Bilesa's teams couldn't defend

For everything Leeds United related and everything not - Have your say... the Marching on Together way!
Forum rules
Please be sure you are acquainted with the forum rules outlined within our FAQs.

Help support the site by using our Amazon Affiliate link when making any purchases from Amazon.
User avatar
weasel
Superstar
Superstar
Posts: 14031
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 10:28 pm
Location: Within a mile of Yorkshire

Re: Bilesa's teams couldn't defend

Post by weasel »

DDB220 wrote: Sat Jan 28, 2023 9:09 pm Bielsa’s teams did concede a lot but they also created and scored a s**t load. That is the reality of an exciting risk and reward style of play. City would concede a lot without the ability to buy world class players.
Would some have preferred we played like Burnley ???
We conceded less than Burnley did in our first season abck in the prem.

It is all relative to some degree. In the championship when we had championship level defenders we had the 3rd then best defensvie record. I think we moved on quicker than we were able to get premiership level defenders and as such it was little surprise we conceded more especially given the amount of injuries sustained.
User avatar
DDB220
Site Contributor
Site Contributor
Posts: 3954
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2020 10:17 am

Re: Bilesa's teams couldn't defend

Post by DDB220 »

But that was a huge flaw in the team - the lack of depth. Bielsa preferred a small squad, and essentially two players per position. He ostensibly relied on the utility of certain players to play a number of positions and thus the two players per position was really only on paper, as he moved his core senior players around to fill holes. Koch, Struijk and even Klich on occasion as a defensive mid when KP was out. Ayling at CB, James and Roberts as a 9 - none of these players were are good enough to play those roles. Only Dallas is a true utility player IMO.

The under 23’s he had in the first team squad, Drameh, Cresswell, Gelhardt and Leo only got isolated time on the pitch when we were down to the bare bones. Squad depth was undoubtedly our Achilles heal. Imagine if Meslier had got injured. We had Klaesson as the back up.

The question as to why we didn’t sign players to fill the glaring holes is the basis of much disagreement. But there was a number of good freebies in the window before the start of that season. Whilst no one could have predicted our injury crisis - the preferred small squad played a part in the issues that occurred.
User avatar
weasel
Superstar
Superstar
Posts: 14031
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 10:28 pm
Location: Within a mile of Yorkshire

Re: Bilesa's teams couldn't defend

Post by weasel »

DDB220 wrote: Sat Jan 28, 2023 10:21 pm But that was a huge flaw in the team - the lack of depth. Bielsa preferred a small squad, and essentially two players per position. He ostensibly relied on the utility of certain players to play a number of positions and thus the two players per position was really only on paper, as he moved his core senior players around to fill holes. Koch, Struijk and even Klich on occasion as a defensive mid when KP was out. Ayling at CB, James and Roberts as a 9 - none of these players were are good enough to play those roles. Only Dallas is a true utility player IMO.

The under 23’s he had in the first team squad, Drameh, Cresswell, Gelhardt and Leo only got isolated time on the pitch when we were down to the bare bones. Squad depth was undoubtedly our Achilles heal. Imagine if Meslier had got injured. We had Klaesson as the back up.

The question as to why we didn’t sign players to fill the glaring holes is the basis of much disagreement. But there was a number of good freebies in the window before the start of that season. Whilst no one could have predicted our injury crisis - the preferred small squad played a part in the issues that occurred.
The trouble you have there is to buy a player to fill the holes and provide squad depth costs a lot of money, which the club wouldn't have wanted to spend. I think the board were very happy to buy 2 or 3 first team starters rather than not improve the starting first 1 but bolster the squad with say 6 or 7 players for the same cost (as the 2 or 3 starters). I think Bielsa liked the small squad but would want a squad of say 18 player who were all roughly of the same ability so that there wasn't such a drop off in quality if two or three players were out. In that small squad of 18 you would also have 3 or 4 players like Dallas whow ould be able to play in 2 or 3 positions.

That for me wasn't something to blame Bielsa on but something that you learn from as a manager and a club and then address it. Don't forget that Bielsa had never stayed at a club as long as he did with us so it was also a learning process for him. I think we have seen with the spending this season that we have now got a better overall squad so injuries aren't as key. We probably haven't actually increased the first team squad too much in terms of numbers (with KP and Raph sold and Dan James, Tyler Roberts, Charlie Cresswell and Leo Hjelde all being out on loan and Gelhardt now out too and likely Drameh as well) but we have stengthened the squad in terms of current ability rather than potential in general.
Post Reply