Subject: [NT] Mr-Llama

Yes yes it's true! You made the mistake last time and now you have a chance to make it up! Vote Mr-Llama for NT coach and we may actually have a chance this year :)

(No offense to Lakay of course. He's still a great manager)

Just like last season, I'll put up a speech of my style of play. Things I do to go the extra mile to give us an extra chance to win. Some of these moves are simple while others are big factors.

I may only have until Wednesday to talk about stuff (depending if luck allows Babes to win or not in my friendly bet) so get your questions here quick

Last season, Lakay changed up the line up a lot, trying out many diffrent players in diffrent games.
Do you think that was a mistake, and would you stick to one line-up or change up every game seeing how players do?

When you're playing friendly games, the best thing you can do is change the lineup and see how other players in different positions do. And when it comes down to World Cup you should generally stay with the same lineup.

However, where I feel Lakay faulted was with his tactics.

They stayed the same! Predictable? Very. Every game I would play I would spend hours seeing how their team played. finding weaknesses in their team and thus countering their moves. Lakay didn't do this last season and i feel it really caught up with us.

Last season, even when i wasn't NT coach, I still analyzed every team and made my own observations. Maybe their right back was slow? Maybe they left gaps in their defense somewhere? It's things like these that lead us to victory

Good answer. I was looking for that first paragraph. And the rest was nice.

:)

And when it comes down to World Cup you should generally stay with the same lineup.

Could you justify that? In my opinion that would make your team a lot more predictable and would be easier for an opponent to use a counter strategy.

Yes tis why I used the word generally.

When you have a lineup that works though, sticking with the PLAYERS is a good idea, but not the same lineup.

Let's say I have an extremely fast winger on the right who I usually play somewhat defensively to prevent counters on that side.

If the team I'm playing doesn't have a strong right side attack, I may switch him up with my left winger and push him to be more offensive to try and create counters on that side.

Or I will move my forwards around in different arrangements to attack their defenses weaknesses.

So I'm sticking with the same lineup, but I'm changing the tactics up accordingly.

I used the word generally though because every now and then you'll have a player that you don't play that would work better in a lineup.

But generally it's the best 11 who play.

the tactics could change the lineup to you could play a 3-4-3 one game and then a different one a next maybe going forward more or playing more defensively.
(edited)

Which would be under the "generally" category

And While I won't say I would never change the style (343 442 etc) I would definitely have tested it out in a friendly before.

Changes like that can be very risky if not tested previously

Well x3wid made a little bulletin thingy of why others are better and why he's better, but I feel that getting that detailed wouldn't really work so well because everybody else's why they're better than me would probably have to do with experience. Vondocha being a previous NT assistant and kysupercat having already been elected. x3wid has been playing longer than vondocha (and me of course) and mr.gibbage seems to know everything.

Thus I'll just say a couple points.

I'm in a low league where promotion seems to have a good chance next season. Thus I'll have plenty of time to spend with the NT.

Also my experience doesn't reflect my knowledge (a point I've brought up many times before) Continue to ask me questions and I'll bring up my views and points.

Test me and you'll see just because these guys have been playing longer doesn't mean they'll do a better job than me.

a bird in the hand or two in the bush?

I am aware that you can change tactics with the same players, but with the same players you still have the same strengths and weaknesses, which can still be decreased or increased in effectiveness depending on the tactic you play.

Example, you might choose slow defenders with high defending, tech and passing. No matter what tactic you use they will still be slow defenders.

Which brings up my next question, say you come up against a team that is of similar strength to the USA (Argentina for this example), would you be tending towards keeping the USA's strongest players for the match, or would you play players that reduce USA's past strengths, but exploit the weaknesses of Argentina?

In what way are you asking that?

With the NT? Like playing a tactic I've never played before or sticking to one I've tested?

Or me personally, by spending more time with the NT and risking me not promoting.

Personally, I will give up a season of promotion as a risk to get our NT further.

With the NT, it depends how big the birds in the bushes are :)

Hmmm that is a very good question.

Which I suppose goes with guac's saying there.

I don't think I would start it off though with only slow defenders.

I love love love variety and just like with my team I play one defender with great pace and passing and the other with great technique and passing.

Having this variety allows me to not have to sacrifice the strongest players to hit their weaknesses.

However, if for some reason I were stuck with all slow defenders as my strongest, I would use the saying a bird in the bush is worth two in the hand.

Unless I had previously tested the tactic before, it wouldn't be worth a World Cup loss for a test

I'm not saying I only have 2 defenders though...just an example of 2 i have

Sorry, i dont think you answered it properly here (better re-word it before i ask the other candidates =] )

the question was..

Say you come up against a team that is of similar strength to the USA (Argentina for this example), would you be tending towards..

(a) keeping the USA's strongest players for the match, or would you...

(b) play players that reduce USA's past strengths, but exploit the weaknesses of Argentina?

An a or b answer with a short/long explanation would be sweet. Thanks!

Also, if you wish to abuse me at any point for asking questions for a foreign country NT, my GB is wide open =p