50+ players. Really!!

[JBFC II]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

That’s cake and eat it isn’t it?  Credit the ones that work out to LJ, but the ones that don’t, aren’t anything to do with him.  If you give him credit (which is fine) then at least be consistent and be critical of him for those that haven’t!

Oh plenty of signings haven’t worked out, that’s been done to death on here and I didn’t feel the need to go and list them off again. 

I was more questioning how many players have regressed under him, I’m sure there are examples but I can’t think of any 

[Davefevs]

5 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

The talk of 'no best 11' always amuses me.  When did the concept of having a 'best 11' last exist?  It's over 40 years since we went up only using about 14 players.  The modern game is a squad game, and almost every club rotates unless, of course, you are on a winning run, as we were when we lined up against Birmingham on Friday night.

I agree in fairness.  That’s why I find it so difficult to pick an eleven, as on the outside we have such little info to go on.

[Davefevs]

6 minutes ago, JBFC II said:

Oh plenty of signings haven’t worked out, that’s been done to death on here and I didn’t feel the need to go and list them off again. 

I was more questioning how many players have regressed under him, I’m sure there are examples but I can’t think of any 

Yes, but is that because the head-coach has failed to develop them?  That’s the question I’m asking...because surely it’s only fair to praise and criticise fairly?  It seems like he gets a free-ride on these?

[Rich]

28 minutes ago, JBFC II said:

Of course flint improved when we he was here under LJ, players can still develop with age when they’re put in an environment that demands improvement, and that’s what happened with Flint. At the end of the 15/16 season most on here would have said Bryan was a decent championship player, but a premier league player? I heavily doubt it, that changed under LJ and was why Fulham were willing to take a risk on him. 
 

The Reid one is interesting, some like to claim that LJ should take no credit for him going from a decent centre mid to a 20 goal a season striker in a season because LJ was ‘forced’ into it, ultimately we won’t know either way. However, looking at it from the outside, I see an OK championship centre midfielder being turned into a very good goal scorer at this level, that isn’t something that happens by ‘luck’. Reid scored 9 of his 21 goals in the second half of the season, so really not a major difference and one that is easier to associate with our lack of form than a change in position. Furthermore, can you blame LJ for trying to include Fam,? Let’s not forget he was our record signing at that point and had a 1 in 2 record after his knee injury, not too shabby. 
 

Which players would you say he’s made ‘worse’? Obviously some signings haven’t worked out, but that happens at every club. I’m struggling to remember any player who has regressed after joining us though

I'll have to disagree with you on Flint, he left here and never achieved anywhere near his form at our club with either Boro, or Cardiff. 

JB went to Fulham and struggled if we're honest, as a premier player who couldn't quite make it. Obviously now back in the championship.

Bobby Reid scored 13 goals up to Christmas as a main striker, LJ brought Fammy back in and dropped BR in behind, he only scored seven goals in the second half of that season. 1 in Jan, 2 in Feb, 2 in March and 2 in April.

I didn't say he'd made players worse, I said it could be argued that he did.

Players to have regressed. Lee Tomlin, Kasey Palmer. That's in my opinion, I'm sure there's also a natural regression or improvement for some players as well. Though we do seem to get a regular turnover of fringe players, who appear to be well suited to a good standard of football, yet rarely make appearances, two to mention, Watkins and Hegeler, possibly O'Dowda going the same way.

[Rich]

44 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Jeez........wtf are you on about?      

LJ sold players he either developed or brought in to amass a cool £29m profit. Bryan, Reid,  Kelly, Webster, Brownhill none of which were SC players........Flint and Pack are not included.

Reid and Bryan were already at the club, Johnson inherited them.  We have a team that identifies possible players, a team that purchases them (tries to) a team that develops them, a team that negotiates wages and contracts and you heap all the praise onto one man who in real terms is just the front for those teams. Not an easy job but, he aint doing it all, by a long way.

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

at the end of the day, it’s quite correct to say Lee has had an influence on the values of several players.  But he’s also been in charge of a number of players who haven’t.  Just think we need a bit of balance....and recognise that others have played a part too.  As earlier too I can’t think of one player aged 25+ who’s had a renaissance / improved under Lee.  Maybe I’m being selective.  Rowe?  

I thought Bobby was pretty much a midfielder all the way through his youth. Moving to different positions like all youngsters. But his mate told me he was a midfielder when he trained with him in the academy. Bobby wasn't even sure he could be a striker when LJ told him that was his plan preseason.

I thought Kelly's debut was against Reading under LJ?

I think anyone that does well who improves is improving under what the coaches are teaching them. They're always going to have influence on the players they are becoming.

If the players would also improve under other managers or coaches then they'd also be doing a good job in developing those players.

I said earlier that Freeman and Ayling did not do particularly well under LJ so I'm happy to say who it appears he maybe did not improve. No surprise we didn't get much for those two..maybe because they weren't playing that well.

O'Dowda is one that improved a lot and then after the injury never quite got back to the player we saw against Fulham away in the 2-0 win.

On Kodjia I thought he went onto another level when LJ came in and probably helped get so much money for him.

Partly down to Tomlin. But LJ was the one making these decisions. As far as getting a player playing better and getting good money for him, LJ did well there imo.

Older players? Well we haven't had many of them. Certainly Williams has been a lot better this season than it appears he was last season. Been rock solid in most games. LJ even said he had to teach him how to run differently!

Afobe not old but came here having had not the best of seasons. Lost loads of weight and looked absolutely class. LJ found a way to get him back to his best.

 

[TonyTonyTony]

46 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

I havnt got a clue what you are on about and tbh not interested in your particular view or opinion to be quite honest

I was referring to you not posting for weeks on end and wondered whether you’d found The delights of Czech lagers or a girl or something but hey ho ...... there’s time

Robert come on - posting after 6 pm isn’t good for your bed time shit. We have spoken about this. You get angry and tetchy. You won’t squeeze it out

Lets go and play UNO for a bit before a sing song.

(If not true, a likely scenario)

[Robbored]

15 minutes ago, Rich said:

Reid and Bryan were already at the club, Johnson inherited them.  We have a team that identifies possible players, a team that purchases them (tries to) a team that develops them, a team that negotiates wages and contracts and you heap all the praise onto one man who in real terms is just the front for those teams. Not an easy job but, he aint doing it all, by a long way.

Reid and Bryan are/were academy graduates both sold for a reasonable profit and largely developed by LJ and his coaches.

However this thread started about how many players has signed but little acknowledgement of how many were developing and how many were first team ready.

It was important to recognise that with all the wheeling and dealing has amassed £29m profit over LJs tenure - which is of course an integral part of SLs policy of sustainability and an integral part of LJs remit.

Very few other managers would be prepared to repeatedly allow their better players to move on season after season.

[Rich]

5 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Reid and Bryan are/were academy graduates both sold for a reasonable profit and largely developed by LJ and his coaches.

However this thread started about how many players has signed but little acknowledgement of how many were developing and how many were first team ready.

It was important to recognise that with all the wheeling and dealing has amassed £29m profit over LJs tenure - which is of course an integral part of SLs policy of sustainability and an integral part of LJs remit.

Very few other managers would be prepared to repeatedly allow their better players to move on season after season.

Reid and Bryan were largely developed by Plymouth, Joe Bryan being an integral part of the promotion team, they were here for only just over a playing year of his tenure. As I think I've stated there's a large team identifying and trying to obtain  talents that are then shunted on as soon as possible for profit. That team is headed up by Mark Ashton, who joined the club about the same time as LJ, I believe. Yet you seem to give all the credit for any profit to LJ, even though a large swathe of that profit was from players already here. Perhaps if he left, the same would happen, who knows, it's just not as black and white as you paint it. 

Trouble is, we only get to see a small proportion of those players that are successful and actually make it through to our team. 

[Lrrr]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Kelly - given first break by Cotts pre-season.

So Cotts gets the credit for Joe Morrell for a solitary JPT game at 16?

If LJ left tomorrow would he get future credit for any academy player to have featured in a pre-season game under him...?

[Rich]

Let's get honest here, if a coach doesn't improve young players, whether to play or to move them on, what the hell is he/she doing coaching young players.

 

[Davefevs]

37 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Reid and Bryan are/were academy graduates both sold for a reasonable profit and largely developed by LJ and his coaches.

However this thread started about how many players has signed but little acknowledgement of how many were developing and how many were first team ready.

It was important to recognise that with all the wheeling and dealing has amassed £29m profit over LJs tenure - which is of course an integral part of SLs policy of sustainability and an integral part of LJs remit.

Very few other managers would be prepared to repeatedly allow their better players to move on season after season.

I think it’s fair to say there’s been some great successes and some failures too.

£29m is indeed great, but totally necessary against a backdrop of big wage increases and big amortisation bill, meaning on average over his tenure we have lost circa £9m per year (£37.3m estimated).

Based on pure facts, years 16/17, 17/18 and 18/19 result in losses of £20.9m.  This would’ve been higher without Kelly’s £15m going into 18/19’s account.  Smart work MA / SL!!

Even with the sales of Webster, Pack, Eisa, Brownhill and sell-on money from Freeman, we are looking at a £10m+ loss for 19/20, and a bigger wage bill and amortisation cost commitment for a further 2/3/4 years.  I also fear less of “rinse and repeat” going forward in terms of buying young, lower leagues players that we can sell for the kind of money / profit of the likes of Brownhill.  I hope the next Reid / Bryan / Kelly is just around the corner too.

As it stands, Lee has to be prepared to sell.  If he wants a squad of this size with the cost commitments that go with it, he has to swallow the inevitable trading that goes with it.  Most managers in this division (certainly without PPs) have exactly the same constraints.  I think (obviously I don’t know) there are a number of managers who’d love to manage here.

That is why I feel uncomfortable with things like £29m net spend being banded about.  Notwithstanding it’s failure to take into account signing on fees, agent fees, loan fees.  It’s just not fully contextual.  Maybe it’s just me?

What is your view of £29m net so end versus losses of £20-35m.  I guess without these, we would be falling foul of FFP.

[Davefevs]

17 minutes ago, hodge said:

So Cotts gets the credit for Joe Morrell for a solitary JPT game at 16?

If LJ left tomorrow would he get future credit for any academy player to have featured in a pre-season game under him...?

No, just saying that LJ shouldn’t get all the credit, and that it’s far too speculative to attribute one coach to the improvements made by any given player.  Not everything is down to coaching.  Some of it is natural development, growth (physically and mentally), etc.

[Robbored]

39 minutes ago, Rich said:

Reid and Bryan were largely developed by Plymouth, Joe Bryan being an integral part of the promotion team, 

Both were at Argyle as part of their development into competitive men’s football. That’s how the academy works. Young City players gain experience elsewhere as their is no competitive football available at City.

[Lrrr]

44 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

No, just saying that LJ shouldn’t get all the credit, and that it’s far too speculative to attribute one coach to the improvements made by any given player.  Not everything is down to coaching.  Some of it is natural development, growth (physically and mentally), etc.

Wasn't a particular slight against your comment as such, just I have seen similar comments made by those perhaps more serious about it 

[REDOXO]

9 hours ago, Davefevs said:

 

These two posts are quite good examples of where we are as a club.  Over the past couple of days there have been some really good thought provoking posts. Views from us OTIBers that have the same data behind them but different opinions, especially when being subjective about how good or bad a particular signing is / was. 

As I’ve posted many times re the Finances of City, Net Spend is a bit of an irrelevance.  It’s not how City manage their budgets, and with so many fees as undisclosed, let alone failure to lock in agent fees, signing fees, loan fees, it can be pretty inaccurate.

If I take a few comparisons - Bristol City FC not BC Holdings as it more accurately shows the pure football side

Season 16/17 versus 17/18 and 18/19

Income: £10.3m vs £17.1m vs £17.7m - starting to plateau

Profit on Transfers (not net spend): £0.1m vs £0.3m vs £38.1m - includes Bryan, Flint, Reid, Kelly, Magnússon 

Wages: £15.4m vs £23.1m vs £24.6m - gone up a lot, and will continue to, expect it to be getting close to £30m this year

Amortisation: £2.3m vs £8.1m vs £8.1m - growing, and a big strain on our accounts.  Likely to be a big jump this season too.

Op Costs: £6.0m vs £9.8m vs £10.4 - probably levelling out now

re Players we are now starting to see the truer view of LJ’s transfer dealings, that is players he signed and sold.  Two sides to this.  We can all say that Flint, Bryan, Reid and Kelly (£38m) weren’t his signings, and there will be a bun fight re Reid because he instigated the position change.  Another bun fight re Kelly too.  But ultimately, whichever side if the fence you’re on, apply the same consistency to the manager who comes in and replaces LJ, because he will leave players for the new manager to make profit on too (hopefully).

Personally I think recruitment has improved hugely.  The calibre of players brought in is fantastic.  The proof of this is not on paper, but how they are formed into a team on the pitch.  My view is split!

Are we seeing some players brought in as a business transaction?  Are the likes of Adelakun, Eisa and Szmodics a case of buying up talented lower division players, give them a few games, loan them out and sell for a profit (ignoring wage costs over their time here)?

Finally, if you buy predominantly younger players, you must expect most of them to develop.  Is that down to our coaching, or just natural progression?  Somewhere in between imho!  Was Josh Brownhill down to LJ, or just getting better through age and physical development?  If you are on the side that believes his progress was down to LJ, then use the same consistency with his best mate O’Dowda.

And if you take that view on younger players, ask yourself the same as to whether he’s developed any of our players over 25?  Hunt? Weimann? Smith? Watkins? Baker?  Maybe compare to Wilder with players like McGoldrick.

In terms of where I am, I think he’s doing a decent job, but he’s been wasteful with the club’s resources.  I think he could achieve a play-off challenge with a much trimmer squad, and without a heavy burden on our finances....which ultimately would mean he doesn't need to trade.  At the moment he’s allowed to throw “players” at any problem.  Would love to see him be forced to resolve problems by training, coaching and drilling a “team”!

 

We operate the Chelsea model in our transfer dealings to some extent. Players bought at a young age developed on loan after a year or two playing at U23 level (keep in mind we play players considerably younger than 23 in our U23 team). If they do well they are nothing more than an asset, if they do really well they go into the first team squad.

However the obvious Moore Bakinson Sczmodics,Jennah etc aside it then becomes about who we bring in to compete in the first team squad and how they fit.

If you just look from today we have Kalas who is having a nightmare season and Nagy both never fit/or look fit. (12m right there) Luckily Williams was available on a free and is now thought of as being captain material if not for Smith. WE Got lucky with the signing but unlucky with the injuries that made him a target.

Wells I think is a good buy, particularly if he can get on the end of Elliason crosses. Elliason himself was not played until LJ had no option and right now is easily our most saleable asset.

The other two window signings we are yet to know what they are like, but the guy from Leicester hardly covered himself with glory for the Birmingham third goal. Time will tell.

I was listening to Billic today and he was pretty pleased about how WBA over powered a Millwall team that relies on power. Both of these sides bullied us as they were clearly stronger than our midfield....HNM, Nagy, Smith, Patterson et al all good players but not really aggressive or powerful enough. Combine this with our inability to create anything like as many chances as the other promotion contenders makes us a bit soft, particularly at home. 

Lets hope the Norwegian is the guy we need to toughen us up, if he is not then I don't see us winning promotion by any route

[Rich]

2 hours ago, Robbored said:

Both were at Argyle as part of their development into competitive men’s football. That’s how the academy works. Young City players gain experience elsewhere as their is no competitive football available at City.

So you agree, they were developed at Plymouth.  Please don't talk down to me, I know how the development of young players works. 

No competitive football here! What do our under 18's and under 23 teams do in the professional development leagues?

[Robbored]

15 minutes ago, Rich said:

No competitive football here! What do our under 18's and under 23 teams do in the professional development leagues?

When Brian Tinnion spoke at Senior Reds he explained that there is no competitive men’s football available outside of the first team squad and that’s why City loan out many younger players and why BT sounds hours on the road following up the various loanee’s.

The u18s and u23 are not all that competitive because of no league structure and are played like training matches.

[Rich]

2 minutes ago, Robbored said:

When Brian Tinnion spoke at Senior Reds he explained that there is no competitive men’s football available outside of the first team squad and that’s why City loan out many younger players and why BT sounds hours on the road following up the various loanee’s.

The u18s and u23 are not all that competitive because of no league structure and are played like training matches.

Ah! I see now, you had to have Brian Tinnion explain how the system works, thanks for passing that on.

So when they play these games for the under 18's and 23's, they don't actually compete with the opposition? 

Obviously the players that are progressing to a certain level need to be tested in proper league games by going out on loan.

I'm as old as you Robbo and I know how it works.

[Robbored]

26 minutes ago, Rich said:

Ah! I see now, you had to have Brian Tinnion explain how the system works, thanks for passing that on.

So when they play these games for the under 18's and 23's, they don't actually compete with the opposition? 

Obviously the players that are progressing to a certain level need to be tested in proper league games by going out on loan.

Of course they compete with the opposition but it’s nothing like the pace or hurly burly of a real league match. It’s boys football essentially.

[Spike]

9 hours ago, Robbored said:

I daresay that there are plenty of managers out there who would seriously struggle with having to sell your better players every season - SC for example............

You make that statement like he's had to sell all the best players and bring in dross, that simply isn't the case.

For almost every quality player we've sold we've replaced with just as good if not better.

For all the players we've had to sell we still have a squad capable of competing for a play-off spot and yet we played better football in the 16/17 season when you could argue the squad was not as strong as it is now, especially in depth.

[Guest]

10 hours ago, REDOXO said:

We operate the Chelsea model in our transfer dealings to some extent. Players bought at a young age developed on loan after a year or two playing at U23 level (keep in mind we play players considerably younger than 23 in our U23 team). If they do well they are nothing more than an asset, if they do really well they go into the first team squad.

However the obvious Moore Bakinson Sczmodics,Jennah etc aside it then becomes about who we bring in to compete in the first team squad and how they fit.

If you just look from today we have Kalas who is having a nightmare season and Nagy both never fit/or look fit. (12m right there) Luckily Williams was available on a free and is now thought of as being captain material if not for Smith. WE Got lucky with the signing but unlucky with the injuries that made him a target.

Wells I think is a good buy, particularly if he can get on the end of Elliason crosses. Elliason himself was not played until LJ had no option and right now is easily our most saleable asset.

The other two window signings we are yet to know what they are like, but the guy from Leicester hardly covered himself with glory for the Birmingham third goal. Time will tell.

I was listening to Billic today and he was pretty pleased about how WBA over powered a Millwall team that relies on power. Both of these sides bullied us as they were clearly stronger than our midfield....HNM, Nagy, Smith, Patterson et al all good players but not really aggressive or powerful enough. Combine this with our inability to create anything like as many chances as the other promotion contenders makes us a bit soft, particularly at home. 

Lets hope the Norwegian is the guy we need to toughen us up, if he is not then I don't see us winning promotion by any route

Unless Kalas gets fit and stays fit, he could become a bad signing.

8 million is loads for a centre back. And I thought he was just about the most guaranteed quality signing we could get!

Obviously the club could never have predicted the injuries he has had.

Really hope he can get back fit and stay fit. He's our best defender imo when match fit with a run of games.

[jambodinho]

Should LJ move on (either poached by a prem team or sacked) does our next manager/coach get the same backing? Will we see similar fees going out and numbers of players being traded? Will they survive 2 of the longest losing/games without winning streaks in the clubs history? Will be interesting to see if it continues when the next guy comes in. 

[JBFC II]

7 hours ago, Spike said:

You make that statement like he's had to sell all the best players and bring in dross, that simply isn't the case.

For almost every quality player we've sold we've replaced with just as good if not better.

For all the players we've had to sell we still have a squad capable of competing for a play-off spot and yet we played better football in the 16/17 season when you could argue the squad was not as strong as it is now, especially in depth.

We finished 17th in the 16/17 season, the football was nowhere near what it is now...

[Spike]

3 hours ago, JBFC II said:

We finished 17th in the 16/17 season, the football was nowhere near what it is now...

We finished 17th but in our last 10 games when we'd finally gelled and had a genuine style of play we won 6, lost 3 and drew 1. That style of play led into the 17/18 season where we ended up 11th but had arguably our best season under Johnson in terms of the football we played and we managed to gain respect from so many media outlets because our style of football was impressive. 
In 18/19 the football was peaking and then we lost it when we had arguably our worst January transfer window in a very long time, since that LJ seems to have given up on that great football we were playing and although we're getting results this season the football is awful and it shows in our home form as unless a team comes to the Gate looking to take the game to us we struggle to break them down because we genuinely have lost our attacking flair.

If LJ's logic is that ugly football can get us promoted then I could understand the change and focus on long balls and crossing but despite us starting off incredibly well it only took one poor month in December to slow us down a lot and now we approach the end of the season in arguably our hardest month of fixtures still to play. It wasn't so long ago that LJ was talking about the players being tired and it affecting us, well, from the 12th to the 29th we have 5 games, 5 games in 18 days is a lot so if it really does affect the players it's going to make a tough month much tougher, especially when we have an in form league leaders in West Brom, Leeds who are due a turn in form, Derby who are making a positive turn in form and then our best chance of getting points is Millwall and Huddersfield, both away games.

To sum it up, had we stuck with the football style we had in the 16/17 or 17/18 season we'd more than likely have a much stronger home form, a lot more happy fans and we'd be seeing the potential a lot of our players have coming to the surface. Johnson still doesn't know how to get the best from his players which has been the issue since the end of the 17/18 season, he really needs to nail down a way to get this squad playing football where they can control the game and take it to the opposition rather than relying on them to make mistakes that we can counter or capitalise on.

[Rich]

13 hours ago, Robbored said:

Of course they compete with the opposition but it’s nothing like the pace or hurly burly of a real league match. It’s boys football essentially.

So they do compete, just not at the level of league competition, just on a par with the oposition.

Under 23's is boys football is it? Can you enlighten me on how our more senior pros sometimes use under 23 matches to get back to match fitness, if it doesn't provide a level of competitiveness.

[Robbored]

7 minutes ago, Rich said:

So they do compete, just not at the level of league competition, just on a par with the oposition.

Under 23's is boys football is it? Can you enlighten me on how our more senior pros sometimes use under 23 matches to get back to match fitness, if it doesn't provide a level of competitiveness.

I haven’t  watched an u23 game for years but based on what BT said at Senior Reds the competition at that level is nowhere near the  competitiveness of the Championship.

That said, that type of game is ideal for senior pro’s returning from injury to get match fit - it’s a game after all and that’s what’s needed to be ready for consideration of the first team squad.

[Davefevs]

12 hours ago, Spike said:

You make that statement like he's had to sell all the best players and bring in dross, that simply isn't the case.

For almost every quality player we've sold we've replaced with just as good if not better.

For all the players we've had to sell we still have a squad capable of competing for a play-off spot and yet we played better football in the 16/17 season when you could argue the squad was not as strong as it is now, especially in depth.

I started writing a detailed response to this last night, but abandoned it. I was trying to show how much we’d spent to replace each player (Flint, Bryan, Reid) and the cost to do so. It didn’t read well, nor can we directly attribute a replacement either, so I deleted it.

In brief, it’s not like we’ve been raided Lg1/2 for their replacements is it in a rinse and repeat cycle.

Flint - Kalas loan, Webster, Kalas (the good news financially was Webster)

Bryan - DaSilva loan, Kelly, DaSilva (Kelly a real boost)

Reid - Weimann, Eisa, Afobe, Wells

Alongside these LJ has been able to improve other positions too.  

5 hours ago, JBFC II said:

We finished 17th in the 16/17 season, the football was nowhere near what it is now...

It was better!!!!!

[Spike]

16 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I started writing a detailed response to this last night, but abandoned it. I was trying to show how much we’d spent to replace each player (Flint, Bryan, Reid) and the cost to do so. It didn’t read well, nor can we directly attribute a replacement either, so I deleted it.

In brief, it’s not like we’ve been raided Lg1/2 for their replacements is it in a rinse and repeat cycle.

Flint - Kalas loan, Webster, Kalas (the good news financially was Webster)

Bryan - DaSilva loan, Kelly, DaSilva (Kelly a real boost)

Reid - Weimann, Eisa, Afobe, Wells

Alongside these LJ has been able to improve other positions too.  

It was better!!!!!

Whilst I understand your point the expectation is to sell players high, buy low, develop them and then sell high again in a repeated cycle. My reason to say we have big expectations is because although we've done that we've also spent fairly big, beating our biggest transfer fee with Kalas and also spending £3-8m on an 18 year old midfielder.

I don't feel our squad was better in the past with the exception of Webster being our best defender. When you look at our options at center back right now it's probably the strongest we've ever had at one singular time, DaSilva is an incredible talent at left back, Bentley was a cool £4m and has been incredible at times and now we've got Wells and Diedhiou. I'd say our weakest point is the midfield but when was the last time we had a solid/impressive midfield?

As it stands we have a squad capable of making it to the Premier League, definitely if we could get Henriksen integrated and playing to his full potential but I think we're far more likely to finish lower mid-table as LJ's tactics just are not working for us.

[Phileas Fogg]

5 minutes ago, Spike said:

As it stands we have a squad capable of making it to the Premier League, definitely if we could get Henriksen integrated and playing to his full potential but I think we're far more likely to finish lower mid-table as LJ's tactics just are not working for us.

I really don't understand this point of view.. granted, we need to improve at home and get much better at breaking down teams that defend a lead at AG.. but we're 7th and 5 points off 2nd, if overall his tactics 'just are not working' we simply wouldn't be in that position.