I've read a couple times here people saying, things on the lines of, "the story consists of the main characters fighting a stronger opponent who they almost lose to and then have to find a new trick to beat."
I think there are several things wrong with their analysis. First it's obviously not true since they lost already to the big 3 without beating them the first time, so every game doesn't end in them winning. Second its the entire point of the story.
They are in Blue Lock fighting strong opponents in order to become better at soccer and unlock their eggos. Its natural find the thing you've been doing this entire time and winning with, not working anymore. They then Improvise, Adapt and Overcome.
The story is a constant fight of Isagi finding that missing piece of the puzzle by analysing his games in and out and finding the thing that will help him get better. It isn't even like its coming out of nowhere. When they faced against Barou we understood that Barous lost in the second round because of his arrogance and his inability to cooperate. When they brought him on to their team we are then trying to find a way for how Isagi is going to be able to beat an evenly matched opponent when they have no team synergy and they do.
I think anyone who criticizes the story for being a story that is just them improvising, adapting, and overcoming every battle don't even make sense. THAT'S THE ENTIRE POINT OF BLUE LOCK.
It's entirely fine if you don't think it's your cup of tea, not everyone likes Shonen and this is basically what it is at its core. And there are other issues you can fine, but saying its bad because of what it is doesn't make sense, they just means you don't like stories like this.
I'm honestly starting to believe that some people thinks its cool to criticize things, because it makes you sound smart. The criticism doesn't even have to make sense.
There are some people who have said the main character is boring, I think that's all subjective. You find him boring. I think he's extremely interesting. This undying will of following your passion and his obsession of viewing things by hyper analyzing them. It's very rare to find those things in shonen, they main character is usually very simple and loves food. If you want more backstory it's going to come, we just got the backstory now of one of the first introduced characters.
Again I'm not saying you have to love the story, I think you just have to give it fair criticism. How can you say about a story about becoming your better self in soccer that, "every game is them just getting better by fixing their flaw."
I do agree that everything in here is overly dramatic and extremely fast. How is he able to fix this flaw instantly(even though that was addressed in the story), it's a little far fetched. Its kinda just a shonen thing and is more interesting to watch then them watching replays of their battles and thinking about how to fix it in retrospect. Making the story maybe more entertaining, but for less believable, which takes you right out of the story.
That would be a far better criticism then, "why is that arch are all the same, all they do is get better at soccer and beat their opponent." We know that what they do, that what they said was going to happen from chapter 1.
thanks for listening to my ted talk.