Dreams of starting 3-5-2 are Unfounded

Lack of offense going forward from Riley and Leo. They have rarely been in the box and in an offensive position. The only crosses they serve in are from greater than 35 – 40 yards out and are bloopers.
I’d be okay with the lack of offense if we had one of the better defenses in the league, but we’re leaking goals.
So what do we do? Hope that Riley and Leo suddenly become offensive threats? Well that hasn’t been the case for almost 2 years. Hope that Riley becomes a better 1v1 defender….hope Leo finds some after-burners?
I think that a change in tactics might (again might) suit our talent a bit better. We have 2 more midfielders than we know what to do with….at least until our other competitions start. “The Special One” finds ways to change tactics to suit the team and the needs of each game, why can’t we?

Is the only barrier to its implementation that coordinating it mid-season will be a problem?

A starting 3-5-2 and 3-5-2 to chase a game are completely different in personnel and objective. Like Dave mentioned, if we you do a traditional 3-5-2 you are playing 3 centerbacks and 2 wing backs. If you are thinking we should do a 3-5-2 like we did to chase the Philly game you are looking at 5 attacking midfielders and only 3 natural defensive players. It’s a bit crazy to think we could get by in the league with only 3 natural defenders in our lineup, or to think that are fullbacks can pick up the offensive slack that we would have by having 1 less midfielder.

I think the real issue is the desire some fans have in wanting a combination of Rosales, Alonso, Evans, Friberg, and Zakuani in midfield. That is why the 3-5-2 seemed so magical. The only viable way to have those midfielders on the pitch at once is not to have one less defender, but one less forward. However Montero is not going to be the only man up top and we like someone with a bit more size in there as well. Perhaps if Montero and White had a lovechld this offspring could play up top alone in this imaginary land where a 4-2-3-1 featuring the 5 aforementioned midfielders would work. The reality is we need Montero up top paired with a big forward, and we need 4 in the back. We’re not going to get all 5 of those players on the field at once, especially if Montero is playing.

a depth of talent — no one wants to see them on the bench because they can contribute. As long as everyone can manage the ego’s, this depth will prove a difference maker for this team as the season wears on.

of taking Leo and Riley out and putting Ianni in? You’ve essentially put three bigs on the back (although our bigs aren’t really BIGS) and, although in a perfect system, Fernandez and Evans are tracking back to pick up outside players, the reality is that at least in counters, you’e got inane one-on-one with a fast, clever forward/mid…. usually a good formula to end up with Ianni on his back with his legs looking like pretzels. Ianni is so much more effective on the inside. If anything, I’d rather put Ianni on the inside in that formation and switch Hurtado out, who has the pace and tactical sense to cover past outside players. Parke isn’t a great option on really quick guys either, but he’s certainly better than Ianni in my mind..

As I read this thread, it strikes me that Fucito was barely mentioned. Is he again relegated to USOC and CCL play? As a protected player, he certainly was in Sigi’s plans for this year, but unfortunately he picks the most inopportune times to get injured. The wings look pretty loaded with talent who all are playing pretty well (with Fernandez debate aside), so thoughts of moving him out there are dampened – especially knowing Sigi’s propensity to avoid major changes when the team is playing well…..so looks like he’s Montero’s injury backup, and may compete for late sub minutes when we’re down – kind of like last year. queue up the PPM debate.

Sounds like he was ready to be in the 18 last week, but Montero was able to go. Side note – boy, I didn’t realize how much I missed Freddy until he played on Saturday.