The Stagnation of Positional Play: Why the Euro Favorites Have Underwhelmed

"In the final third, you need players who can invent solutions, not just follow instructions." -Pep Guardiola

It's one of Guardiola's many quotes on the final third. While he's modest in accepting the influence of his work training final third play (City clearly has solutions), there is a sense that positional play is not without its drawbacks.

"In the final third, it is about talent, not tactics."

"You cannot coach talent in the final third. You either have it or you don't."

"The final pass, the final shot, the final decision—it's all about the player's talent."

"Tactics can create space, but it's talent that exploits it in the final third."

I started coaching during those Pep years at Barcelona. Though I'm a Real Madrid fan, I'll concede that Pep had the greatest influence on my early development. His Barca side was mesmerizing. Finding my team's version of Pep's positional play was my objective. Whether starting attacks from the back or aggressively counterpressing the opponent, total control of the match was the desired end.

And it still is.

Playing the match on our terms is still the desired outcome, but adaptation was necessary.

While I still have a great respect for Pep, Zinedine Zidane and Carlo Ancelotti have greatly influenced my coaching in recent years. Writing Revitalizing Real Madrid was a critical step in my coaching development.

Zizou offered another interpretation of positional play. It was one that still prioritized structure, but with greater fluidity to the match and a sense of player autonomy that resonated with me. The Real Madrid legend put his players in positions to fully tap into their skill sets across the pitch, seamlessly integrating the talent into a cohesive entity.

In a sense, his interpretation of positional play relieved pressure from final third play. Rather than breaking through the wall, Zidane's sides discovered how they could go around, above, and below it. When opponents tried to set the match initiative through a resolute low block, Real Madrid wrestled the initiative back by coaxing them out of the trenches.

That's where this year's Euros feel stagnant. That maneuverability, the abilty to sync player strengths with the game model to unbalance the opposition, is missing.

Positional Play Poorly Interpreted and Applied

This post is a bit different from my standard articles. In fact, it started as a standard page post, not an article. You won't find the typical still frames from games or data to support my thesis. This is more of a journal entry, a reflection on the tournament and a coach/analyst's interpretation.

Perhaps it started with a cliche: "There's no one way to play." If you're a coach or analyst, you've surely heard it.

But you can make a strong case that's not what we're seeing from the European favorites. There's a near homogeneity to the approaches. The build-out is typically a 3-2-5. As opponents drop numbers behind the ball, central overloads with one width provider on each side encourage teams to progress through the wings. Then, in the final third, we wait. We wait for that bit of magic. We wait for that world-class player to showcase his talent. We wait for an open play chance that breaks the will of the opponent and produces that moment of awe that draws us to sports.

Of the 17 tournaments on record, the 2024 edition's group stage goals per game rate (2.25) ranks 12th. Seven of the 81 were own goals. Of the 36 group stage games, four ended 0-0, six in a 1-0 scoreline. Opta's top eight pre-tournament favorites have been shut out or scored one goal on 15 occasions (24 games played).

Tournament play is inherently more pragmatic, but this...this is a stagnant form of positional play.

Juego de posición seeks to create advantages through positioning. Occupying specific zones that enhance network connections, using overloads, dynamic positional rotations, and quick ball circulation, positional play is a means of prioritizing structure to limit risk, disorient the opposition, and create positional superiorities.

At its worst, positional play leads to quick ball circulation with little progression, final third entry with limited avenues to attack the box, and a host of half chances. If the balance of talent clearly favors one side, the added implication is a game played largely in one half of the pitch, possibly even the weaker team's defensive third. One team's attempt at total control is met by the other team's necessary attempt to reduce the playing area and defend their besieged goal. Positional play, which has its roots in Total Football, is reduced to Total Possession.

When the favorites have struggled in this tournament, it's the final third magic that's missing.

And that's not to say that there's no talent on the pitch. Talent is not the issue. It's in ample supply. The problem concerns the attacking conditions the players are asked to solve.

Anyone who has played or coached the game at a reasonably high level will tell you that beating a low block is one of the most difficult tasks in the game. Space is limited and the opponent holds positional advantages in key parts of the pitch. For the attacking team to push additional numbers forward is to leave themselves exposed to the opposition's counterattack, which is exactly what they want.

What we're seeing at the Euros is the response to positional play. While positional play attempts to maximize the playing area, the solution is to compress it. The low block effectively eliminates, or at least limits, the virtues of juego de posición. An attempt to make the pitch big is met with the will to keep it small.

And that's where each nation's interpretation of positional play comes under the microscope.

As matches get bogged down in the opposition's defensive third and the low blocks fend off wave after wave of attacks, the intended advantage becomes a set of golden handcuffs. "We've seen what positional play can be. We've seen it at its best. If we stick to the process and let the talent in our squad solve the low-block problem, we'll find the breakthrough moment."

What we see instead is a redundancy of approach, the football version of banging one's head against a wall. The same response is offered to solve the recurring problem. By definition, it's insanity.

Reimagining Positional Play

Don't take that last section as a dismissal of positional play. I do believe positional play offers tremendous advantages and use it within my own environment. Knowing the pros and cons of the philosophy, the question I have to continually ask myself is, "are we creating the attacking conditions that lead to high-quality opportunities to goal?" If the answer is "no", then my interpretation and application need adjustment.

What would another interpretation look like?

Perhaps the top priority is in the orientation of the approach. Fully exploring the "why" is necessary. Connecting our approach to the intended responses of the opposition is key. In invasion sports, one team's action is to produce an anticipated opposition reaction. That's where the opportunity lies.

This is also where personnel plays a factor. For Pep's City teams, they can take a more rigid approach knowing they have the talent and cohesion to consistently break down low blocks and create high-quality chances on goal.

I'm not Pep and I don't have his players. That doesn't mean I should throw my hands in the air and abandon the philosophy. What it means is that I need to tailor our game model to the talents of the players, our coaching staff, and the time we have to implement our playing style. We have to find the right fit for us.

And this is where Zidane and Ancelotti have aided my development as a coach. What those two do so well is hone in on the attacking conditions where the individuals thrive. Their interpretation of positional play melds the game model with the talents of the players in the squad. The tactical element comes into play when team and individual qualities are contextualized through the anticipated problems posed by the opposition.

That's where the top positional play coaches shine. They show their expertise in understanding what they have and connecting it to the restraints faced in each match. Some lean more towards a team-wide solution, others towards small group and individual actions, but the team's play is always geared towards creating an advantage.

In other words, positional play poorly interpreted is seeing the game from one perspective, that of our own team. The danger here is that we build an assumption that the opponent will play the game the way we want them to. The game is little more than a two-dimensional exercise on the tactics board where we determine how the opponent plays into our traps.

Rightly interpreted, positional play anticipates the response of the opposition and adapts to meet the demands of the game at hand. Easier said than done, but the objective is to force the opponent from their desired approach through a series of diverse actions.

In chess, probing an opponent's weaknesses creates conditions for response. Testing the integrity of an opponent's structure with a variety of attacks searches for weaknesses and creates conditions for a response. It simultaneously keeps the opponent off balance while forcing adjustments to defend against an emerging threat.

In warfare, the term "maneuver" signifies a deliberate change in tempo and the ability to adapt to changing circumstances on the battlefield. Using movement and position, one side looks to unbalance to other to create better conditions to attack. There's a degree of flexibility and localized autonomy required to make this happen. By disrupting the opposition's defensive tactics, the attacking side creates a window of opportunity that requires velocity of action. Attack when the opponent is destabilized and incapable of a response.

Muhammad Ali's famous quote, "float like a butterfly, sting like a bee" perfectly encapsulates the opportunities a positional play approach seeks to impose. By creating a variety of threats and using deceptive movements to provoke a wrong reaction, the opponent eventually falls into a state of imbalance, overly emphasizing one area of their defenses while leaving themselves exposed elsewhere.

That's what's missing from many of these games.

Again, I offer no visuals to highlight this issue or data visuals to offer more concrete evidence for my claim.

This is simply one coach/analyst sharing thoughts on a lingering interpretation of a tournament and positional play.

Dialogue is welcome.