Club Formation: do we need the left back and right back?

I'm looking at the players and thinking what would be the best formation for the club. the one thing that kills me is we have LB & RB that are not that great.They rarely make an offensive attack and when they do they never come back to defend. Almost all the goals come from the middle and hardly ever do we see nice crosses in the MLS so i ask everyone do you really think that our formation (4 on the back)is the right choice?

i know we don't have the players to make "tic tac" passes but with the players we have know, having two pretty good CDM shouldn't we have a more defensive middle back with a 3-5-2 or or stay with the LB/RB and have a 4-2-3-1 formation?



~~FINDLEY~~~ALTIDORE~~~
~~~~~~GIOVINCO~~~~~~
OSARIO~~~~~~~~~JACKSON
~~~BRADLEY~~CHEYROU~~~
~~~~~~CALDWELL~~~~~~
~~~PERQUIS~~~~BLOOM/MORROW/OR..
~~~~~~BENDIK~~~~~~~~

What are you talking about? Morrow is top notch. RB will be a fight between Creavalle and Bloom with the former appearing to win the early start. I don't see any additions to our fullbacks in the short term, it'd take an injury or a massive drop in form to change that.

Yeah, Morrow definitely needs to start and his overlapping runs and defensive work are both big factors for us. 4-2-3-1 is a formation I'd like to see (or 4-4-1-1 if you like).

Morrow is quality. Nobody would claim otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ruffian

Morrow is quality. Nobody would claim otherwise.

---

Morrow is also training today.. he'll be playing if the season starts this weekend. As was Cheyrou.

Creavalle natural position is a CDM not a RB but I could be wrong.
I would say a lot of goals are scored threw the middle and we never use the RB/LB on the attack.

Sorry to burst your bubble put our LB/RB are not the greatest. Infact I would say that's our weakest position on the pitch

Bloom and morrow have not created nor scored goals for how many years?
Can someone please show me the last time they scored

Well Justin tends to believe we should bring sexy back.

He didn't score, but he did set up a nice goal by Issy vs. Columbus.

http://www.torontofc.ca/news/2014/04...p-crew-0-tfc-2

And has been said, he makes good over-lapping runs and can put the ball in dangerous areas.

Good clip that show Bloom and Morrow both geting an assist. Both on the right side of the pitch. both close the box when making the pass yet my point is running attack like a LB/RB normally do which is a style that just doesn't do much for the team. The back 4 formation. From giving crosses to hitting headers from corners and if they miss the header they run fast to defend the back line on the counter.

I'm not taking about the player being good I'm talking about the formation that works for the players we have and the style that works for the MLS

Morrow is one of the better left backs in the league and his play last year, both going forward and defending, was one of the few bright spots in another mess of a season. Bloom isn't anything spectacular, but I am very happy to have Morrow on the left, especially with Osorio playing on the left of midfield who likes to cut in. And now that we have a more solid centre midfield pairing, I'm even more comfortable with Morrow going forward. He's got the legs to go touchline to touchline and he does it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pronto

Creavalle natural position is a CDM not a RB but I could be wrong.
I would say a lot of goals are scored threw the middle and we never use the RB/LB on the attack.

Sorry to burst your bubble put our LB/RB are not the greatest. Infact I would say that's our weakest position on the pitch

---

Seriously? Morrow is widely considered one of the best LB in the league. You'd have a hard time naming better LBs.

There were numerous games, even when we were doing poorly, where he was the best defender on the pitch. His positioning is immense. I was even more impressed when he was moved to CB, a position he hasn't played as much in.

While he might not be as attacking-oriented as you may like, he is sufficient in this department. He regularly makes runs and has provided sufficient, if not impressive service. To say that this is our weakest position is hyperbolic.

Ur that guy on mlssoccer.com who keeps coming up with the whacked out TFC formations, arn't you?

I'm not that guy but good to now someone else is thinking more then 4-4-2 formation for our team. All I'm saying is most of the goals that are scored on us is threw the middle. So why don't we have 3 CB AND 2 CDM that would make our middle back stronger. 5 player on the back.

I'm not saying to put him on the bench I'm saying he would be better for us as a CB and having a formation that would have 3CB WITH TWO 2CDM to make the middle stronger

In the early days of football this was a common formation used... I believe a 2-3-5 (ie 2 defenders 3 mids and 5 forwards) wasn't uncommon. Until someone got the idea to put 4 on defence and 4 in the mid field and send them with the attack.. suddenly all any time had to do was lob the ball up and there weren't enough players to do shit.. which is likely how English long ball started.


So no having only 2 defenders is a shit poor idea... the reason is because 100+ years of football has shown that to be true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flamehawk

Seriously? Morrow is widely considered one of the best LB in the league. You'd have a hard time naming better LBs.

There were numerous games, even when we were doing poorly, where he was the best defender on the pitch. His positioning is immense. I was even more impressed when he was moved to CB, a position he hasn't played as much in.

While he might not be as attacking-oriented as you may like, he is sufficient in this department. He regularly makes runs and has provided sufficient, if not impressive service. To say that this is our weakest position is hyperbolic.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaz

In the early days of football this was a common formation used... I believe a 2-3-5 (ie 2 defenders 3 mids and 5 forwards) wasn't uncommon. Until someone got the idea to put 4 on defence and 4 in the mid field and send them with the attack.. suddenly all any time had to do was lob the ball up and there weren't enough players to do shit.. which is likely how English long ball started.


So no having only 2 defenders is a shit poor idea... the reason is because 100+ years of football has shown that to be true.

---

I'm not saying 2CB
I'm say 3-5-2 formation or 3-4-1-2
On defense 3 CB
On midfield 5 players:
two of which would be CDM
The other three could be attacking midfielder.

~~~~ST~~~~ST~~~~. FORWARD

LM ~~CAM/CF~~ RM. MIDFIELD

~~~CDM ~~CDM~~~. MIDFIELD

~~~~~~~CB~~~~~~~. DEFENSE
~~~~CB~~~~CB~~~~. DEFENSE

~~~~~~~GK~~~~~~~. GOALIE

As others have stated, a 3 man backline doesn't match our skill set in defence.