Leicester's Identity

[CrispinLA in Texas]

 The board need to have a clear style on how they want Leicester to play.

Then get a manager who's played his team's in that formation. Feel the board have just picked managers based on how successful they've been in their previous roles without looking at their styles of play and is it right 

Once you got the manager, he and the Leicester scouts have to get the players who fit that style.

I know I've written it simply but hope I everyone kind of gets what I'm trying to say.

[StanSP]

It's all the rage these days choosing what your identity is! 

[Chelmofox]

Just now, StanSP said:

It's all the rage these days choosing what your identity is! 

Then everyone complains you cant adapt.

[themightyfin]

Another BR out thread started behind a smokescreen. 

Boring 😴 

[CalH]

 

14 minutes ago, CrispinLA in Texas said:

 The board need to have a clear style on how they want Leicester to play.

Then get a manager who's played his team's in that formation. Feel the board have just picked managers based on how successful they've been in their previous roles without looking at their styles of play and is it right 

Once you got the manager, he and the Leicester scouts have to get the players who fit that style.

I know I've written it simply but hope I everyone kind of gets what I'm trying to say.

Surely we don’t have to have only one style of play? There needs to be flexibility too.
 

We want to see attacking play and the team scoring goals, playing as a team, for the team. Can we not set out to win every football match, whoever the opposition are?

 

In the great escape season the fans didn’t lose heart because we saw the team trying so hard and there was a feeling we were unlucky at times. 

[Voll Blau]

Buzzing for people to go back to moaning about there being "no Plan B" any time we don't win if this ficitonal "Identity" ever does emerge...

[foxy boxing]

Identity is more than just a playing style!. Good teams should be able to adapt and play different ways depending on a number of factors.  Rodgers clearly prefers possession  based while the fans prefer and are more used to counter attacking football.  It's good to have possession as along as your team has the ball the opposition can't hurt you with it!. Its also good to attack fast and direct as soon as you have the ball so the opposition don't have time to prepare their defence. We need a team that can have many options and ways to beat the opposition and not just one single way. 

[coalvillefox]

Tactically neautral is the way forward

[VLC86]

23 minutes ago, StanSP said:

It's all the rage these days choosing what your identity is! 

Recon we are non binery.

[SecretPro]

What are our pronouns?

[Finnegan]

We have an identity, say what you want about Rodgers but he has quite a clear footballing philosophy and when he can manage the morale in the squad its actually pretty good. 

 

It's obvious that Top and the board have a vision of us playing a more "elegant" possession based style. I'm aware that a lot of Leicester fans don't like or want that but then tough shit, raise a few billion and buy the club yourself. Whether they should be or not, football clubs aren't run as democracies. 

 

We've actively sought out managers to help us transition to a more possession orientated game and made signings to facilitate it. 

 

Whatever the problems may be at the club, having a clear footballing direction isn't one of the.. We know how Rodgers wants us to play, that it isn't working out is another matter. 

[Dames]

Lets not go down this road otherwise we'll sound like delusional West Ham fans banging on about 'The West Ham way'.

 

In terms of playing style we've got no identity, we never have. In terms of club identity we've always fancied ourselves as the underdog looking to cause an upset or two. 

 

We've let entitlement creep in over the past few years but we can hardly be blamed with the money that has been spent by the club.

[foxfan92]

12 minutes ago, SecretPro said:

What are our pronouns?

Describing words that explain what a thing is and have turned professional. 

Edited 24 August 2022 by foxfan92

[Rigga]

Not actually sure what our style of play and plan A is tbh 

[HybridFox]

Only one man to investigate

 

 

[cruzFOX]

Does anyone have a highlight reel of the games we played and won in Rogers first season? The team was flying and from what I remember it was a combination of possession but no slow sideways and backwards but lightning quick passing and directness forwards also we would do old school counter attacking too. 
 

so what the hell has happened to us?

when we were playing like that no one could handle it. Almost untouchable.

Can we not go back to that or has everyone got too old, lost confidence or injured?

[Larry_LCFC]

1 hour ago, SecretPro said:

What are our pronouns?

Boring and Tedious

[BenTheFox]

1 hour ago, Finnegan said:

We have an identity, say what you want about Rodgers but he has quite a clear footballing philosophy and when he can manage the morale in the squad its actually pretty good. 

 

It's obvious that Top and the board have a vision of us playing a more "elegant" possession based style. I'm aware that a lot of Leicester fans don't like or want that but then tough shit, raise a few billion and buy the club yourself. Whether they should be or not, football clubs aren't run as democracies. 

 

We've actively sought out managers to help us transition to a more possession orientated game and made signings to facilitate it. 

 

Whatever the problems may be at the club, having a clear footballing direction isn't one of the.. We know how Rodgers wants us to play, that it isn't working out is another matter. 

And one of the reasons we try to play that way is because the board believe that it is beneficial to us from a business point of view. Most of the top clubs, i.e. those who would be wiling to pay top dollar for our players play a possession heavy game. If we were to essentially become a glorified Burnley, there would probably be less interest in our players. 

[BeaumontFox]

1 hour ago, SecretPro said:

What are our pronouns?

Shit/shite

[The_77]

27 minutes ago, cruzFOX said:

Does anyone have a highlight reel of the games we played and won in Rogers first season? The team was flying and from what I remember it was a combination of possession but no slow sideways and backwards but lightning quick passing and directness forwards also we would do old school counter attacking too. 
 

so what the hell has happened to us?

when we were playing like that no one could handle it. Almost untouchable.

Can we not go back to that or has everyone got too old, lost confidence or injured?

I don’t think we can underestimate the loss our dynamic, attacking fullback play. We lost a lot of pace not having players like Chilwell and Ricardo in the lineup, and Justin hasn’t been able to cover ground like he used to before his injury. 

[leicesterlad1989]

Aside from the posession based football, our current identity is defined by the fitness of Harvey Barnes. If he's fit we play 433. If he's not we play wing backs.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

Fading by the week.

[FoxesWalk]

We can only create anything when we play with wingers, but we only have one winger of quality. 
 

We can’t defend generally, but particularly can’t defend set plays. 
 

We concede the most big chances in the league.

 

We create the fewest big chances in the league. 
 

We pass it around our centre backs a lot. 

A number of our quality players want out.

 

And then the really big one… we hand out overly generous contracts to players and managers who we are then trapped with regardless of how they perform. We have ****ed up with this one so badly that we could genuinely be relegated just one season after being a regular feature in Europe.  

 

 

[Matt]

I used to hate all this identity and “it’s the [insert name of club] way” bollocks, never believed in it.

 

That’s because I didn’t realise it until it gone.

 

We’ve gone down the one size fits all, “pretty”, “sexy”, “attractive” football route, the board, powers that be and a majority of fans brainwashed in this insipid, boring and negative way of possession football, “the way the game should be played”. Do me a favour.

 

As I’ve said many times, it’s not an issue exclusive to us there’s only a handful of teams who don’t play this way, it’s an issue with football - the whole game stinks and is in a bad way in terms of excitement and entertainment.

 

That doesn’t mean it’s right we follow suit.

 

We lost our identity of being up for a fight, fast, dynamic, pouncing on any mistake to play this slow, exciting football club to become a ponderous, mistake laden, camping infront of your own 18 yard box tipping and tapping it from left to right borefest of a club. Disgusting.

 

We used to be hard to beat, teams would know it'd be a tough game for them, never knowing when to give up, we've gone to be easy to beat, a soft underbelly, we must be one of the easiest teams in the league to play against, we do half (if not more) of the work for the opposition.

 

How anyone enjoys or gets behind it is beyond me.

 

Atleast it’s sustainable though, right?

 

Edited 24 August 2022 by Matt

[old koppite]

2 hours ago, Dames said:

Lets not go down this road otherwise we'll sound like delusional West Ham fans banging on about 'The West Ham way'.

 

In terms of playing style we've got no identity, we never have. In terms of club identity we've always fancied ourselves as the underdog looking to cause an upset or two. 

 

We've let entitlement creep in over the past few years but we can hardly be blamed with the money that has been spent by the club.

I agree with you, except it’s not true to say we have never had an identity. The Bloomfield team of the 70s were regarded as an exciting attacking team but just couldn’t quite win any trophies, and it often pleased me to hear supporters from across the country so we were their second favourite team after their local team. Martin O’Neil’s era was known for spirit , fight, tenacity, and upsetting the big boys.