|
Post by lordb on Aug 29, 2022 17:29:06 GMT
I'm not sure about Neill having an aversion to younger players. Almost the last thing he did at Sunderland was bull up the arrival of a kid from Costa Rica. He will, I imagine want someone like Ben Pearson to do some dirty midfield work. Maybe Laurent or Kilkenny can be worked on, or maybe he'll try for Pearson. The kid from Costa Rica was a 'club signing', Neil not enamoured by it apparently
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 29, 2022 17:46:27 GMT
Post by maine on Aug 29, 2022 17:46:27 GMT
Lordb, I took this from the Guardian.
'Bennette’s new manager could scarcely have been more effusive in his praise of a player who became the youngest footballer to represent Costa Rica when he came on as a substitute against El Salvador a year ago, but he preached caution. “We need to be patient and allow him time to acclimatise to a new country and learn the language,” said Alex Neil. “He is certainly one for the future.”
You may be right. I guess we'' see.
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 29, 2022 19:07:18 GMT
via mobile
Post by lordb on Aug 29, 2022 19:07:18 GMT
Lordb, I took this from the Guardian. 'Bennette’s new manager could scarcely have been more effusive in his praise of a player who became the youngest footballer to represent Costa Rica when he came on as a substitute against El Salvador a year ago, but he preached caution. “We need to be patient and allow him time to acclimatise to a new country and learn the language,” said Alex Neil. “He is certainly one for the future.” You may be right. I guess we'' see. Saw those too Also saw subsequent reports that he wasn't happy with it, thats probably where his comments re signing players in their late 20's came from
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 29, 2022 20:21:54 GMT
via mobile
march4 likes this
Post by bertieb on Aug 29, 2022 20:21:54 GMT
Lordb, I took this from the Guardian. 'Bennette’s new manager could scarcely have been more effusive in his praise of a player who became the youngest footballer to represent Costa Rica when he came on as a substitute against El Salvador a year ago, but he preached caution. “We need to be patient and allow him time to acclimatise to a new country and learn the language,” said Alex Neil. “He is certainly one for the future.” You may be right. I guess we'' see. Saw those too Also saw subsequent reports that he wasn't happy with it, thats probably where his comments re signing players in their late 20's came from Reading between the lines, he may be saying "he isn't playing for me in the immediate future" sounded very Tony pulis like to me
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 29, 2022 21:27:08 GMT
via mobile
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 29, 2022 21:27:08 GMT
I'm not sure about Neill having an aversion to younger players. Almost the last thing he did at Sunderland was bull up the arrival of a kid from Costa Rica. He will, I imagine want someone like Ben Pearson to do some dirty midfield work. Maybe Laurent or Kilkenny can be worked on, or maybe he'll try for Pearson. The kid from Costa Rica was a 'club signing', Neil not enamoured by it apparently Sunderland appear to operate along the same lines as Watford - the backroom boys decide on recruitment strategy and the manager is really the head coach. I suspect a big reason he came to Stoke is he'll have more say in recruitment and that will mean bringing in players who will get the results straight away rather than when they have finally started to realize their potential. Neil hasn't the time nor the budget to do much this season but if he survives he'll get a decent budget next summer now that the wage bill has been sorted whereas at Sunderland his hands would be tied by their operating model.
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 30, 2022 8:31:24 GMT
via mobile
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 30, 2022 8:31:24 GMT
This article rokerreport.sbnation.com/2022/8/30/23326524/sunderland-and-alex-neil-was-it-all-just-a-marriage-of-convenience appears to support the view that a big reason for Neil's departure was his lack of control over transfer policy as a result of the way Sunderland are structured. Sunderland seem to have adopted the recruitment policy we adopted under O'Neill - buy young, develop and sell on. Looks like we've ditched that approach - which explains John Coates statement about a change of direction when O'Neill was sacked. Also seems to confirm we are happy to employ an old school manager rather a DOF and Head Coach.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 30, 2022 8:32:25 GMT
This article rokerreport.sbnation.com/2022/8/30/23326524/sunderland-and-alex-neil-was-it-all-just-a-marriage-of-convenience appears to support the view that a big reason for Neil's departure was his lack of control over transfer policy as a result of the way Sunderland are structured. Sunderland seem to have adopted the recruitment policy we adopted under O'Neill - buy young, develop and sell on. Looks like we've ditched that approach - which explains John Coates statement about a change of direction when O'Neill was sacked. Also seems to confirm we are happy to employ an old school manager rather a DOF and Head Coach. I think it's too early to say whether we've ditched that approach isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Aug 30, 2022 8:34:41 GMT
This article rokerreport.sbnation.com/2022/8/30/23326524/sunderland-and-alex-neil-was-it-all-just-a-marriage-of-convenience appears to support the view that a big reason for Neil's departure was his lack of control over transfer policy as a result of the way Sunderland are structured. Sunderland seem to have adopted the recruitment policy we adopted under O'Neill - buy young, develop and sell on. Looks like we've ditched that approach - which explains John Coates statement about a change of direction when O'Neill was sacked. Also seems to confirm we are happy to employ an old school manager rather a DOF and Head Coach. I think it's too early to say whether we've ditched that approach isn't it? It’s promotion or bust if we have they can’t expect much patience.
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 30, 2022 10:29:01 GMT
via mobile
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 30, 2022 10:29:01 GMT
This article rokerreport.sbnation.com/2022/8/30/23326524/sunderland-and-alex-neil-was-it-all-just-a-marriage-of-convenience appears to support the view that a big reason for Neil's departure was his lack of control over transfer policy as a result of the way Sunderland are structured. Sunderland seem to have adopted the recruitment policy we adopted under O'Neill - buy young, develop and sell on. Looks like we've ditched that approach - which explains John Coates statement about a change of direction when O'Neill was sacked. Also seems to confirm we are happy to employ an old school manager rather a DOF and Head Coach. I think it's too early to say whether we've ditched that approach isn't it? It's too early to say in terms of any actual evidence but the circumstantial evidence is pretty compelling: 1 A defining characteristic of the transfer policy under O'Neil was to target young players and John Coates said the club are looking at a change of direction - which may mean just a change of manager but reads like something deeper 2 Neil has stated in the past the he rates experience over youth 3 There are reports that Neil wasn't happy with his lack of control over transfers at Sunderland where the strategy is to buy and develop young players 4 Neil left Sunderland in part because he sees himself as a manager rather than a Head Coach. He isn't going to be happy if the club try to take responsibility for transfer policy out of his hands. On the other hand there is no evidence to support the view that Neil intends to continue the strategy of playing youngsters. The next few team sheets and any late arrivals might provide clues to where we are heading but if there was a book running on this I know where my money would go.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 30, 2022 10:52:30 GMT
I think it's too early to say whether we've ditched that approach isn't it? It's too early to say in terms of any actual evidence but the circumstantial evidence is pretty compelling: 1 A defining characteristic of the transfer policy under O'Neil was to target young players and John Coates said the club are looking at a change of direction - which may mean just a change of manager but reads like something deeper 2 Neil has stated in the past the he rates experience over youth 3 There are reports that Neil wasn't happy with his lack of control over transfers at Sunderland where the strategy is to buy and develop young players 4 Neil left Sunderland in part because he sees himself as a manager rather than a Head Coach. He isn't going to be happy if the club try to take responsibility for transfer policy out of his hands. On the other hand there is no evidence to support the view that Neil intends to continue the strategy of playing youngsters. The next few team sheets and any late arrivals might provide clues to where we are heading but if there was a book running on this I know where my money would go. Neil may well prefer experience over youth to a degree but it hasn't stopped him being prepared to play youth at Sunderland, where three members of the team that started the play-off final were 23 or under and that doesn't include Jack Clarke, who played a big role there on his watch. My understanding of his issues with Sunderland's strategy was that they were exclusively targeting youth players rather than signing a mixture of youth and experience. It's a pretty big leap at this point to assume we're abandoning our approach altogether.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Aug 30, 2022 10:53:39 GMT
This article rokerreport.sbnation.com/2022/8/30/23326524/sunderland-and-alex-neil-was-it-all-just-a-marriage-of-convenience appears to support the view that a big reason for Neil's departure was his lack of control over transfer policy as a result of the way Sunderland are structured. Sunderland seem to have adopted the recruitment policy we adopted under O'Neill - buy young, develop and sell on. Looks like we've ditched that approach - which explains John Coates statement about a change of direction when O'Neill was sacked. Also seems to confirm we are happy to employ an old school manager rather a DOF and Head Coach. Hooray. A club with sense. And even better, it’s our club.
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 30, 2022 12:20:38 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2022 12:20:38 GMT
Most of the squad is young, many of them recently signed. Whether Neil wants to play young players or not, he’ll have to for the next window or two.
Who knows what will happen with Tezgel. We could really do with him starting when we enter the FA cup, as a sign of faith. Until then, points on the board matter most.
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 30, 2022 12:30:20 GMT
Post by owdestokie2 on Aug 30, 2022 12:30:20 GMT
I don’t want to see a situation where youth development is seen as the primary function. You almost never get the benefit of the end product at clubs where this is the case. We need an environment where if you are good enough you get your chance but nothing more or less than that. A poor man’s version of Chelsea or Man City I suppose rather than a full on Crewe Alexandra. I don't mind being a development club because my prime motive is enjoyment of the football over success I don't think being a struggling premier league team is much fun. What I would say is if that ever were to become the model the club would have to be completely open and honest about it. I've certainly had my suspiscions about it over the past 4/5 years but never been able to square it with the spaffing of all that money post relegation. Other than two relatively short time spans over out tenure in the EPL when were we “a struggling Premier League Team”?
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 30, 2022 12:38:59 GMT
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Aug 30, 2022 12:38:59 GMT
I don't mind being a development club because my prime motive is enjoyment of the football over success I don't think being a struggling premier league team is much fun. What I would say is if that ever were to become the model the club would have to be completely open and honest about it. I've certainly had my suspiscions about it over the past 4/5 years but never been able to square it with the spaffing of all that money post relegation. Other than two relatively short time spans over out tenure in the EPL when were we “a struggling Premier League Team”? What's the matter do the words offend you? For about half our Premier League tenure we were a team of little ambition beyond not getting relegated, you might have loved it I thought it was mostly shite.
|
|
|
Post by Vadiation_Ribe on Aug 30, 2022 12:54:42 GMT
For Stoke vs Sunderland, the average age of the starting lineups was near identical at 25. But Jagielka adds a year to our average age compared to a 30 year old (say the Batth equivalent at Sunderland).
O'Neill (perhaps by design of the board too?) went too far towards youth.
Jacob Brown, at 24, was one of the most experienced players in the lineup when taking starts across all leagues into account, and many of our starters hadn't had regular games at League One, never mind the Championship. More often than not, I don't think that's going to be a successful team.
You can win something with kids, but only if the experience is out there on the pitch to guide them, especially during bad spells of a game.
According to TransferMarkt, Brown and Jagielka have 134 Championship games each. No one else in that starting lineup was anywhere near that level of experience, and Jagielka is the only player to have had regular experience at a higher level.
I see our average age staying relatively low over the next couple of seasons, but perhaps more like the 25-27 age range than the 24 it would've been vs Sunderland if Jagielka hadn't started.
We have a good youthful squad and Neil needs a couple of experienced new signings to help guide it. Powell and perhaps Laurent will help that too.
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 30, 2022 14:55:24 GMT
via mobile
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 30, 2022 14:55:24 GMT
It's too early to say in terms of any actual evidence but the circumstantial evidence is pretty compelling: 1 A defining characteristic of the transfer policy under O'Neil was to target young players and John Coates said the club are looking at a change of direction - which may mean just a change of manager but reads like something deeper 2 Neil has stated in the past the he rates experience over youth 3 There are reports that Neil wasn't happy with his lack of control over transfers at Sunderland where the strategy is to buy and develop young players 4 Neil left Sunderland in part because he sees himself as a manager rather than a Head Coach. He isn't going to be happy if the club try to take responsibility for transfer policy out of his hands. On the other hand there is no evidence to support the view that Neil intends to continue the strategy of playing youngsters. The next few team sheets and any late arrivals might provide clues to where we are heading but if there was a book running on this I know where my money would go. Neil may well prefer experience over youth to a degree but it hasn't stopped him being prepared to play youth at Sunderland, where three members of the team that started the play-off final were 23 or under and that doesn't include Jack Clarke, who played a big role there on his watch. My understanding of his issues with Sunderland's strategy was that they were exclusively targeting youth players rather than signing a mixture of youth and experience. It's a pretty big leap at this point to assume we're abandoning our approach altogether. I'm not saying he won't play young players (given who we have in the building he will have to) - I'm saying it looks highly likely that he will bring in more experienced players than we have over the last couple of seasons and when push comes to shove he won't play young players in order to develop them. If there is a choice between an experienced player who will win the next game and a young player with the the potential to be a better player down the line Neil will play the experienced player. The only young players who will play are those who are the best available on the day. Bursik is a case in point. Someday he may well end up being a better goalkeeper than Bonham but at the moment he simply isn't as reliable and has only been getting game time based on his potential - his performances haven't merited his position as first choice. Similarly Sparrow and DWP have made match day squads and don't look anywhere near ready for the Championship. The likes of Delap may well turn out to be a first team regular - but only because they are good enough in the here and now. I may well be wrong but the match day squads over the next few games should give an indication of how much giving young players a chance to develop figures in Neil's thinking. I just don't believe it will have as high a priority as it had under O'Neill.
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 30, 2022 15:06:05 GMT
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 30, 2022 15:06:05 GMT
Neil may well prefer experience over youth to a degree but it hasn't stopped him being prepared to play youth at Sunderland, where three members of the team that started the play-off final were 23 or under and that doesn't include Jack Clarke, who played a big role there on his watch. My understanding of his issues with Sunderland's strategy was that they were exclusively targeting youth players rather than signing a mixture of youth and experience. It's a pretty big leap at this point to assume we're abandoning our approach altogether. I'm not saying he won't play young players (given who we have in the building he will have to) - I'm saying it looks highly likely that he will bring in more experienced players than we have over the last couple of seasons and when push comes to shove he won't play young players in order to develop them. If there is a choice between an experienced player who will win the next game and a young player with the the potential to be a better player down the line Neil will play the experienced player. The only young players who will play are those who are the best available on the day. Bursik is a case in point. Someday he may well end up being a better goalkeeper than Bonham but at the moment he simply isn't as reliable and has only been getting game time based on his potential - his performances haven't merited his position as first choice. Similarly Sparrow and DWP have made match day squads and don't look anywhere near ready for the Championship. The likes of Delap may well turn out to be a first team regular - but only because they are good enough in the here and now. I may well be wrong but the match day squads over the next few games should give an indication of how much giving young players a chance to develop figures in Neil's thinking. I just don't believe it will have as high a priority as it had under O'Neill. I think that's probably true but I wouldn't say that was 'abandoning the model'? He brought in plenty of players aged 24 and under at Norwich and Preston. Many of them had a fair amount more first team experience than, say, Bursik or DWP absolutely, but they weren't the finished article in many cases either and still required some level of developing. I daresay it will be less of a priority than it was under MON but I don't think it'll be abandoned altogether - if young players are pushing for a place and can offer something, I'd be surprised if they didn't get their chance. That to me makes more sense than the use of Sparrow this season or the bloody-minded persistence with Bursik.
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Aug 30, 2022 15:15:22 GMT
For Stoke vs Sunderland, the average age of the starting lineups was near identical at 25. But Jagielka adds almost 10 years to our average age compared to a 30 year old (say the Batth equivalent at Sunderland). O'Neill (perhaps by design of the board too?) went too far towards youth. Jacob Brown, at 24, was one of the most experienced players in the lineup when taking starts across all leagues into account, and many of our starters hadn't had regular games at League One, never mind the Championship. More often than not, I don't think that's going to be a successful team. You can win something with kids, but only if the experience is out there on the pitch to guide them, especially during bad spells of a game. According to TransferMarkt, Brown and Jagielka have 134 Championship games each. No one else in that starting lineup was anywhere near that level of experience, and Jagielka is the only player to have had regular experience at a higher level. I see our average age staying relatively low over the next couple of seasons, but perhaps more like the 25-27 age range than the 24 it would've been vs Sunderland if Jagielka hadn't started. We have a good youthful squad and Neil needs a couple of experienced new signings to help guide it. Powell and perhaps Laurent will help that too. PJ adds 10 years to the average age of the squad 🧐
|
|
|
Post by Vadiation_Ribe on Aug 30, 2022 15:20:56 GMT
For Stoke vs Sunderland, the average age of the starting lineups was near identical at 25. But Jagielka adds almost 10 years to our average age compared to a 30 year old (say the Batth equivalent at Sunderland). O'Neill (perhaps by design of the board too?) went too far towards youth. Jacob Brown, at 24, was one of the most experienced players in the lineup when taking starts across all leagues into account, and many of our starters hadn't had regular games at League One, never mind the Championship. More often than not, I don't think that's going to be a successful team. You can win something with kids, but only if the experience is out there on the pitch to guide them, especially during bad spells of a game. According to TransferMarkt, Brown and Jagielka have 134 Championship games each. No one else in that starting lineup was anywhere near that level of experience, and Jagielka is the only player to have had regular experience at a higher level. I see our average age staying relatively low over the next couple of seasons, but perhaps more like the 25-27 age range than the 24 it would've been vs Sunderland if Jagielka hadn't started. We have a good youthful squad and Neil needs a couple of experienced new signings to help guide it. Powell and perhaps Laurent will help that too. PJ adds 10 years to the average age of the squad 🧐 He really is that old! Good spot, thanks.
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 30, 2022 16:13:49 GMT
via mobile
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 30, 2022 16:13:49 GMT
I'm not saying he won't play young players (given who we have in the building he will have to) - I'm saying it looks highly likely that he will bring in more experienced players than we have over the last couple of seasons and when push comes to shove he won't play young players in order to develop them. If there is a choice between an experienced player who will win the next game and a young player with the the potential to be a better player down the line Neil will play the experienced player. The only young players who will play are those who are the best available on the day. Bursik is a case in point. Someday he may well end up being a better goalkeeper than Bonham but at the moment he simply isn't as reliable and has only been getting game time based on his potential - his performances haven't merited his position as first choice. Similarly Sparrow and DWP have made match day squads and don't look anywhere near ready for the Championship. The likes of Delap may well turn out to be a first team regular - but only because they are good enough in the here and now. I may well be wrong but the match day squads over the next few games should give an indication of how much giving young players a chance to develop figures in Neil's thinking. I just don't believe it will have as high a priority as it had under O'Neill. I think that's probably true but I wouldn't say that was 'abandoning the model'? He brought in plenty of players aged 24 and under at Norwich and Preston. Many of them had a fair amount more first team experience than, say, Bursik or DWP absolutely, but they weren't the finished article in many cases either and still required some level of developing. I daresay it will be less of a priority than it was under MON but I don't think it'll be abandoned altogether - if young players are pushing for a place and can offer something, I'd be surprised if they didn't get their chance. That to me makes more sense than the use of Sparrow this season or the bloody-minded persistence with Bursik. The model we had under O'Neill was to buy in and bring through young players with a view to making a profit or realising their potential in a few years time - that's why the likes of Bursik, Sparrow and DWP got game time. I'm sure we will carry on bringing in young players and play them but I genuinely don't think young players will get game time to help realise their potential (which was the model) but only because they are the best players we have and able to get hold of. I don't think the new model places any emphasis on playing youngsters for gains down the line - the new model involves placing the emphasis on points in the here and now and that is a definite change of approach. I'm only saying what I think will happen - not what should happen. My personal take is that the choice of strategy is down to the club - I may have an opinion but my opinion is worthless on the matter. What actually counts is whether the club and the manager delivers on their strategy. Under O'Neill it was to be patient and develop a team in the medium long term. The club and the fans have abandoned the patient approach and appointed a manager whose sole aim is promotion - which is fine by me providing he succeeds. If we don't go up in the next two season the change of approach will be a failure and we will be back to where we were with a group of relatively older, under achieving players on higher wages and looking to throw the dice again - which to be fair is what the majority of fans seem to want. The thing you can't have is a manager who prioritises winning in the short term AND is also expected to use the first team to bring young players on - that simply isn't going to happen because you can't do both. Neil knows this full well and part of the reason he left Sunderland is because their model is to develop young players and he wants to get promotion on his CV sooner rather than later - you can have one or the other, not both. Or at least Neil is honest enough to acknowledge he can't do both and push comes to shove he sees his job as winning things, not develop youngsters.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 30, 2022 16:42:40 GMT
I think that's probably true but I wouldn't say that was 'abandoning the model'? He brought in plenty of players aged 24 and under at Norwich and Preston. Many of them had a fair amount more first team experience than, say, Bursik or DWP absolutely, but they weren't the finished article in many cases either and still required some level of developing. I daresay it will be less of a priority than it was under MON but I don't think it'll be abandoned altogether - if young players are pushing for a place and can offer something, I'd be surprised if they didn't get their chance. That to me makes more sense than the use of Sparrow this season or the bloody-minded persistence with Bursik. The model we had under O'Neill was to buy in and bring through young players with a view to making a profit or realising their potential in a few years time - that's why the likes of Bursik, Sparrow and DWP got game time. I'm sure we will carry on bringing in young players and play them but I genuinely don't think young players will get game time to help realise their potential (which was the model) but only because they are the best players we have and able to get hold of. I don't think the new model places any emphasis on playing youngsters for gains down the line - the new model involves placing the emphasis on points in the here and now and that is a definite change of approach. I'm only saying what I think will happen - not what should happen. My personal take is that the choice of strategy is down to the club - I may have an opinion but my opinion is worthless on the matter. What actually counts is whether the club and the manager delivers on their strategy. Under O'Neill it was to be patient and develop a team in the medium long term. The club and the fans have abandoned the patient approach and appointed a manager whose sole aim is promotion - which is fine by me providing he succeeds. If we don't go up in the next two season the change of approach will be a failure and we will be back to where we were with a group of relatively older, under achieving players on higher wages and looking to throw the dice again - which to be fair is what the majority of fans seem to want. The thing you can't have is a manager who prioritises winning in the short term AND is also expected to use the first team to bring young players on - that simply isn't going to happen because you can't do both. Neil knows this full well and part of the reason he left Sunderland is because their model is to develop young players and he wants to get promotion on his CV sooner rather than later - you can have one or the other, not both. Or at least Neil is honest enough to acknowledge he can't do both and push comes to shove he sees his job as winning things, not develop youngsters. The club and the fans didn’t ‘abandon the patient approach’ they abandoned a manager who’d lost the plot as far as the on-field stuff was concerned. He’d lost it in terms of the approach, in terms of game management, in terms of balance of the side. The club and the fans decided the manager had to go because there was no longer a reason to trust that we were heading in the right direction on the pitch. You’re characterising it as petulant impatience which really isn’t fair. I also don’t think it’s entirely true to say MON was playing players who weren’t ready in the name of gains down the line. Bursik had us some good games in League 1 and at this level and was England u21 coach - he needed games, he’s just suffered a dip in form. DWP had impressed in the u23s and thus deserved his chance. It’s to MON’s credit that he gave it to him (as he did players like Campbell before him) but it didn’t come prematurely. Sparrow played because he’d mishandled the RWB situation. I think Neil will as you say prioritise players who can win him promotion but the pathways for young players won’t close. You don’t start a 22- year-old goalkeeper and 20-year-old full back in a Wembley final if you’re not interested in youth development.
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 30, 2022 16:51:53 GMT
Post by leicspotter on Aug 30, 2022 16:51:53 GMT
This idea that MON only signed young players is patently untrue, he did show a level of pragmatism, bringing in the likes of Jags and Flint for example (not the only ones either). I'm sure Neil will be equally pragmatic and select young players on merit in order to turn out the best possible side every week. He won't ditch young players based purely on their age, nor select older players who are out of form.
It's all about balance
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 30, 2022 17:58:31 GMT
Post by stormin on Aug 30, 2022 17:58:31 GMT
Emre Tezel is a young lad who is nowhere near ready for the first team yet and i think is parents will know it how many 17 year olds are playing regularly in english football, not many i think. The point I was making is, MON offered him a quicker route to first team football than the clubs chasing him, that may have changed now that he has gone, and they may think we may as well be at a more successful club if the first team opportunities are about the same. It is too early for Tezel to play first team football, I recall Mark Sale played first team at about age 18/19 and some animal broke his leg and was never the same afterwards, but conversely to MON I think any player at 20 plus should be eligible to play first team. Loaning out almost lost us Souter.
|
|
|
Post by owdestokie2 on Aug 30, 2022 20:30:22 GMT
Other than two relatively short time spans over out tenure in the EPL when were we “a struggling Premier League Team”? What's the matter do the words offend you? For about half our Premier League tenure we were a team of little ambition beyond not getting relegated, you might have loved it I thought it was mostly shite. I don’t take offence. I have differences of opinion. In the world of Disney I’d love to see Stoke win 3,4 or even 5 every game with a swashbuckling approach. In reality I then wake up and all I want to witness is Stoke winning a game of football (sadly that’s what I thought it’s all about, please correct me if I’m wrong) because the more games you win the more successful you are. I enjoyed our EPL experience because I was able to watch up close world class footballers (those you see in World Cups etc on the TV) only 10 minutes from my home. I loved it when we were giving (on occasions) far superior teams filled with international named players a bloody nose, not enjoying a wet and windy night at the Brit…….that was my “entertainment” I loved being in SE Asia when people would come an talk to you about SCFC and certain players…..my team!! I’ll suggest you look up an infamous quote by Alan Durban, understand what he was alluding to and if as years have gone by you can’t accept reality you should consider whether or not it’s worth following SCFC. Finally listen closely to our new managers interview for tomorrows game in which in essence he says the ultimate goal is to win games by whatever means…..
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 30, 2022 20:40:59 GMT
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Aug 30, 2022 20:40:59 GMT
What's the matter do the words offend you? For about half our Premier League tenure we were a team of little ambition beyond not getting relegated, you might have loved it I thought it was mostly shite. I don’t take offence. I have differences of opinion. In the world of Disney I’d love to see Stoke win 3,4 or even 5 every game with a swashbuckling approach. In reality I then wake up and all I want to witness is Stoke winning a game of football (sadly that’s what I thought it’s all about, please correct me if I’m wrong) because the more games you win the more successful you are. I enjoyed our EPL experience because I was able to watch up close world class footballers (those you see in World Cups etc on the TV) only 10 minutes from my home. I loved it when we were giving (on occasions) far superior teams filled with international named players a bloody nose, not enjoying a wet and windy night at the Brit…….that was my “entertainment” I loved being in SE Asia when people would come an talk to you about SCFC and certain players…..my team!! I’ll suggest you look up an infamous quote by Alan Durban, understand what he was alluding to and if as years have gone by you can’t accept reality you should consider whether or not it’s worth following SCFC.
Finally listen closely to our new managers interview for tomorrows game in which in essence he says the ultimate goal is to win games by whatever means….. I don't need to look it up. The man was a cnut, sneering at the people who were paying his wages(the paying customers) Maybe you should consider whether an actual supporter of a club encourages people to consider whether it's worth supporting your club because they disagree with your opinion. Perhaps you'd be happier with 8,000 in the ground that think like you.
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 30, 2022 21:04:51 GMT
Post by owdestokie2 on Aug 30, 2022 21:04:51 GMT
I don’t take offence. I have differences of opinion. In the world of Disney I’d love to see Stoke win 3,4 or even 5 every game with a swashbuckling approach. In reality I then wake up and all I want to witness is Stoke winning a game of football (sadly that’s what I thought it’s all about, please correct me if I’m wrong) because the more games you win the more successful you are. I enjoyed our EPL experience because I was able to watch up close world class footballers (those you see in World Cups etc on the TV) only 10 minutes from my home. I loved it when we were giving (on occasions) far superior teams filled with international named players a bloody nose, not enjoying a wet and windy night at the Brit…….that was my “entertainment” I loved being in SE Asia when people would come an talk to you about SCFC and certain players…..my team!! I’ll suggest you look up an infamous quote by Alan Durban, understand what he was alluding to and if as years have gone by you can’t accept reality you should consider whether or not it’s worth following SCFC.
Finally listen closely to our new managers interview for tomorrows game in which in essence he says the ultimate goal is to win games by whatever means….. I don't need to look it up. The man was a cnut, sneering at the people who were paying his wages(the paying customers) Maybe you should consider whether an actual supporter of a club encourages people to consider whether it's worth supporting your club because they disagree with your opinion. Perhaps you'd be happier with 8,000 in the ground that think like you. “Sneering at people”….he was saying it as it was and remains to this day. It’s about winning, in style if you can, if not win and that equals success Your’e 2nd point……not a clue what you’re talking about. I can remember gates of 8000 or less, that’s 60 years ago. How many attendances were less than 20K even during our darkest days in the EPL? Noted that you didn’t comment upon our EPL years and our opportunity to watch close up World Class Footballers, strange I suppose it doesn’t meet your expectations of entertainment. Think win = success
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 31, 2022 7:47:29 GMT
via mobile
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 31, 2022 7:47:29 GMT
The model we had under O'Neill was to buy in and bring through young players with a view to making a profit or realising their potential in a few years time - that's why the likes of Bursik, Sparrow and DWP got game time. I'm sure we will carry on bringing in young players and play them but I genuinely don't think young players will get game time to help realise their potential (which was the model) but only because they are the best players we have and able to get hold of. I don't think the new model places any emphasis on playing youngsters for gains down the line - the new model involves placing the emphasis on points in the here and now and that is a definite change of approach. I'm only saying what I think will happen - not what should happen. My personal take is that the choice of strategy is down to the club - I may have an opinion but my opinion is worthless on the matter. What actually counts is whether the club and the manager delivers on their strategy. Under O'Neill it was to be patient and develop a team in the medium long term. The club and the fans have abandoned the patient approach and appointed a manager whose sole aim is promotion - which is fine by me providing he succeeds. If we don't go up in the next two season the change of approach will be a failure and we will be back to where we were with a group of relatively older, under achieving players on higher wages and looking to throw the dice again - which to be fair is what the majority of fans seem to want. The thing you can't have is a manager who prioritises winning in the short term AND is also expected to use the first team to bring young players on - that simply isn't going to happen because you can't do both. Neil knows this full well and part of the reason he left Sunderland is because their model is to develop young players and he wants to get promotion on his CV sooner rather than later - you can have one or the other, not both. Or at least Neil is honest enough to acknowledge he can't do both and push comes to shove he sees his job as winning things, not develop youngsters. The club and the fans didn’t ‘abandon the patient approach’ they abandoned a manager who’d lost the plot as far as the on-field stuff was concerned. He’d lost it in terms of the approach, in terms of game management, in terms of balance of the side. The club and the fans decided the manager had to go because there was no longer a reason to trust that we were heading in the right direction on the pitch. You’re characterising it as petulant impatience which really isn’t fair. I also don’t think it’s entirely true to say MON was playing players who weren’t ready in the name of gains down the line. Bursik had us some good games in League 1 and at this level and was England u21 coach - he needed games, he’s just suffered a dip in form. DWP had impressed in the u23s and thus deserved his chance. It’s to MON’s credit that he gave it to him (as he did players like Campbell before him) but it didn’t come prematurely. Sparrow played because he’d mishandled the RWB situation. I think Neil will as you say prioritise players who can win him promotion but the pathways for young players won’t close. You don’t start a 22- year-old goalkeeper and 20-year-old full back in a Wembley final if you’re not interested in youth development. I'm not suggesting it was a petulant decision - that's you spinning what I actually said. I'm sure it was a considered decision to change manager but it also singles a change of approach - which is what John Coates said when O'Neill was sacked. Under O'Neill we emphasised youth which takes time and requires patience - getting rid of O'Neill and bringing in someone more results orientated is by definition losing patience. Playing a 22 year old goalkeeper and a 20 year old defender in a Wembley final is completely irrelevant to whether youngsters will be given a chance to prove themselves in the first team. The club will certainly continue to develop youngsters but under Neil they will be given far fewer chances to continue their development in the first team than they were under O'Neill. Young players may well make it in the first team but only because they are the best option - which wasn't always the case under O'Neill. Spin it how you like but the path into the first team for youngsters is going to be harder under Neil than it was under O'Neil.
|
|
|
Tezgel
Aug 31, 2022 8:03:06 GMT
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 31, 2022 8:03:06 GMT
The club and the fans didn’t ‘abandon the patient approach’ they abandoned a manager who’d lost the plot as far as the on-field stuff was concerned. He’d lost it in terms of the approach, in terms of game management, in terms of balance of the side. The club and the fans decided the manager had to go because there was no longer a reason to trust that we were heading in the right direction on the pitch. You’re characterising it as petulant impatience which really isn’t fair. I also don’t think it’s entirely true to say MON was playing players who weren’t ready in the name of gains down the line. Bursik had us some good games in League 1 and at this level and was England u21 coach - he needed games, he’s just suffered a dip in form. DWP had impressed in the u23s and thus deserved his chance. It’s to MON’s credit that he gave it to him (as he did players like Campbell before him) but it didn’t come prematurely. Sparrow played because he’d mishandled the RWB situation. I think Neil will as you say prioritise players who can win him promotion but the pathways for young players won’t close. You don’t start a 22- year-old goalkeeper and 20-year-old full back in a Wembley final if you’re not interested in youth development. I'm not suggesting it was a petulant decision - that's you spinning what I actually said. I'm sure it was a considered decision to change manager but it also singles a change of approach - which is what John Coates said when O'Neill was sacked. Under O'Neill we emphasised youth which takes time and requires patience - getting rid of O'Neill and bringing in someone more results orientated is by definition losing patience. Playing a 22 year old goalkeeper and a 20 year old defender in a Wembley final is completely irrelevant to whether youngsters will be given a chance to prove themselves in the first team. The club will certainly continue to develop youngsters but under Neil they will be given far fewer chances to continue their development in the first team than they were under O'Neill. Young players may well make it in the first team but only because they are the best option - which wasn't always the case under O'Neill. Spin it how you like but the path into the first team for youngsters is going to be harder under Neil than it was under O'Neil. You're spinning it though aren't you? You're suggesting what happened was that O'Neill wanted to patiently blood youngsters and was less concerned about results and that fans and management tired of this. You make no mention of his own role in our poor form in terms of his tactics and game management. They were the reason why fans (and ultimately management) lost faith in him. Also, playing a 22-year-old keeper and a 20-year-old left back in a high pressure Wembley final sure seems relevant to whether youngsters will be given a chance? Who did O'Neill play simply to give them a chance rather than them being 'the best option'? If we're spinning him trying to turn Sparrow into a wing back as being a good thing rather than a borderline negligent one then we're into the next level of excuse making.
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Aug 31, 2022 8:33:26 GMT
I don't need to look it up. The man was a cnut, sneering at the people who were paying his wages(the paying customers) Maybe you should consider whether an actual supporter of a club encourages people to consider whether it's worth supporting your club because they disagree with your opinion. Perhaps you'd be happier with 8,000 in the ground that think like you. “Sneering at people”….he was saying it as it was and remains to this day. It’s about winning, in style if you can, if not win and that equals success Your’e 2nd point……not a clue what you’re talking about. I can remember gates of 8000 or less, that’s 60 years ago. How many attendances were less than 20K even during our darkest days in the EPL? Noted that you didn’t comment upon our EPL years and our opportunity to watch close up World Class Footballers, strange I suppose it doesn’t meet your expectations of entertainment. Think win = success We obviously have very different views despite that note I’ve not suggest you consider your support for the club who the fuck do you think you are to tell me to do so. Telling thousands of paying spectators to go to the circus if they expect to be entertained is sneering disrespect of your customer base in any industry. Watching world class players is only enjoyable either as a neutral or if you’re going toe to toe with them, we did eventually and it was brilliant while it lasted. You probably preferred what came before which was wank.
|
|
|
Post by AlliG on Aug 31, 2022 11:20:27 GMT
I don't need to look it up. The man was a cnut, sneering at the people who were paying his wages(the paying customers) Maybe you should consider whether an actual supporter of a club encourages people to consider whether it's worth supporting your club because they disagree with your opinion. Perhaps you'd be happier with 8,000 in the ground that think like you. “Sneering at people”….he was saying it as it was and remains to this day. It’s about winning, in style if you can, if not win and that equals success Your’e 2nd point……not a clue what you’re talking about. I can remember gates of 8000 or less, that’s 60 years ago. How many attendances were less than 20K even during our darkest days in the EPL? Noted that you didn’t comment upon our EPL years and our opportunity to watch close up World Class Footballers, strange I suppose it doesn’t meet your expectations of entertainment. Think win = success You are wasting your time mate. You are trying to have a discussion with someone who will argue black is white and then white is black. He is "conveniently overlooking" that Durban's comments were most certainly not aimed at the Stoke fans. He had just taken Stoke to Arsenal and put on a defensive masterclass to win 1-0. He was responding to a sneering comment from a London based journalist on the lines of "how dare little old Stoke stifle and beat the wonderfully entertaining Arsenal on their own ground rather than playing attractive football but eventually rolling over and losing". The point Durban was making was that as the away manager he wasn't responsible for "entertaining" the home fans. As a Stoke fan I was delighted with the win!
|
|