Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Finley_Smith10

Eliasson

Recommended Posts

Anyone know what's happening with Eliasson atm? 

Wasnt in the team Saturday, hardly any game time this season...When we signed him I was really excited by him however I haven't seen as much as I would've liked to of seen of him this season

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask Johnson if you bump into him in Clifton.  

These fringe players don't get a game in the under 23's or first team. Just training or the monthly friendly at Cheltenham! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From comments made by the coaching staff he’s incredibly highly rated but needs to learn aspects of the game.

I still would’ve liked to see him get more game time. I’ve got this nagging feeling he might end up another Bolasie whereby he goes on to fulfil his potential at a rival club..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cidered abroad said:

Ask Johnson if you bump into him in Clifton.  

These fringe players don't get a game in the under 23's or first team. Just training or the monthly friendly at Cheltenham! 

You're boring

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect to see him more involved next season. I think he has looked good twice when coming on. But has not played well when he has started. Clearly got huge potential, and would be very surprised if he doesn't make it with us. If he isn't involved next season, then we need to loan him out till January as he needs games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hasn’t been used enough. Plain and simple. My biggest thing with LJ. Wants to protect players too much. All this talk about learning different aspects of the game is relevant but not to the point we need to pay them for years before we use them. Spent a lot of money on players who won’t have half a season between them in minutes or appearances. Our squad was decimated with injuries for 3-4 months so he just wore out a select 12-13. In my mind, a big reason our form dipped. Play the ones here already. For me it is why teams like Preston and Brentford appear to recruit so well. The players they buy, they play. They grow as part of the squad. Imagine we had bought Ollie Watkins and he was sat on our bench getting 10 minutes every month. 

Taylor Moore, Gustav Engvall, Liam Walsh, and Eliasson. Almost 6m worth of players with limited appearances. In the case of Moore and Engvall, we bought them, gave them contracts and those contracts now going into their final 12 months!! Sometimes you need to see if players sink or swim but none have been given the chance. Age is but a number and it is BS that young players can’t get the job done. I just watched a CB pairing aged 18 and 19 help beat Bayern Munich the other day with Leipzig. Upemacano and Konate played very well and they have grown given proper chances to thrive. 

Anyway, these players need chances. I have no doubt that given the minutes, Eliasson would produce. Could have easily been given minutes too. Engvall never been given a fair chance(has looked better than loan strikers like Woodrow and Diony). Walsh fair enough hard to get into the team with Pack and Smith but maybe should be used instead of one of them in matches like Burton where the defensive burden isn’t so great? Taylor Moore also has quite a bit in front of him but with talks of Flint leaving, we all say we can buy a good replacement. So where does that leave Moore? Where does he get his chance? At RB where he doesn’t look as comfortable? No, it is LJ’s biggest weakness imo. He can grow young players but he coddles them too much. Even COD and Brownhill were given chances throughout the season. Need to do the same for the others. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JoeAman08 said:

Hasn’t been used enough. Plain and simple. My biggest thing with LJ. Wants to protect players too much. All this talk about learning different aspects of the game is relevant but not to the point we need to pay them for years before we use them. Spent a lot of money on players who won’t have half a season between them in minutes or appearances. Our squad was decimated with injuries for 3-4 months so he just wore out a select 12-13. In my mind, a big reason our form dipped. Play the ones here already. For me it is why teams like Preston and Brentford appear to recruit so well. The players they buy, they play. They grow as part of the squad. Imagine we had bought Ollie Watkins and he was sat on our bench getting 10 minutes every month. 

Taylor Moore, Gustav Engvall, Liam Walsh, and Eliasson. Almost 6m worth of players with limited appearances. In the case of Moore and Engvall, we bought them, gave them contracts and those contracts now going into their final 12 months!! Sometimes you need to see if players sink or swim but none have been given the chance. Age is but a number and it is BS that young players can’t get the job done. I just watched a CB pairing aged 18 and 19 help beat Bayern Munich the other day with Leipzig. Upemacano and Konate played very well and they have grown given proper chances to thrive. 

Anyway, these players need chances. I have no doubt that given the minutes, Eliasson would produce. Could have easily been given minutes too. Engvall never been given a fair chance(has looked better than loan strikers like Woodrow and Diony). Walsh fair enough hard to get into the team with Pack and Smith but maybe should be used instead of one of them in matches like Burton where the defensive burden isn’t so great? Taylor Moore also has quite a bit in front of him but with talks of Flint leaving, we all say we can buy a good replacement. So where does that leave Moore? Where does he get his chance? At RB where he doesn’t look as comfortable? No, it is LJ’s biggest weakness imo. He can grow young players but he coddles them too much. Even COD and Brownhill were given chances throughout the season. Need to do the same for the others. 

Sums up the Johnson regime. The money this guy has spent is unbelievable. And people don't expect top six!!! What a joke. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, tinman85 said:

Sums up the Johnson regime. The money this guy has spent is unbelievable. And people don't expect top six!!! What a joke. 

How much have the teams in the top six spent compared to what we have spent? What a joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JoeAman08 said:

Hasn’t been used enough. Plain and simple. My biggest thing with LJ. Wants to protect players too much. All this talk about learning different aspects of the game is relevant but not to the point we need to pay them for years before we use them. Spent a lot of money on players who won’t have half a season between them in minutes or appearances. Our squad was decimated with injuries for 3-4 months so he just wore out a select 12-13. In my mind, a big reason our form dipped. Play the ones here already. For me it is why teams like Preston and Brentford appear to recruit so well. The players they buy, they play. They grow as part of the squad. Imagine we had bought Ollie Watkins and he was sat on our bench getting 10 minutes every month. 

Taylor Moore, Gustav Engvall, Liam Walsh, and Eliasson. Almost 6m worth of players with limited appearances. In the case of Moore and Engvall, we bought them, gave them contracts and those contracts now going into their final 12 months!! Sometimes you need to see if players sink or swim but none have been given the chance. Age is but a number and it is BS that young players can’t get the job done. I just watched a CB pairing aged 18 and 19 help beat Bayern Munich the other day with Leipzig. Upemacano and Konate played very well and they have grown given proper chances to thrive. 

Anyway, these players need chances. I have no doubt that given the minutes, Eliasson would produce. Could have easily been given minutes too. Engvall never been given a fair chance(has looked better than loan strikers like Woodrow and Diony). Walsh fair enough hard to get into the team with Pack and Smith but maybe should be used instead of one of them in matches like Burton where the defensive burden isn’t so great? Taylor Moore also has quite a bit in front of him but with talks of Flint leaving, we all say we can buy a good replacement. So where does that leave Moore? Where does he get his chance? At RB where he doesn’t look as comfortable? No, it is LJ’s biggest weakness imo. He can grow young players but he coddles them too much. Even COD and Brownhill were given chances throughout the season. Need to do the same for the others. 

Yet we’re still above Brentford and Preston....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, tinman85 said:

Sums up the Johnson regime. The money this guy has spent is unbelievable. And people don't expect top six!!! What a joke. 

Yes because of course we have spent more money than Wolves, Derby, Villa, Sunderland, Boro, Fulham, Reading etc etc. If the league was decided on players wages or transfer fees spent then Lee Johnson's Bristol City are punching above their weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CoD didn’t play much last year and he’s done alright this season. Bobby Reid was average at best as with Joey and they’ve done well. Smith and Pack as well. Many of the team we have now people would’ve wanted to sell last year.

 

Time is on his side... as with Engvall. He can still push his way in over the coming years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eliassons problem is that he can not defend. Johnson bought him because of his great goal scoring assist record.

Sold by my club AIK Solna to IFK Norrköping for £100,000 in November 2016.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JoeAman08 said:

Hasn’t been used enough. Plain and simple. My biggest thing with LJ. Wants to protect players too much. All this talk about learning different aspects of the game is relevant but not to the point we need to pay them for years before we use them. Spent a lot of money on players who won’t have half a season between them in minutes or appearances. Our squad was decimated with injuries for 3-4 months so he just wore out a select 12-13. In my mind, a big reason our form dipped. Play the ones here already. For me it is why teams like Preston and Brentford appear to recruit so well. The players they buy, they play. They grow as part of the squad. Imagine we had bought Ollie Watkins and he was sat on our bench getting 10 minutes every month. 

Taylor Moore, Gustav Engvall, Liam Walsh, and Eliasson. Almost 6m worth of players with limited appearances. In the case of Moore and Engvall, we bought them, gave them contracts and those contracts now going into their final 12 months!! Sometimes you need to see if players sink or swim but none have been given the chance. Age is but a number and it is BS that young players can’t get the job done. I just watched a CB pairing aged 18 and 19 help beat Bayern Munich the other day with Leipzig. Upemacano and Konate played very well and they have grown given proper chances to thrive. 

Anyway, these players need chances. I have no doubt that given the minutes, Eliasson would produce. Could have easily been given minutes too. Engvall never been given a fair chance(has looked better than loan strikers like Woodrow and Diony). Walsh fair enough hard to get into the team with Pack and Smith but maybe should be used instead of one of them in matches like Burton where the defensive burden isn’t so great? Taylor Moore also has quite a bit in front of him but with talks of Flint leaving, we all say we can buy a good replacement. So where does that leave Moore? Where does he get his chance? At RB where he doesn’t look as comfortable? No, it is LJ’s biggest weakness imo. He can grow young players but he coddles them too much. Even COD and Brownhill were given chances throughout the season. Need to do the same for the others. 

Good post

30 minutes ago, tinman85 said:

Sums up the Johnson regime. The money this guy has spent is unbelievable. And people don't expect top six!!! What a joke. 

If your Eliasson’s, your Moore’s, etc come in next season and do what Brownhill and O’Dowda did this season, e.g. really kick-on, then I think you can say you’re wrong, even if Moore took 2 seasons....Bobby Reid took lots!  

But if they don’t break through, and just fall away with little money recouped (which looks like the case with Engvall), then you’d be well within your rights to be critical.

Frustrating as it may seem, you might have to wait another 6 or do months to be proved right or wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tinman85 said:

Sums up the Johnson regime. The money this guy has spent is unbelievable. And people don't expect top six!!! What a joke. 

Not quite what I meant. All I can say is probably too much spent on projects. I don’t doubt they can be good players but with wages a very big investment before/if we get a return

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, gazza1982 said:

Yet we’re still above Brentford and Preston....

Not the point. Probably spent much more per point though which is fine but again point was that we don’t utilise our assets enough. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tinman85 said:

Sums up the Johnson regime. The money this guy has spent is unbelievable. And people don't expect top six!!! What a joke. 

Since Johnson came in, 4 transfer windows ago, we've had a net spend of 8.5 mill, compare that to Derby County who are 1 point above us and in the same period have a net spend 3x that.

We are punching well above our weight considering the money we have spent, Cardiff spent more than our record signing in January on a striker with a worse than 1 in 4 scoring record...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, bristolcitysweden said:

Eliassons problem is that he can not defend. Johnson bought him because of his great goal scoring assist record.

Sold by my club AIK Solna to IFK Norrköping for £100,000 in November 2016.

 

So all of you in Sweden keep saying. 

Yet when he has been given minutes as a sub, I have been impressed by his defensive work, tracking back and winning tackles to begin counter attacking. 

I agree with Joe Aman's earlier post. I think our coaching staff are too overprotective of the fringe youngsters. Vyner, Eliasson and Kelly have been treated like this. 

Kelly was many people's MOM against Ipswich. He will have poor games and good ones but the only way forward is play and get experience. Eliasson and the other young Reds likewise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tinman85 said:

Sums up the Johnson regime. The money this guy has spent is unbelievable. And people don't expect top six!!! What a joke. 

Any thoughts yet on the Cardiff wage bill? You seem to have missed multiple postings despite blaming this on not having enough time...

On 2/25/2018 at 15:08, tinman85 said:

I don't have time to do that thanks. But please enlighten me 

I did try but you strangely didn't engage. I'll try again. I'm sure it's perfectly innocent and you are totally up for dealing with the facts of wage bills for 2016/17...

  • Bristol City Holdings Ltd - 16/17... £20.920m (613 employees) which is broken up into... 
    • Bristol City Football Club Ltd - 16/17... £17.896m (162 employees)
    • Ashton Gate Ltd - 16/17... £3.125m (451 employees)
    • Note: there's a minor discrepancy here of c. £100k but that's not really relevant in the bigger picture
  • Cardiff City Football Club (Holdings) Ltd - 16/17... £29.006m (178 employees)

So comparing BCHL to CCFCHL, the CCFCHL wage bill is 38.65% higher despite 435 less employees. Or comparing BCFCL to CCFCHL, the CCFCHL wage bill is 62.08% higher though this includes 16 additional employees.

Neil 'shoestring budget' Warnock indeed, eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, cidered abroad said:

So all of you in Sweden keep saying. 

Yet when he has been given minutes as a sub, I have been impressed by his defensive work, tracking back and winning tackles to begin counter attacking. 

I agree with Joe Aman's earlier post. I think our coaching staff are too overprotective of the fringe youngsters. Vyner, Eliasson and Kelly have been treated like this. 

Kelly was many people's MOM against Ipswich. He will have poor games and good ones but the only way forward is play and get experience. Eliasson and the other young Reds likewise. 

Who do you drop? Who do you play? Do you drop Brownhill for Eliasson? Do you drop Flint for Moore? Do you drop Mags or Bryan for Kelly?

1 mistake from a youngster and this place would be up in arms asking why were playing youngsters when better first team players are available - you always need to play your best players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, View from the Dolman said:

Any thoughts yet on the Cardiff wage bill? You seem to have missed multiple postings despite blaming this on not having enough time...

I did try but you strangely didn't engage. I'll try again. I'm sure it's perfectly innocent and you are totally up for dealing with the facts of wage bills for 2016/17...

  • Bristol City Holdings Ltd - 16/17... £20.920m (613 employees) which is broken up into... 
    • Bristol City Football Club Ltd - 16/17... £17.896m (162 employees)
    • Ashton Gate Ltd - 16/17... £3.125m (451 employees)
    • Note: there's a minor discrepancy here of c. £100k but that's not really relevant in the bigger picture
  • Cardiff City Football Club (Holdings) Ltd - 16/17... £29.006m (178 employees)

So comparing BCHL to CCFCHL, the CCFCHL wage bill is 38.65% higher despite 435 less employees. Or comparing BCFCL to CCFCHL, the CCFCHL wage bill is 62.08% higher though this includes 16 additional employees.

Neil 'shoestring budget' Warnock indeed, eh?

Breath. Don't. Your. Hold.

 

Rearrange those words to find my advice when it comes to expecting a thought out response to your query.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Pezo said:

Who do you drop? Who do you play? Do you drop Brownhill for Eliasson? Do you drop Flint for Moore? Do you drop Mags or Bryan for Kelly?

1 mistake from a youngster and this place would be up in arms asking why were playing youngsters when better first team players are available - you always need to play your best players.

It's not about dropping players. It's about using as many of the squad as is possible over a season. Sub appearances will be the best way to give game time to the less experienced and younger ones. 

Doing that should give them a real sense of belonging and also ensure that we don't burn out the first choices. Like we appear to have done to some of the latter! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn’t disagree he is overly protective, but can understand to some degree with us pushing for promotion why it has happened.

What I really, really don’t get is the January window where we’ve bought in players, 2 of the 3 on short term loans, who are weaker than our existing fringe players. Not only that, they’ve been given game time to show the world how weak they are at the expense  both of our league position and existing players most of whom are sat redundant in the stands watching and gaining naff all playing experience. 

Absolutely bizarre and, frankly, a situation that should be seen by the scouting system, coaches and management as a total embarrassment and shambles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cidered abroad said:

So all of you in Sweden keep saying. 

Yet when he has been given minutes as a sub, I have been impressed by his defensive work, tracking back and winning tackles to begin counter attacking. 

I agree with Joe Aman's earlier post. I think our coaching staff are too overprotective of the fringe youngsters. Vyner, Eliasson and Kelly have been treated like this. 

Kelly was many people's MOM against Ipswich. He will have poor games and good ones but the only way forward is play and get experience. Eliasson and the other young Reds likewise. 

So Kelly was actually playing?? 

Umm- so here's a guy who is regularly in the first team squad and is given his chance and has taken his chance at the age of 19 who may be very good but not yet as good as Bryan so is quite rightly second choice if Joe is available.

Just explain to me in really simple terms how " the coaching staff" are "too overprotective" to this 19 yr old defender with 1 goal and one assist who is currently playing in the first team?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, cidered abroad said:

It's not about dropping players. It's about using as many of the squad as is possible over a season. Sub appearances will be the best way to give game time to the less experienced and younger ones. 

Doing that should give them a real sense of belonging and also ensure that we don't burn out the first choices. Like we appear to have done to some of the latter! 

In which case I kind of agree but we do seem to use all our subs in most games and the question I asked needs altering slightly. Drawing or 1 goal up do you take Pack off for Walsh or Bryan off for Kelly.

We do have a lot of close tight games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pezo said:

In which case I kind of agree but we do seem to use all our subs in most games and the question I asked needs altering slightly. Drawing or 1 goal up do you take Pack off for Walsh or Bryan off for Kelly.

We do have a lot of close tight games.

Subs do not necessarily have to replace on a like for like basis.

For example, we are defending a 1-0 lead away from home.

You could replace Paterson with Kelly to stop their right back charging up the wing and giving Joe Bryan at left back, a torrid time.

Or replace a tired Diedhiou with the speed of Eliasson to run at a couple of big lump centre backs.

Or put Walsh on in midfield instead of a striker and leave Bobby to be a nuisance up front.

It's creative thinking in game management that would help the fringe players to get game time and maybe keep more points.

And this us not a criticism of LJ and his staff. Just trying to look at where we could do some things differently and maybe better. And give more game experience to our young squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly a highly rated player and has been in and around the squad all season - but clearly not deemed quite ready. If you're good enough, you're old enough, I know. Perhaps he isn't quite good enough yet? I think his more recent substitute appearances back that up IMO, and his impressive cameos, Watford, Hull(?), show the potential.

He is one of those young players who gets stuck in that middle ground, close enough to the first team to be needed for the squad, so won't go out on loan - but not quite ready to break into the first 11 regularly. So from the outside it looks like he is rotting on the bench. I'm sure however he is improving his all round game with every training session up against Wright, Baker, Flint etc, learning the English game, bulking up etc and if he is capable of stepping up, he'll be better prepared for it.

Look every player's development is going to be different, plenty of examples of that in our current squad. So it's too simplistic to compare ages, but either way, food for thought:

Eliasson is 22 years old, at 22:

  • Joe Bryan was playing in league one.
  • Bobby Reid was on loan at Plymouth.
  • Callum and Josh are both the same age, but each had three years, 87 and 65 apps respectively, of the "men's football" that is talked about a lot and important to player development. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have set our stall out to buy young players as a club, in my 34 years watching City, i can't remember another period of time where so many young players have actually improved, Brownhill, Reid, Bryan, Pack, Paterson, O'dowda, Smith, off the top of my head. Why not trust the current management set up? Bringing in new players has never been an exact science, and the tricky part about bringing in young players, from abroad especially, is that they will need to be developed, which obviously takes time. Seems to me that the decision to loan certain players out is working well, and at the prices we are paying for players, the risk in terms of Championship budgets, is pretty low. The current magagement team have got a hell of a lot more right than wrong in my opinion, so the future looks bright. COYR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Alessandro said:

Clearly a highly rated player and has been in and around the squad all season - but clearly not deemed quite ready. If you're good enough, you're old enough, I know. Perhaps he isn't quite good enough yet? I think his more recent substitute appearances back that up IMO, and his impressive cameos, Watford, Hull(?), show the potential.

He is one of those young players who gets stuck in that middle ground, close enough to the first team to be needed for the squad, so won't go out on loan - but not quite ready to break into the first 11 regularly. So from the outside it looks like he is rotting on the bench. I'm sure however he is improving his all round game with every training session up against Wright, Baker, Flint etc, learning the English game, bulking up etc and if he is capable of stepping up, he'll be better prepared for it.

Look every player's development is going to be different, plenty of examples of that in our current squad. So it's too simplistic to compare ages, but either way, food for thought:

Eliasson is 22 years old, at 22:

  • Joe Bryan was playing in league one.
  • Bobby Reid was on loan at Plymouth.
  • Callum and Josh are both the same age, but each had three years, 87 and 65 apps respectively, of the "men's football" that is talked about a lot and important to player development. 

 

 

Nice post Alessandro.  The interesting thing about the above players listed is that their men’s football experience was in the Football League (Bryan also loaned to Bath).  I’m not dissing those going out on loan to Torquay, Bath, Solihull, etc, but I think that most players who get to 20 at a Champ club, need league football on loan.  It’s a generalisation, I accept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, bristolcitysweden said:

Eliassons problem is that he can not defend. Johnson bought him because of his great goal scoring assist record.

Sold by my club AIK Solna to IFK Norrköping for £100,000 in November 2016.

 

Do you go on AIK Solna forum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, JoeAman08 said:

Not the point. Probably spent much more per point though which is fine but again point was that we don’t utilise our assets enough. 

I don’t get your point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

27 appearances off the bench from Brownhill and CO’D in the league last season, with a combined 34 starts. Have been key players this season when fit.

Patience paid off three times last season, with Bobby coming of the bench 12 times and made 39 league appearances.

Says it all really.

I expect Eliasson (after a season with us) to then become a key player.

Really rate him and think it’ll work out just fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/20/2018 at 15:30, tinman85 said:

Sums up the Johnson regime. The money this guy has spent is unbelievable. And people don't expect top six!!! What a joke. 

That was brave. 

You are wrong of course, but not as wrong as some would imply. 

What we should expect is to compete. Guess what, that is what SL expects. If we compete well enough a top six finish is more than achievable. 

Every manager stands and falls on his decisions and his budget. LJ is no different 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Captain Hindsight said:

27 appearances off the bench from Brownhill and CO’D in the league last season, with a combined 34 starts. Have been key players this season when fit.

Patience paid off three times last season, with Bobby coming of the bench 12 times and made 39 league appearances.

Says it all really.

I expect Eliasson (after a season with us) to then become a key player.

Really rate him and think it’ll work out just fine.

I think eliasson looks a very good young footballer, the problem he has got is that if odowda comes back in at the level he was when he was injured, now adding goals to an otherwise very solid and strong performer, thats one first team place covered. Other left side options are obviously bryan and kelly, and right side is brownhills spot, who also is young and improving and strong defensively. A deep striker false 9 role is reids unless he is sold, and elliason isnt an out and out centre forward like diedhou or duric. 

I accept that players can come and go, and injuries happen, but it seems to me that his pathway is blocked for the forseeable future?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Captain Hindsight said:

27 appearances off the bench from Brownhill and CO’D in the league last season, with a combined 34 starts. Have been key players this season when fit.

Patience paid off three times last season, with Bobby coming of the bench 12 times and made 39 league appearances.

Says it all really.

I expect Eliasson (after a season with us) to then become a key player.

Really rate him and think it’ll work out just fine.

The first bit is my main problem though. They were given plenty of opportunity last season with some starts and many appearances off the bench. They both looked lost at different times at points. So why is Eliasson not getting the same chance? Why was Kent brought in? 

I am sure there is a reason in the minds of the coaches but seems even Kent has lost some favour but was given 5-6 matches to prove his worth. Eliasson has only had 1-2 starts and a handful of appearances off the bench. I would have preferred Eliasson given a go instead of Kent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've seen Eliasson given a chance and he's clearly not ready for the championship, physically or tactically. As others have said, you have to play your best team, there's no room for sentiment in a playoff battle.. LJ flirted with the 'squad rotation' that is being suggested here when 3-0 up at HT v Sunderland and we all know how that turned out.. If Eliasson came on and was responsible for a crucial goal going against us it would set his confidence and development back. As for the Kent arguments, he already has a season of championship football under his belt so it would have been fair for LJ to view him as having a better understanding of what's expected from him, sometimes it just doesn't work out.

I think LJ has been more than fair to him personally, next year we will see a more involved Eliasson, assuming he goes away and works on his physique over the summer as the likes of Bryan and COD have done in recent summers. Until then I'll reserve judgement, both on the player and LJs approach 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, georgebcfc said:

We've seen Eliasson given a chance and he's clearly not ready for the championship, physically or tactically. As others have said, you have to play your best team, there's no room for sentiment in a playoff battle.. LJ flirted with the 'squad rotation' that is being suggested here when 3-0 up at HT v Sunderland and we all know how that turned out.. If Eliasson came on and was responsible for a crucial goal going against us it would set his confidence and development back. As for the Kent arguments, he already has a season of championship football under his belt so it would have been fair for LJ to view him as having a better understanding of what's expected from him, sometimes it just doesn't work out.

I think LJ has been more than fair to him personally, next year we will see a more involved Eliasson, assuming he goes away and works on his physique over the summer as the likes of Bryan and COD have done in recent summers. Until then I'll reserve judgement, both on the player and LJs approach 

It is a fair point about Kent and his season in the championship. Just would rather see time on the pitch go to our assets rather than a loan player. Eliasson has looked good enough when I have seen him. Even the last time I remember him starting was against Sheff U with their wingbacks and he worked tirelessly in a not so easy scenario. Mistakes I would live with but not trying I can’t. From what I have seen Eliasson is a harder worker on the pitch than Kent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the key thing to me - and this is the bit where I genuinely do not know the answer - is how the players feel.

If the likes of Walsh, Eliasson, Moore, Engvall, Vyner etc. are comfortable with the fact they are developing in training or on loan and will get their chance in time then there is no problem. My concern is when players start to become uncomfortable and unsettled and we lose out on potential as a result. So far, LJ seems good at keeping players on the fringes happy and settled. As long as that continues, there is no issue.

I do think in a way those players are a victim of our success. For the last two years, we have either been in a relegation or a promotion battle and it has been harder to bring players in. I suspect the players above would have played a lot more if we were mid-table...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

 

I do think in a way those players are a victim of our success. For the last two years, we have either been in a relegation or a promotion battle and it has been harder to bring players in. I suspect the players above would have played a lot more if we were mid-table...

I'd agree with this, and I'd like to think that if we find ourselves out of the playoff race with 2 or 3 games left, he gives the younger players a proper opportunity. Certainly you'd expect them to figure over the likes of Kent, Diony and Woodrow who won't be here next season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/03/2018 at 21:50, JBFC II said:

Since Johnson came in, 4 transfer windows ago, we've had a net spend of 8.5 mill, compare that to Derby County who are 1 point above us and in the same period have a net spend 3x that.

We are punching well above our weight considering the money we have spent, Cardiff spent more than our record signing in January on a striker with a worse than 1 in 4 scoring record...

Or we could compare our spend with Huddersfield last year - depends what your benchmark is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Dullmoan Tone said:

Or we could compare our spend with Huddersfield last year - depends what your benchmark is?

I'd say our benchmark should be the teams around us this season, by that benchmark we are doing well 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/03/2018 at 22:26, Pezo said:

Who do you drop? Who do you play? Do you drop Brownhill for Eliasson? Do you drop Flint for Moore? Do you drop Mags or Bryan for Kelly?

1 mistake from a youngster and this place would be up in arms asking why were playing youngsters when better first team players are available - you always need to play your best players.

It’s not about who you drop. 

Eliasson should have got minutes rather than Kent.

Vyner or Taylor-Moore should have played instead of playing smith or brownhill at right back. 

Engvall should be getting minutes rather than  Diony or Woodrow

LJ bought in Diony, Woodrow and Kent who IMHO are no better than the youngsters that were already here who we paid decent money for and who could have been given the valuable game time experience afforded to the loanees. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, georgebcfc said:

We've seen Eliasson given a chance and he's clearly not ready for the championship, physically or tactically. As others have said, you have to play your best team, there's no room for sentiment in a playoff battle.. LJ flirted with the 'squad rotation' that is being suggested here when 3-0 up at HT v Sunderland and we all know how that turned out.. If Eliasson came on and was responsible for a crucial goal going against us it would set his confidence and development back. As for the Kent arguments, he already has a season of championship football under his belt so it would have been fair for LJ to view him as having a better understanding of what's expected from him, sometimes it just doesn't work out.

I think LJ has been more than fair to him personally, next year we will see a more involved Eliasson, assuming he goes away and works on his physique over the summer as the likes of Bryan and COD have done in recent summers. Until then I'll reserve judgement, both on the player and LJs approach 

Easy to FLUSH out the rovers fans when there's people talking this much TOILET!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/03/2018 at 18:23, JoeAman08 said:

Hasn’t been used enough. Plain and simple. My biggest thing with LJ. Wants to protect players too much. All this talk about learning different aspects of the game is relevant but not to the point we need to pay them for years before we use them. Spent a lot of money on players who won’t have half a season between them in minutes or appearances. Our squad was decimated with injuries for 3-4 months so he just wore out a select 12-13. In my mind, a big reason our form dipped. Play the ones here already. For me it is why teams like Preston and Brentford appear to recruit so well. The players they buy, they play. They grow as part of the squad. Imagine we had bought Ollie Watkins and he was sat on our bench getting 10 minutes every month. 

Taylor Moore, Gustav Engvall, Liam Walsh, and Eliasson. Almost 6m worth of players with limited appearances. In the case of Moore and Engvall, we bought them, gave them contracts and those contracts now going into their final 12 months!! Sometimes you need to see if players sink or swim but none have been given the chance. Age is but a number and it is BS that young players can’t get the job done. I just watched a CB pairing aged 18 and 19 help beat Bayern Munich the other day with Leipzig. Upemacano and Konate played very well and they have grown given proper chances to thrive. 

Anyway, these players need chances. I have no doubt that given the minutes, Eliasson would produce. Could have easily been given minutes too. Engvall never been given a fair chance(has looked better than loan strikers like Woodrow and Diony). Walsh fair enough hard to get into the team with Pack and Smith but maybe should be used instead of one of them in matches like Burton where the defensive burden isn’t so great? Taylor Moore also has quite a bit in front of him but with talks of Flint leaving, we all say we can buy a good replacement. So where does that leave Moore? Where does he get his chance? At RB where he doesn’t look as comfortable? No, it is LJ’s biggest weakness imo. He can grow young players but he coddles them too much. Even COD and Brownhill were given chances throughout the season. Need to do the same for the others. 

This! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...