Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Fair point Chaddy , think JB summed it up well on twitter  Link   Imagine the negotiations between Venkys and Levy. Insane. Levy: We will give you 10m. 2m upfront, 8m when we win the le

The last deal he signed was ridiculous from the clubs point of view. Nothing in there to protect us given the length of the deal. We really need to tie him down to a 4 year deal. Allow a release

Fair enough, if you've got a problem with his off the field antics and the celebrity nature of his girlfriend, I think a lot of people are re-writing history about Dack here. Barring a couple of

Posted Images

Great news and unexpected to hear that Dack has signed a longer contract.

I do fear that he will be squeezed into a midfield 3 which doesnt suit him but I cannot wait to see him back as soon as possible. He is a goalscorer so the number 10 role is perfect, and ultimately he shouldn't be compromised to benefit inferior players.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

 

I do fear that he will be squeezed into a midfield 3 which doesnt suit him but I cannot wait to see him back as soon as possible. He is a goalscorer so the number 10 role is perfect, and ultimately he shouldn't be compromised to benefit inferior players.

He played in midfield 3 and score goals and assists for Gillingham there so when not here?.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Great news and unexpected to hear that Dack has signed a longer contract.

I do fear that he will be squeezed into a midfield 3 which doesnt suit him but I cannot wait to see him back as soon as possible. He is a goalscorer so the number 10 role is perfect, and ultimately he shouldn't be compromised to benefit inferior players.

Bradley Dack gives hint on new-look Blackburn Rovers role | Lancashire Telegraph

According to Dack he's also played deeper. It was the No.10 that was new to him until he came to Rovers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

He played in midfield 3 and score goals and assists for Gillingham there so when not here?.

 

1 hour ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

Bradley Dack gives hint on new-look Blackburn Rovers role | Lancashire Telegraph

According to Dack he's also played deeper. It was the No.10 that was new to him until he came to Rovers. 

Mainly because Dack has been consistently brilliant for us as a number 10. Regardless of the glory years at Gillingham. His numbers are so high and being a number 10 allows him to make an impact as he does in the final third. He is not someone who controls games and when he drops deep he tends to render himself ineffective.

Its not as if the change of formation has improved our results and cannot be changed, 4-3-3 has not seen us pick up more points and the effectiveness of Holtby and Rothwell is far less than Dack when he is fit to start.

It makes sense to build around our best players, Dack is a 10, Armstrong thrives centrally, Elliott is best on the right and Brereton the left. Have them in a 4-2-3-1 and then Travis can come back in alongside Johnson in CM.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

He is not someone who controls games and when he drops deep he tends to render himself ineffective.

He's never played there for us to know that. Dropping deep occasionally isn't the same as playing there permanently. Anyway, Dack seems happy to be part of a midfield 3 and he probably knows best. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

He's never played there for us to know that. Dropping deep occasionally isn't the same as playing there permanently. Anyway, Dack seems happy to be part of a midfield 3 and he probably knows best. 

But he has played consistently as a 10 for us, brilliantly, constantly scoring and assisting goals. Why change what was never broken? And logically, moving him further away from goal could limit his main strength.

He didnt say he would prefer to play there, Bennett always publically said that he was happy to play right back, doesnt mean that he would personally have picked there, 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, roversfan99 said:

But he has played consistently as a 10 for us, brilliantly, constantly scoring and assisting goals. Why change what was never broken? And logically, moving him further away from goal could limit his main strength.

He didnt say he would prefer to play there, Bennett always publically said that he was happy to play right back, doesnt mean that he would personally have picked there, 

If we don't play with a 10 then he's no choice.  All we know is what Dack has said in the article  "Creating from a little bit deeper is something I really enjoy doing"  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

If we don't play with a 10 then he's no choice.  All we know is what Dack has said in the article  "Creating from a little bit deeper is something I really enjoy doing"  

 

Of course, that is the main issue. For me, I dont see any overwhelming reason to continue with the 4-3-3 if it means any compromise to Dack, a consistent source of goals and assists from a number 10 role, to essentially help far less effective and inferior players, and when the team isnt any more successful playing that formation.

Putting Dack as a 10 gives us another major goal threat and him and Armstrong together could be prolific, and it would potentially mean a second central midfielder would add a bit more solidity. Win win for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, roversfan99 said:

Of course, that is the main issue. For me, I dont see any overwhelming reason to continue with the 4-3-3 if it means any compromise to Dack, a consistent source of goals and assists from a number 10 role, to essentially help far less effective and inferior players, and when the team isnt any more successful playing that formation.

Putting Dack as a 10 gives us another major goal threat and him and Armstrong together could be prolific, and it would potentially mean a second central midfielder would add a bit more solidity. Win win for me.

I think he's a natural goalscorer, better than AA. So I'd play him as a 10 every time. But playing him as the most advanced of the 3 CM's may work if he can get into the box a lot. The only concern about playing him as a 10 is that he might not be as effective without a target man like Graham to play off and/or it might nullify AA a bit as Dack would take his space. Who knows? I just don't see Mowbray changing the 4-3-3 as he's a stubborn old mule. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

 

Mainly because Dack has been consistently brilliant for us as a number 10. Regardless of the glory years at Gillingham. His numbers are so high and being a number 10 allows him to make an impact as he does in the final third. He is not someone who controls games and when he drops deep he tends to render himself ineffective.

Its not as if the change of formation has improved our results and cannot be changed, 4-3-3 has not seen us pick up more points and the effectiveness of Holtby and Rothwell is far less than Dack when he is fit to start.

It makes sense to build around our best players, Dack is a 10, Armstrong thrives centrally, Elliott is best on the right and Brereton the left. Have them in a 4-2-3-1 and then Travis can come back in alongside Johnson in CM.

His numbers were high playing with Graham and direct style. Now we playing different formation and style. Will his numbers be as high? Let's hope so for Rovers. 

 

8 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Of course, that is the main issue. For me, I dont see any overwhelming reason to continue with the 4-3-3 if it means any compromise to Dack, a consistent source of goals and assists from a number 10 role, to essentially help far less effective and inferior players, and when the team isnt any more successful playing that formation.

Putting Dack as a 10 gives us another major goal threat and him and Armstrong together could be prolific, and it would potentially mean a second central midfielder would add a bit more solidity. Win win for me.

Who says you are compromising Dack's source of goals by playing him as part of 3 man midfield? 

Surely until he plays there you cannot properly judge that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderation Lead

It’s alright for one practice match, but it seems to me that the very idea of moving Bradley Dack further back, where he is likely to score less goals, seems to be completely counter productive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.