1- They make the pitch insanely wide when in possession.
2- Paradoxally, they make the pitch very small when dispossessed of the ball
3- A strict and rigid sense of position to the point where it looks mechanical
4- Passing is crucial to this type of football
5- Freedom of the movement (attackers ) in the last third of the pitch
Well, I do love intelligent discussions on the subject and I like what you have just said, even if I partially disagree.
I did watch the Bayern game live and I think I know what you are talking about. Also I agree on many of your points. Nevertheless there are big "but"s for me, lemme list a few:
- Attacking tactics should be adapted to the available material of players and not vice versa.
- Neymar is a pretty much two-footed player, so is Suarez. But Messi depends so largely on his left foot, that playing him on the extreme right doesn't bring too much good, unless (as he always does) finally he dribbles INWARDS to use his left foot. That's a factor which ties his positional concerns ("false 9" or otherwise).
- When Alves played for the team he could do what was needed on the right, could even score important goals, but now the situation is diametrically opposite, having nobody useful on the right.
- What Henry mentions in your quotation is just the opposite compared to what he himself mentions when talking about the time of their attacking, when he rightly says that Pep's concern was to bring the ball in to the last third (usually by midfielders) and THEN the attackers had their complete freedom to do what was needed.
By saying just that, let me do a bad comparison: I don't think Suarez would be worse than Cavani, neither I think Cavani was way better. They are somewhat similar. Both Suarez and Cavani are the ones, who need considerable space for themselves, which may not count when hard balls are arched to the middle, as Cavani is a much better header than Suarez.
But at the PSG game Cavani could show his positive part, whereas Suarez was ineffective. Why? Because of the midfield or rather the lack of it on Barca's side.
The pitch being "insanely wide" as you put it, serves well for different teams and player characteristics but the favorable factor for the MSN is that when in good form and having a good day, they are also capable to play against 8-9 defenders lined up. They do that with the weapon of their unpredictability and Messi's and Neymar's exceptional dribbling skills.
Furthermore:
- Playing with wingers on the wings, which I see as the typical English football, serves when one has that type of players, hence for Barca I definitely prefer the type of "Latino" football (at least in attacking) and I'm also certain that either Messi or Neymar would have extreme difficulties in the Premier Leage. It's just not for them, specially with the quantity of physicality that being played there.
- When the MSN are in good form, they are unstoppable, regardless the actual tactics, but this needs to correspond to the form of the midfielders.
- Barca has tremendous problems in the right side this season, neither Roberto nor the daily Gomes, Denis, Rafinha or Arda are good enough to serve there, Rakitic is not great but all right in his good form. Until that problem is solved somehow, Barca and the MSN will undoubtedly suffer each and every game and by changing the attacking movements or formations will not ever help to fill that existing gap.
The PSG game - before all other factors - showed fatigue, tiredness, Messi's worst day in months, huge tactical mistakes in midfield and defense, also the coach's stubborn mentality towards his own ideas.
If I were the coach that day, I'd have done this:
- Pulling off Gomes after 20 minutes. Rakitic is usually much better covering Messi, if he loses the ball. Pulling off Roberto, regardless who comes in his place. Telling the defenders to concentrate more on the actual players, rather than mere territory and Busquests to go deeper back.
We still would have lost that day but it would have been a manageable 0:2 or something like that...