Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
+++Conor McGrandles (2024 edit - Rejoins Lincoln page 23)+++
Comments
-
It's so much better having these kind of options. We've previously just had first choice players and then 'squad players.' Now we've got actual competition for places and people who can offer something different.Scoham said:I’m quite excited about our options in central midfield.
In tougher games we can play both Dobson and McGrandles with one of Fraser or Payne (assuming JFC moves on).
We shouldn’t lack legs and ability to tackle in the middle, and that’s not something you usually associate with a third tier side focussed on possession.
We can also have a more attacking and creative midfield by playing both Fraser and Payne together with one other.
1 -
Most definitely. Having this kind of flexibility for the uglier away games (I'm thinking Bolton, Sheff Wed...) will be huge.Scoham said:I’m quite excited about our options in central midfield.
In tougher games we can play both Dobson and McGrandles with one of Fraser or Payne (assuming JFC moves on).
We shouldn’t lack legs and ability to tackle in the middle, and that’s not something you usually associate with a third tier side focussed on possession.
We can also have a more attacking and creative midfield by playing both Fraser and Payne together with one other.1 -
Not too dissimilar build to Andy Robertson. In fact much taller. He seems to handle himself ok!0
-
When was the last time we genuinely had 5 or 6 players competing for 3 positions, where if you asked 10 people you would get 7 or 8 permeations?Chunes said:
It's so much better having these kind of options. We've previously just had first choice players and then 'squad players.' Now we've got actual competition for places and people who can offer something different.Scoham said:I’m quite excited about our options in central midfield.
In tougher games we can play both Dobson and McGrandles with one of Fraser or Payne (assuming JFC moves on).
We shouldn’t lack legs and ability to tackle in the middle, and that’s not something you usually associate with a third tier side focussed on possession.
We can also have a more attacking and creative midfield by playing both Fraser and Payne together with one other.
Exciting isn't it? I we could have that on the front 3 as well, well..........1 -
I really get the feeling we're gonna go with something like this 4-2-3-1:
Wollacott
Egbo - Innis - O'Connell - Sessegnon
Dobson - McGrandles
B.Taylor - Payne - Kirk
Stockley0 -
Lavelle interchangeable with Innis
DJ with CBT
Kirk with Clayden 😕
Stockley with Aneke 😕0 -
I agree it is exciting. We are starting to see a decent squad with some depth. I think it might take a few games to gel but I really do think we might be surprised this season and mount a serious challengeCafc43v3r said:
When was the last time we genuinely had 5 or 6 players competing for 3 positions, where if you asked 10 people you would get 7 or 8 permeations?Chunes said:
It's so much better having these kind of options. We've previously just had first choice players and then 'squad players.' Now we've got actual competition for places and people who can offer something different.Scoham said:I’m quite excited about our options in central midfield.
In tougher games we can play both Dobson and McGrandles with one of Fraser or Payne (assuming JFC moves on).
We shouldn’t lack legs and ability to tackle in the middle, and that’s not something you usually associate with a third tier side focussed on possession.
We can also have a more attacking and creative midfield by playing both Fraser and Payne together with one other.
Exciting isn't it? I we could have that on the front 3 as well, well..........1 -
- Sponsored links:
-
Perhaps but I think Garner will try and play both.Dazzler21 said:0 -
Fraser in for CBT for me, but that team looks mustard to me... really looking forward to this seasonDazzler21 said:I really get the feeling we're gonna go with something like this 4-2-3-1:
Wollacott
Egbo - Innis - O'Connell - Sessegnon
Dobson - McGrandles
B.Taylor - Payne - Kirk
Stockley1 -
Fraser for Kirk and a more mobile striker in for stockley and it is looking half decent I think although I’ve hardly seen any of our new signings play and people on here who’s views im basing it on have tended to overrate our incomings in the past - maybe switch Fraser and paynes positions - Fraser looks like hd would operate best in the middleCAFCsayer said:
Fraser in for CBT for me, but that team looks mustard to me... really looking forward to this seasonDazzler21 said:I really get the feeling we're gonna go with something like this 4-2-3-1:
Wollacott
Egbo - Innis - O'Connell - Sessegnon
Dobson - McGrandles
B.Taylor - Payne - Kirk
Stockley3 -
Still nervous that Dobson may be sold3
-
Like a pair of McGrandles off a McGrirthday Cakegolfaddick said:He's got rather spindly legs. Fear they could snap in a tough tackle.0 -
4231 with an immobile centre forward .. sounds very Karl Robinson and this team doesn’t have Ricky HolmesDazzler21 said:I really get the feeling we're gonna go with something like this 4-2-3-1:
Wollacott
Egbo - Innis - O'Connell - Sessegnon
Dobson - McGrandles
B.Taylor - Payne - Kirk
Stockley0 -
The three behind Stockley would be CBT, Fraser and Payne for me.0
-
I didn't suggest we should, merely that I have a feeling we might.wmcf123 said:
4231 with an immobile centre forward .. sounds very Karl Robinson and this team doesn’t have Ricky HolmesDazzler21 said:I really get the feeling we're gonna go with something like this 4-2-3-1:
Wollacott
Egbo - Innis - O'Connell - Sessegnon
Dobson - McGrandles
B.Taylor - Payne - Kirk
Stockley0 -
Part of the reason Ipswich didn’t get the best out of Fraser was because at times they played him on the left wing, as you say he’s more suited to the middle.DOUCHER said:
Fraser for Kirk and a more mobile striker in for stockley and it is looking half decent I think although I’ve hardly seen any of our new signings play and people on here who’s views im basing it on have tended to overrate our incomings in the past - maybe switch Fraser and paynes positions - Fraser looks like hd would operate best in the middleCAFCsayer said:
Fraser in for CBT for me, but that team looks mustard to me... really looking forward to this seasonDazzler21 said:I really get the feeling we're gonna go with something like this 4-2-3-1:
Wollacott
Egbo - Innis - O'Connell - Sessegnon
Dobson - McGrandles
B.Taylor - Payne - Kirk
Stockley2 -
Is he ready to train yet?
he’s still out injured from what I’ve read0 - Sponsored links:
-
I thought Garner was all about fluidity - 4231 is about as rigid as it gets, hence hardly any good teams have ever used it .Dazzler21 said:
I didn't suggest we should, merely that I have a feeling we might.wmcf123 said:
4231 with an immobile centre forward .. sounds very Karl Robinson and this team doesn’t have Ricky HolmesDazzler21 said:I really get the feeling we're gonna go with something like this 4-2-3-1:
Wollacott
Egbo - Innis - O'Connell - Sessegnon
Dobson - McGrandles
B.Taylor - Payne - Kirk
Stockley0 -
IMO it is easy to get stuck in formation speak. I would write it down as playing two defensive midfielders in front of a back four, but then it is about how you then play. Two DMF gives cover for pushing a wing back up that could make it three up front, or if one moves to cover it could be a diamond in midfield.wmcf123 said:
I thought Garner was all about fluidity - 4231 is about as rigid as it gets, hence hardly any good teams have ever used it .Dazzler21 said:
I didn't suggest we should, merely that I have a feeling we might.wmcf123 said:
4231 with an immobile centre forward .. sounds very Karl Robinson and this team doesn’t have Ricky HolmesDazzler21 said:I really get the feeling we're gonna go with something like this 4-2-3-1:
Wollacott
Egbo - Innis - O'Connell - Sessegnon
Dobson - McGrandles
B.Taylor - Payne - Kirk
Stockley
1 -
Is this a whoosh... Ok I'm just gonna say it anyway. Loads of great teams play this formation and its variations. Look who won the Champions League this year.wmcf123 said:
I thought Garner was all about fluidity - 4231 is about as rigid as it gets, hence hardly any good teams have ever used it .Dazzler21 said:
I didn't suggest we should, merely that I have a feeling we might.wmcf123 said:
4231 with an immobile centre forward .. sounds very Karl Robinson and this team doesn’t have Ricky HolmesDazzler21 said:I really get the feeling we're gonna go with something like this 4-2-3-1:
Wollacott
Egbo - Innis - O'Connell - Sessegnon
Dobson - McGrandles
B.Taylor - Payne - Kirk
Stockley
0 -
It's almost like rigid Man City have just signed to players so they can play 4231 as well..........Chunes said:
Is this a whoosh... Ok I'm just gonna say it anyway. Loads of great teams play this formation and it's variations. Look who won the Champions League this year.wmcf123 said:
I thought Garner was all about fluidity - 4231 is about as rigid as it gets, hence hardly any good teams have ever used it .Dazzler21 said:
I didn't suggest we should, merely that I have a feeling we might.wmcf123 said:
4231 with an immobile centre forward .. sounds very Karl Robinson and this team doesn’t have Ricky HolmesDazzler21 said:I really get the feeling we're gonna go with something like this 4-2-3-1:
Wollacott
Egbo - Innis - O'Connell - Sessegnon
Dobson - McGrandles
B.Taylor - Payne - Kirk
Stockley
Personally I think it will be 433, but there isn't really much difference.
Charlton fans, generally, are scared of 4231 because we had 2 managers that for different reasons shoehorned some unsuitable players into it and results picked up after they left and we played something different.
That says more about the suitability of the players to the system than the system itself.4 -
I think you could probably write an algorithm to judge how well the season is going based by how many people on here are saying we should be playing 442.Cafc43v3r said:
It's almost like rigid Man City have just signed to players so they can play 4231 as well..........Chunes said:
Is this a whoosh... Ok I'm just gonna say it anyway. Loads of great teams play this formation and it's variations. Look who won the Champions League this year.wmcf123 said:
I thought Garner was all about fluidity - 4231 is about as rigid as it gets, hence hardly any good teams have ever used it .Dazzler21 said:
I didn't suggest we should, merely that I have a feeling we might.wmcf123 said:
4231 with an immobile centre forward .. sounds very Karl Robinson and this team doesn’t have Ricky HolmesDazzler21 said:I really get the feeling we're gonna go with something like this 4-2-3-1:
Wollacott
Egbo - Innis - O'Connell - Sessegnon
Dobson - McGrandles
B.Taylor - Payne - Kirk
Stockley
Personally I think it will be 433, but there isn't really much difference.
Charlton fans, generally, are scared of 4231 because we had 2 managers that for different reasons shoehorned some unsuitable players into it and results picked up after they left and we played something different.
That says more about the suitability of the players to the system than the system itself.2 -
With bonus points for nippy strikers?Chunes said:
I think you could probably write an algorithm to judge how well the season is going based by how many people on here are saying we should be playing 442.Cafc43v3r said:
It's almost like rigid Man City have just signed to players so they can play 4231 as well..........Chunes said:
Is this a whoosh... Ok I'm just gonna say it anyway. Loads of great teams play this formation and it's variations. Look who won the Champions League this year.wmcf123 said:
I thought Garner was all about fluidity - 4231 is about as rigid as it gets, hence hardly any good teams have ever used it .Dazzler21 said:
I didn't suggest we should, merely that I have a feeling we might.wmcf123 said:
4231 with an immobile centre forward .. sounds very Karl Robinson and this team doesn’t have Ricky HolmesDazzler21 said:I really get the feeling we're gonna go with something like this 4-2-3-1:
Wollacott
Egbo - Innis - O'Connell - Sessegnon
Dobson - McGrandles
B.Taylor - Payne - Kirk
Stockley
Personally I think it will be 433, but there isn't really much difference.
Charlton fans, generally, are scared of 4231 because we had 2 managers that for different reasons shoehorned some unsuitable players into it and results picked up after they left and we played something different.
That says more about the suitability of the players to the system than the system itself.2 -
They play 433, as do Liverpool and Man CityChunes said:
Is this a whoosh... Ok I'm just gonna say it anyway. Loads of great teams play this formation and its variations. Look who won the Champions League this year.wmcf123 said:
I thought Garner was all about fluidity - 4231 is about as rigid as it gets, hence hardly any good teams have ever used it .Dazzler21 said:
I didn't suggest we should, merely that I have a feeling we might.wmcf123 said:
4231 with an immobile centre forward .. sounds very Karl Robinson and this team doesn’t have Ricky HolmesDazzler21 said:I really get the feeling we're gonna go with something like this 4-2-3-1:
Wollacott
Egbo - Innis - O'Connell - Sessegnon
Dobson - McGrandles
B.Taylor - Payne - Kirk
Stockley0 -
I want to like and LOL that, very true.Chunes said:
I think you could probably write an algorithm to judge how well the season is going based by how many people on here are saying we should be playing 442.Cafc43v3r said:
It's almost like rigid Man City have just signed to players so they can play 4231 as well..........Chunes said:
Is this a whoosh... Ok I'm just gonna say it anyway. Loads of great teams play this formation and it's variations. Look who won the Champions League this year.wmcf123 said:
I thought Garner was all about fluidity - 4231 is about as rigid as it gets, hence hardly any good teams have ever used it .Dazzler21 said:
I didn't suggest we should, merely that I have a feeling we might.wmcf123 said:
4231 with an immobile centre forward .. sounds very Karl Robinson and this team doesn’t have Ricky HolmesDazzler21 said:I really get the feeling we're gonna go with something like this 4-2-3-1:
Wollacott
Egbo - Innis - O'Connell - Sessegnon
Dobson - McGrandles
B.Taylor - Payne - Kirk
Stockley
Personally I think it will be 433, but there isn't really much difference.
Charlton fans, generally, are scared of 4231 because we had 2 managers that for different reasons shoehorned some unsuitable players into it and results picked up after they left and we played something different.
That says more about the suitability of the players to the system than the system itself.
Just imagine the reaction if we concede early on by making a mistake playing out from the back. Some will be demanding the entire system and style are scrapped as we “need to keep it simple”, despite the majority of this squad likely playing in variants of 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 throughout their teenage years.3
