|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2018 19:40:55 GMT
When fully fit stoke are too good to go down compared to previous teams
Who has been the best team to go down?
|
|
|
Post by Pretty Little Boother on Jan 3, 2018 19:43:22 GMT
We've shown absolutely nothing, zilch, nada to suggest we're too good to go down. At all.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jan 3, 2018 19:49:22 GMT
When fully fit stoke are too good to go down compared to previous teams Who has been the best team to go down? The trouble is we're to bad to stop up There's only zouma butland and Allen worth much more than two wanks into a tissue And one of them isn't ours in the first place
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2018 19:50:01 GMT
I think we're showing all the classic telltale signs of being the archetypal relegation team.
|
|
|
Post by 19notbeaten72 on Jan 3, 2018 19:51:04 GMT
No ones to good to go down the table does not lie nor does goals against which in our case may prove decisive. Ours goals against is almost like having one point less its thats bad.
|
|
|
Post by mrred on Jan 3, 2018 19:55:16 GMT
Fit or not fit, no teams too good to go down. You're only as good as your last match, the majority of ours have been wank for 2 years.
|
|
|
Post by stokemark on Jan 3, 2018 19:55:38 GMT
When fully fit stoke are too good to go down compared to previous teams Who has been the best team to go down? Who do you reckon Mark ?
|
|
|
Post by blackpoolred on Jan 3, 2018 20:39:50 GMT
From where I am standing we are an awful team. We had two 18 year defenders playing against Chelski, because our manager forgot to buy any backup in the full-back positions, another expensive flop in the centre of defence and we are lumping it up to a 40 year old in the hope of scoring a goal. I have read comments this week that fat Adam is our only hope and how we must play him instead of Fletcher - oh the choices We have a more expensive squad than a few teams in this league, does not make us a good team just because we have spunked more money than other teams
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jan 3, 2018 21:04:37 GMT
As shit as we are there are more shit teams this year than ever.
Quality of the Premier League is dropping and dropping quickly
In years past the performances of late would have seen us rock bottom with about a dozen points
Whoever goes down there will be at least five utterly shit sides (& you could argue seven) who stay up.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2018 21:17:51 GMT
We are far better than the teams that went down last season especially sunderland
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jan 3, 2018 21:29:49 GMT
We are far better than the teams that went down last season especially sunderland Defensively we aren't.
|
|
|
Post by jzime on Jan 3, 2018 21:37:32 GMT
We are absolutely not too good to go down. In fact, I'd go as far to speculate that Coates believing that we're 'too good to go down' might have led to him not acting sooner and us being in this situation in the first place.
On paper we have a few good players, particularly Shaqiri. But we don't have a proven goalscorer (the man who was meant to be that cost £12m and isn't ever going to score for us), we sold our best outfield player to a direct rival and replaced him with a free transfer who is decent but fundamentally not as good, and our defensive record is the worst in the of any club in any of the top leagues in Europe.
We're currently 18th after 22 games played with a goal difference of -24. How on Earth can you look at that at this stage of the season and believe that we're too good to go down?
|
|
|
Post by chigstoke on Jan 3, 2018 21:41:52 GMT
We are absolutely not too good to go down. In fact, I'd go as far to speculate that Coates believing that we're 'too good to go down' might have led to him not acting sooner and us being in this situation in the first place. On paper we have a few good players, particularly Shaqiri. But we don't have a proven goalscorer (the man who was meant to be that cost £12m and isn't ever going to score for us), we sold our best outfield player to a direct rival and replaced him with a free transfer who is decent but fundamentally not as good, and our defensive record is the worst in the of any club in any of the top leagues in Europe. We're currently 18th after 22 games played with a goal difference of -24. How on Earth can you look at that at this stage of the season and believe that we're too good to go down? Berahino will never score because the manager never fucking starts him now and no one makes any one good pass for him to run on too, whilst he looks for great openings and space like at Chelsea. We are relegation fodder for sure. Does Coates have the bollocks to back Hughes with money if he sticks or the actual bollocks to twist and get a new motivated manager in? I suspect so far, neither.
|
|
|
Post by TrentValePotter96 on Jan 3, 2018 21:56:02 GMT
We are not too good to go down. Far from it.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Jan 3, 2018 22:01:45 GMT
We are far better than the teams that went down last season especially sunderland The bait is as smelly as Peter Coates piss soaked slippers, freshen it up a bit
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jan 3, 2018 22:04:42 GMT
I think this thread is a wind up, I'm not going to bite.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2018 22:08:48 GMT
When fully fit stoke are too good to go down compared to previous teams Who has been the best team to go down? You are massively deluded.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2018 22:48:02 GMT
I think there are teams with less talented players but Stoke are showing all the signs of a team sinking without trace.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Jan 3, 2018 22:49:09 GMT
I think this thread is a wind up, I'm not going to bite. It isn't. It's Class A Happy Clapping.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Jan 3, 2018 22:51:13 GMT
Welcome everyone to Planet Mist
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2018 22:57:43 GMT
Welcome everyone to Planet Mist If only we were as good as he thinks we are.
|
|
|
Post by estp1863 on Jan 3, 2018 23:16:33 GMT
We are far better than the teams that went down last season especially sunderland Defensively we aren't. That's an understatement
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2018 23:25:05 GMT
We are absolutely not too good to go down. In fact, I'd go as far to speculate that Coates believing that we're 'too good to go down' might have led to him not acting sooner and us being in this situation in the first place. On paper we have a few good players, particularly Shaqiri. But we don't have a proven goalscorer (the man who was meant to be that cost £12m and isn't ever going to score for us), we sold our best outfield player to a direct rival and replaced him with a free transfer who is decent but fundamentally not as good, and our defensive record is the worst in the of any club in any of the top leagues in Europe. We're currently 18th after 22 games played with a goal difference of -24. How on Earth can you look at that at this stage of the season and believe that we're too good to go down? Walters to score on 21 April to send us down
|
|
|
Post by tony1234 on Jan 3, 2018 23:27:12 GMT
Great question & had me sadly surfing for an answer for 1/2hr - Challenge is that a team that starts the season looking OK on paper, ends up looking crap by virtue of the results and the odour that failure starts to carry.... Newcastle 2015 were mid table OKish looking "on paper" at the start - (GK) Krul, (Def) Janmaat, Coloccini, Lascelles/Taylor, Dummett, (Mid) Wijnaldum, Sissoko, Colback, Tiote, Townsend, (At) Cisse, Perez. By the end, pros like Taylor and Colback that had looked serviceable in 2-3 seasons before suddenly looked hopeless. They even got a mention in the Guardian predictions for being an exciting prospect under McClaren - and his young gun Mitrovic - and Stoke got some positive mentions*. That year, Norwich were also a match for most with some talent. (Villa capitulated). A couple of teams had notable players (at the time) after a decline. Leeds 2003 could still field: Robinson, Kelly, Duberry, Radabe, Harte, Lennon, Batty, Bakke, Wilcox/Milner, Barnmby/Smith and Viduka. I kind of think half of them were crocked though. Kind of similarly, Blackburn 2011-12 boasted some decent ones in Robinson, Dann, N'Zonzi, Dunn, Pedersen and Yakubu - but had succumbed to the Steve Kean revolution, so also had David Goodwillie, who compensated the better players single handedly. www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2015/aug/05/premier-league-2015-16-season-predictions
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jan 3, 2018 23:52:16 GMT
I think the OP is confusing teams with squads.
Stoke do have a strong squad, not as strong as it should be, but still a lot of talent.
What Stoke don't have is a good team and football is not about sending 11 men onto the pitch it's about teamwork. Stoke's teamwork is very poor and most worryingly has been getting poorer. The defence is a shambles. All creativity seems to have evaporated. We can't even keep hold of the ball lately, and goal scoring which was acceptable up to the beginning of December, now seems to have dried up with only 4 goals scored (including 3 against West Brom) in 6 matches and failure to score in 4 matches.
The league is not a beauty contest, or how many miles a team has run, its about accumulating points. There are quite a few squads in the Prem that are not as good as Stoke's on paper; I would say Swansea, West Brom, Newcastle, Brighton, Huddersfield, and even Burnley. The last 4 though are playing better than Stoke, especially Burnley, although it should be noted we are only 4 points behind Huddersfield in 11th place which can be quickly caught up. On current form though it might as well be 14 points the way we are playing.
|
|
|
Post by AstroTom on Jan 4, 2018 10:26:29 GMT
No team is ever 'too good' to go down. You go down based on your performances over 38 games, not over the course of history.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 4, 2018 10:35:02 GMT
West Ham in 2003, who went down with 42 points and had a squad containing James, Carrick, Defoe, Kanoute, Di Canio, Joe Cole and a then-good Glen Johnson is probably the best I can remember.
We aren't remotely too good to go down, we're missing quality in just about every area.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Jan 4, 2018 10:38:43 GMT
West Ham in 2003, who went down with 42 points and had a squad containing James, Carrick, Defoe, Kanoute, Di Canio, Joe Cole and a then-good Glen Johnson is probably the best I can remember. We aren't remotely too good to go down, we're missing quality in just about every area. Newcastle that season a few years back had a number of internationals in their squad? Still went down. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%9309_Newcastle_United_F.C._season#StatisticsSome very good players in that team.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 4, 2018 10:51:22 GMT
West Ham in 2003, who went down with 42 points and had a squad containing James, Carrick, Defoe, Kanoute, Di Canio, Joe Cole and a then-good Glen Johnson is probably the best I can remember. We aren't remotely too good to go down, we're missing quality in just about every area. Newcastle that season a few years back had a number of internationals in their squad? Still went down. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%9309_Newcastle_United_F.C._season#StatisticsSome very good players in that team. Indeed. Guess the issue with both is that while the first team (particularly in terms of attacking talent) looks strong, the depth wasn't there.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Jan 4, 2018 10:52:27 GMT
Indeed. Guess the issue with both is that while the first team (particularly in terms of attacking talent) looks strong, the depth wasn't there. Whereas our problem is that our first team is shit, and we also lack depth?
|
|