Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Chicago Fire' started by Es Brennt, Apr 18, 2012.
Chicago Fire vs Toronto Fun Club
While I would like to see this lineup, some how I see Pause being out there, but I agree with the result.
Toronto still has a team? I thought they gave up last year.
We'd better get three points out of this. There's no way we're as bad as TFC.
Who sits to make room for Pause?
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.
I know who you would take out, I'm asking Sparky98.
I would take out Sean Johnson to make room for Pause.
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.
He'd rack up a record number of own goals based on his incessant backpassing!
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.
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...
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.
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.
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?
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.
I'm just stuck in 1998.
1998 is the new 1908.
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.
I think you skipped a stanza.
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.
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
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?