Excellent interview from Arace. He doesnt push Henrik too far. I like a lot of the ideas. Henrik isnt so much a person that likes to wait to see what the opposition does. He rather push the opposition into making decisions. https://open.spotify.com/episode/6a25CQGjdCNsGKCIyQSPPZ?si=IIDAgKVbRIOjtpkF3oyEKw&context=spotify:show:18AFfeH8Nhh6GdRivHh9QD&t=0&pi=ZzXMrgiJTbSgM
I liked the interview. He mentioned taking players on, taking risks. What I like about that is how he mentioned that taking this job was a big decision. A risk with having to move so far away. He is doing the things he is encouraging his players to do. I love that.
I was impressed on the analysis on Gazdag and more importantly he knew how Philly used him and why that didn't work here. Dude has done his homework.
Not only that, but the Hungarian national team plays a relationism style. Gazdag will already be familiar with the concepts and how Rydström likes to play. It sounds like the team’s formation and tactics will vary a lot depending on the opponent which should make Rydström’s Crew harder to figure out than Nancyball. I’m excited, he’s impressive (seems intelligent, adaptive, and a good communicator).
He seems to combine aspects of Nancy's intelligence and tactical approach to the game with Porter's desire to, you know, win. Not a bad start. But we're obviously in that glorious honeymoon stage with the guy.
Agreed...paraphrasing the response in the podcast but I believe he said sometimes possession isn't everything and you just have to run at the other team to create pressure. That was refreshing to hear.
Nancy started to be a bit more direct, bypassing the mid-third toward the end with not so much success minus a few Farsi and Herrara goals. Excited to see some new twists on that. I do get a little bored with some of the direct play of EPL where the mid-third has become sort of a no man's land. That'll probably change again next year. Game changes so quick.
Nice interview. I like him. Well grounded, no bullshit. But not chest thumping egotism, either. Smart, driven, yet knows he’s not god’s gift to football. Sounds like man who both knows that life’s a journey, not a sprint, but that he’s in a business where you’re always being gauged and measured. I particularly liked hearing the backstory of his exchange with Issa who mentioned about sometimes you win, but feel shitty afterwards. I get it. That you didn’t ever intend to play the game just to, you know, gut it out. Win ugly. Looking forward to seeing how this team plays under him, but I like everything I’ve seen thus far.
Given Rydström’s adaptive opponent dependent style, I’m once again very happy that we hired Courtois. He will be able to supply a lot of valuable intel about each team.
I was impressed in that interview about his knowledge of us and Philly. Obviously Courtois will bring an even larger volume of information but good to see him diving into it right away
You can have an identity and still adapt your approach to the game based on who you are playing. For example, you can be a high pressing team, but press differently depending on the opponent. If the opponent has a keeper that is good with their and can ping a long ball and drop it on a dime, and also has a dangerous forward like Bouanga, you probably want to press differently than if they have a slower number 9 up top and an old school keeper who doesn't want the ball at his feet. The only identity I truly care about though is winning. I don't care if we play beautiful free-flowing soccer or if we have to scrap and claw and play dirty to win, I just want to win.
Based on his comments about Issa, I dont think we will be spending entire games in a 4-4-2 low block to adapt to the opponent. Or play CB9k ball.
Let's also remember that every coach talks about how they are adaptable and not married to a system/formation. and then like 95% of them aren't adaptable and are married to a system/formation.
Re: Rydström, these comments seem a bit contradictory to me. So is your concern that he might not have a clear system and that leads us to not having a distinct way of playing? Or that he'll be like everyone else have find himself unable to break away from his rigid system when it's clearly not working?
Opening this thread is like diving into an English garden bursting with fragrant flowers and happy, chirping birds while double rainbows showcase the dancing unicorns.
I'm not going to pretend to know enough about the guy to have an opinion on that. All I know is that everyone saw the word "relationism" and talked about how he had this unique idea and a defined style of play, and now everyone is saying he's incredibly adaptable and will play any ol' formation. I don't know what to believe, I think the extremes each have pros and cons. Being too dogmatic (like Nancy) and being worried about the opponents instead of yourself (thus not creating patterns of play to fall back on as a default) are both an issue. I'm just gonna have to wait and see, I suppose. People read one thing a dude has said and act like they know his entire philosophy lol.
As I've said before, I think his biggest challenge won't come from what he intends to do, his skills and approach to the game intellectually, philosophically and emotionally. It'll be whether what he's done before in a weaker league will work in MLS. At least he's aware and freely admits that MLS is a step up from where he's coached before. He's obviously a hard worker, is smart and has done his research.
My biggest concern is we have a core group of young-ish players (Farsi, Zawadzki, Max, Taha) that have found early success in their careers while under Nancy and really that's the bulk of their experience. Will they be able to change their game to whatever the new guy will ask? We are excited that Gazdag should thrive in this "relationism" style but will our young guns be able to make the same jump. Time will tell...
If he cant get production out of the core players, then they have a guy in the wings who has show success with several of these players albeit in a very weak league. Im curious to see what he does with the midfield. You have ~4 options there for 2 spots, unless Taha is at the AM role. (Doyle had a whole article about that and how he doesnt like Picard. Doyle must be a Cardassian.) With no CBs coming in, Sean could stay at CB for the time in a back 3. Maybe he moves up in a back 4. Some team is looking at Cheberko whose contract expires in June with an option only til December.