4-4-2 / 4-1-3-2

[nolando]

Am I crazy for dreaming of us in a different formation against at least some opposition, able to try out Hume and Jackson in their true positions as twin attackers?

------------Jackson-------Hume--------------

Simpson--------Hutchinson----------Nakajima

----------------Johnson---------------------

de Jong-----McKenna---Jakovic------Hainault

----------------Hirschfeld---------------------

[Redcoatsforever]

Am I crazy for dreaming of us in a different formation against at least some opposition, able to try out Hume and Jackson in their true positions as twin attackers?

My very favourite formation: The 3-5-2 (a bit of a 3-2-3-2, but I digress)...

-------Friend----------Jackson---------

---Simpson--Hutchinson---De Rosario---

---------Edgar------Johnson-----------

---Klukowski---McKenna----Peters-----

----------------Borjan-----------------

Now that's a team I'd love to watch...

[ThiKu]

Redcoats....in your 3-5-2 .... I can't even begin where all the holes are. What exactly do you believe Peters's role would be in this formation!?!? He can't be a fullback because he'd leave Kluka and McKenna exposed, and he can't be a central defender because....well he isn't Puyol. You can't allow him freedom to provide width down the flank because Johnson and Edgar would have to cover for him but they are required to do other jobs, in a 3-5-2. Sorry you are completely out to lunch on this one.

Either play it a 5-4-1, 5-3-1-1, or 5-3-2 if you want 3 central defenders. In which case, yes, Peters would be a superb choice at right wing back. Kluka would be our best left wing back, but you still need 3 central defenders....McKenna, Hainault, and Jakovic.

Also...what in heavens name do you have Edgar doing in the first XI - has even played a game this year for Burnley??? No....gotta be Pacheco, JDG, Bernier, JBB.....numerous other superior choices. Mine would be JDG for Edgar. I'd also play the front two as Gerba and Hume....

I like 5 at the back, even 3 at the back with the expectation your wide players are wing backs is fine....just not your line-up!

[Redcoatsforever]

Redcoats....in your 3-5-2 .... I can't even begin where all the holes are. What exactly do you believe Peters's role would be in this formation!?!? He can't be a fullback because he'd leave Kluka and McKenna exposed, and he can't be a central defender because....well he isn't Puyol. You can't allow him freedom to provide width down the flank because Johnson and Edgar would have to cover for him but they are required to do other jobs, in a 3-5-2. Sorry you are completely out to lunch on this one.

Either play it a 5-4-1, 5-3-1-1, or 5-3-2 if you want 3 central defenders. In which case, yes, Peters would be a superb choice at right wing back. Kluka would be our best left wing back, but you still need 3 central defenders....McKenna, Hainault, and Jakovic.

Also...what in heavens name do you have Edgar doing in the first XI - has even played a game this year for Burnley??? No....gotta be Pacheco, JDG, Bernier, JBB.....numerous other superior choices. Mine would be JDG for Edgar. I'd also play the front two as Gerba and Hume....

I like 5 at the back, even 3 at the back with the expectation your wide players are wing backs is fine....just not your line-up!

in all honesty, I can never think of a good right fullback off the top of my head. It's bizarre, even when it's international or club football anywhere on earth, I can name a player I like in pretty much any position, but I hit RB and just stop dead. Replace Peters with whomever you like.

Hainault, perhaps?

and with regards to Edgar, all fair points. I was going to put JDG in there, but I've had to defend his performances on the TFC Bigsoccer boards so many times that I just try to avoid mentioning him.

I don't know that Hart will be keeping Iain Hume in the fold anymore, so I left him out. It would be lovely to have him tearing it up for us in front, but I just don't know if he'll be there at all anymore.

[Juby]

I have always had a preferred formation but generally I never really thought we had the right group of talent to make the suggestion but lately...

it's really just an attacking (and demanding) 4-4-2 that could also be converted (pretty much for hutch) to what would look like a 2-3-3-2.

the 4-4-2 would be

--------Gerba-Jackson---------

Simpson---------------?Dero?

--------Julian-Hutch----------

Klukowski--------------Peters

-------?????-Jakovic--------

------- Borjan/Hirsch-------

the question mark is for probably right now Mckenna/Hainault/Edgar, with Nana and Straith in the future.

the problem with this strategy is that it's very demanding on the wingbacks and central midfields, but I'm starting to think we might have what it takes: Peters has all the essentials for a natural wingback (being able to attack and defend without being a liability, it takes alot of pace, stamina and skill), despite their recent struggles, Klukowski and JDG are probably still amoung our finest players and of course Hutch is our recent POY. Pretty much everyone else is in a very natural position (you'd probably half to have Hume and Issey on the bench though if Jackson's a striker and we still have two wingers out there).

the 2-3-3-2 isn't really a 2-3-3-2, it just looks that way on paper, that would just involve putting De Guzman at CDM and Hutch at CAM.

I always suggest though that unless your one of the biggest teams in the world, you can't really do much more then picking the formation that favours your talent, i've just found it interesting lately that our talent fits my preferred formation.

edit: I forgot all about Johnson, I think he's the main omission, probably a decent right winger or CM sub, you can probably figure out where he fits.

[TheKottonmouthed1555362307]

------------Borjan

-------Hainault--Jakovic

Peters-----------------DeJong

----------DeGuzman

----Hutchinson---Johnson

DeRosario------------Simpson

------------Jackson

Sorta a 4-5-1, It's a small attacking front, but the CONCACAF is not always a battle of physical sides, and I think sometimes we believe our size and strength can trump the technically skilled.

I rather see a guy like Friend be used as a sub and let his physical strength take over teams in the last 25-30 minutes when he's still fresh and the backline is now getting fatigued.

[Sam]

I don't have any confidence in anything but a 5 man midfield. We don't have any midfielder who is dominant enough going forward and defending that we can playing 4 in the midfield. I don't mind switching to a formation with 2 men up front if we are trailing or tied in the second half of a game, but from the start I think it would be suicide. We've got a few good tools in the centre of midfield, Johnson, De Guzman and Hutchinson are all quality, but I can see several midfields in CONCACAF that would tear any pairing out of that trio apart.

I think the 4-5-1/4-3-3 with three men in the centre of midfield has worked alright for us so far, and Hart seems to be drilling that style into the players throughout the friendlies, why make such a drastic change right before the important games start coming on.

[youllneverwalkalone]

I don't think formations mean much of anything in football other than for supporters to draw them out on message boards. 90% of clubs/nations a have 4 defenders at the back and everything else is really interchangeable on the pitch. What I believe the venerable OP is really thinking is whether there's a way to get Hume and Jackson on the pitch at the same time? I'm not sure that there really is because we need one of Friend, Gerba, or Occean to be in the match to hold the ball up and maintain a little possession. *IF* we played in Europe, or maybe Asia/Africa, we could consider conceding possession entirely in favour of playing a quick tempo counter attacking style which some might call kick and chase. But years of failure have proven that this does not work in Central America or even against Central American teams. Honduras or Costa Rica will simply slow everything down with back passes, flopping, and -amittedly- better technique. back in the day we could count on winning most headers and scoring more goals from set play, but looking at the athleticism of players these days, that advantage appears to be gone. The only change to Hart's current system/selection policy is that Hume does have the skill to play more centrally and, by my observations, both he and Hutch always play better when they're on the pitch together.

[Juby]

I don't think formations mean much of anything in football other than for supporters to draw them out on message boards. 90% of clubs/nations a have 4 defenders at the back and everything else is really interchangeable on the pitch..

I think that's an oversimplification, it's true for 12 year olds, alot of them just run around following the play, just trying to get involved when they can. But at the top level it's about having roles and responsibilities. It's not just attack then defend (or just one for strikers and CB's), you can't let this space become a defensive hole (take your risks accordingly), try and advance the teams attack from this space (capitalizing on your skills), and know how often you should be with the attack and with the defense (it varies position to position obviously).

It's about giving a player the mindset for their position.

Example:

Jaime Peters again, as a winger his job is to use the wings to find space, beat his man, advance the ball, attack the net and occasionally get back and help.

As a rightback, his job is help hold down his wing, contribute defensively and to attack without leaving a hole in the D. He can't think like an adventerous winger there.

A small change to right wingback means he is expected to contribute to the attack regularly AND get back (which is why it's a difficult position), his mentality is no longer focused on the back right, or the top right, it's pretty much his entire wing end to end which he has to factor into his mindstate and constantly remind himself.

Another good example is CDM to CAM, both midfielders, one tries to cover the outs, one tries to lead the attack, they both still overlap but their not just doing it randomly, their constantly thinking about what they should be doing in regards to their role.

[JoshieScores]

It's about giving a player the mindset for their position.

Example:

Jaime Peters again, as a winger his job is to use the wings to find space, beat his man, advance the ball, attack the net and occasionally get back and help.

As a rightback, his job is help hold down his wing, contribute defensively and to attack without leaving a hole in the D. He can't think like an adventerous winger there.

A small change to right wingback means he is expected to contribute to the attack regularly AND get back (which is why it's a difficult position), his mentality is no longer focused on the back right, or the top right, it's pretty much his entire wing end to end which he has to factor into his mindstate and constantly remind himself.

I'm a big fan of Jaime Peters' upside and talent and I think if Hart can utilize his speed to overlap with midfielders in a diamond 4-4-2 formation, it opens up a whole new possibility of wide wing attacks. The problem Canada has is, although we have a lot of depth in the midfield, we have mostly industrial players not creative attacking minded players.