Game 5: Fire vs TFC 4/21 2:30pm - The Two Towers

Discussion in 'Chicago Fire' started by Es Brennt, Apr 18, 2012.

  1. Es Brennt Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Location:
    Shermer, Illinois
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    [IMG]

    Chicago Fire vs Toronto Fun Club
    4/21/2012 2:30pm
    BMO Field
    NBC Sports
          
  2. firefan2001 Member

    Member Since:
    Dec 27, 2000
    Location:
    Oswego, Illinois
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
    [LINEUP-4-4-2]Oduro,Rolfe,Pappa,Grazzini,Pardo,Nyarko,Segares,Friedrich,Anibaba,Gargan,Johnson[/LINEUP-4-4-2]


    FIRE 3-1.......
  3. Sparky98 Member

    Member Since:
    Jun 8, 2007
    While I would like to see this lineup, some how I see Pause being out there, but I agree with the result.
  4. cweimers Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 5, 2010
    Location:
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
    Toronto still has a team? I thought they gave up last year.
  5. ratdog Member+

    Member Since:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Location:
    In the doghouse
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
    We'd better get three points out of this. There's no way we're as bad as TFC.
  6. firefan2001 Member

    Member Since:
    Dec 27, 2000
    Location:
    Oswego, Illinois
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
    Who sits to make room for Pause?
  7. ratdog Member+

    Member Since:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Location:
    In the doghouse
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
    Pardo, easily. Central d-mids usually do a lot of dirty work that goes unseen and are therefore underappreciated but even adjusting for that Pavel is flat out having a horrible start to his season. He looks incredibly slow and doesn't seem to have had many touches on the ball.
  8. firefan2001 Member

    Member Since:
    Dec 27, 2000
    Location:
    Oswego, Illinois
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
    I know who you would take out, I'm asking Sparky98.
  9. Kozy tHE pOPULAR fRONT

    Member Since:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Location:
    check.
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
    I would take out Sean Johnson to make room for Pause.
  10. Sparky98 Member

    Member Since:
    Jun 8, 2007
    I would prefer no one because he SHOULD sit. Pardo seems the obvious choice (although I think he's a great field general). Then again, I can't see Andrew being happy paying Pardo to sit. Maybe Frank will surprise us and actually sit Pause.
  11. Sparky98 Member

    Member Since:
    Jun 8, 2007
    He'd rack up a record number of own goals based on his incessant backpassing!
  12. fireman451 Moderator

    Member Since:
    Jun 26, 2002
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
  13. Andy Zilis Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 9, 2005
    Location:
    Rochelle, IL
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
    It'd be fun to see Rolfe go straight back into our starting lineup, but I have a feeling he'll be a sub this weekend. Haven't heard anything one way or the other on that, but I'm guessing when he does eventually get into the starting lineup, it'll be in place of either Pappa or Nyarko. There's no way Pause sits, and I don't think Pardo does either.
  14. Kozy tHE pOPULAR fRONT

    Member Since:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Location:
    check.
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
    Pardo and Pause can both play CDM only if we go to a 3 man back line (3-2-3-2)...and if we continue with this (4-4-2 ring around the rosy?)...we will continue to be sluggish on offense. Nyarko needs to be at RM, so we can open a forward spot for Rolfe, Orr, or Puppo...so either Pause and Pardo share time, or, we go with Jamil, Arne, and Jumper on the back line...but something's gotta change...
  15. bunge BigSoccer Supporter

    Member Since:
    Oct 24, 2000
    As much as I pine for a five man midfield and two forwards I don't have faith in Sega and Gargan as the two outside backs in a 3-5-2. I do drool at the thought of it though.

    If Pause/Pardo were one player we'd be a championship team.
  16. nowherenova Member

    Member Since:
    Jul 20, 2003
    Location:
    Formerly Terminus
    Anibaba would be a better choice at rb in a 3 -5 -2 with Friedrich in the middle and sega on the left. Hunter might be another effective player in a 3 man backline.
  17. anotherbodymurdered Member

    Member Since:
    Nov 3, 2007
    Location:
    chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    --other--
    so did de los cobos come back along with rolfe and that's why ppl are talking about 3-5-2? because that worked so well, right?
  18. Chris M. Member+

    Member Since:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ding, ding, ding.

    I think people are still stuck on the notion that a three man back leads to more offensive play when the reverse is typically true.
  19. bunge BigSoccer Supporter

    Member Since:
    Oct 24, 2000
    I'm just stuck in 1998. :D
  20. fireman451 Moderator

    Member Since:
    Jun 26, 2002
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States

    1998 is the new 1908.
  21. Chris M. Member+

    Member Since:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    If only the club were as well. ;)

    I've had this discussion with a number of people, including a couple who were quite knowledgeable about that 1998 team. ;) For the life of me, I recalled us playing more four man back line than three, but the semantics were not all that important, other than to show that you need some special players to really pull off a back three and still be offensive.

    My error in recollection had to do with Diego. I was thinking that we went four across the back with Diego on the left and CJ on the right and Lubos and Francis in the middle. Technically, Diego was often listed as a midfielder but the whole back line (including Diego as the left midfielder responsible for defending the left flank) communicated and worked better together in a way that we haven't seen since those old guys retired.

    My sense is that we would have simply played a traditional back four if CJ had any interest in getting forward on the right. He didn't. He was an awesome defender, but not exactly a Roberto Carlos style wide defender.

    Brazil basically started the whole back four defense as a way to get more offensive.

    Diego was a perfect left mid for a three man back or a perfect left back for a four man back. It is easy looking back to see little difference between a three and four man back line.

    Now, what is best at the moment? Tactically, I love a back four, BUT I will say that I'm not sure it is best for our personnel. You have to have two great center backs to give the wide backs confidence to truly press forward -- not just the occasional overlapping run, but to play forward. To use an example many will know, look at the way Patrice Evra and Rafael play, particularly when they have at least one of either Vidic or Ferdinand in the middle. With Freidrich and Annibaba, there is potential for dominance in the middle, but from game one, there are some issues to work through for both. Second, I don't think Sega and Gargan are that well suited to playing wide back in a truly attacking four man back. Sega USED to be ideal. Gargan has shown some good instinct getting forward but to be a great offensive team with a back four, he needs to stay forward.

    So, I just don't know. It is a puzzle for Frank to figure out given our personnel. I'd like to go four in the back giving Hunter Jumper a shot at that left back spot and see what transpires. I'd also like to see Austin Berry get some time along side Freidrich.
  22. fireman451 Moderator

    Member Since:
    Jun 26, 2002
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
    I think you skipped a stanza.
  23. SixKick Member

    Member Since:
    Nov 13, 2000
    Location:
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
    That's a ridiculous argument. So, because it didn't work for half a game with a different coach and mostly different personnel, we must scrap the formation for all eternity?

    Are people saying that it will lead to more offense or just trying to figure out how to get our best 11 on the field at once? Something like this could work out:

    [LINEUP-3-5-2]Oduro, Rolfe, Pappa, Pause, Grazzini, Pardo, Nyarko, Segares, Friedrich, Anibaba, Johnson[/LINEUP-3-5-2]

    My only real concern with the idea (and it's a big concern) is that I don't trust Pappa going both ways as a wing-back.
  24. anotherbodymurdered Member

    Member Since:
    Nov 3, 2007
    Location:
    chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    --other--
    no more ridiculous than trying to shoehorn a roster into a formation they were not intended to play but hey it seems everyone on this board knows better than the PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALLERS on every item from formation to transfers to whether or not Logan Pause gets to play so by all means, solve the club's problems with your 3-5-2
  25. SixKick Member

    Member Since:
    Nov 13, 2000
    Location:
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
    So if we are all too naive to discuss formations, transfers, and tactics, why should we even discuss the team at all? What's left, who's got the nicest ass?

Share This Page