The Importance of Alphonso Davies

[Club Linesman]

2 hours ago, baulderdash77 said:

Every time Davies plays like this cements more and more that he’s Canada’s LB of the present and future.  Him and Laryea teamed up gives Canada the best set of FB in CONCACAF.  
 

 

Davies and anyone on our roster or for that  matter one of the Voyageurs would give us the best pair, he is that good.😁

[gator]

1 hour ago, Club Linesman said:

Davies and anyone on our roster or for that  matter one of the Voyageurs would give us the best pair, he is that good.😁

I haven't laced the boots up for a few years and am more of a goal scorer than defender, I still play hockey, do you think we'd still be the best FB pair in CONCACAF?🤣

[LeoH037]

5 hours ago, baulderdash77 said:

Every time Davies plays like this cements more and more that he’s Canada’s LB of the present and future.  Him and Laryea teamed up gives Canada the best set of FB in CONCACAF.  
 

 

No, no, no, and NO. Davies can play as a LB for Bayern because he has 10 other world class players on his team to bail him out and close any gaps he might leave while moving forward. Canada DOES NOT have this luxury... its really not that hard to understand. Davies a LB for Canada is a complete waste, specially when him and David together in attack can make any CONCACAF defense uneasy.

[Kent]

10 minutes ago, LeoH037 said:

No, no, no, and NO. Davies can play as a LB for Bayern because he has 10 other world class players on his team to bail him out and close any gaps he might leave while moving forward. Canada DOES NOT have this luxury... its really not that hard to understand. Davies a LB for Canada is a complete waste, specially when him and David together in attack can make any CONCACAF defense uneasy.

Yeah, I would rather have the best attacking duo in CONCACAF than the best fullback duo in CONCACAF.

Can anyone name a less important position than fullback? All due respect to fullbacks, I spent much of my (very) amateur career there, and sure there are exceptions in individual players (Lahm, Roberto Carlos) but it is probably the least important position on the field. Why would we want our best player, who has talents that are incredibly useful in more important positions, to be wasted back there?

[Mikmacdo]

21 minutes ago, Kent said:

Yeah, I would rather have the best attacking duo in CONCACAF than the best fullback duo in CONCACAF.

Can anyone name a less important position than fullback? All due respect to fullbacks, I spent much of my (very) amateur career there, and sure there are exceptions in individual players (Lahm, Roberto Carlos) but it is probably the least important position on the field. Why would we want our best player, who has talents that are incredibly useful in more important positions, to be wasted back there?

Maybe FB wasnt that important back in the day but liverpool without Trent and Robertson would not be anything close to what they are right now. 

[dyslexic nam]

42 minutes ago, Kent said:

Yeah, I would rather have the best attacking duo in CONCACAF than the best fullback duo in CONCACAF.

Can anyone name a less important position than fullback? All due respect to fullbacks, I spent much of my (very) amateur career there, and sure there are exceptions in individual players (Lahm, Roberto Carlos) but it is probably the least important position on the field. Why would we want our best player, who has talents that are incredibly useful in more important positions, to be wasted back there?

A good FB can be a big help, but it is also where we stuck the guy who wasn’t very good when we played low level competitive footy.  I know that is worlds apart from upper tier footy and a quality LB can be important, but that amateur experience has always stayed with me in how I judge the position relative to the others.  

[Bdog]

55 minutes ago, LeoH037 said:

No, no, no, and NO. Davies can play as a LB for Bayern because he has 10 other world class players on his team to bail him out and close any gaps he might leave while moving forward. Canada DOES NOT have this luxury... its really not that hard to understand. Davies a LB for Canada is a complete waste, specially when him and David together in attack can make any CONCACAF defense uneasy.

As much as the whole team looked bad (and I try to block the game from my mind), the last game against the US is why I don't want him at LB for us. I feel like he tried doing too much at times and like you said, didn't have world class defenders to cover him when he pushed up. I remember him doing a ton of running trying to attack and having to sprint back when they countered, he'll get too gassed if he needs to do that every game.

If he plays LB for us but keeps it simple and focuses mostly on defending, we're kind of wasting the most dangerous attacking player in CONCACAF.

[Kent]

48 minutes ago, Mikmacdo said:

Maybe FB wasnt that important back in the day but liverpool without Trent and Robertson would not be anything close to what they are right now. 

OK. I haven’t been watching EPL for a few years, so I don’t actually know those players at all. But I didn’t challenge people to name good fullbacks. I challenged people to name a less important position. Which position is less valuable than FB? Centre back? Defensive midfielder? Attacking midfielder? Striker? Goalkeeper? Winger?

[SthMelbRed]

6 hours ago, Kent said:

OK. I haven’t been watching EPL for a few years, so I don’t actually know those players at all. But I didn’t challenge people to name good fullbacks. I challenged people to name a less important position. Which position is less valuable than FB? Centre back? Defensive midfielder? Attacking midfielder? Striker? Goalkeeper? Winger?

Your thesis betrays an utter lack of understanding of modern football at the highest levels. 

Liverpool is almost universally regarded as the current best club side in the world. Their two fullbacks have one less combined assists in the league this season than their world-class front three. Modern fullbacks are an integral part of the attack for the best teams in the world, yet you're looking at the position as where your house league team used to hide the fat kid who couldn't run. Every decent team has at least one fullback who is contributing greatly in attack. 

[Snowcrash]

1 hour ago, SthMelbRed said:

Your thesis betrays an utter lack of understanding of modern football at the highest levels. 

Liverpool is almost universally regarded as the current best club side in the world. Their two fullbacks have one less combined assists in the league this season than their world-class front three. Modern fullbacks are an integral part of the attack for the best teams in the world, yet you're looking at the position as where your house league team used to hide the fat kid who couldn't run. Every decent team has at least one fullback who is contributing greatly in attack. 

Yes, people are still thinking about house league or MLS 1.0 where the fullbacks were North Americans earning $30k a year whose singular talent was they could run a lot and only occasionally falling down on their own chasing fading, out of shape South American wingers.

Internationally, I have absolutely no issue with Davies playing LB against a stronger team, particularly if they have speedsters on the wings like Dortmund.  For one-on-one defensive coverage as a FB, he's probably top 5 in the Bundesliga. 

Also, when Canada has the ball, you can switch to a three man back with someone like MAK slipping behind Davies as he plays further up.  In that position, he's the defacto winger or wingback on the left side.

A FB who's the fastest player on the field, can beat a defender one on one and is the best one on one defender on the field is like winning a power ball lottery ticket.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 10, 2020 by Snowcrash

[WestHamCanadianinOxford]

Maybe somewhat of a middle ground. 

I don't think you can say there is an unimportant position in a team that wants to be great.  Even if you just mostly break up play and let others do the creative stuff like Makelele in the first great Chelsea teams and more recently Kante with Leicester, you are vital. But those players also do not need to be the stars or the best players.  You look to give creative outlets to your best players and part of the balance of being a good manager is working your system around them.  

Liverpool makes use of  its fullback more creatively but again you have some players that sit and hold when they do.  Maldini,  was one of the first that that I saw regularly who helped run a team from full/wing back. So it is not completely new either.  

Now, and please take this in spirit of honesty and humility it is given, we (Canada) are not at the stage where we are able to look at being great on the world stage, we need to get there regularly and be good first.  So I think there is a bit of an unfair comparison there to begin with.  We are going to need to grind out draws at some point (hopefully) and that requires different choices. 

Right now Davies has rapidly developed into the best left sided defender we have by a country mile, the problem being, he is also the best left-sided player and probably the best forward if used right.  There are some games when you need to feed him the ball and let him do his thing but (and this goes contrary to me being strongly against him being "wasted" at fullback a year ago) there are some situations where you need your best leftback to play leftback or at least wing back.  And right now our depth in the forward positions is better than our depth in defence. 

But, (back the other way) right now we need to win whatever games we play so I would keep him away from defence and close to the opposition net. 

Tough one. 

 

[Unnamed Trialist]

Everyone is forgetting at Davies as FB for our last match vs the US was a calamity, it was a mess and a lot of it was his fault. 

For a team with possession and a midfield that can hold and control, you can put an attacking minded player in an outside back position. At Barça that is Jordi Alba now, Alves in past. Neither is very good as a defender, though fast and tenacious. They just get away with their defects because the teams they are on are rarely on their back foot for any length of time.

Davies at Bayern is useful at LB because they are going forward, the wing or attackers (Perisic often) are much higher up and leave him ground to cover and attack. Since most rivals are sitting back, if he was a left wing there they'd just absorb him and let him run off the end-line with his overlong controls. If he were on their right it'd work better.

For Canada, Davies is, IMO, better as a false wing on the right, or a right wing. He has no attacking value as a LB except for crossing, never gets a shot in even though doing great dribbles, and his value is wasted for us. How many dribblers do we boast? Why would we put one away from the ball and away from the opposing box?

Even at Bayern, he holds poorly, most of his highlight reel stuff defending is making up for having been out of position or improperly holding in the previous set of plays. For Bayern, it was a matter of covering for injuries and he's done well. For Canada, we'd be better to have mostly stay at home FBs and then have a few effective pieces going forward to get onto goal.

 

Edited February 10, 2020 by Unnamed Trialist

[costarg]

Davies is at the point where Canada needs to mold the team to him.  We need to use him at LB and winger, crazy thing is he actually has the speed and stamina to play both.  Best option to maximise his punch is going with 3-5-2 or 3-4-3.  Laryea or ZBG can also play the wide man on the right.  

 

 

[Snowcrash]

17 minutes ago, costarg said:

Davies is at the point where Canada needs to mold the team to him.  We need to use him at LB and winger, crazy thing is he actually has the speed and stamina to play both.  Best option to maximise his punch is going with 3-5-2 or 3-4-3.  Laryea or ZBG can also play the wide man on the right.  

 

 

Canada needs to mold the team to fit both Davies and David.  Both are world class and have a place on CL finalists.  Davies there already and David after he leaves Gent.  Similarly, there's discussion as to the best position for both players.  Davies has already been talked to death but it's still not settled whether David should be a 9 or a 10 for Canada. 

Particularly if Larin regains his form and becomes a starter next to  Cavallini up front. If that's the case, I can see David being slotted at the top of the diamond like for Gent where they have good sized finishers like Yaramchuk and Depoitre. Otherwise, he can play the 9 with Cav but then you need a 10 with decent vision and anticipation for finding David in those pockets of space he creates so well for himself in the box. 

Edited February 10, 2020 by Snowcrash

[TFC2017]

We have enough players playing around the same level (A pretty high level) where you could definitely make arguments about different formations... I think a 3-5-2 best suits us for our lack of quality CB and natural full back strength.. I think Davies and Laryea used as wingbacks where they could get forward more because we have the cover in 3 CB's would help us.

 

David - Cavallini

Davies - Osorio - Kaye - Arfield - Laryea

Cornelius - Miller - James

Borjan

 

 

[SpursFlu]

Playing for Canada Davies should be playing forward. Use his ball winning ability in the ther teams final 3rd. And when he gets the ball allow him to fifa on the other team. With Bayern Davies doesn't really ever defend. The other team gives away so much possession Davies speed and strength is used to snuff out counterattacks. When Bayern has the ball they push their fullbacks up in to attacking positions which is where Davies spends most of his time

Davies has also said he prefers to play an attacking position so I think we should allow playing for Canada to be a bit of therapy and also allow him to continue playing his preferred position

Edited February 10, 2020 by SpursFlu

[costarg]

14 minutes ago, TFC2017 said:

We have enough players playing around the same level (A pretty high level) where you could definitely make arguments about different formations... I think a 3-5-2 best suits us for our lack of quality CB and natural full back strength.. I think Davies and Laryea used as wingbacks where they could get forward more because we have the cover in 3 CB's would help us.

 

David - Cavallini

Davies - Osorio - Kaye - Arfield - Laryea

Cornelius - Miller - James

Borjan

 

 

Exactly, just need to get Vitoria in there ahead of James

Piette, Eustaquio or even Hutch for Osorio when playing better teams and we need the added defensive cover for the back.  Someone on here mentioned he's playing like he's 30 again.

[costarg]

50 minutes ago, Snowcrash said:

Canada needs to mold the team to fit both Davies and David.  Both are world class and have a place on CL finalists.  Davies there already and David after he leaves Gent.  Similarly, there's discussion as to the best position for both players.  Davies has already been talked to death but it's still not settled whether David should be a 9 or a 10 for Canada. 

Particularly if Larin regains his form and becomes a starter next to  Cavallini up front. If that's the case, I can see David being slotted at the top of the diamond like for Gent where they have good sized finishers like Yaramchuk and Depoitre. Otherwise, he can play the 9 with Cav but then you need a 10 with decent vision and anticipation for finding David in those pockets of space he creates so well for himself in the box. 

The 10 isn't soo necessary when you have Davies, Kaye, Arfield, Osorio, Laryea and maybe Eustaquio in the midfield.  They can all distribute the ball to Cavallini and David up top, and break down defenses.

[SpursFlu]

We need to accommodate Davies and David not Osorio. Please everyone stop with the madness

[Obinna]

Davies should not be burdened with defensive duties. It's that simple. His speed, strength and skill should be used to put pressure on the opponent as much as possible. The USA could not deal with him in Toronto.

[The Beaver 2.0]

And I don't think we should dismiss the idea of him playing on his off-wing either. He played there for parts of the first game against the US and he was a pain in their Yankee assess. It is tactically wise to use Davies in attack, if only because it forces the opposition to always keep an eye on him. It is as much a defensive tactic as an offensive. (Two birds; one Davies.)

[SpursFlu]

With the Caps Robbo constantly had him switching sides and he was equally affective on the right or left.

[Unnamed Trialist]

5 hours ago, SpursFlu said:

We need to accommodate Davies and David not Osorio. Please everyone stop with the madness

There's a huge chunk of TFC supporters here who push Osorio  very dogmatically, even making up BS to bolster his rep (this business of worldwide transfer interest, totally baseless). Maybe not so much now, but it was really over the top just two years ago.  I mean, Osorio has never been even close to Arfield or Hutchinson, and though better than Piette in attack and with a pretty good mindset going forward (not as good there as Junior though), he's little more than solid midfield player and a good piece to have amongst our best 15 players.

That said, I am surprised others are arguing we have to build around Davies or David. The former, because he does not dictate play, and should probably not be asked to. Let him break things open and give him freedom, but don't build around him. Nor David: we really have not seen whether he can handle a higher level yet, the UEFA games will help but until that transfer comes through we won't know. 

I am personally inclined to keep our focus on improving the central positions we are weak at, starting at CB. If we had a top flight CB, with Borjan, the mids and the attacker we'd be in good stead.

[Aird25]

I'm curious if everyone is actually watching his play with Bayern or if many of these comments are based strictly on his national team performances? 

Personally, I think he's been absolutely outstanding this season in almost all facets of the game. In defense as well as sparking the attack. The one knock I have with his play this season has been in and around the 18 yard box. Not that he's been poor, but just not at the same level as some of his teammates or other elite attackers in the game.

His decision making was poor against the US and he took unnecessary risks in his own half. I haven't seen that from him at many other points in his career, and I think it would be silly to place too much weight on a single game. For me, he is best suited as a wide player. Whether that's as an attacking fullback, a shutdown fullback, or a winger depends on the tactics and the opponent, but that's where I think his attributes are best utilized. That could all change as his game develops of course. He may very well turn into an elite striker, but he isn't one at this point. Thankfully he is one of the better two way left sided players in the game

[Bertuzzi44]

I just remember watching the American feed for the last game against the USA, and the commentators basically saying "thank god Canada put Davies in the back four." They know how much of a threat Davies is, and want him to stay as far as humanly possible from their goal...

So yeah, for me Canada shouldn't use Davies in defence.