Formations - how about a box midfield?

Callumcafc

Lots of talk about 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 diamonds lately because those are the formations that Jones has tended to favour.

Looking at the glut of midfield options we have, is it possible that a 4-2-2-2 box midfield set up might be the best way forward?

Something like…

Isted

REG Jones Gillesphey Tennai

Coventry Dobson

Camara Bakinson

Kanu May

It’s incredibly workman-like and won’t be pretty but I think from the selection choices NJ made on Tuesday night, I think it was clear he prefers a team that will run themselves into the ground rather than try to force pretty football that isn’t there.

If we stack the middle of the field and make ourselves near impossible to play through - we might be able to spring a few counter attacks through the break out runs of Camara and/or Bakinson.

SELR_addicks

Any formation is fine as long as the players understand their roles and responsibilities. 

Like for example another team would just play wingers with overlapping full-backs against that formation.

As long as Coventry/Camara knows to cover the right and Dobson/Bakinson the left, we'd be fine. 

If they don't, we get 2v1'd down the wings all afternoon. 

Callumcafc

Used Edun instead of Tennai here because this website didn’t have a headshot for Tennai…

Chizz

Swisdom

I was concerned at the beginning of January when I was told we were going to play with wing-backs.  It didn't sound as if the decision was being made by Appleton but more that "it was decided"
The way I see it you should be playing to the formation as decided by the manager and recruiting on that basis - not deciding what formation you want your manager to play and then finding players to fit in with it.
I guess that is where the lack of long-term thinking became clear.

Now we have Nathan apparently on a 4.5 year contract so presumably he will be given a certain amount of autonomy to choose who plays, how we play and will also ensure the recruitment is aligned with his thinking rather than anyone else.

In answer to the thread - a box midfield might just work well given the glut of central midfielders and the lack of genuine width

Scoham

It’s another option with this squad and I think we’ll see Jones switch between formations, including during games, rather than stick with one.

I wouldn’t call it workman-like, it’s the opposite of anything seeing as it was supposed to have originated in Brazil. Puts a lot on the two 10s to create, as well as the full backs.

https://www.coachesvoice.com/cv/4-2-2-2-football-tactics-explained-rangnick-hasenhuttl-pellegrini/

Jac_52

Man city use it as a 3-2-4-1 in possession with one of the CBs or full backs moving into midfielder. Could potentially use REG in that role to move into midfield but tbh I think we'd be horribly exposed as we don't have the technical ability or brains to not get relentlessly countered.

wmcf123

Does anyone remember when we had Arter and Watson in a box midfield ? Scarring 

NabySarr

Don’t think those 4 work in that set up. The box midfield is all about getting your creative players on the ball in-between the lines. Maybe Camara, but Bakinson is certainly not the type of player to exploit that kind of set up. 

I think it’s clear what Jones wants to do, go direct to the front 2. Whether that’s into the channels for May/Kanu to chase or directly to Ladapo and Aneke. And then he wants energy and legs in midfield to win the second balls and go from there. 

It’s the best set up for what we have at the moment. It won’t be pretty but it might keep us up, and then Jones has the summer to build something that might be a bit more pleasing on the eye 

NabySarr

Jac_52 said:

Man city use it as a 3-2-4-1 in possession with one of the CBs or full backs moving into midfielder. Could potentially use REG in that role to move into midfield but tbh I think we'd be horribly exposed as we don't have the technical ability or brains to not get relentlessly countered.

Nearly every top team at the moment does similar. They defend in a 4-4-2 where the number 10 presses alongside the striker and then in-possession they move to the 3-2-4-1 or W-M formation as it’s also known as, with the box midfield and back 3 to control possession and not be countered 

Good article on the 4-4-2 bit below for subscribers to the athletic
https://theathletic.com/5238298/2024/02/11/how-4-4-2-is-used-in-modern-football/?source=user_shared_articleThe 4-4-2 is dead. Long live the 4-4-2 

mendonca

I really think 433 at home could be the way to go. Perhaps it's the plan after securing a certain points target. You evolve as the season progresses.

We have the robust, all-action CMs for it (for the first time in a while), aswell as the variety in the forward line to be able to fulfil this (for the first time in a while, too). 

wmcf123

mendonca said:

I really think 433 at home could be the way to go. Perhaps it's the plan after securing a certain points target. You evolve as the season progresses.

We have the robust, all-action CMs for it (for the first time in a while), aswell as the variety in the forward line to be able to fulfil this (for the first time in a while, too). 

Same formation but sacrifice a midfielder for an attacking player .  

Gillis

Looking back at the early part of this thread and seeing how people were trying to make silk purses out of sows' ears makes me feel grateful for the squad we have now.

Scoham

mendonca said:

I really think 433 at home could be the way to go. Perhaps it's the plan after securing a certain points target. You evolve as the season progresses.

We have the robust, all-action CMs for it (for the first time in a while), aswell as the variety in the forward line to be able to fulfil this (for the first time in a while, too). 

We don't really have the wide players for it with only Campbell and possibly Dixon (who seems to be more of a striker) so I don't see that happening. Jones has mainly used two strikers in 3-5-2 or a 4-4-2 diamond, and we have a lot of options up front. This is a squad built for 3-5-2 with the potential to sometimes use a diamond.

NabySarr

mendonca said:

I really think 433 at home could be the way to go. Perhaps it's the plan after securing a certain points target. You evolve as the season progresses.

We have the robust, all-action CMs for it (for the first time in a while), aswell as the variety in the forward line to be able to fulfil this (for the first time in a while, too). 

Do we have a striker that can play on their own up there? Maybe Leaburn but he’s probably a while off being up to speed. I think the 3-5-2 is fine for now, it’s what we recruited for 

mendonca

To see more chances created and shots on target, I'd be interested in seeing us surprise some opposition teams by starting:

TC | Ahadme | Godden

We have Aneke, Leaburn, Kanu, Dixon, Berry, Hylton (:/) as forward options, but obviously will need to think formations and structure before naming the bench.