OFFICIAL Joe Willock (Out)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Football Manager

Copy & Paste Merchant
Firstly we don't have a style. The football under Mikel is poor boring and slow. And you don't sell an asset today based on the manager as we all know in a couple of years there will be a new manager.

Secondly while I agree Willock won't score 7/7 and a rate of 1 goal a game every week but he doesn't need to. If he is able to get you 10 goals a season and 6-7 assists both from starts and the bench then that's not so bad for a player who is developing and won't hit his ceiling for about another 3 years.

People would say before. Until we see what Willock can do week in week out we don't know how good he is.

So he went on loan, had an excellent loan, saved Newcastle season, fitted like a glove there and took to the club while maintaining respect for us.

Hes done all he can to prove he is worth considering for the Arsenal squad.

He doesn't need to start for us now. But being one of the first subs, while playing cup games and learning and developing in training could serve him well.

People said Emi had proven nothing. He had his 3-4 month spell with us and was excellent. People said oh purple patch. Yet this season he was one of the keepers in the league and was very good.

Would we swap Leno for Emi today. Course we would. Maybe we can use that as a lesson learned.

If we could sell Willock and sign a world class player of similar age and profile I would accept it. But if we are selling Willock to throw 40m at a 28 year old or 6 loans no.
1) If we keep Arteta, he should improve our playing style. In terms of tactics, stop the useless crosses, play through the middle...In terms of our squad, we should sell limited/one dimensional players, and buy players with more creativity.

If we hire a new manager, we are the Arsenal football club, we will not hire managers that love shxt, boring, relegation style football.

So either way, we will never play like Newcastle in the future.

2) Willock would be a huge liability in the general play. We need players that make our team plays better. So our team will score more. Willock adds some goals but our team will score less as a whole with him playing.

3) Imagine if you have 11 inzaghi, or 11 aubameyang in the team. Would you expect 30*11=330 goals/season just because they are a “30 goals/season player”? No because this team has no creativity. Each time you add one limited/one dimensional goal scorer into the team, the less creative your team will become. If you create less as a team, you will have less goal scoring chances.

4) I have already explained in the below post, that how it might work for willock if we keep him, and why I don’t think he is good enough.

If I have to pick someone playing this box to box goal scorer DM/CM/AM/CF hybrid role. I would pick a player with the skill set of an AM and transform his game into a more box to box role. Rather than picking a player with the skill set of a DM/CM and transform them, because they lack the creativity/passing/football skills to operate in the half space creating for the team.

You can’t coach Song and turn him into Cazorla. That’s why you have to pick the right player to develop his game.
We need a very specific system to get this type of player to play well.

Willock can work in a double pivot. For example, in a 3-4-3.
However, there are several weaknesses in him. When he make forward runs, he will leave a huge space in the midfield area.

This can be fixed with having the wide midfielder tuck inside, occupying the original space willock has left. Now willock is occupying the half space (which the wide forward was occupying, so the wide forward can run wide to keep the width for the team.
Here below, is how it looks like after the movements are made. Willock can use his strengths to attack the box in the half space (Note that his starting position was as a central midfield in a double pivot.)
(And of course, this is only one possible solution if we want to play good/attacking/entertaining football. We can fill up the space he left with other kind of movements. However, if we want to play shxt/boring/defensive/relegation football, then the solution would just be having everyone else staying at the back to fill in the gaps he has left.)
Without a clear tactical plan, we will be at picture 2 (as above), which the opponent team will rape us with counter attacks.
However, there are other weaknesses that stops willock from playing well in this midfielder/attacking midfielder/striker hybrid position.

When he is occupying the half space, his role there is mainly to be an attacking midfielder. The problem is that he is not a creative player, he is not a skillful dribbler, and he is not a great passer to occupy in that critical half space. He is not going to create much in this area which we need creativity the most. You can see how many through balls/amazing passes that KDB had made in this position, that willock are just not capable of.


I get that his strength is to pick the right time, to make runs into the box, become the striker and score. However, how many times will the right time exist in a match? If there are so few of these, it means most of his time, he would have to try creating for the team in the half space outside the box as an attacking midfielder. Willock just doesn’t have the close control/through passing ability to operate in this small pocket of spaces.

And that is where he is lacking. If he could improve on this, then great, I would loved to watch him play week in week out. But for now, I don’t think he is good enough for this role. ESR would be a good fit.
 
Last edited:

14Henry

Well-Known Member
1) If we keep Arteta, he should improve our playing style. In terms of tactics, stop the useless crosses, play through the middle...In terms of our squad, we should sell limited/one dimensional players, and buy players with more creativity.

If we hire a new manager, we are the Arsenal football club, we will not hire managers that love shxt, boring, relegation style football.

So either way, we will never play like Newcastle in the future.

2) Willock would be a huge liability in the general play. We need players that make our team plays better. So our team will score more. Willock adds some goals but our team will score less as a whole with him playing.

3) Imagine if you have 11 inzaghi, or 11 aubameyang in the team. Would you expect 30*11=330 goals/season just because they are a “30 goals/season player”? No because this team has no creativity. Each time you add one limited/one dimensional goal scorer into the team, the less creative your team will become. If you create less as a team, you will have less goal scoring chances.
So a 21 year old can't be coached to play a different role in some games?

No footballer in the world, especially a young one, can be coached effectively to make him a better team player?
 

Emeryates

Professional Troll
Newcastle doesn’t need creativity. They play counter attacks under a boring/shxt/relegation side style of football.
And Arteta plays a very interesting possession based style that is definitely not boring /s

Jose plays counter attack too, with our players it'd probably be more effective than whatever Arteta is trying
 

Football Manager

Copy & Paste Merchant
And Arteta plays a very interesting possession based style that is definitely not boring /s

Jose plays counter attack too, with our players it'd probably be more effective than whatever Arteta is trying
I don’t think Arteta is playing good football, and I have explained here in 1).
1) If we keep Arteta, he should improve our playing style. In terms of tactics, stop the useless crosses, play through the middle...In terms of our squad, we should sell limited/one dimensional players, and buy players with more creativity.

If we hire a new manager, we are the Arsenal football club, we will not hire managers that love shxt, boring, relegation style football.

So either way, we will never play like Newcastle in the future.

2) Willock would be a huge liability in the general play. We need players that make our team plays better. So our team will score more. Willock adds some goals but our team will score less as a whole with him playing.

3) Imagine if you have 11 inzaghi, or 11 aubameyang in the team. Would you expect 30*11=330 goals/season just because they are a “30 goals/season player”? No because this team has no creativity. Each time you add one limited/one dimensional goal scorer into the team, the less creative your team will become. If you create less as a team, you will have less goal scoring chances.

4) I have already explained in the below post, that how it might work for willock if we keep him, and why I don’t think he is good enough.

If I have to pick someone playing this box to box goal scorer DM/CM/AM/CF hybrid role. I would pick a player with the skill set of an AM and transform his game into a more box to box role. Rather than picking a player with the skill set of a DM/CM and transform them, because they lack the creativity/passing/football skills to operate in the half space creating for the team.

You can’t coach Song and turn him into Cazorla. That’s why you have to pick the right player to develop his game.
@14Henry
updated 4).
 

Goonger

Well-Known Member
Can people remember the big Ramsey debate / dilemma?

Ramsey's main strength was similar to Willock's, arriving into the box late & finishing well. However, we always had the similar debates / problems with regard Ramsey, his lack of positional discipline quite often leaving the midfield open to counters & being overrun.

However, playing him as the 10 didn't work either as he wasn't creative enough & it was more difficult for him to arrive in the box late unmarked.

Now I appreciate Ramsey & Willock have different attributes, & the players they are playing with are different, but would we not see a similar scenario happen here if we continued with the double pivot with Willock as an option.

If so, that would suggest that a formation change really is the only way to get the best out these players.
 

Football Manager

Copy & Paste Merchant
Can people remember the big Ramsey debate / dilemma?

Ramsey's main strength was similar to Willock's, arriving into the box late & finishing well. However, we always had the similar debates / problems with regard Ramsey, his lack of positional discipline quite often leaving the midfield open to counters & being overrun.

However, playing him as the 10 didn't work either as he wasn't creative enough & it was more difficult for him to arrive in the box late unmarked.

Now I appreciate Ramsey & Willock have different attributes, & the players they are playing with are different, but would we not see a similar scenario happen here if we continued with the double pivot with Willock as an option.

If so, that would suggest that a formation change really is the only way to get the best out these players.
You’re absolutely right. We would have the same issue. So here is a possible solution that I have posted earlier.
We need a very specific system to get this type of player to play well.

Willock can work in a double pivot. For example, in a 3-4-3.
However, there are several weaknesses in him. When he make forward runs, he will leave a huge space in the midfield area.

This can be fixed with having the wide midfielder tuck inside, occupying the original space willock has left. Now willock is occupying the half space (which the wide forward was occupying, so the wide forward can run wide to keep the width for the team.
Here below, is how it looks like after the movements are made. Willock can use his strengths to attack the box in the half space (Note that his starting position was as a central midfield in a double pivot.)
(And of course, this is only one possible solution if we want to play good/attacking/entertaining football. We can fill up the space he left with other kind of movements. However, if we want to play shxt/boring/defensive/relegation football, then the solution would just be having everyone else staying at the back to fill in the gaps he has left.)
Without a clear tactical plan, we will be at picture 2 (as above), which the opponent team will rape us with counter attacks.
However, there are other weaknesses that stops willock from playing well in this midfielder/attacking midfielder/striker hybrid position.

When he is occupying the half space, his role there is mainly to be an attacking midfielder. The problem is that he is not a creative player, he is not a skillful dribbler, and he is not a great passer to occupy in that critical half space. He is not going to create much in this area which we need creativity the most. You can see how many through balls/amazing passes that KDB had made in this position, that willock are just not capable of.


I get that his strength is to pick the right time, to make runs into the box, become the striker and score. However, how many times will the right time exist in a match? If there are so few of these, it means most of his time, he would have to try creating for the team in the half space outside the box as an attacking midfielder. Willock just doesn’t have the close control/through passing ability to operate in this small pocket of spaces.

And that is where he is lacking. If he could improve on this, then great, I would loved to watch him play week in week out. But for now, I don’t think he is good enough for this role. ESR would be a good fit.
 

MikelHadADream

Well-Known Member
Weird how Willock needs creative players to score but scored so many in a **** NUFC team with their main creative threat injured

A lot of his goals came from crosses. Guy has a sixth sense in the box. Imagine him with freedom to arrive in the box late with KT and Saka spamming crosses...
 

Barry

Well-Known Member
It depends quite how good Willock ends up being though. I suspect that he's not quite as good as Ramsey, but if he ends up being better in terms of goal output we'd be talking about designing the team around him.

Does the debate even happen if Ramsey had sustained his half season of amazing goal scoring form? Of course not. I just think it's too early to know yet. Willock has just posted an 8 goal season 2 years younger than Ramsey managed the same thing.

I do understand the counter arguments though and ultimately if we are not going to play him we should probably sell, so long as it is a good fee
 

kash2

More Consistent Than Arteta
Can people remember the big Ramsey debate / dilemma?

Ramsey's main strength was similar to Willock's, arriving into the box late & finishing well. However, we always had the similar debates / problems with regard Ramsey, his lack of positional discipline quite often leaving the midfield open to counters & being overrun.

However, playing him as the 10 didn't work either as he wasn't creative enough & it was more difficult for him to arrive in the box late unmarked.

Now I appreciate Ramsey & Willock have different attributes, & the players they are playing with are different, but would we not see a similar scenario happen here if we continued with the double pivot with Willock as an option.

If so, that would suggest that a formation change really is the only way to get the best out these players.
we made it work...we got a lot out of him.. won stuff... used him in various positions.... didnt try to kill his natural strengths but adapted our play accordingly.

there was one season I remember when we had literally nothing high quality upfront ...but we had Sagna who was world class in the air...and Theo who had world class pace...so we used a quarterback play for many games....goalies hoofs it to Sagna ...who wins it and gives to theo...who sprints upfield like a demon.

I dont really mind that we arent Man City, built on the bloodmoney of tyrants who treat women as subhuman, and can afford to buy two world class players for every position. We have a history, a great base in London, an amazing academy and a loyal global fanbase... lets at least do the best we can and play to our strengths.
 

MikelHadADream

Well-Known Member
Can people remember the big Ramsey debate / dilemma?

Ramsey's main strength was similar to Willock's, arriving into the box late & finishing well. However, we always had the similar debates / problems with regard Ramsey, his lack of positional discipline quite often leaving the midfield open to counters & being overrun.

However, playing him as the 10 didn't work either as he wasn't creative enough & it was more difficult for him to arrive in the box late unmarked.

Now I appreciate Ramsey & Willock have different attributes, & the players they are playing with are different, but would we not see a similar scenario happen here if we continued with the double pivot with Willock as an option.

If so, that would suggest that a formation change really is the only way to get the best out these players.

Ramsey was ideal for a 433, playing in an offensive box to box role. Other than the first few months of 14/15, we never really gave it a go (it was hard to fit Özil in that formation).
 

Football Manager

Copy & Paste Merchant
It depends quite how good Willock ends up being though. I suspect that he's not quite as good as Ramsey, but if he ends up being better in terms of goal output we'd be talking about designing the team around him.

Does the debate even happen if Ramsey had sustained his half season of amazing goal scoring form? Of course not. I just think it's too early to know yet. Willock has just posted an 8 goal season 2 years younger than Ramsey managed the same thing.

I do understand the counter arguments though and ultimately if we are not going to play him we should probably sell, so long as it is a good fee
Ramsey was a huge liability. He doesn’t help our team build up, always missing in the general play. He fed crap to our attacking players, because his passing range is limited, he’s not a good passer, and his football iq is low. As a result, we score less as a team.

He gave away too much possession, because of his poor touch, misplaced pass and poor technical abilitiy. He was one of the worst player on the ball, not even 1/10 of Cazorla’s ability. And what does less possession means? We have less chance to score while the opponent has more.

And he doesn’t help the team to defend, leaving our midfield exposed to counter attacks. (he does help sometimes, but only when he’s able to, because more than often he was not in place when the midfield needed someone to defend).
 

kash2

More Consistent Than Arteta
Ramsey was ideal for a 433, playing in an offensive box to box role. Other than the first few months of 14/15, we never really gave it a go (it was hard to fit Özil in that formation).
I have seen Ramsey play right back and put his head down and do it well. It depends how you manage a player.
 

kash2

More Consistent Than Arteta
Ramsey was a huge liability. He doesn’t help our team build up, always missing in the general play. He fed crap to our attacking players, because his passing range is limited, he’s not a good passer, and his football iq is low. As a result, we score less as a team.

He gave away too much possession, because of his poor touch, misplaced pass and poor technical abilitiy. And what does less possession means? We have less chance to score while the opponent has more.

And he doesn’t help the team to defend, leaving our midfield exposed to counter attacks. (he does help sometimes, but only when he’s able to, because more than often he was not in place when the midfield needed someone to defend).
well you played a partey, ceballos, Ødegaard midfield and got your arse handed to you against villareal. Football isnt played on excel sheets. Your arguments are tedious and I doubt if you ever played football.
 

Football Manager

Copy & Paste Merchant
well you played a partey, ceballos, Ødegaard midfield and got your arse handed to you against villareal. Football isnt played on excel sheets. Your arguments are tedious and I doubt if you ever played football.
You love attacking/entertaining football, which is great. But some of the players you supported are not anywhere close to that style of play. We need more creativity in the team.

We didn’t play well against Villarreal. But it’s not just the players problem. Arteta’s tactics has to be blamed too.
 
Last edited:

Barry

Well-Known Member
I know that's your view and I respect that you prefer technical quality in players, but personally I disagree on Ramsey. Think he was a massive player for Arsenal, a match winner who helped us to FA Cup wins and improved our general play. Arguably the best player in the team the year his contract expired. Not everyone is going to agree on this and that's fine as well.


Ramsey was a huge liability. He doesn’t help our team build up, always missing in the general play. He fed crap to our attacking players, because his passing range is limited, he’s not a good passer, and his football iq is low. As a result, we score less as a team.

He gave away too much possession, because of his poor touch, misplaced pass and poor technical abilitiy. He was one of the worst player on the ball, not even 1/10 of Cazorla’s ability. And what does less possession means? We have less chance to score while the opponent has more.

And he doesn’t help the team to defend, leaving our midfield exposed to counter attacks. (he does help sometimes, but only when he’s able to, because more than often he was not in place when the midfield needed someone to defend).
 

kash2

More Consistent Than Arteta
You love attacking/entertaining football, which is great. But the players you supported are not anywhere close to that style of play. We need more creativity in the team.
I love football. Bloody glorious football. Can be counterattacking, can be resolute defence and can be fluid attacking gung-ho football. You play according to what you have and what the situation demands. Not according to an anal manager who lacks man management skills and creativity.

The team works as one fluid organism...sometimes it retreats and defends and goes into its shell and sometimes it swarms out like a bunch of hornets. I would want Ramsey even if I was defending for my life, or I needed a goal to save my life. Because he was a real football player.

Style of play? what does that even mean? Just copying Fraudiola for the sake of copying him? Possession based bullshit that needs overwhelming financial muscle to ensure zero mistake football in a 100 pass progression? Strangling the game by rotational fouling when your elaborate passing sequence goes wrong?
 

kash2

More Consistent Than Arteta
You love attacking/entertaining football, which is great. But some of the players you supported are not anywhere close to that style of play. We need more creativity in the team.

We didn’t play well against Villarreal. But it’s not just the players problem. Arteta’s tactics has to be blamed too.

creativity. so hard to define. so hard to manage. so hard to teach. so easy to kill.

creatives make mistakes. creatives take risks. creatives have moodswings. this machine like football has killed creativity because there is no tolerance left for creatives. Then people cry ..we lack creativity. All that is left are the technicians and athletes. Look around you at the football being played now. The beating heart of football has been ripped out.
 

Football Manager

Copy & Paste Merchant
creativity. so hard to define. so hard to manage. so hard to teach. so easy to kill.

creatives make mistakes. creatives take risks. creatives have moodswings. this machine like football has killed creativity because there is no tolerance left for creatives. Then people cry ..we lack creativity. All that is left are the technicians and athletes. Look around you at the football being played now. The beating heart of football has been ripped out.
Funny how people think possession based football means not creative/not taking risk. Barcelona, Bayern, City had the most amazing creative talents number-wise and quality-wise in their squad, a lot of dribbling/killer passes happening there, and they have created so many chances.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top