Rather, Potter's system is more fluid than will happily fit in a numerical format. His players will all know their roles, and those roles will adjust slightly depending on the game as would always be the case, but the system itself might be a little more fluid than we're used to seeing.
I think you've misunderstood me.
I've never favoured totally rigid systems and one dimensional football. Every system changes shapes during a football match, depends on whether you are attacking, defending or just playing tennis in the middle of the park. It can't be different.
I hope Potter's system will be
much more fluid than we've been used to see in the past four years. We've played defensive football, and
defensive football per definition requires rigid formations. Only attacking football allows fluidity which is another word for creativity. Creativity is not only through balls, it's much more: one-twos, triangles, running into spaces with and without ball, take-ons, perfect crosses, wingers changing flanks....
Yes and no. No, because the players they have are world class, so you need a comparable squad to go toe-to-toe, and very few have. Yes, because Klopp proved it. Liverpool were Man City's bogey team last season for a reason. Those games were mostly shootouts, but Klopp's high pressing game exposed City's weak defense in a way other teams couldn't, because other teams are too busy getting battered by City's offense. Guardiola is an excellent coach, and City have an excellent squad, but even that team had its weakness, and Klopp's philosophy and squad was perfectly set-up to exploit it (admittedly Liverpool got at least one favourable decision in the Champions League). Sure, Burnley also got something our of City, but that was a fluke of Dyche's horrible one-trick anti-football. As for Liverpool - they were like City. Great offense, secretly (nor not so secretly in Liverpool's case) weak defensively. City's bad defense was protected by it's heavyweight offense. Neither team won the Champions League, which is ultimately the contest both are measured by, moreso that the Prem (which has 28 soft games for a side like City). Also, isn't Guardiola's system more often a 2-3-2-3, at least when in possession?
The reason I like 4-3-3 is that it doesn't require world class players whilst allows you to effectively press high. Klopp didn't have world class players in the midfield and at the back last season, and still managed to beat Manchester City three times and reach Champions League final. Manchester City have, without doubt, world class players in almost all positions. High pressing and work rate did the trick for Liverpool. It's not that Manchester City had poor defenders, the rest of the squad was always so high on the pitch leaving defenders outnumbered and vulnerable to Liverpool's counter-attacks.
What I want to see from Swansea under Potter:
1. High pressing is on the top of my wish list
2. Midfielders who are running, tackling and providing through balls
3. Front three scoring goals. Not only a lump up front waiting for crosses, all three must score.
4. Attacking full-backs providing crosses
I've said before that Potter has so far won success being a reactive manager with an underdog squad. In Swansea, he will lead a squad that is considered a favourite in the division, and you can't play reactively in this situation. You have to lead games, and assert dominance. I believe this will be his biggest challenge, but he can do it playing his amorphous football.
I disagree we'll have a squad that is considered a favourite, but even with a poorer squad we should be able to play high pressing football and assert dominance. We should be able to do the same thing to our opponents what Liverpool did to Manchester City last season.
