|
Post by y_oh_y_delilah on Feb 1, 2022 10:58:43 GMT
With attitudes like that I seriously wonder why some people bother ‘supporting’ the club. Maybe they’d have more fun going fishing on a Saturday afternoon rather than living in a world of misery and negativity. It’s the reality of the situation we are in. . . . . and you’re so wise that you’re convinced all the changes to personnel MoN’s made won’t make any difference, or worse. Well maybe you’re right, who knows, but for myself I’d rather think a bit more positively and think that actually most of these signings are a step in the right direction. Anyway that’s just the difference in people I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Feb 1, 2022 11:10:47 GMT
The realization of how bad the state of the club is has finally hit home, MON looks to have finally rid the club of expensive milestones around it's neck after 2 and a half years. In my opinion I'll Judge him on what he achieves from next season on, he's been working under constant financial strains. You've worked out his master plan. From now on until the spring of '23 he can relax in the Scottish sea, because he won't be judged until then.
|
|
|
Post by femark on Feb 1, 2022 11:16:35 GMT
He's cleared out the majority of the shit on big wages and the rest will be gone in the summer. He's reduced the age of the squad and has brought through several youngsters from the academy. In my books he's done exactly what was tasked of him. He hasn't rbought a single player through from the club academy! He has brought a number of players through from other clubs' academies...Citeh's especially. Then he manages to convince people like femark and many others that he's great for the club's academy. You're just being pedantic mate but if that suits your agenda then fine. He has looked at what players are playing for our academy and decided which ones could make the step up. He's then played them, regardless of how long they've been with our academy.
|
|
|
Post by yyy on Feb 1, 2022 11:16:42 GMT
Can only assume O Neill has been given assurances that this is a project and to clear the decks until we get it right.
As much as I think we have had an overall decent window I believe it's a tall order to make so many changes mid season and expect a team to gel whilst picking up the required points.
This squad though right now today, keeper situation aside I'd bet on a top 6 finish if it had the summer and started the season together.
Why we've let Davies go is beyond me far and away our best number 1 atm
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Feb 1, 2022 11:17:05 GMT
Reading the comments on here I'm surprised by the negativity. We are in a far better shape than at the beginning of January. We have brought in two exciting options up front, a midfielder to replace and upgrade Allen long term, two no nonsense experienced defenders who are clear upgrades on Batth and a young centre half who to me at least looks a better, calmer option than Ostigard. Not only have we done all that but our wheeling and dealing to improve the squad and conform with FFP has not involved selling a young asset but by getting rid of two or three of our highest earners.
So, some are on loan. It's what Championship teams do, it's what Pulis did and what we haven't done well enough going back to the Premier. They may never come here long term although people said that about the loan of the young Shawcross. In the end if players enjoy playing here and feel part of an ambitious club they feel is going somewhere, you never know.
We need a striker who can score the chances he gets. It's interesting what MON said about losing too many games 1-0 to teams who have a player who takes the one chance he gets because we haven't got a player who takes chances. We apparently have only lost to Fulham by more than one goal. All too often we bemoan the fact that one of our strikers misses a gilt edged chance. We don't create a lot so we can't wait for Brown or whoever to score the one in five chances that he gets. Campbell hopefully will but isn't yet. We thought Surridge would but that went wrong. Fletcher certainly doesn't. Brown scores great instinctive goals when he doesn't have time to think and is improving but misses too many chances when he has to make a decision about what to do. You just know he'll miss when 1 v 1.We've tried to rectify that. If Maja works out we have an option to buy at what I guess will be a cheap price. Good business.
Selling Surridge was a surprise but he didn't fit in. I suspect we went for the cheap option in the summer on someone who looked as if he could get into positions to score and take chances. It worked at first but he just didn't fit our style. The big difference between him and Vokes is that he is young and not on big wages so we have had the chance to offload for a small loss. Young players are saleable, old pros not so much. I'm sure we would have liked to have been able to sell Vokes and I suspect we might even have been trying to find a club to take on Fletcher this month.
More than anything, whether it's because Scholes has gone or something else, this window seems to have marked a change in our transfer policy. Identify early and target the players before they've had chance to consider options. Apart from Moore who I suspect helped to get Ince off our hands while covering for Jagielka for half a season, there wasn't a whiff of a panic buy. We were in control, knew what we wanted and weren't prepared to compromise. It was choice no. 1 or nothing. And all the players we brought in were surprises, no rumours until the deals were virtually wrapped up.
As for the comment MON doesn't really bring in players from our academy but other academies what is wrong with that? Manchester City have the pick of young players. To be discarded by them is not a sign of failure. Foden made it but how many others? We took Campbell and Wright Phillips because they were never going to challenge the expensive signings they make. We continued their development and gave them a first team opportunity and now have two assets. Of course in general Manchester City's academy is always going to have higher quality students than Stoke's but taking on their failures seems a good policy to follow and I'm sure the success of Campbell and DWP will help us to recruit. We spent years with a fairly successful youth team but no players actually coming through to the first team because to be brutal they weren't good enough to play men's football.
I can see the way we are going clearer than since Hughes left and I like it. It is a much more sustainable route than Hughes and Pulis's of buying players either at the end of their careers or who belong to Battersea dogs' home having been thrown out on the streets because of issues rather than footballing ability. I am excited to see what we do in the summer and I'm beginning to think that the likes of Allen won't be kept as the easy option and a good egg.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Feb 1, 2022 11:30:55 GMT
With the news of the infrastructure refurbishment, I think this transfer window shows the Coates family are fully committed to the club and are looking to improve things both on and off the pitch.
|
|
|
Post by foxysgloves on Feb 1, 2022 11:32:13 GMT
Reading the comments on here I'm surprised by the negativity. We are in a far better shape than at the beginning of January. We have brought in two exciting options up front, a midfielder to replace and upgrade Allen long term, two no nonsense experienced defenders who are clear upgrades on Batth and a young centre half who to me at least looks a better, calmer option than Ostigard. Not only have we done all that but our wheeling and dealing to improve the squad and conform with FFP has not involved selling a young asset but by getting rid of two or three of our highest earners. So, some are on loan. It's what Championship teams do, it's what Pulis did and what we haven't done well enough going back to the Premier. They may never come here long term although people said that about the loan of the young Shawcross. In the end if players enjoy playing here and feel part of an ambitious club they feel is going somewhere, you never know. We need a striker who can score the chances he gets. It's interesting what MON said about losing too many games 1-0 to teams who have a player who takes the one chance he gets because we haven't got a player who takes chances. We apparently have only lost to Fulham by more than one goal. All too often we bemoan the fact that one of our strikers miss a gilt edged chance. We don't create a lot so we can't wait for Brown or whoever to score the one in five chances that he gets. Campbell hopefully will but isn't yet. We thought Surridge would but that went wrong. Fletcher certainly doesn't. Brown scores great instinctive goals when he doesn't have time to think and is improving but misses too many chances when he has to make a decision about what to do. You just know he'll miss when 1 v 1.We've tried to rectify that. If Maja works out we have an option to buy at what I guess will be a cheap price. Good business. Selling Surridge was a surprise but he didn't fit in. I suspect we went for the cheap option in the summer on someone who looked as if he could get into positions to score and take chances. It worked at first but he just didn't fit our style. The big difference between him and Vokes is that he is young and not on big wages so we have had the chance to offload for a small loss. Young players are saleable, old pros not so much. I'm sure we would have liked to have been able to sell Vokes and I suspect we might even have been trying to find a club to take on Fletcher this month. More than anything, whether it's because Scholes has gone or something else, this window seems to have marked a change in our transfer policy. Identify early and target the players before they've had chance to consider options. Apart from Moore who I suspect helped to get Ince off our hands while covering for Jagielka for half a season, there wasn't a whiff of a panic buy. We were in control, knew what we wanted and weren't prepared to compromise. It was choice no. 1 or nothing. And all the players we brought in were surprises, no rumours until the deals were virtually wrapped up. As for the comment MON doesn't really bring in players from our academy but other academies what is wrong with that? Manchester City have the pick of young players. To be discarded by them is not a sign of failure. Foden made it but how many others? We took Campbell and Wright Phillips because they were never going to challenge the expensive signings they make. We continued their development and gave them a first team opportunity and now have two assets. Of course in general Manchester City's academy is always going to have higher quality students than Stoke's but taking on their failures seems a good policy to follow and I'm sure the success of Campbell and DWP will help us to recruit. We spent years with a fairly successful youth team but no players actually coming through to the first team because to be brutal they weren't good enough to play men's football. I can see the way we are going clearer than since Hughes left and I like it. It is a much more sustainable route than Hughes and Pulis's of buying players either at the end of their careers or who belong to Battersea dogs' home having been thrown out on the streets because of issues rather than footballing ability. I am excited to see what we do in the summer and I'm beginning to think that the likes of Allen won't be kept as the easy option and a good egg. Excellent post.
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Feb 1, 2022 12:03:50 GMT
He hasn't rbought a single player through from the club academy! He has brought a number of players through from other clubs' academies...Citeh's especially. Then he manages to convince people like femark and many others that he's great for the club's academy. You're just being pedantic mate but if that suits your agenda then fine. He has looked at what players are playing for our academy and decided which ones could make the step up. He's then played them, regardless of how long they've been with our academy. Except he hasn't played them. Simple fact. To be pedantic: he did play Taylor and Forrester, when he was short of central defenders last season. Then they never played for Stoke eagin, and with four new central defenders coming in this season, I'm not holding my breath that they will. He's played some like Norton and DWP from our u23s, but I gather that's not who you have in mind, as they've never been with the academy.
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Feb 1, 2022 12:20:58 GMT
The realization of how bad the state of the club is has finally hit home, MON looks to have finally rid the club of expensive milestones around it's neck after 2 and a half years. In my opinion I'll Judge him on what he achieves from next season on, he's been working under constant financial strains. I'm just curious as to what the new strains on the club's finances are...I'm satisfied that MON has sold players, not just paid them to leave as he did in the summer. I'm also impressed that he lost us some big wage earners like Batth, Davies, and Ince. He also succeeded in moving on players that did little for us during their time here. On the other hand he extended Clucas' contract and I didn't hear any mention of Sam's wages being reduced. He signed Jagielka and Moore, and I can't believe they would turn up without getting paid the figures that befits players with that level of experience. There's a lot of paperwork involved with 10-12 transfers going in and out the club, so wages are spent on that as well. As for where the club is going and what the identity of MON's team is. I've really answered that in a couple of other threads, so I'll cut down on the repeats. Idon't see that we are going anywhere at all - and I don't know where MON is headed with his teams. The best players on the books are those who were signed by previous managers. Hell, the best Stoke player in recent years was signed by Nathan Jones! I didn't say new strains I was merely saying he was working with the previous managers over spending and cutting his cloth accordingly, I agree there doesn't seem to be any real direction but again that could well be for the reasons mentioned earlier. In the summer we will have Ince and Allen off the wage bill and more than likely Afobie will be sold or loaned so that should free up some lee way.
|
|
|
Post by femark on Feb 1, 2022 12:33:16 GMT
You're just being pedantic mate but if that suits your agenda then fine. He has looked at what players are playing for our academy and decided which ones could make the step up. He's then played them, regardless of how long they've been with our academy. Except he hasn't played them. Simple fact. To be pedantic: he did play Taylor and Forrester, when he was short of central defenders last season. Then they never played for Stoke eagin, and with four new central defenders coming in this season, I'm not holding my breath that they will. He's played some like Norton and DWP from our u23s, but I gather that's not who you have in mind, as they've never been with the academy. Again - you know what I mean and you're being pedantic. He's bring through young players and reducing the age of the squad. Lets leave it at that...
|
|
|
Post by wakefieldstokie on Feb 1, 2022 12:46:28 GMT
Middle diddle.
This season at least
|
|
|
Post by independent on Feb 1, 2022 13:13:36 GMT
Why would anyone want MON to play players who aren't good enough? And why do people think that any manager gets every player that he tries for. One poster even suggests that MON has been backed in each transfer window, when any money that he has spent he has generated himself. People said that he would never recoup the fees he paid for Brown and Sturridge. He more or less got his money back on Sturridge and I don't doubt that he would get a decent fee for Brown. How much did this squad cost to assemble, and how much did one Sam Vokes cost,especially when you add in his wages. MON is no fool and knows what he is doing. He makes mistakes like any human being but whoever follows him will inherit a far better squad than the one he got. Instead of constantly moaning I just wish people would suggest who we can realistically get for no money and low wages to improve our side. Everyone knows that we need a goalscorer (Who Doesn't?). Hopefully Maja or Campbell will come good. Goals change games, We have only lost one game by more than one goal, and in a lot of games we have been behind and never looked like getting it back. Often after giving away a soft goal ourselves. How many games should we have been 2 or 3 up at half time.
|
|
|
Post by mowlee on Feb 1, 2022 13:21:35 GMT
Middle diddle. This season at least mons the middle diddle master
|
|
|
Post by independent on Feb 1, 2022 13:24:54 GMT
You obviously can't see that we are making progress. Have you forgotten how bad the football was in the second half of last season? It's been mostly much better this season even without Souttar and Powell.
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Feb 1, 2022 13:26:47 GMT
I'm just curious as to what the new strains on the club's finances are...I'm satisfied that MON has sold players, not just paid them to leave as he did in the summer. I'm also impressed that he lost us some big wage earners like Batth, Davies, and Ince. He also succeeded in moving on players that did little for us during their time here. On the other hand he extended Clucas' contract and I didn't hear any mention of Sam's wages being reduced. He signed Jagielka and Moore, and I can't believe they would turn up without getting paid the figures that befits players with that level of experience. There's a lot of paperwork involved with 10-12 transfers going in and out the club, so wages are spent on that as well. As for where the club is going and what the identity of MON's team is. I've really answered that in a couple of other threads, so I'll cut down on the repeats. Idon't see that we are going anywhere at all - and I don't know where MON is headed with his teams. The best players on the books are those who were signed by previous managers. Hell, the best Stoke player in recent years was signed by Nathan Jones! I didn't say new strains I was merely saying he was working with the previous managers over spending and cutting his cloth accordingly, I agree there doesn't seem to be any real direction but again that could well be for the reasons mentioned earlier. In the summer we will have Ince and Allen off the wage bill and more than likely Afobie will be sold or loaned so that should free up some lee way. It was I that said new strains. I don't necessarily want us to use what comes out of those departures. With six new players coming now - granted some are loans - that's an usually high number of players in a January window, not just for us, but anybody. We should sooner look for some continuity, so that we might actually play the same team for a month or preferably longer. Injuries have blocked some sense of continuity with key players missing, but O'Neill's indecision is a big factor. I didn't like Surridge's attitude and Sima's injuries can't be helped, but it still shows a lack of conviction from the manager in his transfer dealings that those two are now already past tense, and it might indicate that he felt forced to sign somebody, just anybody really, in order to be seen to be moving forwards - I dread that there may be a da ca po in this window. But if he had used the first part of the season to integrate academy players rather than signings who it turns out weren't really what he wanted, we might have been in a better place now. I'm not suggesting we should play with half a team of teens, but that they had played enough minutes to be considered, if for instance Tymon goes missing for the rest of the season, to name just one example. Now then is not the time to go through another period of integrating players, whether from academy or the market. At this point with 18 games left, he should know exactly who his key central defenders are, for instance, not deliberate between six different options, and obviously that applies to other sections as well. But he will probably feel compelled to try out those six new options.
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Feb 1, 2022 13:29:05 GMT
You obviously can't see that we are making progress. Have you forgotten how bad the football was in the second half of last season? It's been mostly much better this season even without Souttar and Powell. Such as when? It's been pretty dire in the last couple of months, with the odd decent game in between.
|
|
|
Post by wakeypotter on Feb 1, 2022 13:30:37 GMT
It’s a bit of a mess imo. Why is Forrester still at the club? Why is Coates still at the club? Why is Jones still at the club? They all need to be out on loan or being used here. And being used here seems a million miles away from the equation. We have made the squad more unbalanced and haven’t signed players in positions we needed. Those being a LCB, LB or a RB. Exactly what me and my son said this morning I don’t know as much as you about the youth players but with them staying you would hope they are going to be used in the positions we need otherwise why have we not bought in a right back or left back these are by far our weakest link.
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Feb 1, 2022 13:32:22 GMT
Except he hasn't played them. Simple fact. To be pedantic: he did play Taylor and Forrester, when he was short of central defenders last season. Then they never played for Stoke eagin, and with four new central defenders coming in this season, I'm not holding my breath that they will. He's played some like Norton and DWP from our u23s, but I gather that's not who you have in mind, as they've never been with the academy. Again - you know what I mean and you're being pedantic. He's bring through young players and reducing the age of the squad. Lets leave it at that... I am being "pedantic" because it's idiotic that some people don't know the difference between an under-23s team and the academy. You're not the only one that that uses those terms as if they were identical, which they are not.
|
|
|
Post by theonlooker on Feb 1, 2022 13:34:07 GMT
Yesterday got me thinking a lot about the process we currently run, the troubles we have had and continue to have balancing FFP with huge contracts, and the short term nature of a lot of our transfer business. Our current squad is this: Bursik Bonham Fielding - Short Term Deal
Edwards (?) Smith - Out of contract Duhaney
Jagielka - Out of contract Moore - Loan return Wilmot Chester - Out of contract Harwood-Bellis - Loan return Forrester Taylor
Souttar - injury return
Tymon Fox
Allen - Out of contract Clucas Baker Thompson - Out of contract Vrancic - Out of contract Powell - Contract option? Sawyers - Loan return Oakley-Booth Doughty
Fletcher - Out of contract Maja - Loan return or option? Campbell Brown JPB - Loan return Wright Phillips Sima - Loan return
Next season before a ball is kicked it could well be this: Bursik Bonham
Edwards (?) Duhaney
Wilmot Forrester
Taylor Souttar - injury return
Tymon Fox
Clucas Baker Powell - Contract option? Oakley-Booth
Maja - Loan return or option? Campbell Brown Wright Phillips Instantly what jumps out is the sheer amount of work we need to get a competitive first team, never mind a promotion winning team or squad. We could start off with this side: Bursik Duhaney Wilmot Forrester (Souttar) Tymon/Fox Clucas Baker Campbell Powell/DWP Doughty
Maja/Brown I make that up to 5/6 players to change that starting line up into a very good Championship side. An extra centre half at least, a good right back, question marks over Tymon and Fox for me at left back, a good central midfielder and a wide man or two. To boost the squad we are probably looking at another 3-4 players - an extra target man type, another keeper (?), a different option in midfield and possibly better cover at full back. That isn't half a lot of work to be done with a process that has so far been lukewarm at best, and downright diabolical in certain areas. Yesterday we dropped lucky in Forest having an injury up front and panicking to scramble for Surridge - else he would have been out on a 'development' loan at Cardiff and we would 'possibly' have been left struggling to get our money back. Where do we stand with FFP, the reduction in wages from the players that will be leaving, the reduction in our income and how much of that income we will have to spread around? If we sign Maja, you would expect the Surridge fee to roughly cover that wouldn't you? The question I have overall is though, as the title suggests, just where are we heading as a club? The manager has been here now for over 2 years and it's often said a manager needs three years to get his squad right. Looking at what we'll be left with in the summer, because of our short term transfer structure, it seems like he will need another 3 years on top of where we are now to get it right. We've often been told that the manager can't be expected to achieve anything due to FFP, injuries and the 'mess' he is sorting out.
Is he creating a mess of a different type that again, is going to take longer to sort out than we first feared? How much longer are we going to be a club in transition, a club sorting things out?
I think the picture you've painted is a real positive one. Finally we are shorn of the vast majority of deadwood, rid of those leaches on huge wages where they barely justify them and we have a real opportunity to put in place a team that O'Neill trusts. Arguably, v Huddersfield last Friday, he fielded his own 11 for the first time in his 2 and a half years in the job. He has had to make wholesale changes whilst hamstrung by the errors of previous managers and financial fair play. At last we will have a clan slate to really rebuild the club back to where it needs to be. I'm not actually sure myself Dave to be honest. I look at it and can see it from a positive angle and a negative angle, with some very large question marks over our recruitment and whether it can be improved, assuming it needs to be? Hence the thread in the hope it would generate some good debate.
On one hand, the squad in the summer could be almost as bare as the situation Boskamp inherited, which I always think is a positive when you are rebuilding. Clean slate - crack on. On the other hand I see what we've done in the market and without the assumption that we can suddenly start spending like Ken Dodd on ecstacy when we are rid of Allen and the like, then I worry about our success rate of our long term and short term signings in our current budget bracket?
My worry would be the fact we've spread the Collins money around quite thinly, something we will probably need to do again and again going forwards and I struggle to see what we are going to generate from the players we've brought in with it? Surridge has already gone for no profit (dead money), Wilmot has slotted in and looks solid, not spectacular and Brown (signed earlier) looks to be progressing slowly and steadily. Doughty we seemingly have given up on a la Surridge and it would have been interesting to see if we would have sold him outright had another club come in like they did for Surridge?
Not every signing is going to be a coconut - I get that. I just fear we're going to run out of assets to sell as we burn our way through 2 out of 3 mistakes and experienced plodders and loans each time we sell someone. I get the argument that he has been really restricted so far, because of the wage and FFP situation but I can't get my head around that changing too much to open up the market for us more? In terms of loans, we're pretty much fishing in the top pond already with players from Man City and Villa youth teams, two of the best around.
Maybe the negative side of me is jumping the gun a bit too early and maybe next summer will see more permanent arrivals, with a better hit rate and less reliance on loans and cheap, short term freebies?
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Feb 1, 2022 13:35:14 GMT
It’s a bit of a mess imo. Why is Forrester still at the club? Why is Coates still at the club? Why is Jones still at the club? They all need to be out on loan or being used here. And being used here seems a million miles away from the equation. We have made the squad more unbalanced and haven’t signed players in positions we needed. Those being a LCB, LB or a RB. Exactly what me and my son said this morning I don’t know as much as you about the youth players but with them staying you would hope they are going to be used in the positions we need otherwise why have we not bought in a right back or left back these are by far our weakest link. Over the manager's dead body, although at least Jones might have his hopes up a little higher.
|
|
|
Post by independent on Feb 1, 2022 13:37:20 GMT
Probably because no one wants to take them on loan. The ones who have been loaned out have all flopped. As regards LF the papers have reported that he tried for a LF but the premiership player turned him down.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Feb 1, 2022 13:43:57 GMT
I don't understand the concern with loans.
a) they are the norm in the Championship for virtually every team unless they have loads of money to spend (which isn't always a good idea!)
b) I don't see that much difference between loans and transfers apart from you don't have the long term commitment. Why would you need to sign someone for 3-4 years if you can get someone to do a job for 6 months who could be more effective for the role? Its's not like players always improve over 3-4 years anyway and you might get stuck with them.
If you want to buy a player in the Championship the market is going to be limited by a number of factors which may not apply to loans.
The amount of loans in the Championship is staggering but it's probably because it's the only way a lot of clubs can function and the reality is that the Championship will increasingly become a place that nurtures young talent for Prem teams.
It's also the case that whether it is a loan or a transfer a manager may not always be able to fill the role he wants to fill position wise, and will opt not to go for an option that may not improve the situation at cost.
I really wish Rowett would have gone for the loan option, the story could have been very different!!!
|
|
|
Post by independent on Feb 1, 2022 13:56:18 GMT
Until Premier Clubs are prevented from having 20/30 players out on loan and forced to release them instead, this will continue. No club should be allowed have more than 25 signed professionals not counting under 21's. Then instead of hoarding players and charging EFL clubs to rent them these players would be available for signing by other clubs. How many signed players do Man.City and Chelsea have on their books.
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Feb 1, 2022 14:18:57 GMT
Until Premier Clubs are prevented from having 20/30 players out on loan and forced to release them instead, this will continue. No club should be allowed have more than 25 signed professionals not counting under 21's. Then instead of hoarding players and charging EFL clubs to rent them these players would be available for signing by other clubs. How many signed players do Man.City and Chelsea have on their books. I think rules regarding that are coming into force next season.
|
|
|
Post by independent on Feb 1, 2022 14:28:40 GMT
I hope so. Most EFL clubs are struggling financially and can't afford to give money to Premier clubs. In the past Premier clubs would redistribute money to the lower tier clubs by buying their players. Nowadays we constantly read of big clubs signing up kids of 14,15,16.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Feb 1, 2022 14:50:00 GMT
I think the picture you've painted is a real positive one. Finally we are shorn of the vast majority of deadwood, rid of those leaches on huge wages where they barely justify them and we have a real opportunity to put in place a team that O'Neill trusts. Arguably, v Huddersfield last Friday, he fielded his own 11 for the first time in his 2 and a half years in the job. He has had to make wholesale changes whilst hamstrung by the errors of previous managers and financial fair play. At last we will have a clan slate to really rebuild the club back to where it needs to be. I'm not actually sure myself Dave to be honest. I look at it and can see it from a positive angle and a negative angle, with some very large question marks over our recruitment and whether it can be improved, assuming it needs to be? Hence the thread in the hope it would generate some good debate.
On one hand, the squad in the summer could be almost as bare as the situation Boskamp inherited, which I always think is a positive when you are rebuilding. Clean slate - crack on. On the other hand I see what we've done in the market and without the assumption that we can suddenly start spending like Ken Dodd on ecstacy when we are rid of Allen and the like, then I worry about our success rate of our long term and short term signings in our current budget bracket?
My worry would be the fact we've spread the Collins money around quite thinly, something we will probably need to do again and again going forwards and I struggle to see what we are going to generate from the players we've brought in with it? Surridge has already gone for no profit (dead money), Wilmot has slotted in and looks solid, not spectacular and Brown (signed earlier) looks to be progressing slowly and steadily. Doughty we seemingly have given up on a la Surridge and it would have been interesting to see if we would have sold him outright had another club come in like they did for Surridge? Not every signing is going to be a coconut - I get that. I just fear we're going to run out of assets to sell as we burn our way through 2 out of 3 mistakes and experienced plodders and loans each time we sell someone. I get the argument that he has been really restricted so far, because of the wage and FFP situation but I can't get my head around that changing too much to open up the market for us more? In terms of loans, we're pretty much fishing in the top pond already with players from Man City and Villa youth teams, two of the best around.
Maybe the negative side of me is jumping the gun a bit too early and maybe next summer will see more permanent arrivals, with a better hit rate and less reliance on loans and cheap, short term freebies?
I'd criticise our use of the loan system more than I'd criticise our permanent transfer policy. Thompson cost us pittance, Brown (depends who you believe in terms of what his fee actually was), Doughty cost us what, 500k and Surrige we've got our money back in full so whilst he may have turned out to be a dud, we've cleared him out quickly whilst he's still got a re-sale value. Wilmot is a very good signing who has proven very versatile in the process. Jagielka looks like being a terrific signing as does Baker and in terms of running out of gems to sell, we've got an exceptionally young potential spine to sell yet, with Wright-Phillips coming through as well. Bursik, Souttar, Campbell and Wright Phillips all have potential sale value as does Baker if the early signs are anything to go by. I think we are looking good. The slate is almost clean and we can really start to rebuild the club in a new image, hopefully with younger, hungrier, fitter, faster and more powerful players allied to some actual ability with a football at their feet.
|
|
|
Post by independent on Feb 1, 2022 15:11:51 GMT
I think the picture you've painted is a real positive one. Finally we are shorn of the vast majority of deadwood, rid of those leaches on huge wages where they barely justify them and we have a real opportunity to put in place a team that O'Neill trusts. Arguably, v Huddersfield last Friday, he fielded his own 11 for the first time in his 2 and a half years in the job. He has had to make wholesale changes whilst hamstrung by the errors of previous managers and financial fair play. At last we will have a clan slate to really rebuild the club back to where it needs to be. I'm not actually sure myself Dave to be honest. I look at it and can see it from a positive angle and a negative angle, with some very large question marks over our recruitment and whether it can be improved, assuming it needs to be? Hence the thread in the hope it would generate some good debate.
On one hand, the squad in the summer could be almost as bare as the situation Boskamp inherited, which I always think is a positive when you are rebuilding. Clean slate - crack on. On the other hand I see what we've done in the market and without the assumption that we can suddenly start spending like Ken Dodd on ecstacy when we are rid of Allen and the like, then I worry about our success rate of our long term and short term signings in our current budget bracket?
My worry would be the fact we've spread the Collins money around quite thinly, something we will probably need to do again and again going forwards and I struggle to see what we are going to generate from the players we've brought in with it? Surridge has already gone for no profit (dead money), Wilmot has slotted in and looks solid, not spectacular and Brown (signed earlier) looks to be progressing slowly and steadily. Doughty we seemingly have given up on a la Surridge and it would have been interesting to see if we would have sold him outright had another club come in like they did for Surridge?
Not every signing is going to be a coconut - I get that. I just fear we're going to run out of assets to sell as we burn our way through 2 out of 3 mistakes and experienced plodders and loans each time we sell someone. I get the argument that he has been really restricted so far, because of the wage and FFP situation but I can't get my head around that changing too much to open up the market for us more? In terms of loans, we're pretty much fishing in the top pond already with players from Man City and Villa youth teams, two of the best around.
Maybe the negative side of me is jumping the gun a bit too early and maybe next summer will see more permanent arrivals, with a better hit rate and less reliance on loans and cheap, short term freebies?
I think you are not allowing for the fact that we have reduced our overblown wage bill and are now sustainable, even tho' parachute payments are long gone. I think that we can now move forward without having to sacrifice our best players to pay off our past mistakes and get them off the payroll. Judging by the way MON has got us out of the shit while remaining within FFP I can't see him gambling with the club's future. He is at least a year ahead of where I expected him to be. It has taken Tony Mowbrey 5 years to get Blackburn to where they are. And he started in a better position than MON. I just wish people would stop being so high when we play a few good games and so despairing when we play badly. I don't see anyone here mentioning Forest's defeat on Sunday and deciding that Cooper is not the man to take Stoke forward. Had Forest won I think they would have been fourth.
|
|
|
Post by femark on Feb 1, 2022 15:54:45 GMT
Again - you know what I mean and you're being pedantic. He's bring through young players and reducing the age of the squad. Lets leave it at that... I am being "pedantic" because it's idiotic that some people don't know the difference between an under-23s team and the academy. You're not the only one that that uses those terms as if they were identical, which they are not. For the sake of the discussion it doesn't particularly matter, so get your knickers out of a twist and crawl back under whatever rock you came from. You're not exactly adding anything meaningful to the discussion if that's your only input.
|
|
|
Post by heworksardtho on Feb 1, 2022 16:19:41 GMT
10-15th this season but heart says top 6 , the first 4 months of next season is massive for him
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Feb 1, 2022 17:36:20 GMT
I am being "pedantic" because it's idiotic that some people don't know the difference between an under-23s team and the academy. You're not the only one that that uses those terms as if they were identical, which they are not. For the sake of the discussion it doesn't particularly matter, so get your knickers out of a twist and crawl back under whatever rock you came from. You're not exactly adding anything meaningful to the discussion if that's your only input. And you are adding...what exactly? No don't bother.
|
|