Luke Williams

[jackodiamonds]

Luke Williams of Notts County has been linked with Swansea. Young, only managed at League Two level, but his philosophy is good. Here he is discussing his commitment to short corners:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1727295909002928421

A little cocky but he's right. Notts County also keep the ball in-play more than any other side in League Two, 6 mins and 33 seconds more than the league average.

Interesting dark horse option?

 

[Yankee_Jack]

He would require a transfer fee to County. And he’d be another stepping up with ideas that would have to be sold, assimilated etc

I’d rather somebody who has the ability to coach multiple systems and most importantly the system best suited to the players we have. This is how we get the best out of the resources on hand, which is a short term view, but that’s the “term” of most importance at the moment.

 

[ivoralljack]

Yes, we absolutely need a manager who can work with, and improve, the squad we have, with particular emphasis on our passing and footballing DNA. It was the other way round with Michael Duff and was never going to work. It won't work doing it that way with any other manager either,

 

[CroJack]

I’d rather somebody who has the ability to coach ... the system best suited to the players we have.

I think that's completely wrong.

My first question is... what are our players best suited for? They are obviously not suited to playing passing football and they are not suited to playing high pressing football. They are sloppy in possession and they can't run and press properly. Our players have had the opportunity to play for three different managers who play three different systems and they were most successful under Steve Cooper who played defensive football. So the conclusion is that they are suited to sit back, hoof the ball, hope not to concede and eventually score from one shot on target.

My second question is, do you really think that playing Steve Cooper's style of football can be successful in the long term? I don't think so. I bet Cooper will soon be sacked by Forest.

So what should we do?

Either we get a manager who is brave enough to attack relentlessly with our current squad and hope we concede less than we score, which is extremely risky, or we get a manager who gets rid of 90% of our squad, brings in players with pace and starts from scratch.

I think we got it completely wrong when we recruited the current squad. We simply lack pace in all positions. Our attackers can't get past opposition defenders and opposition attackers easily get past our defenders. Not to mention our midfielders.

 

[jackodiamonds]

Either we get a manager who is brave enough to attack relentlessly with our current squad and hope we concede less than we score, which is extremely risky, or we get a manager who gets rid of 90% of our squad, brings in players with pace and starts from scratch.

For sheer entertainment value I'd like option 1 in the short term while the board work on option 2 in the medium term.

 

[ivoralljack]

Done properly I believe our passing game can work. There were times under Martin where we looked pretty good particularly towards the end of his tenure. Where Martin, and the team, failed, was when we tried to be too clever at the back taking needless risks and losing the ball near our goal. Sometimes the situation calls for a good hoof to get the ball out of danger and even top teams like Pool and Citeh do it when called for. Possession is the best form of defence - when we have the ball they can't score. And they can get tired trying to win it back.

So I'd bring back possession, movement and passing but only in those areas of the pitch where we have space and time to operate. Then I'd get the team fitter and stronger, which any team can achieve in training, to press the oppo when they've got the ball. Football is a simple game. Play to your players' strengths and you are halfway there. It just needs the right manager.......

 

[Yankee_Jack]

I think that's completely wrong.

Disagree. The next guy has to quickly assess the current squad's capabilities and then employ a system that maximizes their utility. Any other approach at this point is longer term and will require multiple transfer windows to implement. This does not imply any particular system; it implies a common sense approach.

For starters, play square pegs in square holes. It's highly simplistic, but Duffer couldn't get his mind around that, and he dug his own grave as a result. For example, we all scream every match, play Cullen at #9 so let's start with that - square peg, square hole. Flank Cullen with Lowe and Bolasie to give speed, width and offensive threat. Back them up with a #10 - Pato, Cooper, Congreve - ideally Cooper because he can go box-to-box. Then the rest picks itself except for the shuffle at CB. How you approach the game with this line-up is a matter of debate and each coach will have their own religion in that regard and @CroJack has suggested one approach, as has @ivoralljack, which are both as good as any other ... but any system or style will be minimized and ultimately fail with square pegs in round holes. Duffer is the case in point. Play each peg in its proper hole and let it role, at the very least you'll eliminate friction and optimize utility. If you were to start with the line-up I suggested and let it role a system will naturally fall out ... give the players some credit ... let the DNA we have left assert itself.

We have a shit record, in a shit position in the table as a result, and need to win games and harvest points. This is the immediate term need. We need to take the squad we have, for better or worse, and fashion a winning combination. You won't do that by starting Yates and having Cullen play 30 yards from where he most effective ... if Duffer-ball can be summarized in anyway then it means playing players out of position (including starting on the bench) and expecting good things to happen.

BTW, Duffer has a worse record than BoBo, and he actually makes BoBo look competent. Never thought that could actually happen.

 

[jackodiamonds]

Re: Cooper. At this point I'd play him at #8. Pato has been too good to drop lately, but Cooper has too much potential to waste on the bench.

Atm Fulton is generally seen as the only combative midfielder in the centre of the park, but Cooper actually makes more tackles and with fewer fouls per 90 mins.

He's a high-energy, high-effort player who could easily go box-to-box and is very willing to do the dirty work. Plus, his attacking talent means that when Swansea are in possession, you could have Pato, Lowe, Bolasie, Cullen, Cooper and Key pushing forward in earnest, giving 6 players in the attack phase without compromising very much defensively.

Any midfield duo or trio combo involving Grimes, Patino, Fulton, Cooper and Walsh works, giving a lot of options depending on if the game needs more possession, physicality, or flair from that part of the field. Assuming Grimes isn't actually undroppable which is one thing Martin and Duff agreed on.

 

[CroJack]

Disagree. The next guy has to quickly assess the current squad's capabilities and then employ a system that maximizes their utility.

For example, we all scream every match, play Cullen at #9 so let's start with that - square peg, square hole.

Yates or Cullen up front is a false dilemma imho. They do not have much creative or individual ability, which means chances need to be created for them. They are both specialized in scoring tap-in goals. Choosing between Yates and Cullen for the forward position is a false dilemma because they are practically identical.

This season, Yates scored 1 goal in 280 minutes, while Cullen needed 480 minutes. I anticipate your objection that Cullen played on the right in a 4-2-3-1 formation, and that's valid, but Piroe occupied the same spot under Martin and netted ample goals.

Historically, Yates surpasses Cullen - he requires precisely 242 minutes to score a goal, while Cullen needs 339. I assure you, this data is readily found. Yates has played 11889 minutes of professional football and netted 49 goals, while Cullen has played 4747 minutes and scored 14 goals. Unfortunately, neither of them are skilled goal-scorers. I do like Liam, but I prefer complete strikers. These are players who attack the opposing team's penalty box, have the ability to take on defenders, deliver crosses, score from various distances and angles, score inside the box, score with headers and tap-ins, and create chances for others. Piroe and Ginnelly are good examples of such players.

I don't think it would improve things if Cullen played up front instead of Yates. Why? The real issue is much bigger - our style of play, not Yates or Cullen. We don't create many good chances because:

• we normally don't dominate our opponents like we did against Huddersfield,
• we don't press together as a team,
• we don't shoot frequently enough,
• we do not cross the ball frequently,
• we do not attack in numbers (we lack bravery)

Additionally, we lack pace in the front line due to the lack of players like James and Obafemi.
Although we now have both Bolasie and Paterson, we still need to improve our front line skills.

When I say that Yates or Cullen up front is a false dilemma, it implies that our front line performance is not the primary issue. Eight teams above us in the league table have scored slightly more or slightly fewer goals than we have. Our main issue this season, which has been consistent under Martin, lies in our defence.

• we make many mistakes in possession which lead to dangerous situations,
• our opponents tend to dominate us,
• we aren't pressing as a cohesive unit,
• our blocking of crosses is poor,
• we allow too many shots against us, and
• we lack the necessary pace and skills

I believe the issue at hand is not so much about Yates or Cullen, Walsh or Pato, Fulton or Patino, but rather stems from the way we play and the abilities of our players, particularly those in the defensive line.

 

[CroJack]

Assuming Grimes isn't actually undroppable which is one thing Martin and Duff agreed on.

I think he should be droppable and we should try other midfield combos that don't include Grimes.

 

[Yankee_Jack]

The only alternative we have to Yates / Cullen at #9 is big Myk. And I’d be delighted if he was given a chance and did the job.

however, given we only have a choice of two for Sat, I vote for Cullen.

 

[ivoralljack]

This season, Yates scored 1 goal in 280 minutes, while Cullen needed 480 minutes. I anticipate your objection that Cullen played on the right in a 4-2-3-1 formation, and that's valid, but Piroe occupied the same spot under Martin and netted ample goals.

Historically, Yates surpasses Cullen - he requires precisely 242 minutes to score a goal, while Cullen needs 339

But I wonder how many assists Yates has. When Piroe was here Cullen's goal involvement (goals/assists) was better than twice as effective as that of Piroe, something many of us commented on at the time. There's nowt wrong with dedicated goal-scorers. The likes of Gary Lineker, Mark Hughes, Ian Rush and many, many others didn't do so badly and they mostly depended on service for their goals. It's one of the reasons for having creators, playmakers and so on in the team. We can't afford the type of striker (complete) that you mentioned and, if Cullen and Yates were that accomplished, they sure as hell wouldn't be wasting their ability in our team.

To me, we are what we are - a limited mid-table Championship team with individual players that match. All we can do is to make the best use of the ability that they do have and that means playing them in the positions that they are most happy and comfortable with; where things come naturally and easily.

 

[jackodiamonds]

Cullen's definitely going to be hungry to impress. I don't think he's signed a new contract yet has he? If he doesn't catch the favour of the new boss he'll be gone either in January or certainly in the summer.

Also, I don't think Swansea's players are that bad or limited. We're still yet to see these guys playing with confidence. Those who were in Swansea last season showed some confidence briefly in that decent late run, but otherwise this lot are not exactly playing to their potential.

For example, there were some berating Piroe for large parts of last season but look at him now in Leeds. Until we see this team playing to its potential, it's unfair to write off the majority of the squad as being also-rans.

I don't think talent is the biggest issue. Confidence is, and that comes when there's decent team spirit and an over-arching tactical identity the players can buy into. No surprise these guys looked like shite playing under Duff. Doesn't mean they're actually shite.

 

[jackodiamonds]

When Piroe was here Cullen's goal involvement (goals/assists) was better than twice as effective as that of Piroe, something many of us commented on at the time.

If we look at "goal-creating actions" which are the last two actions before a goal was scored (v similar to my old "regressive assists" model), Cullen produces twice as much as Yates, 0.38 to 0.19 over 90 mins. Some degree of that is no doubt because of their differing roles, but Cullen is definitely capable of more than just scoring. So is Yates for that, if you look at his old highlight reels. Duff's system just didn't allow any room for his flair.

 

[CroJack]

When Piroe was here Cullen's goal involvement (goals/assists) was better than twice as effective as that of Piroe, something many of us commented on at the time.

That was a small statistical sample. Also, the vast majority of the goals Cullen scored in that period were tap-ins where Piroe did all the work.

There's nowt wrong with dedicated goal-scorers. The likes of Gary Lineker, Mark Hughes, Ian Rush and many, many others didn't do so badly and they mostly depended on service for their goals.

I never said I don't like dedicated goal-scorers. And with all respect to Cullen, he is not on Lineker, Rush, Wright, Solskjær...level, and never will be.

 

[ivoralljack]

No, of course he's not but I believe he's the best we've got. He's never been given a long enough run in that position to settle in and develop his game despite the opinion of Messrs Trundle, Curtis and many other good judges at the Liberty. Strikers need to find a rhythm which leads to confidence and Cullen has always been 'messed about' by poor managers who didn't know any better.

As for tap-ins, you have to have the instinct to be there to get them - it's part of being a striker of that kind. When Cullen is played out wide he's in no position to 'be there' and that's his game.

 

[CroJack]

If we look at "goal-creating actions" which are the last two actions before a goal was scored (v similar to my old "regressive assists" model), Cullen produces twice as much as Yates, 0.38 to 0.19 over 90 mins

I know. This is my post from early September.



Still neither of them is a prolific goal-scorer no matter how we spin it. Minutes per goal ratio during their senior career is what tells me they are not so good. Both of them are solid Championship strikers, but we need better players up front if we want to progress as a club. None of our strikers have Michu's wildness or Bony's physical strength, if you know what I mean. They don't need to be as good as Michu and Bony but I want to see wildness, pace, and/or physical strength. Any of these would be good. Two of these very good, and all three excellent.

 

[CroJack]

Until we see this team playing to its potential, it's unfair to write off the majority of the squad as being also-rans.

I'm afraid I've seen enough of their potential.