Göztepe's Defensive Paradox: From Second-Best Defense to the Leakiest Backline

Göztepe entered the new season as the team with the second-best defense in the league. Three rounds later, they sit among the sides that have conceded the most goals. Seven goals against in three matches — a 3-3 draw away at Samsunspor, a 0-1 home defeat to Gençlerbirliği, and a 2-3 loss to defending champions Galatasaray — is everything needed to raise questions about the entire defensive project the Izmir club has built over the past year.

In the standings, the distance between last season's second-best status and this season's worst is only three weeks. But for those who watch every pass closely, that distance is measured by more concrete things: a centre-back who has never taken the pitch, a midfield that has lost its ability to shield, and an attacking philosophy pushed far higher than the squad's real capacity.

The key lies in a centre-back position that was never filled.

In any defensive setup, the centre-back is the link upon which the whole system depends. Göztepe signed Noah Sonko Sundberg — a Gambia international — expecting him to become the anchor of the back line. But in a pre-season friendly against Trabzonspor, Sonko Sundberg picked up an injury and has not played a single competitive league match. That was the first shock, and it was a shock for which the coaching staff had no contingency plan.

This detail is rarely emphasised by the media but it decides everything. When the first-choice centre-back is absent, the defensive system loses its anchor point. The remaining defenders are forced to compensate by dropping deeper, dragging the midfield back with them, and the entire block gets compressed toward their own goal. When the block is compressed, the gaps between the lines stretch, and opponents' line-breaking passes become far more dangerous.

Across all three matches, this pattern repeats itself. Göztepe still score — three against Samsunspor, two against Galatasaray — but they also concede in equal or greater numbers. The team is not sterile going forward. On the contrary, they attack with real sharpness. The problem is that every time they push up in search of a goal, they expose a space behind that nobody is capable of covering.

This is something I regularly observe when tracking mid-table European sides: a well-organised defense does not come from outstanding individuals, but from the whole system clicking together. When one link is replaced by a player who has not yet built that understanding, the system does not lose a small part — it loses its entire balance. The numbers speak, but few people are patient enough to listen.

Göztepe's story this season is a textbook example of what analysts call the defensive domino effect. An injured centre-back forces a midfielder to drop deeper. A deeper midfielder leaves the middle short in duels. A short middle lets opponents switch from defense to attack with ease. And when opponents transition quickly, a back line that is already thin becomes even more vulnerable.

Beyond the personnel issue, there is another structural problem: transfer policy and how new signings are used. In the early part of the season, attacking arrivals such as Armstrong and Henrique, along with left-back Akonnor, were given the most minutes. The other new signings were mostly used as second-half substitutes.

This distribution of minutes says a lot about the coaching staff's philosophy. Prioritising minutes for attacking players shows an ambition to play open football, but it also reveals impatience in building the defense. Defending is collective work; it requires time for players to understand one another, read each other's intentions and react on instinct. A hastily assembled back line cannot function smoothly, no matter how good the individuals are.

Look at the 2-3 loss to Galatasaray and the naivety is plain to see. Facing the defending champions, Göztepe showed no fear. They chose to trade blows, scored twice, but conceded three. For a side still searching for footing in mid-table, going toe-to-toe with the champions is a gamble. That gamble failed, not for lack of spirit, but because the defense was not mature enough to withstand the pressure.

In the home defeat to Gençlerbirliği, the problem was different. That was a match in which Göztepe controlled more of the ball and created chances, only to concede exactly once — and that once was enough to decide the result. This is the most painful scenario for a team seeking stability: not playing badly, yet dropping points because of a single lapse in concentration.

Meanwhile, the 3-3 draw at Samsunspor on opening day laid bare the nature of the whole season. The three goals scored were a positive sign of attacking power, but the three conceded showed the defense was not yet ready. A draw with six goals in total is the image of a team playing improvised, crowd-pleasing football that offers no safety in terms of points.

Compared to last season, when Göztepe finished as the second-least conceded side in the league, this reversal does not come from the team playing worse. It comes from the structure having changed without being properly adjusted. A defense built on experience and stability was shattered by the Sonko Sundberg injury, and nobody has yet found a way to replace it.

Last season's best defense and this season's worst are not so different in personnel — they differ in structure.

I was mocked for ninety minutes, but history is written by the final goal. This line fits Göztepe's situation: the rushed verdicts claiming the club is finished after three rounds show a lack of patience. Three rounds are not enough to draw conclusions, but they are enough to raise a warning. The problem is not the quality of the squad, but the speed at which the system gets fixed.

What is worth discussing here is how the Turkish media is framing this story. Most headlines focus on Göztepe conceding the most in the league, yet few ask why a defense that finished second last season could collapse so quickly. The answer does not lie in the players' form, but in an unforeseen injury.

Every number I dig up buries a myth the media has created. The myth here is the story of a club in decline. The real story is a club paying the price for building its defense on a fragile foundation. When the stadium is empty, the truth starts filling the seats left by the crowd.

So what should Göztepe do next? First, they need a short-term solution at centre-back. If Sonko Sundberg cannot return, an experienced centre-back capable of marshalling the back line is an urgent priority. Second, they need to rein in their attacking ambition in difficult matches, adopting a more pragmatic approach to accumulate points. Third, they need time for the new signings to understand one another — and time is not something the league hands out easily to anyone.

Looking deeper, Göztepe's story reflects a problem faced by many mid-table European clubs: they focus too much on signing attacking stars to draw crowds, while neglecting the construction of a solid defense. Attack can sell tickets, but defense is what wins points. The crowd is always safe, and that is exactly why it is always mediocre. But in football, safety is the shortest path to victory.

On the data system I track, Göztepe show a clear gap between two metrics: expected goals scored and expected goals conceded. They score at the rate of a decent team, but concede at the rate of a weak one. That gap is the result of a forward line and a back line that were not built in balance. In modern football, balance between the two ends matters more than any individual star.

Three rounds do not shape a club's fate. What I want to stress is that three rounds have made one thing clear: their ability to organise a defense. Göztepe have time to fix things, but not much. If the back line is not reinforced in the next transfer window, the club could keep leaking goals and dropping points in matches they should be winning.

I do not need anyone to agree with me; I need someone good enough to argue back. Those who claim Sonko Sundberg's injury is not a big enough reason to explain Göztepe's defensive decline must argue that one centre-back cannot contribute that much. But the numbers show the opposite: when the Gambian defender is on the pitch, Göztepe's back line operates far more smoothly. Subjective feeling may miss this, but data cannot hide it.

Back to the club's context: the season has only just begun. One draw and two defeats is an unexpected return, but it is not a disaster. What matters is how the coaching staff responds. If they treat this as a chance to adjust the system, Göztepe can still salvage the season. If they keep hoping the attack will paper over the defense, the road ahead will be long and painful.

Ultimately, this story reminds us of something basic that is sometimes forgotten: football is a collective sport, and no system works without its key link. Göztepe have lost that link, and the task now is to find it again — or find another one good enough to replace it. That is the puzzle every club must solve when injury strikes. And how they solve it will decide the fate of an entire season.