Well @RicoS321 and @tlg1903 - I did. And here's what ChatGPT made of it... š I actually think Ricoās argument is more defensible than TLG gives it credit for, but I also think TLG has identified the biggest weakness in Ricoās proposed XI. The key issue is that theyāre approaching the game from two slightly different perspectives: * TLG: pick your best players and make Rangers deal with them. * Rico: pick the XI that best protects Aberdeen against Rangersā strengths. And for me, against Rangers at Pittodrie, the second approach has some merit. Where I agree with Rico The strongest part of his argument is Armstrong rather than Yogane isnāt really about Yogane being bad. Itās about what happens when Aberdeen donāt have the ball. Ricoās basically saying: if our central midfield is going to struggle, donāt leave our left-back exposed as well. Armstrong can start nominally wide but tuck in and give you something closer to a midfield three/extra midfielder when defending. Thatās a pretty sensible tactical idea. And there is some evidence that Armstrong has been used in precisely this sort of flexible role. Against Dundee, Aberdeen played 4-4-2 and Armstrong came on for Ntelo in the 66th minute. More importantly, Rico is right that Olusanya is valuable in this particular game. Stephen Robinson himself has been talking him up ahead of Rangers, describing him as an āabsolute handfulā and emphasising how difficult he is to play against. Iād therefore be very reluctant to sacrifice Olusanya for a more orthodox winger. But TLG has a very good point about Yogane This is where I think Ricoās argument becomes slightly too defensive. If Yogane really did have his best Aberdeen performance against Dundee, why remove him immediately afterwards? Especially when the improvement TLG identifies ā actually producing a quality final ball ā is precisely the sort of thing Aberdeen are going to need against Rangers. The Dundee game is particularly relevant because Yogane wasnāt merely surviving on the flank. He produced the low cross for Nisbetās third goal. And thereās a danger in saying: āRangers are dangerous, therefore letās remove one of our attacking players to make us more solid.ā You can end up conceding the initiative anyway, while simultaneously making it harder for yourself to punish Rangers. Thatās especially relevant because this Rangers side isnāt exactly an irresistible force right now. Theyāve yet to win a league game, and theyāve just gone out of Europe. Aberdeen, meanwhile, have started the season reasonably well. So I wouldnāt approach this as though Aberdeen are playing peak Rangers at Ibrox. The bit I really disagree with Rico on Itās the implication that Yogane offers āzero supportā defensively. If thatās literally what he means, Iād disagree. He may not be a particularly aggressive presser, but thereās a difference between not being good at pressing and providing zero defensive support. And if Armstrong starts instead, youāre also sacrificing something offensively. Youāre asking a midfielder to perform a wingerās job rather than simply selecting the winger. Thatās a significant opportunity cost. Iād rather solve the defensive problem through the structure around Yogane than remove Yogane. What Iād actually do Iād probably go something like: Müller Cadden ā Mayo ā Happe ā Guinness-Walker Armstrong ā Aremu ā Ronan/Briedl Yogane ā Nisbet ā Olusanya Thatās effectively a 4-3-3 that can become a 4-5-1/4-1-4-1 without the ball. And I think that addresses Ricoās underlying concern without accepting his solution. Youāve got: * Aremu providing the physicality. * Armstrong providing experience and defensive intelligence. * Yogane still available as an outlet. * Olusanya causing problems physically. * Nisbet occupying the centre-backs. * Enough pace/width to make Rangers worry about Aberdeen rather than simply camping in Aberdeenās half. Interestingly, one current prediction has Aberdeen in essentially that shape, with Armstrong, Briedl and Aremu behind Olusanya, Yogane and Nisbet. And I think thereās an interesting middle ground If Robinson wants the Rico game plan, I actually wouldnāt necessarily drop Yogane. Iād play Armstrong on the left and Yogane on the right, with Armstrong having licence to narrow when Aberdeen defend. That gives you Ricoās extra defensive security without dropping the player TLG is rightly keen to see rewarded for his Dundee performance. The really interesting question is then Smith vs Yogane. Iām with TLG that Smith has probably been underused. He was particularly lively when he came on against Dundee, and his delivery contributed to an Olusanya chance. But I wouldnāt use Rangers as the game to make a big change simply because Smith deserves minutes. āø» So, if I were judging the debate rather than just picking a team: TLG wins the argument about Yogane. I wouldnāt drop him after his best performance. Rico wins the argument about the tactical problem. Aberdeenās midfield/left-side defensive protection genuinely needs consideration, and simply throwing three forwards and two midfielders out there could leave them badly exposed. But I think the best answer is to change the shape/roles rather than replace Yogane. And thereās one thing Iād absolutely agree with Rico on: Olusanya through the middle is very appealing. Robinsonās comments about how much of a nuisance he is, combined with the fact Rangers are hardly arriving in Aberdeen brimming with confidence, makes me want him running directly at those centre-backs for as long as his legs will let him. In other words: donāt set up as though Rangers are unbeatable ā but do set up as though theyāre dangerous. Thatās probably the sweet spot.