, especially against a side below you in the table, but in years gone by we would have comfortably lost it so I was glad to see Trueman have the poise to appreciate the bigger picture.

Part of that bigger picture is year after year of shockingly bad transfer windows. They had a great effort at it in January, but years of neglect can't be rectified in one month. And it shows in certain areas of the squad where there are clear gaps - no specialist right back, lack of central midfield cover, different options up front. For once, the summer window is an exciting prospect. Cooke's injury is simply bad timing and we haven't found the best person to cover that position. The search for that cover has cost us points at a stage in the season where we had no room for error thanks to a woeful start to the season. And I can understand T&S trying to fix one position in a formula that has yielded promotion form for them rather than ripping things up and starting again.

Looking at the long term and T&S' future, I think you are right to mention culture because stability and calm have been unfamiliar traits of the club for far too long. It shows in the fanbase and has shown in decision making. Yes promotion is the ultimate goal, but it would be nice to actually get through a season without sacking a manager - something we haven't managed to do since 2016/17. Yes change is sometimes required but the best clubs only sack a manager if they know they can deliver improvement. Its probably a measure of how far we have fallen but if T&S see out their current contracts then that will be a minor goal reached for Sparks and the club. They have already exceeded expectation on their first target and I think there is still time for an exciting end to this season, but I hope they can instill some stability and calm to the club next season because it is much needed. And Trueman has already shown signs of that with his comments post-Oldham.

 

So you preferred our performances and results under our previous manager BEFORE they got the job .

 

Some great comments on this topic.
I agree with what @JonButterfield is alluding to. I'm not so sure that Ryan is getting all his ideas from this forum though. I think he's smart enough to see where this club has been lacking over the last few years and is starting to put in place a structure and organisation that will hopefully bear fruit in the years to come.
One thing I think where we've lost our way as a club is our brand identity. And by that I mean our DNA. Some people think brand is a marketing term and is restricted to just marketing. But brand goes much deeper than that. It's about the whole culture of the club whether it's the design of the shirts, to the style of football we play.
One thing I'd like to hear from Ryan at the fans forum is what he thinks is our 'brand' now and where we need to take it. It should inform everything the club does, from the type of football we play, the type of manager we need to play that way, the type of players to play that style, right through to how the club interacts and communicates with the fans.
As an example, throughout my time as a City fan, stretching back the 1980's, part of the City brand was that we played a ball-on-the-deck, passing style. It was what City fans expected. Those of us old enough to remember the Doherty years will recall that he changed the style to long-ball. He brought in players to fit that style and whilst relatively effective wasn't what 'we' played and fans hated it. It made Doherty probably the most hated manager we've had.
And this is where perhaps the lack of identity or brand in recent years has lead, up until fairly recently, the mess we've been in.
As has already been touched on managers have been recruited not on the basis of fitting with our brand but because of past experience. And that in turn has informed recruitment. We've ended up with a hotch-potch of players recruited by successive managers all with their own style and preferred formations. It's been a mess.
But having a brand, isn't a guarantee of success but it does mean that we know what kind of management team we want and what type of players we need. So, we can recruit square pegs to fit square holes. And I'm not talking about sticking to a rigid formation, but a way of playing football which informs the formation.
We're not there yet. T&S have played a certain style and set up based on the resources available to them. Early results gave, in my opinion, false expectations we could go up this season and rather glossed over the shortcomings of the team prior to their appointment.
Now, I don't know what style of football T&S liked to play with the youth set-up, but at a guess I would say that is the way they'll want to play as a management team. It's a question of whether we like that style and have we or do we need to recruit to fit that style? Maybe a question for the forum on Thursday?

 

We've made massive progress as a club, considering the mess we were in when T and S took the helm.

Arguably, if we had managed to make one (or even two) signings in midfield of the quality of Canavan then there might be a very different slant to this debate.

We've gone from being a complete shambles on the pitch to being organised and hard to beat. Limitations have been exposed a bit over the last couple of weeks, but we will end the season with something to build on.

I get the frustration with what appears to be some inflexibility with our current system. But at least we have a system. It was obvious towards the end of SM's tenure that the players didn't understand what was wanted of them. To introduce a new philosophy mid-season and get it to work has been great. It will take time to take us to the next level, and some changes in personnel on the pitch.

However, I agree with @Fordy117 that automatic promotion next season should be the aim. We have a fan base that should be able to sustain decent L1 football and we need to be making progress towards that.

 

It's not the system that matters .... it's the flexibility WITHIN a system that is important

 

I have no problem adopting a style of play for the whole club just not 4-2-3-1 ( 4-5-1 really ) I would much more prefer more attacking options with much more flexibility, Man City ( 4-3-3 ) and Leeds ( 4-1-4-1 ) are much more attacking and yet flexible formations which have the added benefit it can be tweaked to player injuries etc, These pressing styles are good to watch and the fans will then get behind the club more, The present managers prefer the much more pedestrian and defensive style of play but it is hard work for fans with little entertainment