DCU played either a 4-1-4-1 or a 4-3-3 (in rare moments of possession) total counter attack last year. Lots of long ball over the top that needs a quick break. This year we are playing a 4-2-3-1 which is more possession oriented and not nearly as bunker oriented as last year. You need a few pivot players and we only have one with Acosta.
Ben and Dave. Like I said. I ain't gonna dog those players if they can't produce In this system. They'd do better elsewhere (see Pontius). It's your pal Ben's job and your scapegoat Dave's job. The coach and GM should communicate regularly and be completely simpatico.
Maybe Olsen needs to stop overthinking this and go to a 4-4-2. Or maybe he's such a ********ing coaching genius he can dazzle us with his 1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1 formation. The grit is what makes it work.
The 1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1 formation is what I've seen the last several years. It appears to be every man for himself, with little to no teamwork.
Yep. Virtually every goal in Mullins's career has been a 1 touch strike from inside the box. He's not a creator, but a finisher. In theory he should be playing exactly like Chicago's Nikolic. Always standing on the offside line and looking for little pockets of space in between defenders. Whether he's the "lone striker" or not is irrelevant. You should never really be alone even in a 4-2-3-1. In fact, a well functioning 4-2-3-1 should have a line of 3 creative attacking midfielders/withdrawn forwards right behind the striker. This creates a very symmetric attacking diamond pattern that suits a Mullins style poacher. For reference look at Atlanta's attacking diamond (Almiron, Asad, Villalba and Martinez). Or a poor man's version of that is Columbus (Higuain, Meram, Manneh and Kamara). That sort of striker is what Mullins should be aspiring to if he plans on becoming MLS starter material. There are many ways to skin a cat in soccer. Any given team can be successful in a variety of formations. There is nothing inherently wrong with a 4-2-3-1. The key is for the 11 players on the field to understand and recognize the patterns of play, and make the correct movements and decisions. This is what a coach gets paid to do. Create a framework and teach the players on how to succeed in this framework. To this day in 7 years of Olsen/Kasper rule, I have yet to see this team establish a tactical identity where all 11 players on the field look like they're in control of what is happening around them. Most other teams in MLS are oozing with identity and personality. When I think of other teams who have been under one coach for awhile (Portland, SKC, Red Bull, Columbus, Dallas, Toronto etc ... ) I know exactly what kind of identity to expect.
That's very well said, Boloni. There's one thing that always irks me about Olsen coached teams, and it's that they never routinely throw numbers forward with any kind of real plan. That far post run? It's almost never there. How many guys are in the box to meet any sort of cross? Two, if we're lucky. And guys just stand around waiting for passes instead of making runs. There's definitely the talent on this team to score goals. Hell, a lot of it was there last year when the team was regularly bagging 2 and 3 goals in a game in the 2nd half of last season (a year younger then, but still). I really, really think this team needs a new coach to unlock the potential that is most definitely there. One who'll have them actually attack as a team, rather than as a couple of individuals doing some kind of hit and hope.
Apropos of the above: during the Chicago match, I saw numerous instances when one of our midfielders brought the ball forward looking for someone to pass to. The defenders swarmed our guys immediately in front of the man with the ball, but there was a huge expanse of real estate totally empty just to his right. Not one of our players stepped into that void and gave our guy an option. Usually someone like Arriolla will leave the sideline and fill up that void, but maybe he was occupied. Soccer, like nature, abhors a void.