• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

O'Neil aka GONe

Looking at the games we’ve played I think GON has over achieved at home and under performing away.
So I think his just about hovering around the satisfactory mark.
it’s a case of how you define success for us now. Is it maintaining a finish of between 10th-15th hitting around 40-50 points?
Reality is we’re now probably sat in what is our natural home ( bottom half top flight- top 10 second tier)
 
jd1981 said:
Looking at the games we’ve played I think GON has over achieved at home and under performing away.
So I think his just about hovering around the satisfactory mark.
it’s a case of how you define success for us now. Is it maintaining a finish of between 10th-15th hitting around 40-50 points?
Reality is we’re now probably sat in what is our natural home ( bottom half top flight- top 10 second tier)
Click to expand...
As Del said yesterday it doesn't really matter how we define success, Shi in the Summer made it clear that it was 4th from bottom.
 
Let's say Sa comes back and plays to his usual standard which seems a bit higher than Bentley, and let's say Fosun play silly buggers again, what would we say is the main priority, solid midfielder or a really good no. 9?
 
Wolf Hunting said:
Let's say Sa comes back and plays to his usual standard which seems a bit higher than Bentley, and let's say Fosun play silly buggers again, what would we say is the main priority, solid midfielder or a really good no. 9?
Click to expand...
Definitely a move to the transfer thread 😁
 
We don't need a CM.

In this order:

- Versatile forward to play across the frontline, Neto is our only proper wide option and Hwang is away next month
- CH that allows us to play 4 at the back when appropriate
- RWB (and RB) to actually compete with Semedo, as Doherty is no option
- GK to actually compete with Sa, as Bentley is no option
- Outright #9 (nice to have but we won't get one in January)
 
People talk about formations, but once those players cross the white line, they don't matter.

theathletic.com

Gary O'Neil's Wolves - formationless

You try putting a formation on Wolverhampton Wanderers since O'Neil took charge in the summer…
theathletic.com theathletic.com
 
If it really is his overriding philosophy then I maintain he's asking limited players to do too much, with others regularly involved who simply don't suit the brief whatsoever.
 
If you compare how Villa play in a 'formationless' manner to how we try to did it, if that's what he is suggesting then it's night and day.
 
Last edited:
The big strength of Nuno's team was continuity and everyone knowing their exact role inside out, it's what made us so consistent.

Given that Toti still has more rough edges than a glacier, I don't think having him play 3 or 4 positions at once while also being our only centre half who can run is a very good idea.
 
Deutsch Wolf said:
People talk about formations, but once those players cross the white line, they don't matter.

theathletic.com

Gary O'Neil's Wolves - formationless

You try putting a formation on Wolverhampton Wanderers since O'Neil took charge in the summer…
theathletic.com theathletic.com
Click to expand...

In the last 4 games it's looked like nobody knows what they're doing or what's being asked of them.

Probably to do with players growing up in formations and roles and are now being asked to throw all that in the bin.
 
Johnny75 said:
In the last 4 games it's looked like nobody knows what they're doing or what's being asked of them.

Probably to do with players growing up in formations and roles and are now being asked to throw all that in the bin.
Click to expand...

More to do with sub standard players in key positions IMO. There are a number being regularly selected who aren't up to the level required.
 
Deutsch Wolf said:
People talk about formations, but once those players cross the white line, they don't matter.

theathletic.com

Gary O'Neil's Wolves - formationless

You try putting a formation on Wolverhampton Wanderers since O'Neil took charge in the summer…
theathletic.com theathletic.com
Click to expand...
A lot of what he says is fine in terms of how modern teams set up in and out of possession. Most of the time I can kinda see what he is trying to achieve, even if the execution of it isn’t great or the defenders aren’t up to it.

My concern is I find his approach a bit too close to Saunders-esque “setting up based on the opposition” and not really ever feeling like we are dominating a game. Not entirely his fault as the squad isn’t good enough to do that consistently but I would like to see a clearer identity/principles. I don’t think he has that even if he has the players.
 
Tony Towner said:
Well nobody is really, but their players in interviews so they'll play numerous different ones throughout the game
Click to expand...

That's normal at this level. Arteta talked about a game Vs Pep were there were something like 50 odd different phases.
 
Lycan said:
More to do with sub standard players in key positions IMO. There are a number being regularly selected who aren't up to the level required.
Click to expand...
If he wants to play with a high line we have 1 centre half capable of this
If he wants centre halves to step into midfield we have 0 capable of this (guessing a bit with Santi tbf)
If he wants full backs/wing backs to play high and be a proper attacking outlet we have 0 players on the right to do this properly

Ait-Nouri is quite capable at switching between LB/LWB/LM within a game and I believe he plays a lot of his international football for Algeria as LCH in a back three.

The rest of them, nah.

So I would be concentrating on maximising their strengths rather than exposing their limitations.
 
Deutsch Wolf said:
So I would be concentrating on maximising their strengths rather than exposing their limitations.
Click to expand...
Which is why I thought what Lopetegui had done pretty well was largely settle on that 442. Seemed a better alternative to just a 541 which was what we usually reverted to.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top