Are systems over rated? (Especially at lower levels of football)

The Camel · Jul 10, 2014

When I saw Barcelona destroy Man United at Wembley in the Champions League final a few years ago I thought ticka tacka was unbeatable.

If the opposition have the ball 75% of the time, how on earth can you create enough chances to beat them?

But sure enough, Bayern came along with a system which countered it perfectly. High tempo pressing and breaking quickly with Robben and Ribery when you force them into a mistake.

Then Madrid and Atletico found a cure for that.

Eventually we'll get back to 4 4 2 and the long ball game.

So, I'm coming to the conclusion that systems and coaching are not nearly as important as having technically good players.

I think you should form a system around the players at your disposal - instead of buying and selling players to fit a system which your coach thinks is the way forward.

This is especially true the lower down the leagues you go imo.

The best players win championships and promotion. Not the best systems.

Thoughts?

Tubby-McFat-Fuc · Jul 10, 2014

Been saying this ever since Poyet got us into the Championship.

That's why I have a lot of hope for Hyypia.

If he plays to the players strengths, we'll do fine.

The last two managers have had their system, and tried to adapt to it and it hasn't worked. Some may argue that we got into the play offs so it did work, but I'd argue we underachived with the squad we had.

If we play a system that suits our players, I think play offs should be there for the taking if we sign on one else.

If we add 4 or 5 first teamers, then I think the top two is there for the taking as it should have been for the past two seasons.

Hopefully 75% possession tippy tappy football has had its day. It's not good to watch, and it doesn't work!

TomandJerry · Jul 10, 2014

Tubby-McFat-Fuc said:
Been saying this ever since Poyet got us into the Championship.

That's why I have a lot of hope for Hyypia.

If he plays to the players strengths, we'll do fine.

The last two managers have had their system, and tried to adapt to it and it hasn't worked. Some may argue that we got into the play offs so it did work, but I'd argue we underachived with the squad we had.

If we play a system that suits our players, I think play offs should be there for the taking if we sign on one else.

If we add 4 or 5 first teamers, then I think the top two is there for the taking as it should have been for the past two seasons.

Hopefully 75% possession tippy tappy football has had its day. It's not good to watch, and it doesn't work!

There's to wishful thinking!

brightonrock · Jul 10, 2014

The Camel said:
When I saw Barcelona destroy Man United at Wembley in the Champions League final a few years ago I thought ticka tacka was unbeatable.

If the opposition have the ball 75% of the time, how on earth can you create enough chances to beat them?

But sure enough, Bayern came along with a system which countered it perfectly. High tempo pressing and breaking quickly with Robben and Ribery when you force them into a mistake.

Then Madrid and Atletico found a cure for that.

Eventually we'll get back to 4 4 2 and the long ball game.

So, I'm coming to the conclusion that systems and coaching are not nearly as important as having technically good players.

I think you should form a system around the players at your disposal - instead of buying and selling players to fit a system which your coach thinks is the way forward.

This is especially true the lower down the leagues you go imo.

The best players win championships and promotion. Not the best systems.

Thoughts?

Greece in the European Championships. Mourinho winning the Champions League with Porto. Swansea winning the FA Cup. Atletico Madrid winning La Liga. These are in the last few seasons, but there are SO many more examples of good systems with no individual stars performing as more than the sum of their parts, and achieving success. I'm sorry, but what you're saying is simply not true, and in fact you completely contradict yourself. Barcelona's tiki taka got beaten by the high pressing counter, which you admit - I.e., a different system. If your point is systems don't matter, then Barcelona/Spain would win every game as they have the best players. But the fact is that a good manager who utilises lesser players to greater effect is still able to overcome a technically superior opponent. With the right tactics and a bit of luck, Rangers got a 0-0 against Barca. Would you say that Rangers have better players than Barca?

The Camel · Jul 10, 2014

Tubby-McFat-Fuc said:
Been saying this ever since Poyet got us into the Championship.

That's why I have a lot of hope for Hyypia.

If he plays to the players strengths, we'll do fine.

The last two managers have had their system, and tried to adapt to it and it hasn't worked. Some may argue that we got into the play offs so it did work, but I'd argue we underachived with the squad we had.

If we play a system that suits our players, I think play offs should be there for the taking if we sign on one else.

If we add 4 or 5 first teamers, then I think the top two is there for the taking as it should have been for the past two seasons.

Hopefully 75% possession tippy tappy football has had its day. It's not good to watch, and it doesn't work!

CMS is a really good player, but totally unsuited to the Poyet/Oscar system.

Why pay £2m+ for a player and then play a system which doesn't suit him?

The Camel · Jul 10, 2014

brightonrock said:
Greece in the European Championships. Mourinho winning the Champions League with Porto. Swansea winning the FA Cup. Atletico Madrid winning La Liga. These are in the last few seasons, but there are SO many more examples of good systems with no individual stars performing as more than the sum of their parts, and achieving success. I'm sorry, but what you're saying is simply not true, and in fact you completely contradict yourself. Barcelona's tiki taka got beaten by the high pressing counter, which you admit - I.e., a different system. If your point is systems don't matter, then Barcelona/Spain would win every game as they have the best players. But the fact is that a good manager who utilises lesser players to greater effect is still able to overcome a technically superior opponent. With the right tactics and a bit of luck, Rangers got a 0-0 against Barca. Would you say that Rangers have better players than Barca?

I'm saying there will always be a new system which counters a successful system.

Hence, you should concentrate on developing a system which suits your players - rather than making the system the most important thing instead of the players.

CMS is an excellent player who has wasted 2 years of his career in a system which will never suit him.

Stumpy Tim · Jul 10, 2014

Of course having a system is important! What tends to happen is a new system works really well (to say tika-taka doesn't work is absurd - Spain won the euro's, world cup, euro's in succession), and then most teams copy that system. However, the team that wins is the one that comes up with the best system to counter the system that all the others are using. It's a continuous circle

Mellotron · Jul 10, 2014

You can't build it round players - especially at our level where as a selling club players come and go all the time. Players attributes also change as they get older and through injury. I think it's about being flexible and having your players drilled in 2/3 systems that you can adapt to to suit your opponents. Someone like Mourinho has proved to be very good at this.

Biscuit · Jul 10, 2014

I think they're excellent at lower levels. They basically help you use the players you've got in the best way possible,

I recently played in a 7-a-side tournament, in the quarter finals my team were knackered. None of us were particularly fit and we were playing a far superior side. We decided to defend resolutely, keep rigidly to our shape and take our chances from set pieces. We knew we couldn't run around the whole time so made the ball do the work and tried to grind down the opponent. We basically played like a shitty Stoke side of years gone by. We won 1-0.

Got slaughtered in the semi's mind :lolol:

beorhthelm · Jul 10, 2014

systems matter to give the team shape and let every player know there basic/primary job. its probably more important in defense than going forward, where shape quickly gets lost anyway. its important, but only as a starting point i think. at lower levels, you dont have players with the technique or "intelligence" to work with fancy systems, so you'd naturally keep it simple.

Billy the Fish · Jul 10, 2014

We need to distinguish between style of play and formation here.

I've been saying for ages on the endless 4-4-2 threads that the formation is just a framework and it's what they are told to do within that formation that's important.

Last night's game was a really good example, both teams were really rigid which is why it was such a crap game. Without the ball you could see very clearly the defence + midfield two banks of 4 and 5 line up with hardly any gap between them to snuff out all the space for the team with the ball. This was the priority for both sides so when they did have the ball there wasn't much movement because they didn't want to concede position in case they lost it.

If you watch a good attacking team when they've got the ball the attacking players are moving all over the place making runs to open up space. Barca were masters of this and the midfield 3 interchanged all over the pitch. It doesn't matter what formation you play, it's whather you're prepared to take risks.

Gus's team never took risks and Oscar's took very few - our defensive stats prove it.

Bakero · Jul 10, 2014

[MENTION=14160]cam[/MENTION]el You've just highlighted how different systems have dominated and it's taken a new system to overthrow them. I think that answers your question, doesn't it?

Randsta · Jul 10, 2014

Basically is best to be flexible depending who your playing

brightonrock · Jul 10, 2014

The Camel said:
I'm saying there will always be a new system which counters a successful system.

Hence, you should concentrate on developing a system which suits your players - rather than making the system the most important thing instead of the players.

CMS is an excellent player who has wasted 2 years of his career in a system which will never suit him.

I agree whole heartedly with you about CMS, we have wasted his good attributes the last few years - but saying you should develop a system to suit your players is completely short sighted; players get bought by other teams all the time. We then have to buy players to replace those who leave, and they bring different attributes, to be utilised differently. By your very own admission, better players in system A can be beaten by inferior players in system B. So if system B works for the inferior players, that means that the system was more important than the sum of its parts. As I say I agree that when you have someone like CMS who is dying to be played in behind, it frustrates me when we don't play that ball. But this...

The Camel said:
I'm coming to the conclusion that systems and coaching are not nearly as important as having technically good players...The best players win championships and promotion. Not the best systems.

...isn't true. Burnley certainly didn't have the 2nd best group of players in the league last season, they had a system that worked well and to their strengths.

El-Abd would be a perfect example of coaching improving a player - he went from lower league hoofer to ball-playing centre half under Poyet, because under GP's system he was encouraged to be comfortable on the ball, and given the confidence by Poyet's man management to do so. Hopefully the 4321/4312 sort of system SH looks likely to use is going to be the best system for us - but if we win the league it wouldn't be by having the best players in the league, because that clearly isn't true.

GoldWithFalmer · Jul 10, 2014

Systems/formations are a base template,the right blend of players to play a system is as much as important as anything,the real key ingredient for any successful side is having a tremendous team spirit....no system in the world will work without it..

The aim is to have 7/8 players getting regular 7/8 out of 10 performances week in week out,battling for the cause,get that bit right and you could almost play,within reason,any formation you like.

Football,the aim is to out score your opponent and to keep your own goal safe from attack-simple

Albumen · Jul 10, 2014

You have a system that all players buy into but it has to be either genius (Barca and spain for a while) or have flexibility.

Tim Over Whelmed · Jul 10, 2014

As a Youth Football Coach it amazes me the amount of coaches you see talking tactics with the kids using an iPad or talking about diamond formations etc. Yes it's great to educate and expand a child's tactical knowledge but without a strong foundation of football understanding and a love for the game all this is, in my opinion, worthless as the kids just don't get it. My lads have fun, enjoy the training and the matches and we've seen success and maintained top flight status in a four league ladder!

I'm talking from U6s through to U12s, I guess in the next year or so we may get a little more complex but ultimately every kid has to understand what they are doing as their part in a team, if you focus on a few goods players and see others as fill ins you're finished. Teams win, individuals prove they are better than the team but at what cost?

Triggaaar · Jul 10, 2014

The Camel said:
So, I'm coming to the conclusion that systems and coaching are not nearly as important as having technically good players.

I think you should form a system around the players at your disposal - instead of buying and selling players to fit a system which your coach thinks is the way forward.

This is especially true the lower down the leagues you go imo.

The best players win championships and promotion. Not the best systems.

Thoughts?

I think it's a bit of both. Barcelona had a system, but also brilliant players that had been learning the system all their lives. No system would beat them without some brilliant players to carry it out.

It makes sense for a club to have a style, and buy and develop players for that style, and bring in managers that like that style. Let's not pretend that all managers are gods and can deliver any style they wish. Many great managers would not be able to do what Pullis did up the road, and Pullis would not be able to manage Arsenal. Fat Sam thinks he could deliver the Barca style if he had the players - he couldn't, he's an idiot.

Gus showed that he could use his style with players that weren't all used to it, at League 1 and Championship level. He's now going to try and do the same at the next level, and that will be interesting to watch.

I hope our club develops a style, and gets coaches and managers for that style, with a team of people bringing players in so that there's continuity when a manager leaves. Sami's style won't be the same as Gus's, but I hope it's not so different that the players don't adapt to it well.

BigGully · Jul 10, 2014

Tim Over Whelmed said:
As a Youth Football Coach it amazes me the amount of coaches you see talking tactics with the kids using an iPad or talking about diamond formations etc. Yes it's great to educate and expand a child's tactical knowledge but without a strong foundation of football understanding and a love for the game all this is, in my opinion, worthless as the kids just don't get it. My lads have fun, enjoy the training and the matches and we've seen success and maintained top flight status in a four league ladder!

I'm talking from U6s through to U12s, I guess in the next year or so we may get a little more complex but ultimately every kid has to understand what they are doing as their part in a team, if you focus on a few goods players and see others as fill ins you're finished. Teams win, individuals prove they are better than the team but at what cost?

I do feel that sometimes we over egg our local football teams and clubs, is it really the responsibility of an eager parent which is on a hiding to nothing to bring through the next generation of International footballers ..... hardly.

Sometimes locally you just hope you get a team together of kids/parents and enjoy a few wins and despair in a few losses over a pint or two, hopefully those kids can make friends for life and recall the atrocious refereeing decision that robbed them of an under 10's final at East Brighton park in middle age.

The Academys hold the key, the very reason they were introduced was not purely to bring a few Gareth Bales through but create an environment where a new generation of young technically gifted English players might be developed.

This is the key area which needs close scrutiny, it can be disruptive to local teams having their players poached away, but if the scouting is professional and appropriate then not many should be sucked out of out local youth leagues.

The validity on system and formations usually depends on the knowledge of the guy imparting that information.

VHA on NSC · Jul 10, 2014

I think it can help teams get promoted from League One, but from that point you're in danger of stagnating in the Championship, choking in big games, and seeing rival teams leave you in their wake.

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Are systems over rated? (Especially at lower levels of football)

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Dodgy Hamstrings

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

I've asked for soup

Native Creative

A. Virgo, Football Genius

Technocrat

Languidly clinical

New member

Dodgy Hamstrings

Seaweed! Seaweed!

Don't wait for me!

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Banned

Share this page