New Coach - Michael Collins

Great post.

In actual fact, a loss against Barnsley doesn't merit the "we need time to gel"-style excuses.

Barnsley are a good team, they have started the season superbly well, and they steamrolled us.

But even accepting our XI got outplayed by their XI, there were a few fundamental issues that baffled. The formation; the change in formation at half time; the substitutions.

That has nothing to do with players gelling or players not understanding a system; it's about the fact there isn't a system in place for them to understand. Two games in, after seven or eight pre-season games, we haven't even set our stall out yet.

Time to make some decisions.

Who are Bradford City, what style will we play, and how will we achieve our ambitions?

Not by switching formations every 45 minutes or crying about 'time to gel' after every defeat to a good, well-organised side.

 

That's the key thing for me, they were a big strong side but more importantly they were organised, had a plan and executed it.

 

Peterborough haven't played Barnsley yet.

Let's see how we get on in the next league game. Hopefully Barnsley was the exception rather than the rule.

I agree that we seemed to have wasted preseason buy not trying to get as many of the first team playing together. We can't afford another preseason like the last. The opposition and their pitch needs researching well in advance.

 

I remember the FA cup quarter final against Reading and thinking they were a big, strong, athletic side. That's the type of player we need to be recruiting going forward.

 

They'd all practically played together throughout the whole of last season as well.

 

Too early to judge anyway.Everyone is new in the building and although we want the lads to hit the ground running, it's gonna take time to bed in. Also, any misgivings with the appointment of our Head Coach merely clouds the situation imo.

 

In terms of what our “style” is, how some posters still don’t know is baffling.

Collins is obviously in favour of playing 3 at the back and probably playing the ball out of defence.

Unfortunately he has players who don’t like that style and struggle in it (NKP as the prime example). Also if the opposition push up, like Barnsley did, then the goalie has no choice but to go long.

I’ll say it again; the sooner Collins reverts to a back 4 the better. For whatever reason it doesn’t work at City at the moment (and didn’t with Grayson).

 

Or when SM or PP tried it on the odd occasion.

 

We played 3 at the back under Stuart in the season we got to Wembley. Always lined up a 442 but switched to a 343, especially in the second half of the season.

 

I only remember seeing him play 3 at the back a few times eg sheffield utd, and we never won.

 

Agree Sheffield Scunthorpe and Millwall at Wembley and we lost all 3

 

I don’t like 3 at the back. And in particular I don’t like this 343 system he seems to favour. The only team I’ve seen do it well is Chelsea in the year they won the league - it’s too reliant on having top players. Your lone striker has to be physical but also mobile. A target man but also a goal scorer - the likes of Diego Costa and Harry Kane. Your wide forwards have to be good with both feet, able to beat players on either side and score and create plenty. Your wing backs have to be very comfortable defending one on one and your wider central defenders have to be brave enough to push high and wide so the wing backs can Press when the ball goes out there.

We have none of that - no team in this league ever will.

The only way I could see us playing with 3 at the back would be to have a 352 system.

O’D
Mellor O’Connor McGowan
Scannell Akpan Wright Chicksen/Riley
Payne
Miller Doyle

And even then the wide areas worry me - Mellor is a full back; it’s where he performed well for Blackpool and whilst I think Scannell has the engine for a wing back role, we need him further up the pitch. The left side would be a disaster.

With what we have we need 4 at the back. Whether it’s a variation of 442/4411 or 433/451/4231. Those are the systems that get the best out of what we’ve got and would be easiest to understand.

Personally I’d try a few games with 442 - Payne on the left but free to roam and Scannell on the right. In games where we want to be more cautious, play Payne at number 10 and drop a forward.

 

Sshhhhhhh.

Bradford City play 4-4-2. It doesn't matter who the players are, once they pull on a City shirt they cannot, and should not, be expected to play any fancy dan formation (e.g. any not 4-4-2).

The sooner whoever is in charge at City realises these facts the better - we need two centre halves, one good at tackling, one good at heading. On the wings one side should have a full back who likes to get forward and overlap his winger who likes tricks and cutting inside, while the other wing should be two steadier players. In midfield one attacking midfielder and one defensive one, up front one big man and one little man. These should all be non-negotiables, there is no other way we should even consider lining up.

 

Well we will see tonight won't we.

 

Every formation that's getting touted seems hell bent on jamming Payne in somehow.

Without a complete centre forward, it's not going to work. It leaves too much for the front man to do, and if we play two forwards as well as Payne, it leaves us short at the other end of the pitch.

Solution is simple: Payne is an impact sub.

 

All Collins has to remember is formation 4-4-2 and tactics 'gerrit forrad' and he won't go far wrong.

 

It's League One.

All our players are British and have learned to play football in similar systems.

The reason formations might work in the Premier League is they bring players in from Europe who have been brought up playing that style and those formations instead.

Why sign a boxer to fight for you and ask him to use Jiu Jitsu?

 

He’s the best player we’ve got. Impact sub? Not a chance.

 

Is that because his FIFA rating is higher than the others, or is it because of his sub appearances at Blackburn which their fans rated distinctly average?

Or is it reputation?

Help me out here.

 

It’s because he has more quality and pedigree than anyone else we have.

If we ever get to the point where we can have him on the bench as a plan B, I’ll be delighted. We’re a million miles from that right now.

The slight ‘problem’ is what position do you play him? Does he have enough physically or defensively to play with Akpan in a midfield 2? If so, then great. Otherwise it’s a case of him having play off the striker(s) or from a wider role.