The sweeper, will it ever make a comeback?

When I use to play football and my position was sweeper. I was always cleaning up after my team, I always played a year up and was told often I could go far, however, Due to the fact no teams plays with a sweeper I doubt anyone would have taken me on, I am too weak to play CB but I was a good sweeper as I am fast, read the game well, was a good leader, was good on the ball and could play a pass. I was also a great tackler and had good positioning.

Will the sweeper ever be used in the top level again? Would I have ever made it if I kept going? When used correctly they are fantastic and I never really understood why they arn't used. Chelsea could do with a really fast CB right now and for someone to play just behind Terry would work well I feel.

Is it because with a sweeper the offside trap is impossible?

Is it because two strong CB's are better than a strong CB and a fast Sweeper?

Or is it just because there are not enough good sweepers coming through?

What do you guys thk is wrong with playing a sweeper? Would you be happy to see it make a return?

Adding a sweeper, you have to take away from somewhere else.

Its better to have numerical superority in the midfield then the defence.

Many teams play 1 striker, why keep 3 players back marking him?

Why can't that work? Of course the RB and LB would have to be someone like Abidal and Ramos.

Besides, sweepers do not mark people, you would have the same amount of players marking if you played 5 in defence.

With the offside rule the way it is right now playing like that while defending is asking for trouble.

Unless you are proposing the idea of a CB who pushes up to midfield and helps out I don't think a sweeper would be a good idea.

Busquets practically plays as a sweeper.......

kick mars wrote:

GK
Sweeper
RB - CB - LB
DM
CM - CM
RW - CF - LW

Why can't that work? Of course the RB and LB would have to be someone like Abidal and Ramos.

Besides, sweepers do not mark people, you would have the same amount of players marking if you played 5 in defence.

But will the fullbacks go forward like they normally do? If yes, then whats the point of a sweeper? I ask because one player will naturally "sweep" while the other attacks the opposing striker in the standard 4 man backline as it is now.

Sweepers to me are most effective when they are an "extra man" back there. So the standard back 4 and another guy behind them who sweeps up danger. That to me is when they are most pronouced and clear.

If teams play 3 at the back, like Napoli, naturally one of them will act as a sweeper, especially against 2 strikers.

For example, Barca. If they faced Villareal who play 4222 and they used a back 3. Abidal and Mascherano could mark the two strikers while Pique sweeps up. In attack, Abidal and Mascherano spread wide like fullbacks while Pique in the middle can distrubute the first passes.

kick mars wrote:

GK
Sweeper
RB - CB - LB
DM
CM - CM
RW - CF - LW

Why can't that work? Of course the RB and LB would have to be someone like Abidal and Ramos.

Besides, sweepers do not mark people, you would have the same amount of players marking if you played 5 in defence.

You saw what happened to Germany defence yesterday, if you play that sort of position in modern days football your opponent will totally destroy you.

Busi sometimes plays as sweeper, DDR too, can't think of many other examples...

Pepe plays sometimes as a midfield sweeper guy

can go really high up and take the ball, but still remains as the CB, just a free role

Actually we play with Sweeper - Barzagli ... but nto classic more like this

The Franchise wrote:

kick mars wrote:

GK
Sweeper
RB - CB - LB
DM
CM - CM
RW - CF - LW

Why can't that work? Of course the RB and LB would have to be someone like Abidal and Ramos.

Besides, sweepers do not mark people, you would have the same amount of players marking if you played 5 in defence.

But will the fullbacks go forward like they normally do? If yes, then whats the point of a sweeper? I ask because one player will naturally "sweep" while the other attacks the opposing striker in the standard 4 man backline as it is now.

Sweepers to me are most effective when they are an "extra man" back there. So the standard back 4 and another guy behind them who sweeps up danger. That to me is when they are most pronouced and clear.

If teams play 3 at the back, like Napoli, naturally one of them will act as a sweeper, especially against 2 strikers.

For example, Barca. If they faced Villareal who play 4222 and they used a back 3. Abidal and Mascherano could mark the two strikers while Pique sweeps up. In attack, Abidal and Mascherano spread wide like fullbacks while Pique in the middle can distrubute the first passes.

The fullbacks won't generally attack but in the modern game that is not the norm so it would be interesting to see.

My last year of football I played in a 3 man defence which was excatly how you described. It worked well when the CB's did their jobs, if they were anmoyed at me and didn't mark their man the system fell a part. A 4 man defence with a sweeper could work like that against a 4-3-3 if the midfield covered well.

DeviAngel wrote:Actually we play with Sweeper - Barzagli ... but nto classic more like this

----------------------Buffon---------------
--------------SW---------------------
-----RB------------CB----------LB-----

interesting, Barzagli is not fast though? Wouldn't Chillini be a better option?

The offside trap is the primary reason sweepers arent in the game today.
If a team plays a high line,then its suicidal to play a sweeper.
That being said Busquets last season was the closest thing to a sweeper in the modern game.
Not this season.This season he has played a traditional DM role for the simple reason that Barca are playing 3-4-3 and there are alreday 3 at the back.

kick mars wrote:

The Franchise wrote:

kick mars wrote:

GK
Sweeper
RB - CB - LB
DM
CM - CM
RW - CF - LW

Why can't that work? Of course the RB and LB would have to be someone like Abidal and Ramos.

Besides, sweepers do not mark people, you would have the same amount of players marking if you played 5 in defence.

But will the fullbacks go forward like they normally do? If yes, then whats the point of a sweeper? I ask because one player will naturally "sweep" while the other attacks the opposing striker in the standard 4 man backline as it is now.

Sweepers to me are most effective when they are an "extra man" back there. So the standard back 4 and another guy behind them who sweeps up danger. That to me is when they are most pronouced and clear.

If teams play 3 at the back, like Napoli, naturally one of them will act as a sweeper, especially against 2 strikers.

For example, Barca. If they faced Villareal who play 4222 and they used a back 3. Abidal and Mascherano could mark the two strikers while Pique sweeps up. In attack, Abidal and Mascherano spread wide like fullbacks while Pique in the middle can distrubute the first passes.

The fullbacks won't generally attack but in the modern game that is not the norm so it would be interesting to see.

My last year of football I played in a 3 man defence which was excatly how you described. It worked well when the CB's did their jobs, if they were anmoyed at me and didn't mark their man the system fell a part. A 4 man defence with a sweeper could work like that against a 4-3-3 if the midfield covered well.

DeviAngel wrote:Actually we play with Sweeper - Barzagli ... but nto classic more like this

----------------------Buffon---------------
--------------SW---------------------
-----RB------------CB----------LB-----

interesting, Barzagli is not fast though? Wouldn't Chillini be a better option?

Well conte plays barzagli there and Chiel as LB even when Chiel was CB its was barzagli there he is good at reading the game

An interesting point was made by taz.de concerning Löw's 3 CB experiment in the Ukraine friendly. They said that Löw chose the wrong players there, and it might have worked better by using a good 6 there, who would actually work very much like a classic sweeper. The report ended, though, that this might work, but very possibly wouldn't be en vogue in modern football Germany.

Source: http://www.taz.de/!81786/ (Language: German)