The Pearson Debate - Something Not Mentioned Yet…

[Mr Popodopolous]

Think that, possibly, Harry has a certain bias on the recruitment side.

Biases maybe...hard to say but a preference from a relatively narrow pool of players? ie Younger players either from top flight academies or lower Leagues who can be developed. Through more traditional scouting means rather than a Brentford approach say.

Edited October 25, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

24 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I have not read through the whole thread so apologies if already covered but I would ask and especially ask @Harry

Do Brentford rely quite a bit on data etc? I think they do!

Couple of articles in the Times back in August regarding Brentford and their recruitment model. I never got round to posting them but maybe now...

 

The myth is that they are data driven.  The have a top class data capability undoubtedly, but what is often missed is their extensive physical scouting network.

57 minutes ago, Robbored said:

I think Harry was tho………..

That was my entire point Dave. 

Are you suggesting Harry is an average fan.  Just by his posts on here, even you can see he’s not that.

I’ll let Harry defend himself though.

Another poster, an “average fan” forged a great opposition scouting role for himself in the pro game, working for an ex-England manager at club level.

Just because you don’t have the skill set, doesn’t mean others don’t.  Don’t judge everyone by your own level.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

The myth is that they are data driven.  The have a top class data capability undoubtedly, but what is often missed is their extensive physical scouting network.

I know bits about it but happy to look further- saw an interesting snippet that they think outside the box too, in that they have been known to read fans forums for suggestions, unsure which article it was in but definitely remember seeing it mentioned.

Certainly from what I did read a little earlier, the manager gets very little say in the comings and goings.

Edited October 25, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous

[Harry]

1 hour ago, TonyTonyTony said:

@Harry I know Sean personally well. He admits he is snowed under and the infrastructure around him his not right. However your OP comes off as very critical of him. He is a local lad- went to school in Posset and is a true red. 

If you know him personally Tony, then you’ll know that he’s actually a Leeds fan. 
 

[Lrrr]

2 hours ago, Robbored said:

He is a former professional footballer so he’ll definitely know what to look for in any promising player. My point is that your average football fan lacks the necessary skills to do that.

Which is why I said if you take 5 mins to read something someone has sent in as a report you'll know if they know what they're talking about or not, if they do stick their details in a pile of people you know you can take their opinion seriously in future.

[Mr Popodopolous]

23 hours ago, Oh Louie louie said:

20 odd years now we have had sl.

Look where we are.

A dogfight.

Imagine another 20 years of this

 

False. Well partially false.

20 years ago we were midtable to upper half of League One.

Now we are lower midtable in the Championship. The club, the fanbase have grown- go and check turnout 10, let alone 20 years ago. There has IMO been a permanent growth in the club and fanbase- but then fanbases nationally have grown too so it's hard to say if one goes without the other. Bit of both maybe.

Things have stalled badly in the last 2-3 years, no doubt but it's not necessarily the same, and the game itself has changed a lot in 20 years for better and worse.

Edited October 26, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

On a general recruitment note, people rightly cite Watkins from Exeter.

I have to ask though, had we signed Maupay and Benrahma instead of Brentford for relatively low fees as relatively unheralded but definitely young players a) Would fans have been all that excited or b) Would they have made the impact here as there and hit the jackpot- either through promotion to the PL or huge sales? They certainly have/had the raw ability...wonder if they were eyes or data first.

I doubt they would even have been on our radar in 2017 and 2018 respectively whenever it was...

Edited October 26, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous

[exAtyeoMax]

6 hours ago, REDOXO said:

I’m not really very comfortable of people’s names put on a faceless forum by a faceless poster. 
 

Whatever your rationale for doing so, it is completely unnecessary. 

It’s taken directly from the Evening Post article. It’s just stating how the recruitment team is set up. Have a word with the journalist who wrote it, or the press association if you’re concerned.

[exAtyeoMax]

5 hours ago, REDOXO said:

 

 

There in lay the problem. If you refer to a source and link to it then ok. But In this case the post was direct naming individuals. The excuse being as above it’s already out there. 
 

Im not completely sure what already out there means but in this case almost no one on this forum would know or care. However in this case these people have their names put up here in order to justify a cheap response to another poster. 
 

In case no one has noticed the atmosphere here and at the WBA Game was toxic and the naming of those guys here in that atmosphere in that context is inexcusable for no reason whatsoever but as a response to a two bit post, they are just employees of the club! 

Some need to ******* grow up! 

Sorry but that poster had linked both articles in his post and then proceeded to state that Harry was categorically wrong about the recruitment team being made up of analysts. He’d obviously read the articles because he was directly referencing them…how quoting a section of that article is a “cheap response” I don’t know! 

[Oh Louie louie]

Im afraid i see it diffrently mr pop.

You do recall how long it took us to get promoted back in the 00s under steve?

Every season was a dogfight to make the play offs.

Yes the fanbase might have grown the last few seasons.

But if we carry on to struggle, attendences will fall, always has historically.

We are much closer to where he found us then the prem.

Thats a fact.

I mean if we do go down mr pop, you expect 20k to turn up?

Mr kew took us from being bankrupt to being known as the richest club outside the first divsion.

And we were known as that in many circles,

He did that in 5 years mr pop on gates mostly from 6500 to 9000.

 

 

[Oh Louie louie]

The leauge table doesnt lie at the end of the season.

Its a miracle on this form we are mid table.

We can all agree on that.

[David Brent]

23 minutes ago, Oh Louie louie said:

The leauge table doesnt lie at the end of the season.

Its a miracle on this form we are mid table.

We can all agree on that.

Presumably that meant we must have had some good form too

[Oh Louie louie]

At home? are you joking?

Away, i dunno 2 good games?

You seen any?

[Kid in the Riot]

8 hours ago, TonyTonyTony said:

He is a local lad- went to school in Posset and is a true red. 

Even if that were true, it hardly matters where he went to school, least of all in Portishead. 

[Robbored]

7 hours ago, Davefevs said:

The myth is that they are data driven.  The have a top class data capability undoubtedly, but what is often missed is their extensive physical scouting network.

Are you suggesting Harry is an average fan.  Just by his posts on here, even you can see he’s not that.

I’ll let Harry defend himself though.

Just because you don’t have the skill set, doesn’t mean others don’t.  Don’t judge everyone by your own level.

Of course - anyone who posts on here is a average fan. Why would I think otherwise? 

[Phileas Fogg]

43 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Of course - anyone who posts on here is a average fan. Why would I think otherwise? 

Because you’re obviously not as ignorant as you like to make out. You’re a very regular poster on here, and as such it would be impossible for you not to notice that Harry clearly has had dealings in scouting/player ID.

As Dave said above, just because *you* may not know what to look for in a potential player - doesn’t mean that applies to the entirety of OTIB.

[Robbored]

7 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Because you’re obviously not as ignorant as you like to make out. You’re a very regular poster on here, and as such it would be impossible for you not to notice that Harry clearly has had dealings in scouting/player ID.

As Dave said above, just because *you* may not know what to look for in a potential player - doesn’t mean that applies to the entirety of OTIB.

I have absolutely no idea who or what Harry is…..in much the same way I have no idea who or what most posters are or what they do.

I do rate the quality of posters tho and there are several on here whose comments I always read and Harry isn’t necessarily one one of them. That said I have read some of his posts.

 

[Phileas Fogg]

7 minutes ago, Robbored said:

I have absolutely no idea who or what Harry is…..in much the same way I have no idea who or what most posters are or what they do.

I do rate the quality of posters tho and there are several on here whose comments I always read and Harry isn’t necessarily one one of them. That said I have read some of his posts.

Well, if that's the case then it's almost an impressive level of ignorance. Almost 40,000 posts yet doesn't recognise a very well known poster.

[Rob k]

34 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Well, if that's the case then it's almost an impressive level of ignorance. Almost 40,000 posts yet doesn't recognise a very well known poster.

It’s bullshit that’s why - i may not agree with everything the likes of Harry, Dave, KITR etc  say but i know they are generally recognised on the forum and are informed and enjoy their posts. 

[Phileas Fogg]

Just now, Rob k said:

It’s bullshit that’s why - i may not agree with everything the likes of Harry, Dave, KITR etc  say but i know they are generally recognised on the forum and are informed and enjoy their posts. 

Exactly. I know Robbored likes to be a troll, but the constant feigning of ignorance is a bit strange. 

[Harry]

11 hours ago, Robbored said:

I think Harry was tho………..

That was my entire point Dave. 

You misunderstand Robbo. 
I’m suggesting that there are some fans out there who do take an interest in such things and regularly attend other games and they should be utilised. I’m not talking about an average Joe rocking up to any random game, having a few beers with their mates and then saying “yeah, I watched x and they were good”. But more nuanced than that, but I’m sure you knew that already. 

You may not know very much about football yourself but there are plenty of City fans who do grasp the intricacies of the game. 
 

I’m not suggesting this is the solution to many problems but it’s a resource that is currently untapped and could be useful if organised well. 

[Harry]

1 hour ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Because you’re obviously not as ignorant as you like to make out. You’re a very regular poster on here, and as such it would be impossible for you not to notice that Harry clearly has had dealings in scouting/player ID.

As Dave said above, just because *you* may not know what to look for in a potential player - doesn’t mean that applies to the entirety of OTIB.

 

1 hour ago, Robbored said:

I have absolutely no idea who or what Harry is…..in much the same way I have no idea who or what most posters are or what they do.

I do rate the quality of posters tho and there are several on here whose comments I always read and Harry isn’t necessarily one one of them. That said I have read some of his posts.

 

 

55 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Well, if that's the case then it's almost an impressive level of ignorance. Almost 40,000 posts yet doesn't recognise a very well known poster.

 

18 minutes ago, Rob k said:

It’s bullshit that’s why - i may not agree with everything the likes of Harry, Dave, KITR etc  say but i know they are generally recognised on the forum and are informed and enjoy their posts. 

 

17 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Exactly. I know Robbored likes to be a troll, but the constant feigning of ignorance is a bit strange. 

Don’t worry lads. 
I don’t really know who Robbored is either. I’ve heard he’s a gashead bus driver who got slammed back in his box once by GJ, but that’s just hearsay. I’m sure he’s just an average fan like the rest of us.

[Midlands Robin]

Doesn't a lot of the issue depend on what type of calls from agents were allegedly being missed?

If City's recruitment team were actively pursuing a player and had missed returning calls from their agent then I'd say that was a bad thing.

If, on the other hand, the calls that weren't being picked up were cold calls from agents trying to hawk their roster around the market then I don't see the problem missing those types.

I'd rather we were identifying targets and going after them and not relying on an agent calling on the off chance.

[And Its Smith]

13 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

Would Henri Lansbury have been a good signing for us? Imo he would have continued to play like he did last season under Pearson, so I am glad we let him go.

But for Luton he seems to have been an excellent signing. They are 5th in the league.

They have lost 4 regular first team players and replaced them with 4 players that would not even get into our team imo. 

They have also signed some young players who have yet to make much of an impact.

The main problem imo is I don't believe Coventry (4th), Luton (5th), Huddersfield (8th), Millwall (10th) or Blackpool (11th) have better quality of players than us.

Even Middiesbrough (6th) are in that position down to organisation, hard work and Warnock's tactics more than quality of players.

I like some of the signings other clubs have made, by Coventry and Blackpool for example, but there's also a lot of obvious decent championship players like those Stoke and QPR have signed that were maybe out of our budget. And some very average players teams have signed for free.

I keep saying it but coaching and tactics are the biggest problem. Recruitment has to improve of course, but it's not the biggest problem we have imo.

Exactly this.  Most of the time on OTIB it is 'we need X player' or 'we need a new X' or 'X isnt good enough'

These are from fans who have supposedly watched football for years and years.  Players have always got better/worse under different managers and in different systems.  The player is exactly the same player but sometimes the differences can look enormous.  

The tactics to me look very basic and I just hope it is part of a bigger Pearson plan.  I can't think what that plan is though! 

[Davefevs]

23 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

Would Henri Lansbury have been a good signing for us? Imo he would have continued to play like he did last season under Pearson, so I am glad we let him go.

But for Luton he seems to have been an excellent signing. They are 5th in the league.

They have lost 4 regular first team players and replaced them with 4 players that would not even get into our team imo. 

They have also signed some young players who have yet to make much of an impact.

The main problem imo is I don't believe Coventry (4th), Luton (5th), Huddersfield (8th), Millwall (10th) or Blackpool (11th) have better quality of players than us.

Even Middiesbrough (6th) are in that position down to organisation, hard work and Warnock's tactics more than quality of players.

I like some of the signings other clubs have made, by Coventry and Blackpool for example, but there's also a lot of obvious decent championship players like those Stoke and QPR have signed that were maybe out of our budget. And some very average players teams have signed for free.

I keep saying it but coaching and tactics are the biggest problem. Recruitment has to improve of course, but it's not the biggest problem we have imo.

He’s started 4 games (6 subs) - 544 minutes - fyi.  I’m not sure superlatives like “excellent” signing quite fit.

Both Coventry and Luton are benefitting from a cohesive plan over several seasons….Luton punctuated by Jones to Stoke, but he’s now back, carrying on.

I agree, I don’t think their squads are much different to ours….but as above they have a clear plan, a footballing identity (arghhhhh).

Re coaching and tactics, some areas to improve undoubtedly, but quite possibly a result of a poorly built squad, manifesting over 2/3 seasons and there not being ONE system that really suits the personnel.  I do think he needs to pick one and stick to it, and accept that sometimes it’s gonna look like he’s got it wrong, but with the upside that at least it will become more cohesive through regularity.

Just replied to the Bristol Live tweet.

 

[IAmNick]

20 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

Would Henri Lansbury have been a good signing for us? Imo he would have continued to play like he did last season under Pearson, so I am glad we let him go.

But for Luton he seems to have been an excellent signing. They are 5th in the league.

They have lost 4 regular first team players and replaced them with 4 players that would not even get into our team imo. 

They have also signed some young players who have yet to make much of an impact.

The main problem imo is I don't believe Coventry (4th), Luton (5th), Huddersfield (8th), Millwall (10th) or Blackpool (11th) have better quality of players than us.

Even Middiesbrough (6th) are in that position down to organisation, hard work and Warnock's tactics more than quality of players.

I like some of the signings other clubs have made, by Coventry and Blackpool for example, but there's also a lot of obvious decent championship players like those Stoke and QPR have signed that were maybe out of our budget. And some very average players teams have signed for free.

I keep saying it but coaching and tactics are the biggest problem. Recruitment has to improve of course, but it's not the biggest problem we have imo.

I think there's a lot more to a player being good that just whether they're, well, good.

Look at Torres. 65 goals in 100 for Liverpool, one of the best strikers in the world... then at Chelsea?

Players suit teams, systems, and those around them. You need to sign players who fit in to your system, tactics, and how you want to play - not sign players then change your system/tactics to suit them.

My guess is Luton did a better job at assessing where and how Lansbury fit into their system than us.

Our problem imo has been that recruitment and system/tactics have been treated as two separate entities because we've had non football people in charge of one of those things - and we desperately need someone to bridge that gap. We sign lots of decent players, they get here, and they're crap... or rather, they look crap. They haven't become crap overnight, they're still good players, but they don't fit our team.

At our level simply signing good players isn't enough.

I think we kind of agree overall, but I come down on the side of saying that it's a recruitment issue, as it's a lot easier to change who you're signing than to change your footballing philosophy/system/tactics/whatever.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, IAmNick said:

Our problem imo has been that recruitment and system/tactics have been treated as two separate entities because we've had non football people in charge of one of those things - and we desperately need someone to bridge that gap. We sign lots of decent players, they get here, and they're crap... or rather, they look crap. They haven't become crap overnight, they're still good players, but they don't fit our team.

At our level simply signing good players isn't enough.

I so agree.

There are very few of the 60+ LJ/MA signings that I thought were bad players on paper (of the ones I knew anything about), but several where I might’ve questioned a) how they’d fit in to the current or future planned playing system, or b) where they’d get minutes with 2/3 players in front of them.

[bcfcredandwhite]

On 25/10/2021 at 01:07, Harry said:

I’ve had a long break from otib. But I’ve conceded and just had to come back given the debate of late. 
 

Firstly, let me be quite clear on this. I don’t want to see Pearson sacked, but he has an awful lot to prove, for me.
 

However, there is something that I’ve not seen mentioned in the Pearson debate/state of the club debate in these recent turgid weeks. 
 

Recruitment. 
And specifically, the Recruitment Department. 
 

Let me explain. When Pearson arrived, we’d been a few years down the line of a pretty horrendous player recruitment process. You all know my thoughts on Ashton (and I’m glad you all finally saw what I was telling you all 4/5 years ago!). 
The recruitment team basically consisted of Ashton and…..ummmm, no one else. He was the CEO, but was essentially acting as the Director Of Football, the Head of Recruitment and the Chief Scout, all rolled into one. Too much power for one man. Yes we know, we’ve been through that story all summer and autumn. 
 

Once he departed, what were we left with. Well, you’ll see it was made very clear in the Post article a couple of weeks ago. We have a chap called Sean Gilhespy and he has a team of 3 or 4 data analysts and a couple of interns. Yep. That’s your lot. Gilhespy himself was historically a data analyst too. 
So in short, we’ve got 4 guys and a couple of unpaid uni-leavers who all come from a background of number crunching and data slicing. Yes, they’ve all done their uni courses in football analytics, but none of them have any experience of professional football, nor of actual player talent identification. 

Gilhespy is now the person who is taking the calls from the agents and is the first port of call for any recruitment queries, player availability, transfer talk etc. 
Now, if I was to tell you that I know a number of agents in the game, all with a healthy bounty of players, and I said to you that Mr Gilhespy doesn’t answer his phone or his emails, you might be pretty disappointed. 
I have no cross to bear and no reason to doubt that Mr Gilhespy is a nice enough chap and may well be a good data cruncher, but he is not the person who should be talking to agents about player transfers. I know through these agents with whom I have contact that he is seen as utterly useless and completely out of his depth. Data cruncher - no problem. Acting Head of Recruitment - wow!!! Unreal. 
 

I think, though I can’t be 100% sure, that we are probably the only professional football club in the country who doesn’t currently have a Head of Recruitment or Chief Scout. That is the real scandal that is currently going on at our club. We’ve got a chap who did a uni course on football data analysis as our Head of Recruitment and 3 of his data crunching pals running the show. We’ve got an absolute amateur in charge of taking calls from agents, which he invariably doesn’t answer. It’s an utter utter shambles. 
Steve Lansdown seems to be happy continuing with this amateur recruitment set up that Ashton left him with, a set up which SL is probably happy with as he thinks we’re finding gems from an in-house database and not having to talk to those dirty agents touting their players around. Oh, how sweet and innocent. **** your morals Steve. This is football. You alone are not going to change the moral fibre of this sport. If you want to run a recruitment department which ignores player agents then you’ll always be 24th in line in this division for a players signature. 
 

Let’s bring this back to Pearson. 
We all know the Leicester story. Nige was a strong manager, with trusted assistants, but backed up with a head of recruitment in Steve Walsh, who pretty much signed the title winning team. 
The recruitment position is so so essential. Without Steve Walsh and Craig Shakespeare, Nige doesn’t put that Leicester team in the position he got them. That’s not to play down his achievements, Nige clearly had a major influence on that squad, but he was not responsible for putting that squad together and he also had an assistant coach, without whom he hasn’t really achieved any modicum of success (for reference, look at Pearson’s record with and without Shakespeare). It ain’t very pretty. 

Fast forward to February 2021. Pearson joins us. It’s clear that Ashton is departing. It’s clear that Pearson is a manager who needs his trusted back room team. We know for an absolute fact that Pearson is not a man who likes/wants to deal with agents. It’s clear that we are under financial constraints. 
Given all of that, what’s the most important thing we needed. Yep, you’ve guessed it - a Head of Recruitment. 
I must confess, I was absolutely amazed that we didn’t manage to bring Steve Walsh in. He should have been the first person SL needed to call once Ashton was on his way. 
We’ve left a huge void in one of the most important roles at a football club. Even more so given what was required and the financial situation. 
 

Ultimately we’ve made 7 signings so far under Nige. 3 of them were clearly his own call from the Leicester connections. Obviously 2 young prospects with very very little pro football on their cv’s. But we have to add Weimann and Baker too, both of whom should easily have been released. Both were on high wages and hadn’t really proven anything over the previous season or 2. Yes, they both took pay cuts, but they are still incredibly handsomely paid and still 2 of the higher earners we have. 
Both should have gone. But the problem was this - we had no head of recruitment. So we had no idea of any other players we could realistically have brought in to replace them. So I’d imagine Nige had to reluctantly accept their return - there was nothing else on the table!! 
 

If we’d employed a proper experienced head of recruitment when Nige joined in Feb, and also employed some proper experienced talent spotters (ie Scouts and a Chief Scout) to actually physically get out there and watch 10-20 games a week, rather than crunch some numbers on a computer, we might’ve given Nige a very different looking squad this season. 
 

The simple fact that we have a Manager who doesn’t like the recruitment/agent side of the game, a new CEO who isn’t particularly responsible or experienced in that part of the game and a data crunching head of recruitment who ignores calls from agents, topped off with an owner who seems to actively encourage us to steer away from those pesky agents and try to implement our own holier than thou model, basically puts us at the bottom of the list for player availability. 
There were plentiful deals that could have been had in the summer had we acted early enough or shown any semblance of interest in, and we could’ve improved this squad without having to shell out high wages to 2 returning players and 2 other 35 year old has-beens. 
The fact there is a tight financial situation is the very reason we shouldn’t have signed Simpson, King, Baker & Weimann. It’s the very reason we needed proper experienced people running the summer recruitment and dealing with the players and agents, the very reason we should’ve been in conversation for the best deals we could possibly get rather than ignoring the calls and thinking we could do things our own way. 
 

Nige has effectively signed 7 players. 5 or 6 of them featured in pretty much every game this season. So whilst this is still far from being “nigels squad”, half of the outfield first team each week IS his squad. 
Therefore, yes, we can begin to judge Nige on this teams performances as he has 7 of his own players around him and he really really should have been doing much better than what’s gone so far.

But, in his defence, he’s being handed an absolute shit-show of a recruitment team. 
 

My thoughts - Pearson will be given time. No doubt.  But he should rightly take some flak for performances this season. He really should be getting more fight from these players. But, we are going absolutely nowhere - correction, we are going backwards at a rate of knots, until we get a proper recruitment team on board. 

Lansdown needs to pull out whatever stops he can, and bring in a Head of Recruitment as a matter of absolute urgency. This needs to be supplemented by a host of scouts (not just 2 or 3 part-timers, we need countless bodies in every area of the country, an army of scouts watching 20+ games a week between them and reporting to a Chief) - actual physical scouts going and watching players and having conversations with agents and other scouts at games - it’s called networking. And you can’t get that from looking at a bunch of numbers on a screen. Without that network, there is zero relationships, and without relationships with agents, you are bottom of the list when it comes to an agent placing their player with a new club. 

I have zero problem with the data analysts. It’s a perfectly valid part of the modern game. But they shouldn’t be the first port of call on player recruitment. They should be there to back up any scouting reports, not to be the instigators of player ID. And Sean the number crunching shy-guy certainly shouldn’t be the person responsible for speaking to the agents. 
 

This is where change is paramount. And must be effected immediately. 
Everything else that’s being argued about on here is purely secondary - without a properly functioning recruitment team, we will go backwards, fast. 
 

Anyway - good to be back.

You seem to be ‘in the know’ about the recruitment setup. I’m not, so I bow to your superior knowledge and, assuming it’s true then there isn’t much to disagree with here - except your references to Weimann who, IMHO, is one of the few players (along with Kalas, Bentley, Massengo And Semenyo) from the ‘old’ regime who emerge with any credit.

PS
Yes, I know, I’ve changed my tune on Massengo - I used to think he was another of Ashton/LJs ‘duds’ but he’s improved a lot of late and looks like he has an exciting future ahead. I was wrong about him and I’m delighted!!

Edited October 26, 2021 by bcfcredandwhite
Add words

[And Its Smith]

46 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

I think there's a lot more to a player being good that just whether they're, well, good.

Look at Torres. 65 goals in 100 for Liverpool, one of the best strikers in the world... then at Chelsea?

Players suit teams, systems, and those around them. You need to sign players who fit in to your system, tactics, and how you want to play - not sign players then change your system/tactics to suit them.

My guess is Luton did a better job at assessing where and how Lansbury fit into their system than us.

Our problem imo has been that recruitment and system/tactics have been treated as two separate entities because we've had non football people in charge of one of those things - and we desperately need someone to bridge that gap. We sign lots of decent players, they get here, and they're crap... or rather, they look crap. They haven't become crap overnight, they're still good players, but they don't fit our team.

At our level simply signing good players isn't enough.

I think we kind of agree overall, but I come down on the side of saying that it's a recruitment issue, as it's a lot easier to change who you're signing than to change your footballing philosophy/system/tactics/whatever.

Agree to a point but also surely Pearson can eventually get more from this squad of players?  He’s got a decent squad of players and needs to I find a way to maximise them. 

[IAmNick]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I so agree.

There are very few of the 60+ LJ/MA signings that I thought were bad players on paper (of the ones I knew anything about), but several where I might’ve questioned a) how they’d fit in to the current or future planned playing system, or b) where they’d get minutes with 2/3 players in front of them.

Yeah I agree.

I also (usually) disagree with the insinuation some players were lazy or whatever - I think they probably joined with good intentions then quickly found out the weird situation, and like any of us at a job where we feel unappreciated or unwanted morale dropped, and that doesn't take long to spread. Could certainly argue they could have been more professional etc. but I do have some sympathy with them.

1 hour ago, And Its Smith said:

Agree to a point but also surely Pearson can eventually get more from this squad of players?  He’s got a decent squad of players and needs to I find a way to maximise them. 

Yep, I really hope he can! Well, table wise we're roughly where I expected or a bit better until recently. I also expected some good bits, and some crap runs... so I'm not panicking about the last week or two (yet). What I want to see now though is this current little run come to an end, and the team to look a bit more cohesive. Saturday is really important for me, for squad morale as much as the 3 points.

Overall results have been a bit better than I expected, but the "team" are now looking a bit worse I'd say. Squad is decent enough I agree and certainly good enough to stay up with the right person in charge.