WMS How To Solve A Problem Like Will Grigg



I'm interested to see if McNulty can be the 10 in the formation we played last year. If the 10 is a workaholic and can link play then the difference between 4-2-3-1 and 4-4-2 is neither here nor there. Our options last year were not able to do that - Honeyman could work hard enough but not create; Maguire could create but not be trusted to work hard enough. Likewise McGeady, though with him there was also the added sense that we were moving our best player out of the position he felt most comfortable in. Probably the best option at both was Gooch when he was in-form and there is some correlation with his form going off a cliff and the team's more generally. I don't think Gooch can be relied on for that role quality-wise - he'll always be too inconsistent, but it does show the sort of mixed-player we need. I'm interested to see if McNulty could do it. If not, there remains a strong case for signing someone like Maddison to complete us - and if Maguire can be used as a makeweight in that deal it'd be worth it. I'd offer them Flanagan and McGeouch too tbh, because I'd rather not see those two in a Sunderland shirt ever again, but can't see what use they'd be to Peterborough unless they want to make a kind of human trundle wheel out of them.

As for the rest of the team - our midfield is more mobile this year and I suspect that a back four currently suits the available centre-halves more. As the article points out, the full-backs are currently the most pressing concern - along with working out if McNulty is the missing link we need.

One thing that was weird about the article however, is that it never really offered anything about the Grigg conundrum. It worked out the right system to get the best out of McNulty and Wyke, but ultimately said nothing substantive about Grigg. Strange.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top