What? Nahhh his mind is not playing tricks. People were excited about EV sacking and appointment of Setien because of his tenure at Betis and people thought he would have Barca return to attacking football. Once news broke out that he allegedly intensified training people got giddy that he had the balls to stand up to established players and started to believe he would truly bring change.
That's what I said. People were excited EV was sacked and were willing to give Setien a chance. Most were like that, streaming through comments. But nobody actually was that confident he's gonna succeed as he stepped into a team with many problems in the middle of a season.
You say Lucho was the closest but not really Cruyff-adept? This begs the question which current managers who aren't Pep whom you classify that way?
For me, I think the likes of Rijkaard (before Pep), Lucho and even non Barca coaches like Ten Haag or even Tuchel/Nagelsman could be classified that way.
The main difference between those coaches and Pep is that they aren't purist. They rarely had squads as strong as Pep's and they learned to adjust when needed.
What I don't like is lack of ability to adjust, which many of the so called possession coach does. Being arrogant and stubborn is my worries
Now does Xavi has it in him to adjust his game?
In his 1st season he didn't and he had rude awakening, he had the 2nd worst defense on the top 8 teams in the league (the whole league is 12 teams) and turned the champions into 3rd place.
In next season (last one) he finished with best defensive record, actually had the best defense since the league trimmed to just 12 teams from 14, they won the league comfortably.
This year he is back again to having the 3rd worst defense in top 9 teams so far, so he seems he is back to old habits, although results is still solid.
This is one of the main reasons I am not that enthusiastic for Xavi, at least not as a rookie.
I think he needs time and place to do mistakes in Europe and refine his coaching, I just don't think Barca is the right place for that.
The difference is subtle, but it is really there. For example, under EV, and under Koeman, you have a lot of games against inferior teams where they just sit back on narrow leads. Why? It makes no sense when you have a team that could instead outplay these teams. And don't tell me Barca don't have that team, they do.
Remember Villareal in 10 men dominating us last season? I do. That should never ever happen when you have the numerical advantage. Or Getafe, or Granada, or other teams like that who come to Camp Nou and get us on the ropes with 1/10 worth of squad. Under EV we'd have a lot of games where the other team had more chances than us and we would win 2-0 because Messi and Suarez would score some golazos, and the other team would miss their chances. Often they were even better chances than the goals Messi or Suarez would score from.
That should not happen under a better manager. Period.
It is, no doubt, true that a degree of conservatism should exist in any manager. And it does exist even under elite attacking managers like Pep or Klopp. Just that for some managers (EV and Koeman both show this) it is overly present and very bothersome even against way inferior teams. Teams that better managers find ways to outplay.
Elite managers know how to adapt to elite opponents, but always make the smaller opponents play their game. Poor conservative managers adapt even against Getafe most of the time, because they find that easier, and handier than to play exuberant attacking football. Sure even City have their off game where a smaller team gets them on the ropes but those are very very rare occurrences, and it's usually because City don't finish their chances well on that day. Under Koeman and EV (Koeman especially), their teams get pushed around by the smaller teams pretty often, because they are not dominant when in possession. It's not something that happens once every 10 games, but rather every other game. They lack that creative part that Xavi in my opinion will show from day one almost.
The bottom line is managers without much vision have plagued the club for too long. Sure, there is a big risk a purist like Xavi wouldn't adapt that well, but I'd rather have that at this point than someone who adapts too much to teams like Getafe and Granada, and moans the squad is not good enough when likes of Real Sociedad are sitting on 1st place in the table.g
About the bold question that started my comment, the managers who cite Pep as inspiration worked under him and followed his ideas (even if they have some areas where they differ).
Some important common points:
- Insistence on press upfront, and low-block defense is employed only on rare occasions (usually when in an advantageous position or when the team is very tired, or when the opponent is very very good offensively).
- Usually, especially when in defense, there is a short distance between each compartment to compress space and prevent passing between the lines. This, coupled with press-oriented tactics, leads to a risky high line. There is very little tolerance for offensive players who don't work hard, hence why these managers don't really like galactico players. They would much rather prefer a Salah than a Neymar.
- Massive off-the-ball movement (leading to frequent overloads, and small-space combinations like triangles, one-twos, etc.), leading to a fluid style, as opposed to a rigid style where there is little to no positional alterations on the field.
- Preference for 4-3-3 and 3-4-3 styles, due to being very good at providing many passing angles and zone coverage. But the fluidity part means that often the formation is not as visible as it morphs a lot from play to play.
- Fullbacks stay not only wide (classic up and down pendulum movement), but go inside a lot, sometimes really a lot, allowing the midfielder to follow the ball and provide another pass option (see Zinchenko/Walker for City, Angelino for RBL under Naggelsmann, etc.) in the corresponding zone. This means the area opposite to the ball is intentionally undermanned. This is done to provide more options near the ball.
- Wingers stay wide when in the deeper build-up, but often make runs inside once the action reaches the last third. They very rarely are passed to when not in space as opposed to more conservative styles that use wingers to force individual duels. See Pep forbidding overuse of down-the-line pass from fullback to the corresponding winger.
- There is often a false no9, a forward with many abilities associated with midfield play (like Firmino, Tadic, Messi at 2011 Barca, Mertens at Napoli under Sarri, etc.). That player likes to drop often, and vacate the 9 space. The defenders usually don't follow him, preferring to maintain the deeper defensive line as to not create holes. In this way extra midfield superiority in obtained.
- Special attention for speed of play and fitness (not as much physical robustness as stamina and speed, short, fast, and resilient players - Verrati/Gavi types), but that can be said about most styles in frankness.
- High insistence on having multiple passing options for every scenario (tied to the fluidity part), meaning the player on the ball must have 2-3 options for continuation at all times (among which 1 is a safety lateral or back pass, and 2 are progressive options). Normally in other managers, the runs are isolated and you rarely see more than one at a time, which is pretty easy to block.
There are more, but IMO guys like EV and Koeman show few of those. In general, their approach is quite different.
Names who showed most of those things: Guardiola (obviously), Klopp, Nagelsmann, Sarri, Setien, probably Pimienta (haven't watched him much), Luis Enrique, Flick, Ten Hag. Soon Xavi guaranteed.
Top coaches that differ a lot: Antonio Conte, Zinedine Zidane, Diego Simeone, Pochettino, Emery, Max Allegri.
The more you go from Spanish to Dutch/German coaches, the more the style suffers some alterations (more balanced and physical I think you could say, but a bit less pleasing to the eye in my opinion), but the main templates are still present.
