[Albion] Graham Potter joins on four-year deal

[Marshy]

I'd argue it's exactly like that shit show up the road.
Unless the club want to buy 8 first teamers this summer, I can't see how they can appoint a manager with a philosophy at odds to the players we have.
Fulham already had the players and manager for the expansive style and didn't come close to staying up. It's a monumental risk.

I remember Poyet turning El Abd into a footballer over night.... we have the players, or certainly a good starting point with a few key additions.

I see your concerns, but calculated gambles is what Tony does and I for one am quite excited about it.

I shall look forward to next season now, I wouldn't have done had we stayed the same.

 

[Nixonator]

There still seems to be this long standing misconception (especially on this thread) that you are either defensive or ‘expansive’

Expansive has to be the most irritating word in the football vernacular currently


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably because it's been hammered into us at every press conference and post-match interview.

 

[Barham's tash]

I remember Poyet turning El Abd into a footballer over night.... we have the players, or certainly a good starting point with a few key additions.

I see your concerns, but calculated gambles is what Tony does and I for one am quite excited about it.

I shall look forward to next season now, I wouldn't have done had we stayed the same.

That is a FANTASTIC analogy.

Potter has by all accounts got the absolute best out of some previously deemed average footballers. However he’s done it, tactically, motivationally or through discipline, I don’t care.

He’d have a field day with our rabble.

 

[clapham_gull]

There still seems to be this long standing misconception (especially on this thread) that you are either defensive or ‘expansive’

Expansive has to be the most irritating word in the football vernacular currently


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Alongside "project"

 

[Nixonator]

Alongside "project"

If we're playing that game, I raise you - Philosophy

 

[Triggaaar]

That's Ok, our defence is MUSTARD.

Except for when we've transitioning from an attack. Then it's lumpy custard.

 

[Two Professors]

Was he trained at Hogwarts?He could be magic.

 

[Is it PotG?]

It'll be a Wonder if we don't have Potter in July.

 

[BBassic]

Surely an expansive game is going to expose your defence though.

Absolutely. It's not black and white. Perhaps I should have said "had their defence been better their attacking game may have paid off".

They averaged two goals conceded a game, had three different managers, sacked off most of the team that got them to the Premier League, bought in players who showed promise but ultimately under performed and were, stop me if you've heard this one before, relying on one bloke for their goals.

I just feel it's reductive to say the reason they went down is because they were a bit more adventurous on occasion than they perhaps should have been.

 

[BBassic]

Not to my knowledge. I suspect someone else mentioned them in this context.

Yeah probably. I see it everywhere, not just here and for whatever reason, because I don't give two f**ks about Fulham, it really gets on my tits.

I'll put my soap box back in the cupboard

 

[BrianSwan]

 

[TSB]

I remember Poyet turning El Abd into a footballer over night.... we have the players, or certainly a good starting point with a few key additions.

I see your concerns, but calculated gambles is what Tony does and I for one am quite excited about it.

I shall look forward to next season now, I wouldn't have done had we stayed the same.

Yes and Rohan Ince was a promising footballer for one season and JFC scored goals under Poyet.

No matter who is in charge, though, there is a complete lack of leadership on the pitch. Addressing that would have been my number one priority; not changing the manager.

I will hope that your optimism is borne out, Marshy.

 

[Machiavelli]

He actually likes playing with three central defenders in difficult games, but we only had two.

Other than that:

Keeper needs to be good with the ball. Builds play from the back. Uses tall forwards and pacy wingers. Lots of possession.

Welcome, and thanks for that. I heard (from a comment by Henrik Larsson) that he actually changes formation during games regularly, and sometimes more than once. Is this something you've noticed and, if so, can you elaborate?

 

[TSB]

Yeah probably. I see it everywhere, not just here and for whatever reason, because I don't give two f**ks about Fulham, it really gets on my tits.

I'll put my soap box back in the cupboard

I don't think Fulham's adventure is going to be forgotten about for some time. Surely, they will be the benchmark for all promoted teams to avoid for years to come.
I agree with your analysis of their epic fail.

 

[Machiavelli]

There still seems to be this long standing misconception (especially on this thread) that you are either defensive or ‘expansive’

Expansive has to be the most irritating word in the football vernacular currently


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed. But it was Hughton that first drew my attention to the word expansive (probably in reference to the opposition) as he used it regularly.

 

[Machiavelli]

If we're playing that game, I raise you - Philosophy

I've heard the word 'levels' a fair few times of late. Something tells me that I won't be hearing so much of it from hereonin.

 

[schmunk]

It'll be a Wonder if we don't have Potter in July.

Your username is currently on-topic-tastic.

 

[Nixonator]

I've heard the word 'levels' a fair few times of late. Something tells me that I won't be hearing so much of it from hereonin.

Hopefully, once we've established our expansive game, we might ourselves acquire some of these opposition players who can hurt us week in week out, so that we might be able to hurt them. Assuming we're at our levels of course.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

That's Ok, our defence is MUSTARD.

Besides, I am firmly of the view that attack is, at least, a good form of defense. It would be nice to have the opposition actually have some concern about us getting in behind. Playing defensively as we have done has only allowed the opposition to press as high as they like and play attack vs defense for most of 90 minutes.

We also have pretty decent attacking options, time we used them. I have a lot of confidence in our defense/GK, there is no reason we can't leave the defending to them.

Our defence has had to be good because we have been under so much pressure as a result of our complete inability to retain possession except when passing backwards. Oscar's belief was that possession was the best form of defence because if you have the ball the opposition can't score. I'd also point out that the opposition usually can't score if the ball's in their half. So a more attacking game will be welcome on many levels. We might even see Davy Propper in his best position.

 

[Machiavelli]

Our defence has had to be good because we have been under so much pressure as a result of our complete inability to retain possession except when passing backwards. Oscar's belief was that possession was the best form of defence because if you have the ball the opposition can't score. I'd also point out that the opposition usually can't score if the ball's in their half. So a more attacking game will be welcome on many levels. We might even see Davy Propper in his best position.

Our defence is mustard at backs-to-the-wall defending, but make them play a high line, and they won't look up to much all of a sudden. I love D&D, especially Dunk, but they lack pace, and this means that we probably have to sit deep and this, in turn, invites all sorts of other problems. The best teams play a high line, because they know their CBs (and defenders more generally) are as quick as the opponents' forwards. You look at our current team, and it's snail-like down the spine (out wide it's much better).