baddragon62 Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 Donald Judd was a pioneer, and a rather famous one. He was not in any way associated with Football. The relevance is that he was a minimalist artist which has bearing as you will see below… Having recently resigned (retired) as Southport Manager I decided to see if I could repeat my taking a lower league team to the Premier League. I picked Hartlepool simply because they offered me the job! A bonus is that in their history they appear to have won nothing. Even when promoted they have been the bridesmaids! The challenge I set myself was to take a blank 4-4-2 formation and attempt to win using only player roles and PPM’s (i.e.with minimal TI’s and PI’s) So far it seems to be working with one slight concern that I am seeking more experienced peoples opinion on. We are in the 2nd season and are in 2nd place in League 2. I stabilised the team from 17th place after 10 games finish 8th in season 1 (Media prediction was 9th so we overachieved!). The formation: ------------------------- GK (D) ----------------------- --- WB(S) ----- D © ----- D © ---- WB (A) --- --- WM (A) --- CM (D) --- CM(A) --- WM (S) --- ------------------ AF (A) ---- DLF(S) ----------------- TI – Work ball into box PI – WM(A) – Get further forward – Sit Narrower Currently the players playing in the forward pair have scored 32/51 of the goals and have 23/53 assists. My other three top goal scorers play in the CM(A) and WM(A) roles (13/51 goals and 11/53 assists) which is as designed. Is this a normal distribution? To me it feels like I am too reliant on the striker pairs to get goals, although I have never used two striker formations until now. Thanks in advance :-) Edit: PI's on the WM(A) are to make him behave as an IF - he was tending to be drifting too wide when left to own devices - I am training the two candidates for this position to get into box and get forward and will then take these off once they have been taught. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo98 Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 Well, whilst its an interesting approach, I see one immediate question...... You say "(i.e. with no TI's and PI's)", but then go on to list a TI and 2 x PI that you are using ?? :confused: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
baddragon62 Posted May 11, 2015 Author Share Posted May 11, 2015 You say "(i.e. with no TI's and PI's)", but then go on to list a TI and 2 x PI that you are using ?? :confused: Corrected in original post. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.