3-5-2.. whatever happened to it?

It was how we succeeded in the 90's, and its a formation that you rarely see anymore.
Id say its unique, and was probably key to our success back in the day.
These days, its 4-3-3 variations no matter where you go, and its boring.
I have been watching old BFC videos though, with Eaden and Barnard in their pomp. Maybe I should just forget about the past and focus on the present...

 

Wigan played that tactic last night.

 

Last time i can remember it been played was 07 or 08 against West Brom ans it didnt work against a 4231 style west brom.

 

Formations don't win games, players do. That said you have to have the players to match the positions. Seems we're light in midfield and at centre back, whilst having full backs who are better going forward than defending.

352 might be a better fit for the players we have?

 

All current managers going on the same coaching courses. Killing innovation IMHO.

 

Hmmmm.
It worked then... but then again, Hemsy says it didnt work for one game in 2007 so thats that. He forgets the 100 games plus that it worked under Danny. Oh yeah, he wasnt around back then. Football didnt exist until Hemsy started watching it

 

Maybe it is worth a try? I see Wiseman and golbourne as wing backs. Dawson, Perks and Tonge in midfield and Gray Davies up top? The centre back positions take care of themselves, foster, Edwards and Collins/Mcnulty. Could work.

 

Try*

 

And then we all wonder why KH accuses us all of living in the past

Think it could work though, would certainly get the best out of the likes of wiseman and Tonge imo.

 

It wouldnt work.

barnsley had problems with 2 on the wings (full back and winger) against blackpool and posh away, let them get in behind that wing back and they would have got a cricket score on monday. You are saying put an extra player in the one area they didnt have any players at times.

The best weve played this season was 4231.

The only time ive seen it this season was on sky, barca playing away at valencia or vilareal when they didnt only get beat but from what the spainsh press said it was the worst spell theyed play in 5 years. Theyve gone back to 433 and they are closing madrid down.

Alves normally very good and attacking didnt like having someone in front of him ans put his worst spell in for barca.

 

You know that may not be a bad shout at all.

I was thinking who could play the "sweeper" and I reckon that might suit McNulty really well. Reckon you could do it pretty well using 2 of Collins, Edwards and Foster (if he stays on) too.

Not sure how Done and O'Brien would fit into the formation though. We tended to play three narrow in midfield to let the wingbacks fly down the wings

 

Been attacking full back with a winger in front of you and playing wide on your owns different. has ive just put, alves most attacking full back in the wirkd atm didnt enjoy it.

 

One of the biggest issues we've had defensively is absent fullbacks and teams getting round the back of us anyway.

Once the fullback is out of position the centre halves are dragged to the ball and there are gaps galore. An extra defender cures that. We've also had problems being outnumberd in midfield, if we have three narrow and put emphasis on the wingbacks getting up and down and making a 5 and defending as a 5 when needed.

The only problem when we last played 3-5-2 before was it took us a decade to learn how to play 4-4-2 again!

 

And people doubt your knowledge I have to say I agree. (don't get cocky)

In addition to the above forwards learnt how to 'bend their runs' behind the wing back and run into the space. Dwight York gave a master class in that 'run' when we played against them in the prem season

 

Just found this by accident.

 

I called for a return to 3-5-2 just before Flicker implemented, I'll take the usual fee.......

http://v2.barnsleyfc.org.uk/showthread.php?180034-A-radical-problem

 

What does Flicker know. Pffft.

 

To answer the initial OP way back when and the real problem which we might come across shortly is it is easy to nullify.

In the 90s it took a while for teams to work out how to play against it and then it got found out. If you play with really high pushed up wingers it negates the benefit of 3-5-2 which is the ability to attack with Wingbacks mainly. Nicky Eaden and Neil Thompson were our most threatening players and when you add midefielders joing the front men i.e Liddle, Redders and Bullock et al then it was a recipe for success. But when you take the winbacks out and make them defend you then the system becomes a defensive one rather than attacking.

One game that is vague in my mind is Brum at home where they beat us 4 or 5 nil by playing 4-2-4 and it worked a treat.

 

Depends on if you have 3 centrebacks or someone who can stop out from centre back and play as a defensive midfielder too. Appleby did this back in the day and despite his lack of height defending did a good job. He was also able to push into midfield, let the wingbacks drop back and turn 3-5-2 into 4-4-2 when defending the ball in certain positions or bringing the ball out of defence. That's why i thought Hassell would be better as the middle of the three centre back's as he can do that job of pushing out of central defence and pass the ball.

 

4-2-3-1 didnt work over time because there was too much emphesis on people taking the ball in deep positions and if you dont have any width (which we didnt) then everything goes down the centre (which it did). As I said way above, formations dont win games, but it's no use sticking with one if the players you have are not good enough to play in their selected positions. This was our problem as despite Hill buying wingers (Silva and Etuhu) he obviously felt they weren't ready to play out wide and do the job needed of them.