The Enzo Thread

[Suzie the Fox]

3 hours ago, Analysethis said:

And now make a new poll after a win, especially when we played exceptionally well and won by 5 goals- it never happens.

 

Voting after an unexpected loss is always a reaction vote and the result is skewed by bias.

Not saying everyone would change their vote and some want him out regardless, but a poll after a win would make a difference. 

Edited 24 April by Suzie the Fox

[Tom12345]

On 22/04/2024 at 18:47, BenTheFox said:

I'm in this camp. He's clearly a very coach. You don't work for Pep Guardiola if you're not. I'm just not convinced that he's a good manager yet. 

I think this thing with Pep is overblown.

 

He only worked there as a coach for a year or so. Not for a long time. Not as a no. 2 either. He was one of a number of coaches there.

[Tom12345]

15 hours ago, indierich06 said:

I do think Enzo will (or should have) learned a lot in his first season as a manager, and that will stand him in good stead. But one thing that does worry me is that he never seems that introspective after a match - it's always 'the system is fine, we created enough chances to win, we played well'... but how do we account for the losses and the poor form then? If it's just him backing his players publicly, that's fine - but if he really doesn't think there's anything to improve on, or any ways that HE can improve, or any ways his system can be tweaked to counteract the ways it's been exploited this season, then that's a problem.

 

The style can be a bit dry at times, but that seems like the way football is going more generally at the minute, thanks to Guardiola. I do feel for Enzo in the sense that - by and large - we DO create enough chances to win most games we play, we just don't seem to have the strikers to finish them. Vardy is quite a way past his best, I had high hopes for Iheanacho and Daka in this league, but they've proved they're not up to it and should be moved on IMO. But then it's baffling that Cannon hasn't been given more of a chance, given the performances he put in when he did play.

 

And it begs the question - why didn't we move for a more suitable striker in the summer? We let Leeds strengthen by buying Piroe, while leaving ourselves with strikers who weren't good enough. Piroe's not had an amazing season at Leeds, but you look at a lot of the chances we create and we're crying out for a strong, mobile, skilful finisher, and I don't think Leeds have utilised him well. Maybe we were gambling on the fact that the existing strikers could do the business? But I think a smarter move would have been to sell one or two (Iheanacho and Daka) to get them off the wage bill and fund a replacement.

 

All in all, you can't argue the season hasn't been a success if we go up automatically, as champions or runners up, and Enzo should be given the summer to evolve the team - we're likely losing Ndidi, Iheanacho, Praet, Vestergaard, Vardy, Albrighton, the futures of Yunus, Fatawu and Doyle are all up in the air currently too, and clubs are once again going to be sniffing around at the likes of Dewsbury-Hall. That's about six regular starters and 10 squad players whose futures are uncertain. And all this set to the backdrop of ongoing financial issues and a likely points deduction.

 

We'll likely be odds on to go down next season, especially if we start on -6 or whatever the PL decides - I hope we go back to looking at young players with potential (<£10m), and shrewd experienced players, rather than just throwing money around in a desperate attempt to stay up like Forest have done recently. Build a side for the future, regardless of next season's outcome - the mentality at this club is rotten to the core, it looked like we'd fixed it early in the season, but the fight appears to have gone yet again now we're in the thick of it.

 

TL;DR - Enzo's got his flaws, hopefully he learns from them, if he gets us up he deserves a shot at keeping us there.

You are right in the first paragraph. But if you expand this to your other points, I think you will realise it is not the fault of our existing strikers who are clearly a level above this league. It is because of the stubbornness of Enzo and his style which underutilizes or mis-uses them - just like what you said about Leeds not using their striker correctly (I am not sure about that). We will play better with two strikers and Nacho plays better in a two than as a lone striker as it has already been proven in the past. The fact is he has been kept on the bench despite the number of games we had and the first team hardly getting a rest.

[MPH]

1 hour ago, Suzie the Fox said:

And now make a new poll after a win, especially when we played exceptionally well and won by 5 goals- it never happens.

 

Voting after an unexpected loss is always a reaction vote and the result is skewed by bias.

Not saying everyone would change their vote and some want him out regardless, but a poll after a win would make a difference. 

 

im tempted to do a poll after we secure 1st place and get promoted!

[Dan LCFC]

I really hope that's a sign of what could be to come when we are going to have less of the ball and not Southampton and Russell Martin being totally inept.

 

For any criticism I've made of Maresca I'd far sooner have him than Martin.

[Aus Fox]

14th April vs 24th April - 10 days is a long time in FootbalL.

Edited 24 April by Aus Fox

[Raj]

When we play like this and less tippy tappy I want to kiss him and make him risotto 

[Tom12345]

Worrying that Maresca in his post match interview said that this is not the best performance by the team (ok this does not have to be the best) but more relevantly that he implied that he is not happy with certain things and you have to look at the overall complete performance.

 

I may be thinking too much, but this sounds somewhat the same as the way Rodgers criticised the way we played all those years ago against West Brom when we scored 3 in the first half. He talked to the team at HT and said he was much happier with the second half (we did not even look like scoring).

 

5-0 should be good in anyone’s books. If we win 5-0, we must be doing something better than what we have done before (ie. the boring predictable possession football). Wait, that’s it, we didn’t have as much possession but we tried to do something when we had the ball hence we had the chances to go 5-0.

 

Not saying we sack him, but he really needs to embrace positive football, mixing things up with long balls and counterattacks, be comfortable without possession, utilizing the big squad by adjusting himself rather than playing the same team week in week out, and be adaptable.

 

I rather we win 5-0 than holding on the ball for dear life so we can get our possession % to be more than 60%.

Edited 24 April by Tom12345

[LiberalFox]

I love the old school way of trying to score goals with the football.

 

Seemed to work alright for us last night.

[James_lcfc]

So nice to watch the other team have ~70% possession and just pass it round passively with no energy or purpose wasn’t it.

 

Whilst we were the ones hunting in packs winning the ball high up.
I know you relinquish control doing that and can leave yourself exposed, but it’s just so much more entertaining, win or lose.

[Claridge]

10 minutes ago, Tom12345 said:

Worrying that Maresca in his post match interview said that this is not the best performance by the team (ok this does not have to be the best) but more relevantly that he implied that he is not happy with certain things and you have to look at the overall complete performance.

 

I may be thinking too much, but this sounds somewhat the same as the way Rodgers criticised the way we played all those years ago against West Brom when we scored 3 in the first half. He talked to the team at HT and said he was much happier with the second half (we did not even look like scoring).

 

5-0 should be good in anyone’s books. If we win 5-0, we must be doing something better than what we have done before (ie. the boring predictable possession football). Wait, that’s it, we didn’t have as much possession but we tried to do something when we had the ball hence we had the chances to go 5-0.

 

Not saying we sack him, but he really needs to embrace positive football, mixing things up with long balls and counterattacks, be comfortable without possession, utilizing the big squad by adjusting himself rather than playing the same team week in week out, and be adaptable.

 

I rather we win 5-0 than holding on the ball for dear life so we can get our possession % to be more than 60%.

He was talking nonsense.pretentious drivel in his press conference. I only hope it was slightly tongue in cheek as he had clearly changed things with Wilf playing central

[wokinghamfox]

You saved me typing as my thoughts are exactly the same. Excellent post.

[smudger63]

2 minutes ago, Tom12345 said:

Worrying that Maresca is his post match interview said that this is not the best performance by the team (ok this does not have to be the best) but more relevantly that he implied that he is not happy with certain things and you have to look at the overall complete performance.

 

I may be thinking too much, but this sounds somewhat the same as the way Rodgers criticised the way we played all those years ago against West Brom when we scored 3 in the first half. He talked to the team at HT and said he was much happier with the second half (we did not even look like scoring).

 

5-0 is a good on any book. If we win 5-0, we must be doing something better than what we have done before (ie. the boring predictable possession football). Wait, that’s it, we didn’t have as much possession but we tried to do something when we had the ball hence we had the chances to go 5-0.

 

Not saying we sack him, but he really needs to embrace positive football, mixing things up with long balls and counterattacks, be comfortable without possession, utilizing the big squad by adjusting himself rather than playing the same

team week in week out.

He won't have been happy with having only 30 odd per cent of the ball.

For him that means we aren't controlling the game.

The reality is, if you are organised with the press and get it right without the ball, and move the ball with speed and purpose when you get the ball back, then you can have some semblance of control that way too, and can be harder to stop than taking 30 passes more than you needed too, to try break and opposing side down .

We won the Premier League playing that way.

Enzo needs to be more flexible in his thinking, and realise there is more than just one way of playing, that it's OK to mix it up when his way isn't working, and then he could go on to have an excellent career as a manager.

[wokinghamfox]

16 minutes ago, Tom12345 said:

Worrying that Maresca in his post match interview said that this is not the best performance by the team (ok this does not have to be the best) but more relevantly that he implied that he is not happy with certain things and you have to look at the overall complete performance.

 

I may be thinking too much, but this sounds somewhat the same as the way Rodgers criticised the way we played all those years ago against West Brom when we scored 3 in the first half. He talked to the team at HT and said he was much happier with the second half (we did not even look like scoring).

 

5-0 should be good in anyone’s books. If we win 5-0, we must be doing something better than what we have done before (ie. the boring predictable possession football). Wait, that’s it, we didn’t have as much possession but we tried to do something when we had the ball hence we had the chances to go 5-0.

 

Not saying we sack him, but he really needs to embrace positive football, mixing things up with long balls and counterattacks, be comfortable without possession, utilizing the big squad by adjusting himself rather than playing the same team week in week out, and be adaptable.

 

I rather we win 5-0 than holding on the ball for dear life so we can get our possession % to be more than 60%.

Hit the nail on the head and my thoughts entirely. Excellent post

[volpeazzurro]

5 minutes ago, Tom12345 said:

Worrying that Maresca in his post match interview said that this is not the best performance by the team (ok this does not have to be the best) but more relevantly that he implied that he is not happy with certain things and you have to look at the overall complete performance.

 

I may be thinking too much, but this sounds somewhat the same as the way Rodgers criticised the way we played all those years ago against West Brom when we scored 3 in the first half. He talked to the team at HT and said he was much happier with the second half (we did not even look like scoring).

 

5-0 is a good on any book. If we win 5-0, we must be doing something better than what we have done before (ie. the boring predictable possession football). Wait, that’s it, we didn’t have as much possession but we tried to do something when we had the ball hence we had the chances to go 5-0.

 

Not saying we sack him, but he really needs to embrace positive football, mixing things up with long balls and counterattacks, be comfortable without possession, utilizing the big squad by adjusting himself rather than playing the same team week in week out, and be adaptable.

 

I rather we win 5-0 than holding on the ball for dear life so we can get our possession % to be more than 60%.

Agreed, the West Brom analogy was the first thing to come to my mind too! For the next few matches after West Brom we continued to get some good results playing in a free flowing style until Rodgers 'philosophy' fully kicked in. It was hidden/masked for quite a while by the skills of some talented individual players who would perhaps score, sometimes during late on Rodgers defying play until eventually, the system fully kicked in, overwhelmed and quietened them.

 

Maresca is a young new manager and still learning his trade to some extent I suppose. There's a lot to like imo and I suppose discipline and adherence to a system has to be part of it to some extent. With Rodgers it was more of a stubborn obsession without any valid purpose. 

 

Last night was an excellent performance but it was against a team that was quite open who came at us and not the sort of team with tactics that has been troubling us. Hopefully the stats of only 33% possession, the performance and goals scored will give him something to consider though and not, like Rodgers, merely make him double down on some of the more negative tactics. 

[Beachyboy]

15 minutes ago, James_lcfc said:

So nice to watch the other team have ~70% possession and just pass it round passively with no energy or purpose wasn’t it.

 

Whilst we were the ones hunting in packs winning the ball high up.
I know you relinquish control doing that and can leave yourself exposed, but it’s just so much more entertaining, win or lose.

I dont know how much control any team has playing 20 passes in the defensive third, control is possible with and without the ball.

[Beachyboy]

11 minutes ago, smudger63 said:

He won't have been happy with having only 30 odd per cent of the ball.

For him that means we aren't controlling the game.

The reality is, if you are organised with the press and get it right without the ball, and move the ball with speed and purpose when you get the ball back, then you can have some semblance of control that way too, and can be harder to stop than taking 30 passes more than you needed too, to try break and opposing side down .

We won the Premier League playing that way.

Enzo needs to be more flexible in his thinking, and realise there is more than just one way of playing, that it's OK to mix it up when his way isn't working, and then he could go on to have an excellent career as a manager.

Really thats the blue print to get points against top half prem teams, and his more possession based with also be needed against anyone 11th and below.

[BenTheFox]

When we have come up against decent footballing sides that are a bit less direct and want to play against us, we've generally looked better. The games that spring to mind are obviously last night, Southampton away, the first 70 minutes away at Leeds and Bournemouth in the cup. The main exception to thos was the home game against Leeds. We have struggled when the opposition have been organised and physical. This could be for a number of reasons, complacency in the players being one. However, I do recall Maresca saying words to the effect of 'when the opposition plays fast against us, we play fast through them. When they are slow and compact, we play slow and patient'. I think that has been an issue. Our build-up play against mid-table/bottom half teams has been too slow and patient. It's acted as a leveller. I'm not suggesting that we spam the box with crosses but it's harder to defend against when you move the ball quicker with quality. 

[smudger63]

20 minutes ago, smudger63 said:

He won't have been happy with having only 30 odd per cent of the ball.

For him that means we aren't controlling the game.

The reality is, if you are organised with the press and get it right without the ball, and move the ball with speed and purpose when you get the ball back, then you can have some semblance of control that way too, and can be harder to stop than taking 30 passes more than you needed too, to try and break the opposing side down .

We won the Premier League playing that way.

Enzo needs to be more flexible in his thinking, and realise there is more than just one way of playing, that it's OK to mix it up when his way isn't working, and then he could go on to have an excellent career as a manager.

 

[HighPeakFox]

It makes me somewhat sad that last night will soon become a stick to beat the manager with, if it isn't already.

[smudger63]

Just now, smudger63 said:

 

Oops I'm quoting myself, what a prat! 

[casablancas]

3 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

It makes me somewhat sad that last night will soon become a stick to beat the manager with, if it isn't already.

Was just thinking this after reading through people’s thoughts. 

[Lcfc82]

25 minutes ago, smudger63 said:

He won't have been happy with having only 30 odd per cent of the ball.

For him that means we aren't controlling the game.

The reality is, if you are organised with the press and get it right without the ball, and move the ball with speed and purpose when you get the ball back, then you can have some semblance of control that way too, and can be harder to stop than taking 30 passes more than you needed too, to try break and opposing side down .

We won the Premier League playing that way.

Enzo needs to be more flexible in his thinking, and realise there is more than just one way of playing, that it's OK to mix it up when his way isn't working, and then he could go on to have an excellent career as a manager.

The ironic thing is Enzo’s normal style of play doesn’t see us control games. We’re usually like Southampton were last night  - passing around and not really going anywhere.

 

Hopefully last night sees a change of style, doubt it from his post match comments though 

[smudger63]

9 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

It makes me somewhat sad that last night will soon become a stick to beat the manager with, if it isn't already.

I look at it more, as hopefully  a performance that will help Enzos career going forward.

That he will learn from it.

He is very new in his managerial career, and has his idea of how he wants his team to play, and that's fine, but as he is finding this season, there are times when that way isn't working, and you have to find another way.

Last night will hopefully be a reminder for him going forward, that, that is fine too.

He will become a better manager if he does.

Edited 24 April by smudger63

[jim5000]

9 hours ago, LVFox said:

So much better when we play with intensity. It allows us to tear teams apart in the shapes Enzos tactics creates for us.

 

Gives great hope for next season if Enzo stays.

Who gave Claude Puel a logon?