TACTICAL TINKERING (YES, ALREADY)
Sam's view on how we're having to change our approach. After two whole games.
'The way we’re playing doesn’t suit the group as I potentially thought it would, so I need to find a structure and a system that suits us' - Gary O'Neil.
Quite possibly the most alarming statement a Wolves manager has made since... well, since Lopetegui's nonsense last summer actually.

In my last article on Oscillating Wildly I detailed roughly how we set up last season and how I thought we would transition into a more adventurous system. As you can tell from the overall positive tone in the article, I had a good feeling going into the new season. Now, after an absolute pasting at home to Chelsea and a tumultuous second half to the transfer window, I sit here on the train to watch Wolves away at Nottingham Forest extremely worried about our chances. We know Nuno. He may have transitioned away from the three at the back shape that he was wedded to at Wolves, but we know how his teams set up. They are compact, they are well drilled and confident, they try to win the ball in dangerous areas and are direct when they do win it with quick, dynamic forward players anchored around a physical central striker. Anyone who watched the shambles against Chelsea will tell you that's exactly the way to play against this current Wolves team.
In the context of our opening fixtures, this was always going to be a big game early in the season. Now it seems even bigger. Does O'Neil stick with the system he's coached all pre-season - a system which promised so much? Or does he twist towards something different? Something less ambitious, but more solid and less likely to leave us stranded at the bottom of the league by mid-November.
I'll now try and talk about why I feel the system 'failed' and what I think O'Neil will do next.
FAILURE
In my previous article, I mentioned that one of the potential weaknesses of our shape was the distance between Rayan Aït-Nouri and Toti Gomes in defensive transitions. It doesn't take a genius tactical analyst to tell you that we have been badly exposed in this area. The chances we conceded against Arsenal can be explained away, Aït-Nouri was up against Bukayo Saka, one of the best 1v1 wingers in world football. Perhaps a little naïve to leave him exposed against such an attacking force, but given we gave Arsenal a fairly competitive game, you can't be too unhappy. What happened against Chelsea was alarming. Aït-Nouri's positioning vs Chelsea was so poor that the only possible conclusions that you can draw are that a) either he is totally unsuitable for that hybrid position (where he's being asked to play left back out of position and step into midfield when we have the ball) or b) that he's been poorly coached. You could swap out Aït-Nouri and Toti for prime Ashley Cole and Virgil van Dijk and they wouldn't have been able to defend those spaces effectively. Unfortunately, we can't swap out Aït-Nouri for anyone in that position right now, because in their infinite wisdom, Wolverhampton Wanderers have decided to send our only back up left back on loan to the Eredivisie for a season. I am far from the biggest Hugo Bueno fan, but this strikes me as incredibly short-sighted.
The defensive partnership of Yerson Mosquera and Toti continues to be a worry. I like Toti a lot, I think he has a lot of qualities and has performed admirably for us in the Premier League through some tough situations - but he currently looks very suspect defending the larger spaces that this change in style is asking of him. Between them there is a lack of experience and leadership which has only been exaggerated by a lack of 'personality' in the full back positions, an overrun midfield and a goalkeeper who has always caused a a certain degree of panic within his own back line.
Another thing I mentioned was that our new approach should offer us greater control in possession and prevent games from descending into the 'basketball' games that we saw on occasions last year. We clearly haven't seen that benefit yet. Even in the first half last Sunday, it was a hectic 'back and forth' game, good for the neutral but it must've been infuriating for O'Neil. He described the build up to Chelsea's third goal where we failed to get back behind a free kick as 'crazy' - a term he's only used once before to describe some of José Sá's decision making in the early stages of the last campaign. A double pivot of Mario Lemina and João Gomes should in theory be one of the strongest in the league outside of the top clubs, but against Chelsea they were chasing shadows.

Our rest defence has always been a bit of an issue under O'Neil. Last season it was a bit of a necessary evil; a calculated risk to commit more bodies forward in an attempt to reverse our woeful record in front of goal. However, in the Premier League teams will adapt to certain situations quickly; every opponent we face will know that we'll try and form the offensive five with a 2-3 or 3-2 in behind in possession. Unfortunately, we've been picked off at will for a good six months now playing this way. Towards the end of last season, O'Neil could point to a lack of options and an injury crisis to explain away our poor form and he has again made reference to his squad being unsuitable for the style of football he's trying to implement. There is some truth to that; I've already made reference to our options at centre half and left back, but if that's the case, then why spend all summer coaching a system that we can't play?
FUTURE
José Sá to Sam Johnstone I think is probably standing still in terms of quality, but a different style. Johnstone is a much less flashy but more dependable keeper; his recent bollock at Molineux (hacking down Pedro Neto after miscontrolling the ball off a routine backpass) aside he doesn't have the history of horrendous cock-ups that Sá has, but nor does he have the ability to make jaw-dropping, game-changing saves. I know which style of keeper I'd prefer to have in nets. Neither keeper is perfect for the way O'Neil has been asking his keepers to play though. I'm not sure Johnstone is any better with his feet than Sá.
The signing of André is an interesting one. A seriously highly rated, modern day #6. A player who will drop deep between the centre halves, offer a lot of protection to the back four, evade the opposition press and ease pressure with a wonderful passing range. But where does he fit?
A midfield three of Lemina, André and Gomes seems like an obvious strength. André would allow his two midfield partners to be the front foot, aggressive ball winners and progressive attacking forces that they both seem to naturally want to play as, while offering greater protection and control in behind them. This would hopefully cease the relentless tide of opposition forwards running directly onto our inexperienced central defence. O'Neil has never deployed a single pivot though; he has always preferred two and has always looked to press with two forwards as well. The rest of the squad simply isn't set up to play that way.
If Cunha and Strand Larsen play the majority of minutes, as you'd imagine they would when fully fit, then you're left with six attacking forward options vying for one space in the front line. You'd also risk completely neutering our attacking threat in the way that Bruno Lage did - three forwards miles away from each other being asked to score the perfect goal every week. I don't know about the rest of our fanbase, but I have no desire to watch that ever again (Editor: Mate, don’t even start me).
Then there's Rodrigo Gomes, Jean-Ricner Bellegarde and Carlos Forbs. We've spent (if Forbs plays 10 games, as he surely will) the thick end of £45m on these players, and in this formation they simply wouldn't play.
Rodrigo and Forbs offer different attributes, but are essentially both players who will hold width and aim to win the ball back high, both displaying an impressive aptitude to pounce on poor touches and nip in front of opponents with explosive acceleration and then make good decisions in offensive transitions. Rodrigo differs in that he'll arrive late in the box when the ball is on the opposite flank, while Forbs' other great quality is his ability to be able to hold possession and turn a full back who gets touch tight when the ball is played into his feet on the touchline. To me, they seem like perfect options for the LM position I described in my last article; in a 4-3-3 that position wouldn't exist. The fact that Chiquinho, who was exclusively deployed in that position in pre season by O’Neil, was loaned out as Forbs arrived confirms that in my mind.
Maybe you could make it work. Move Cunha to the right and have Aït-Nouri come inside from LB and have Rodrigo/Forbs hold width. Something like this:
CB CB
J.Gomes André Lemina
Semedo Cunha CF Aït-Nouri Rodrigo/Forbs
Once again you're going to have the same issue in defensive transitions though. Aït-Nouri massively out of position and the left sided centre half defending an enormous space. You'd pretty much only get away with playing Mosquera and Toti in that shape, but Craig Dawson and Santi Bueno simply don't have the required pace. You're also moving your most creative player and talisman Matheus Cunha onto his weaker side. Not signing a suitable centre half in this window has been an absolute disaster and MUST be rectified in January.

Personally, I think the occasions where Lemina, J.Gomes and André all take the field together could be few and far between. I think a double pivot with André allowing one of Lemina or Gomes to continue to operate as more of a box-to-box midfielder is far more likely. A frustrating misuse of resources perhaps, but we've long since become accustomed to a wildly lopsided squad under Fosun, and this strikes me as a situation where we have to cover our deficiencies before we can really reap the rewards of our strengths in the middle of the park.
The defensive instability? The obvious answer. The boring answer. Craig Dawson. Drop 10 yards deeper, protect him, and let him lead from the back. He's probably our best centre half on the ball as well. Then you can pick between Toti and Rayan Aït-Nouri at left back depending on whether you want the added creativity to break a team down, or the added height and athleticism to defend in smaller spaces.
Out of possession:
Semedo Mosquera Dawson Toti/RAN
Sarabia André Lemina/Gomes Rodrigo/Forbs
Strand Larsen Cunha
In possession:
Mosquera Dawson Toti/RAN
André Lemina/Gomes
Semedo - Sarabia - Strand Larsen - Cunha - Rodrigo/Forbs
Against Forest I'm guessing that it'll be too early for André and Forbs, their transfers having been announced late last night. I'm anticipating that he'll drop Aït-Nouri for Dawson with Toti outside him and the midfield will be Lemina and J.Gomes again, with one slightly deeper than the other. Hopefully Rodrigo Gomes to come in for Bellegarde, who simply cannot play the left sided position he was asked to last week.
Maybe I'll be surprised and O'Neil will line up with a three man midfield of Lemina - Tommy Doyle - J.Gomes in anticipation of André joining the squad for Newcastle at home in a fortnight’s time, but I can't see it personally. It's always easier for a manager to fall back on something that he knows has worked before (last season's approximate 3-2-5) rather than try something completely new (4-3-3).
What a ridiculous mess to have gotten ourselves into from a position of relative strength. It’s always the way recently with Fosun though. One step forward, two steps back, like a shit Paula Abdul. Hopefully this latest back step doesn't take us off the precipice of the cliff edge that we can all feel creeping up behind us.
A fascinating and very well-written analysis.
Without meaning to be flippant - in summary, we're a mess.
Excellent stuff