Smart energy management

[NewYorkSaint]

I think it's becoming clear where Claude Puel's brilliance lies. He's recognized that when you have two otherwise equal teams, the one whose players have more energy available to them is likely to win. And he's built his entire strategy around that.

 

With Poch, we often had the amazing sight of teams better than us being terrorized by Poch's high press hitting them with blitzkrieg right from the opening minute. It was exciting to see, but all too often we'd lost our edge by 60 minutes, and in so many games the last 30 mins cost us dear. Of course. Because it's physically impossible for a team to go all out for 90 minutes. Indeed over the season we suffered a fair few injuries that may in part have been due to the strain of Poch's regime. That's one reason Koeman deemphasized the press, but it's not clear to me that he replaced it with an alternative strategy for intelligently maximizing the use of energy, although we did stay stronger in the second halves of games.

 

But with Puel, I think he's really studied this issue at depth. I was struck by a comment just made by Reed as reported in today's Echo: "“I speak to the manager after every under-23s game. One thing that came out after the last game was that he wanted me to be more disciplined, and preserve my energy more so I can be more aggressive and win the ball back, rather than making long runs forward."

 

Similarly his justification of the diamond, and of squad rotation is all ultimately linked to energy preservation, both during a game, and during a fixture-intense week. You might think this is a quirky basis for a management strategy. But I actually think it's quite brilliant. Why is it that in the premier league teams that cost a fraction of their opponents can some times beat them? There are only five explanations.

 

- the money spent by the rich team was spent stupidly

- luck

- the poorer team are physically fitter

- the poorer team has outwitted the rich team on formation strategy

- on the day, the poorer team's players put more into the game. they try harder, and win more 50/50 balls, etc

 

1 is sometimes true but can't be main explanation over the long term. Luck is a huge issue, but probably balances out over the season. Most training regimes in the premier league deliver similar levels of fitness. So it's down to the last two factors. Puel believes he can organize a team to be really smart on energy usage, retaining possession, and allowing it to spring in to creative action as the other team tires. He's coupling that with smart rotation of the squad so that many players come to each game physically fresh. On the evidence of the last few games, I'd say he's really on to something. I'm excited to see how this plays out.

[trousers]

[Saint Albert]

If you look at Spurs at the end of last season, I think that part of the reason for their collapse was the players were just plain knackered, and this carried on into the Euros for players like Kane. He was absolutely done by the time it came to putting on the England shirt, as he was when he played for the U21s in the Euros the year before.

[Manuel]

Would explain the lack of pressing. At times it does seem like we sit off the opponent too much when we've lost the ball, but if this is the strategy then so be it and you can't argue with 3 clean sheets in a row.

[Chris27687]

Hard work beats talent of talent doesn't work hard. It's on the walls at Stapleton and Saint Mary's.

[sadoldgit]

Blimey, a very well thought out and written OP. You will give this place a bad name. Don't you know that Puel will be gone by Christmas!!!

[St Neel]

The Op might be right, but this analysis is just selective in favour of his own conclusion. There are mote than 5 reasons why teams whiich cost less can beat more expensive teams, for starters

[Saint Fan CaM]

Good OP observations which are hard to argue with.

[hutch]

Good OP observations which are hard to argue with.

How long have you been here?

[Dangermouth]

I think it's becoming clear where Claude Puel's brilliance lies. He's recognized that when you have two otherwise equal teams, the one whose players have more energy available to them is likely to win. And he's built his entire strategy around that.

 

With Poch, we often had the amazing sight of teams better than us being terrorized by Poch's high press hitting them with blitzkrieg right from the opening minute. It was exciting to see, but all too often we'd lost our edge by 60 minutes, and in so many games the last 30 mins cost us dear. Of course. Because it's physically impossible for a team to go all out for 90 minutes. Indeed over the season we suffered a fair few injuries that may in part have been due to the strain of Poch's regime. That's one reason Koeman deemphasized the press, but it's not clear to me that he replaced it with an alternative strategy for intelligently maximizing the use of energy, although we did stay stronger in the second halves of games.

 

But with Puel, I think he's really studied this issue at depth. I was struck by a comment just made by Reed as reported in today's Echo: "“I speak to the manager after every under-23s game. One thing that came out after the last game was that he wanted me to be more disciplined, and preserve my energy more so I can be more aggressive and win the ball back, rather than making long runs forward."

 

Similarly his justification of the diamond, and of squad rotation is all ultimately linked to energy preservation, both during a game, and during a fixture-intense week. You might think this is a quirky basis for a management strategy. But I actually think it's quite brilliant. Why is it that in the premier league teams that cost a fraction of their opponents can some times beat them? There are only five explanations.

 

- the money spent by the rich team was spent stupidly

- luck

- the poorer team are physically fitter

- the poorer team has outwitted the rich team on formation strategy

- on the day, the poorer team's players put more into the game. they try harder, and win more 50/50 balls, etc

 

1 is sometimes true but can't be main explanation over the long term. Luck is a huge issue, but probably balances out over the season. Most training regimes in the premier league deliver similar levels of fitness. So it's down to the last two factors. Puel believes he can organize a team to be really smart on energy usage, retaining possession, and allowing it to spring in to creative action as the other team tires. He's coupling that with smart rotation of the squad so that many players come to each game physically fresh. On the evidence of the last few games, I'd say he's really on to something. I'm excited to see how this plays out.

 

 

"He's recognized that when you have two otherwise equal teams, the one whose players have more energy available to them is likely to win."

 

Utter rubbish. Prove it.

 

And he's built his entire strategy around that

 

Incorrect. He's said something very similar and done so repeatedly from the time that he arrived but it's for different reasons. He's never made this 'strategy' you allude to a part of his thinking.

 

The comment to Reed should have been made to him several times before and is part and parcel of approaching a game intelligently: don't try to do too much and bear in mind the principal responsibilities of your role. If you're running around like a headless you're not doing a good job.

 

 

Similarly his justification of the diamond, and of squad rotation is all ultimately linked to energy preservation, both during a game, and during a fixture-intense week. You might think this is a quirky basis for a management strategy. But I actually think it's quite brilliant. Why is it that in the premier league teams that cost a fraction of their opponents can some times beat them? There are only five explanations.

 

While I broadly agree with this, Puel has himself (again repeatedly) made this point. It is not therefore innovative of you to repeat what has been said before several times. Indeed, had you listened (along with others) there would be no point in your repeating the obvious.

 

You missed point 6 e.g. Aguero is much better than Connor Wickham, De Bruyne is better than Andrew Surman etc.

 

0/10 must try harder.

[hutch]

QED

[NewYorkSaint]

"He's recognized that when you have two otherwise equal teams, the one whose players have more energy available to them is likely to win."

Utter rubbish. Prove it."

 

I said two otherwise equal teams.... In which case, what other theory do you have? That a magician occasionally swoops down from outer space and gives one team superpowers?

 

 

"While I broadly agree with this, Puel has himself (again repeatedly) made this point. It is not therefore innovative of you to repeat what has been said before several times. Indeed, had you listened (along with others) there would be no point in your repeating the obvious."

 

So on the one hand it's utter rubbish, and on the other hand I'm repeating the obvious. Love it. I do agree Puel has been saying this. I'm just not sure we've yet given him adequate credit for what seems to me an interesting strategy for trying to eke out advantage. What Saint Albert says above about Spurs is relevant here. For Puel, this is not just an individual player strategy, or a formation strategy that will conserve energy over a game, or a busy-week-with-multiple-games strategy. It's a season long strategy. I love the way he's focusing on all four of those elements.

[eelpie]

 

That hammer looks like it isn't squarely on target. But so long as it does it's job...

[sadoldgit]

"He's recognized that when you have two otherwise equal teams, the one whose players have more energy available to them is likely to win."

 

Utter rubbish. Prove it.

 

And he's built his entire strategy around that

 

Incorrect. He's said something very similar and done so repeatedly from the time that he arrived but it's for different reasons. He's never made this 'strategy' you allude to a part of his thinking.

 

The comment to Reed should have been made to him several times before and is part and parcel of approaching a game intelligently: don't try to do too much and bear in mind the principal responsibilities of your role. If you're running around like a headless you're not doing a good job.

 

 

Similarly his justification of the diamond, and of squad rotation is all ultimately linked to energy preservation, both during a game, and during a fixture-intense week. You might think this is a quirky basis for a management strategy. But I actually think it's quite brilliant. Why is it that in the premier league teams that cost a fraction of their opponents can some times beat them? There are only five explanations.

 

While I broadly agree with this, Puel has himself (again repeatedly) made this point. It is not therefore innovative of you to repeat what has been said before several times. Indeed, had you listened (along with others) there would be no point in your repeating the obvious.

 

You missed point 6 e.g. Aguero is much better than Connor Wickham, De Bruyne is better than Andrew Surman etc.

 

0/10 must try harder.

 

Yay! That's more like it!!!

[Batman]

when clicking open this thread, thought it was going to be about a new official club partner or something

[Plastic]

That hammer looks like it isn't squarely on target. But so long as it does it's job...

 

It's all about perspective

[Dark Munster]

- the money spent by the rich team was spent stupidly

- luck

- the poorer team are physically fitter

- the poorer team has outwitted the rich team on formation strategy

- on the day, the poorer team's players put more into the game. they try harder, and win more 50/50 balls, etc

 

I think all of that applied to Leicester last season. Plus Mahrez.

[sambosa75]

Howdy NewYorkSaint! Me and my brother in law are visiting New York next month for a jolly. We are over on the weekend of the Man City game and then later that day going to watch the Jets against Baltimore Ravens. Can you recommend a bar that will have a good atmosphere we can watch the Saints game in, bearing in mind the early kick-off time? Thanks!

[The9]

Howdy NewYorkSaint! Me and my brother in law are visiting New York next month for a jolly. We are over on the weekend of the Man City game and then later that day going to watch the Jets against Baltimore Ravens. Can you recommend a bar that will have a good atmosphere we can watch the Saints game in, bearing in mind the early kick-off time? Thanks!

 

When we were in NY in 2013 we went to the Legends Bar near the Empire State Building, guaranteed to have the match on, was open early too, no bugger there though, but it was only Reading v Saints.

[The9]

As for the OP, the conservation of energy for appropriate bursting is a technique many managers have used, I'm still relatively sure nothing other than an early goal allows it to prosper though. If we're level or behind at home, and killing time with possession, it seems counterintuitive at best.

[NewYorkSaint]

When we were in NY in 2013 we went to the Legends Bar near the Empire State Building, guaranteed to have the match on, was open early too, no bugger there though, but it was only Reading v Saints.

 

That works just fine if you're mid-town. Down town there's the Red Lion in Soho. http://redlionnyc.com. All the games are on cable TV, so I usually just watch at home. Like now. The premier league is becoming a big deal in US these days....

[eelpie]

So without breaking sweat we could be 7th next weekend, and we were 18th last week.

And we miss 90% of chances to score.