And now for something different

Bignot Boyce McDonald Pearson and Thomas would work as a back 5.

Not at this stage of the season though and obviously Boyce isn't a Town player.

I think you're right ginny but your wording of the "back 5" is what would concern me. If Hurst was the one putting this formation in place I'm sure it would end up being just that - a back 5. Rather than wingbacks advanced into midfield just as often.

It was the same with our attempts at 433, which was never in a million years a 433, but a flat 451. We either haven't had players capable of adapting from 442 or Hurst hasn't got the tactical knowledge to get a team playing a different formation.

Quoted from Tommy

Not sure Colbeck's got the brain to learn a very different new position to be honest.

And for his ability alone I'm hoping he won't be at the club next season. It'll worry me if we settle for technically limited players like him just because they're reliable in terms of their work rate.

Bignot would be fine for a wingback role. If he could stay fit.

The other thing with 3 at the back is that the 2 CB's on either side would often have to come across to cover wider areas from balls/attacks down the channels.  Especially when teams counter attack against us. We'd have to consider whether the players in the back 3 (2 of them anyway) were mobile enough for this. For instance I dont think a back 3 of McDonald Pearson Doig would work too well.

Colbeck is yet to learn his own position yet, never mind learn another.

Yes i agree that Colbeck has his limitations, i was just trying to find a
suggestion in the current squad for the right side wing back role,
perhaps Bignot or the young lad instead then, someone with the energy
and  recovery skills to perform the role, wouldn't have thought Hatton
would be the sort of player to risk there  in that formation though.

Quoted from highcliff mariner

I would probably say the people on here who are so critical of a professional football managers tactics think that they are the fountain of all football knowledge. Not someone that questions why they are slating him constantly.

As I said.... It's more popular to slate the team than question someone who is slating the team.

Using wing backs in a 532 would mean no wingers and no overlapping.   Although it offers better defensive options my only worry would be the lack of midfield attack thats if you use the current crop.  The only way we would no is to implement it.

The thing is though Meza that if you get the right players in  the wing back
positions ie players that have high levels of fitness and good recovery abilities there
is no reason why they cannot overlap - i wouldn't want to see wingbacks who didn't
get forward, as others have posted that would be too negative, good wing backs like
the Newport lad get forward to support their attack ,but somehow have the fitness to
be back defending in a flash.
That formation also allows the potential for a  floating midfielder, the type of role
that Peter Beardsley/Teddy Sherringham/Eric Cantona  used to play  so well
(for the older posters like me)
I know that there is nil chance of us playing this formation for the remaining games
this season, but if we fail to gain promotion (which sadly i fear we will) we  have to
start considering changes in approach for next season IMHO - this might not be the
cure-all, but every side in this league know how we play now, so we have to evolve
a style to get us back in the FL.

Playing 3 at the back/wing-backs probably means playing either Neilson or Rodman,
which doesn't get the best use of our most likely match-winners.
I suppose we could try one as a striker alongside (certainly if PH is still here) the Shop.

I quite like the idea - and it could be the making of Colbeck (as right wing-back) - but the old
heads here will remind us (correctly) that whenever Town don't play 4-4-2 it doesn't work.

I reckon Rodman could score goals played as a striker Chiang, he does
seem one of the better players we have finishing-wise, so a target man and
Rodman with Neilson playing just behind them might work - its all hypothetical
anyway unless the Manager changes, because i could never see Paul Hurst
go with the wingback plan (unfortunately).

Quoted from petethemariner

I reckon Rodman could score goals played as a striker Chiang, he does
seem one of the better players we have finishing-wise, so a target man and
Rodman with Neilson playing just behind them might work - its all hypothetical
anyway unless the Manager changes, because i could never see Paul Hurst
go with the wingback plan (unfortunately).

Yep - agree with you on everything.

Rodman could hardly be worse than the rest of our 'strikers'!