"Don't change a winning team"

[cityfanlee23]

I've seen this over the past few weeks plenty of times, and I've never understood this, The quote "you can't change a winning team"  Is complete rubbish IMO...

 

You can always improve a team, As every opposition is managed differently with different players and styles of play, The whole Mahrez over lloyd thing is a prime example.

 

 

85% of the posts on FT said NO. you can't take lloyd off and change a winning team,

Now we are looking better with mahrez on than lloyd.

 

Yes we shoudnt go changing 6 players after a win, But why do so many people have the opinion that you cannot change a winning team?? Horses for courses IMO, Play to your strengths, but change to your opponents weaknesses.

 

 

Thoughts on changing a winning side?

 

IMO any side can be changed if it gives us an edge over the upcoming opposition.

I can't understand why people disagree even when our manager says it, Not that he's always correct...

[BrummieFOX]

 

Now we are looking better with mahrez on than lloyd.

 

 

I think that's up for debate to be honest. 

 

Though I've never agreed with the statement 'Never change a winning side' either, however it hasn't half served us well this season. In fact, I'd say it's been a huge part of us (and Burnley for that matter) being so successful. 

 

It just shouldn't be taken literally.

[Harry - LCFC]

A system that's worked exceptionally well can't be described as "complete rubbish" IMO.

[cityfanlee23]

A system that's worked exceptionally well can't be described as "complete rubbish" IMO.

What?

 

I'm not calling the system rubbish, I'm calling the quote "you cant change a winning team" rubbish, because you can always improve one.

[kingcarr21]

^{For me the difference is our team can beat any team in this league playing the style we play at the moment. Dont care who the opposition is just play the same way as we have and the chances will come to score and win the game. Mahrez only came into the starting line up due to injury to dyer. Lucky for us that change has arguably made us play better.}

 

^{Keeping the same 11 players currently performing and having that winning mentality whilst learning and understanding each others strengths and weaknesses and building in confidence is really important.}

 

^{Unnecessary changing of the team can cause disruption in the players understanding of each other and it only takes one moment to lose a game.}

 

^{Confidence is everything in this league and i believe the best way to maintain that confidence is to stick with a settled team who understand each other so as mistakes can be kept to a minimum.}

 

^{But this is just my opinion so dont go hating}    

[ScouseFox]

well bar the forced changes of moore, konch and dyer i would say 17 games unbeaten with 14 wins and 3 draws says barely changing our team unless necessary has actually worked pretty well. no? 

[cityfanlee23]

^{For me the difference is our team can beat any team in this league playing the style we play at the moment. Dont care who the opposition is just play the same way as we have and the chances will come to score and win the game. Mahrez only came into the starting line up due to injury to dyer. Lucky for us that change has arguably made us play better.}

 

^{Keeping the same 11 players currently performing and having that winning mentality whilst learning and understanding each others strengths and weaknesses and building in confidence is really important.}

 

^{Unnecessary changing of the team can cause disruption in the players understanding of each other and it only takes one moment to lose a game.}

 

^{Confidence is everything in this league and i believe the best way to maintain that confidence is to stick with a settled team who understand each other so as mistakes can be kept to a minimum.}

 

^{But this is just my opinion so dont go hating}    

 

Agree completely, I've just seen the quote so many times recently as we are playing so well, Bloody good players are sitting on the bench (Wood, or kingy for example)

[Captain...]

I agree, it is a stupid philosophy and one you don't see at the biggest and best clubs, I would love to see NP use the squad more and play horses for courses, we need pace we have Lloyd and Mahrez, we need guile we have Knocky, they have a strong wingers we can play Konch and Moore at full back, they play narrow we can use the pace and attacking intent of Schlupp and RDL, for example.

 

We now have a situation where pretty much all of the Matchday squad are good enough at this level, there are no real weak links and my only complaint about NP is that he doesn't always look at utilising the squad's strengths to its full capacity, I also don't like to see players sitting on the bench until they get their chance through injury or suspension. I think it is better for morale to know you will used in games that play to your strengths, giving you the chance to shine and reward good performances. I think it also keeps players fresh and reduces the risk of burn out and injury.

 

Next season we won't have it so easy so it will be interesting to see how NP copes, will we develop a tactic and formation for big teams? switch to 3 CB or 3 midfielders to stop us getting overrun? I don't know, I just hope that we do win enough games to be able to have this debate.

[Harry - LCFC]

What?

 

I'm not calling the system rubbish, I'm calling the quote "you cant change a winning team" rubbish, because you can always improve one.

 

I think you're correct to say that certain players fit certain games better but I don't think there's any real need for us to adapt to a specific match. As long as we play well it won't matter if it's not precisely the right team out there and who better to count on to perform than the team who won last week?

 

I know it's simplistic but when you're the best team in the league's there's no need to complicate it. Just turn up and we'll probably win. Might change my mind in the prem though...

[ealingfox]

There were clear signs of fatigue against Blackburn. Vardy (because of the yellows as well) and at least two of Nuge, James, Drinky or Knocky should be rested ahead of Burnley.

 

Your Kings, Dyers, Woods are itching for a game, get them involved they're all good players.

[kingcarr21]

Agree completely, I've just seen the quote so many times recently as we are playing so well, Bloody good players are sitting on the bench (Wood, or kingy for example)

im sure if we were to change the team it wouldnt have a huge impact because of the good players we have at our disposal. Im sure confidence is high even in the sub players and they will have extra motivation to break into the winning team so will play to the best of there abilities so there are pros and cons on both sides of the argument.

 

I would personally prefer to keep the same team but if there was to be the odd change i wouldnt complain too much (unless we lost obviously but thats never gonna happen to the mighty foxes this season is it  )

[cityfanlee23]

I think you're correct to say that certain players fit certain games better but I don't think there's any real need for us to adapt to a specific match. As long as we play well it won't matter if it's not precisely the right team out there and who better to count on to perform than the team who won last week?

 

I know it's simplistic but when you're the best team in the league's there's no need to complicate it. Just turn up and we'll probably win. Might change my mind in the prem though...

 

Yeah I wouldnt say we need to change every matchday squad and formation just to beat the opposition, It was more the point that It doesnt have to be an excuse not to change just because we are "Playing well"

You just need to do enough to win the match, And if its obvious that wood is going to have an advantage over a 5ft 2 defender, or Lloyd is going to have an advantage over a slow right back. Then I cannot see why so many people defend the option to stick with the team that won last week

[MGLCFC]

I suppose it could read, never change a team that's not losing. I don't totally agree with this, but any tweaks that are made, I think the manager has to have confidence in his decision making to ensure those changes will improve performance. 

[ealingfox]

Nuge goes through cycles. Scores a few, boo-boys back off, plays crap, plays ok but doesn't score for ages, boo-boys come a-knocking, and repeat. The boo-boys are at the gates again, so wise not to drop him as we can probably expect 3 goals from the Yeovil and Burnley games from him.

[MooseBreath]

Can't see any particular problem with it myself. It only results in the same team being played constantly if you're constantly getting good results, which is a good thing, not a problem. If the players being constantly played get fatigued and it causes a poor result, then that immediately allows changes to be made, so it is kind of self regulating.

I think the system has limited application - the big clubs dont use it because they have other competitions to worry about - but for a season of championship dominance it is fine. Obviously the proof is in the pudding.

[blueonyou]

Thing is, if you win then all the players feel they have earned the right (in the most part) to keep their place and build on that win.

 

From a psychological point of view, if you start chopping and changing players from winning sides, how would that make you feel as a player?

 

Also, how would it affect the players not starting from trying harder in training/sub appearances to try and win their place back.

[Hungry Hungry Fox]

I think Nigel Pearson and Sean Dyche probably disagree

[Guest Sharpe's Fox]

The fact is that the teams who never change a winning side if injuries permit it are in the top 3, the teams with stronger squads on paper but have chopped and changed throughout the season are 4th-7th.

[cityfanlee23]

Thing is, if you win then all the players feel they have earned the right (in the most part) to keep their place and build on that win.

 

From a psychological point of view, if you start chopping and changing players from winning sides, how would that make you feel as a player?

 

Also, how would it affect the players not starting from trying harder in training/sub appearances to try and win their place back.

 

 

You make a fair point, but are players really that bad that they don't understand that in a certain match a different player may be able to have an advantage?

 

Watch chris wood in his interviews recently, Everytime he gets questioned about not getting a run in the team, he accepts that he is being kept out by one of the best championship partnerships going at the moment, and is struggling to get back in, and that he will be ready when called upon, We need that passion where players hate being taken off, but they cannot start expecting to be number 1 every week

[cityfanlee23]

I think Nigel Pearson and Sean Dyche probably disagree

 

... Pearson openly said he agrees that changing a winning team is something that needs to be done at times, Luckily this season we've been good enough to win regardless on most occasions, Next season will be very different with regard to chopping and changing I fear, However we're well and truely clear and the fact we have been winning has helped him to keep a balanced squad, but if you think about it, players who have played more than 1 position this season.. Schlupp (LB, LW, ST), Drinkwater (CM CDM, and moved onto the right sometimes) Knocky (All over, RW, LW) Nugent (Striker, Also a role dropping in, Not so much a position change as such) Moore (CB, RB) Wasil (CB, RB) Miquel (CB, LB) We've been fairly experimental.....

[yorkie1999]

Nothing against Mahrez or knocky they're very skilful players, but i'd like to see dyer back in. It's his pace on the wing that destroys teams.

[Richard]

We aren't a winning team, we drew with Blackburn. Therefore Pearson wouldn't be changing a winning team if he replaces Vardy with Wood tomorrow night (which I think would be wise)

[fuchsntf]

I've seen this over the past few weeks plenty of times, and I've never understood this, The quote "you can't change a winning team" Is complete rubbish IMO...

You can always improve a team, As every opposition is managed differently with different players and styles of play, The whole Mahrez over lloyd thing is a prime example.

85% of the posts on FT said NO. you can't take lloyd off and change a winning team,

Now we are looking better with mahrez on than lloyd.

Yes we shoudnt go changing 6 players after a win, But why do so many people have the opinion that you cannot change a winning team?? Horses for courses IMO, Play to your strengths, but change to your opponents weaknesses.

Thoughts on changing a winning side?

IMO any side can be changed if it gives us an edge over the upcoming opposition.

I can't understand why people disagree even when our manager says it, Not that he's always correct...

I totally agree, if one gets an injury, your forced to change anyway...I have always said top teams always pick n mix

a couple of their players.Why put yourself or replacement players under pressures of expectation , when replacing individuals

who have been on form, when injured.

We have 5 top games still to play, I would have prefered, to have seen King, Wood, and a couple more have had more game

time, isnt that the idea of having a strong squad.Not all reserves can bring the quality of the first 11.

I would expect though the mainstay of a squad come team would be of 15-16 players, in a club of citys status.

who could change their style or follow a team ethic accordingly.Burnley in contrast may have only 12-14 players over long periods. Like you say not wholesale changes, but 1 or 2 players or positions should be interchangable, especially when you have a couple of versatile players like Moore, Schlupp, or even knokky and King whos defence or attacking midfield potential can be used.

We've seen over years with city and this season with Forest, and QPR, where injuries have incurred poor displays and tactical confusions.

England compared with Germany over years is a good example, England has had too many forced changes, Germany use their squad.

[lcfcfan23]

agree that you CAN change a winning team, but at the moment i would not change our team. no possible improvements within our current squad. need to wait until the summer to improve it IMO

[Hungry Hungry Fox]

We aren't a winning team, we drew with Blackburn. Therefore Pearson wouldn't be changing a winning team if he replaces Vardy with Wood tomorrow night (which I think would be wise)

Splitting hairs a bit there