Silvio Dante

3 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Will the number of lies match the number of Taylor Swift song references Sam Matterface got in during the West Ham Liverpool game on five live ?

The feeling he’s a bullshitter?

I just can’t shake it off, shake it off

It’s been a shitty season for Paulton Rovers, but fair play, they’ve found a way to make it worse.

24 minutes ago, mozo said:

Dave, did Oxford play pure Manningball? If so, I'm wondering why they could do it but we can't?

By the way, I lived in Sheffield, and it is like a parallel universe 

Define “could do it”

Back end of last season Oxford had a lot of draws, and narrowly escaped relegation - LM pretty much finished where he found them. This season they started like a train but were outdoing their xG (see George Elek comments). There is a question if they had it cracked or were just in good form.

MK Dons could do it - because they had been set up as a squad that way and had three of the best players in the division for that system.

The overall answer though is quality of squad/team and suitability to system. MK Dons (season one) had a squad set up to play it and some of the divisions best players. Season two they had the former but not the latter, hence failed. Oxford season one didn’t have a squad set up to play it - heavy recruitment meant they did season two.

If we’re defining Manningball as possession heavy and patient football then most sides want the ball - Leicester play that way, Southampton play that way, Swansea play that way (all to varying degrees). You need either better players than anyone else had at the level (see MK Dons) or a better coach in order to get up there. Our squad is set up to different strengths, and vitally, the quality of opposing players and coaches is better than at league one.

Put our squad in league one and they could probably play “Manningball” with some success due to the inferior opposition. Try and do it with this squad at this level - it won’t work because we don’t have the best players at this level for that system, it doesn’t play to their strengths, and you’re up against better players.

(See also Russell Martin relative position at Swansea and Southampton)

btw good article @Davefevs 

Paul McCartney. Like a flower.

11 minutes ago, Fjmcity said:

hands down the best Estonian to ever play for us - loved him, assistant manager of Estonia now infact 

Bo Anderson really was class but beset by injuries if I remember correctly, went through a stage of them trying to replace welch, Billy mercer etc I’m a sucker for a keeper in trousers and they both fit that brief 

Disagree. He’s not the best Estonian to play for us.

Because he’s Moldovan.

4 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

I was thinking earlier about what the contract status was of our U-23s and who is likely to leave in the summer. I know a few expire in the summer - I think Acey, HWB and a couple of others but is there a list somewhere either on the site, transfermarket or on here? Every where I've looked I've only seen the senior players and I don't know if the list is hard to find or if I'm missing the obvious?

24 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

What, like Birmingham have with Tony Mowbray…….can be done.

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Beat me to it.

To be fair, I have had the same thoughts but what’s gone on at Brum probably supports that you do make the permanent change as opposed to wait it out. Venus was a horror show and although it’s not the sole reason they may go down, putting Rowett in charge earlier I’d wager they wouldn’t be in as much trouble as they are. Issue there is you do that and he does well, who do you want as manager long term.

Of course, had Nige taken a leave of absence wholly possible Euell and Phlegm could have done well but I do kind of get the logic of a clean break.

1 minute ago, exAtyeoMax said:

That's too removed from the sacking. If we'd managed it this season without a squad/team overhaul, then maybe. 

Yeah multiple factors could change between now and then. And ultimately even if they spunked £20m on the squad in the summer, I think threads like this show the damage is pretty much done.

People didn’t have an issue with the sacking (although they may have disagreed with the decision, that will always happen), it’s more how it was done - and most pertinently, the communications thereafter. Contrition now is too little, too late and although we may get success in the future, the wound in the damage they did with the fanbase is just too deep to recover.

14 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

No, Kid is referring to my meeting with Dave Rennie preseason.

Tins won’t be conversing with me, he’s decided to block me on Twitter this week, despite having had no twitter activity with him recently. Hey-ho!

Gavin Marshall: We need to communicate better and more openly with fans 

Brian Tinnion: Hold my beer.

28 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Just imagine though, if you’d used those limited funds in August rather than January!  That’s always been a big thing for me.  I will never be able to square that off in my head, coupled with “you want a CB, here’s Daniel Ayala”.  Hey ho!

“…and that was the crayoning snake with their August chart topper “Wilful Sabotage”

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 

My god. No wonder he played better Saturday when the sun was out. The dazzle off those bastards must be hell for defenders.

6 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

Amazing that Pearson wasn’t told that he was sacked for results and he wasnt told about the fear the players were being de-conditioned.  Shows what slime balls we have running this club 

The line on the deconditioning piece that “The chairman should have talked to the technical director” was very revealing. Basically it sounds from that like Tinnion knew the training plan and raised no objections.

So, he’s either a snake and said something to Jon he didn’t say to Nige, or had no idea Jon was going to come out with that bullshit.

Either way….

On the bit about us:

- Learnt afterwards that it was about results

- Heard in an “interview” afterwards that players were in danger of being deconditioned and the chairman should have talked to the technical director

- Didn’t know City would make “reasons” public

- Allardyce opined that City may have broken confidentiality clause and Nige could just respond and reply - Nige “Yeah but you don’t need to do that”

- Nige said he was concentrating on his health at present mentioning back and neurological problems but he was getting better. Said he was a football manager not a coach - but he could coach - and he’s not a head coach - “The fad appears to be at the moment get a young coach. Is football suffering with ageism”

- Doesn’t sound as if he’s retiring “Sure they’ll be another opportunity and when it comes I want to enjoy the challenge”

- “Success can be relative. It can be avoiding relegation and cutting a wage bill”

- Keeps an eye out on us. Enjoys living down here, beautiful area, bought some woodland. Thinks he had a good connection with a lot of the people. Some really good people here, keeps in touch with people at training ground

- Fanbase here are patient and knowledgeable - results weren’t always great but they could see past that. Complex job in reshaping the squad. It’s a good club in the sense of academy catchment area, academy tries to develop players. Circumstances in where had to reduce wage bill means fortunate that academy was producing - 

- Although didn’t end amicably the staff worked the best they could. Thinks Liam inherited “a very decent situation, let’s put it like that”

26 minutes ago, Were you at Mansfield? said:

One has just crossed into the higher category so accept that’s just life, but one is still ‘under 12’. In answer to your question,  yes it suits them better. We’re only a few blocks from section 82 and they like the atmosphere (one to debate on another topic!), and we like who we sit by.

I guess if my kids were a few years younger, maybe I would have been more open to relocating.

You kind of touch on another topic in your last line - and that is what the kids who are a few years younger do in 2-3 years time. Too young to go without an adult, too old to want to sit in the family area. By not selling new STs for the South Stand, the club have created a major problem going forward (possibly by intent) - that dad/mum with kids is forced to get a ST in a more expensive part of the ground when the move comes.

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Firstly, agree with your earlier post, as I said not black and white, more a generic thought process on ins and outs.  If Tommy goes, and we bring in Dean, then that also gives scope to improve elsewhere, so not necessarily just one out / one in.  There’s too many moving parts really to be categoric.

Re @ExiledAjax, we can’t afford for our no9 or no10 to fail.  They are the key signings.  If we get them wrong, then I think opportunity to kick on becomes so much harder.

Back to you Silv.  I’m just gonna ignore Mebude’s loan, opportunistic and poorly sold.  So we signed 4:

- Bird

- Stokes

- Murphy

- Twine

plus TGH made perm.  4 out of those 5 were on the radar before LM signed.  So I think we have to wait to see who the no9 is before deciding whether the profiling has changed under LM or not.  I also think that Stokes and Murphy have more of BT’s influence than LM’s due to their age.  So we are really left with Bird, TGH and Twine as players to go through what I’d call the “first team recruitment process”.  Add to that the number 9, and any others we sign as others depart.  LM does make a strong play about physicality, runners, etc, so interested to see who comes in.  Good to hear Knight describe Bird yesterday too.

You can’t ignore Mebudes loan, there’s a 9 page thread on it

With the recruitment I’m kind of spitballing to a degree. I do think there is potential things could be more “difficult” in (any) change of manager for a recruitment team as they’re ripping up plan A - or at best tweaking it - and mastery takes time. But OTOH, it is literally their job. I do take the point of players on radar pre Liam though - ironically the two I think he would have had significant input in are ST and DM and I don’t think they can be classed as “hits”.

Bottom line for me is that if we come out of summer with Williams re-signed, Twine signed permanently & James gone in addition to the other known deals, then I don’t think we’ll have enough if it’s Tommy out and #9 + younger player in. Ideally I’d like to see us do better than Twine in that #10 and get a 9 to augment Tommy as opposed to replace.

Just now, ExiledAjax said:

@Silvio Dante and @Davefevs I think we'd also need to allow for failed transfers. Although we've maybe been a little better over the last few windows, generally I'd guess that at least 1 in 3 transfers are "failures" or don't succeed to the extent hoped. For every Dickie and Sykes there's a Mehmeti* or Mebude.

Therefore really, to give us a hope that two work out, I'd say we'd need net 3 incoming.

Unless of course Tinman has absolutely nailed this window already and the shortlist is absolutely infallible.

*he might have had a couple of good games recently, but this summer we need immediate success, not a season and a half of getting used to the idea of actually passing the ball every now and then.

You know I’m going to agree with you about Mehmeti!!

Very good point, and to slightly link to another thread, although I think recruitment has been much improved in recent years the January “in the building” business for that month (Twine. Medube, Murphy) was poor for various reasons.

A part of me wonders how much of that was due to having to recruit a different “profile” of player from under Pearson - we can talk all we like about club identity but Liam inherently wants - ideally - different players from Nige.

I wonder how much teething problems in recruitment arose from that, and it’s hopeful to assume that’s resolved in the summer - the chance of a “miss” increases with change in manager as it’s setting different exams for the recruitment team.

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Silv - I think the 9 and 10 come in regardless of whether Tommy leaves.  If Tommy leaves we may bring in another forward, but might be one more for the future (see my Max Dean thread).

So Twine goes back - we are one down.  The new no10 (might be Twine) comes in, numbers back up.

New no9 - an extra squad member

I think King goes - one down, but replaced by Bird, numbers back up

And I think we keep one of James or Williams, so one down, but with Knight moving deeper that accommodates the duo of Stokes and Murphy as squad options.

Of course if both go, then I think we will add a player, but I think that will take budget from elsewhere if it requires a fee, hence why I think we will try to retain one, likely Williams.

So, in LM’s eyes:

- the 9 improves us

- the 10 improves us (Twine or whoever)

- Bird improves us

Everything else is a reaction to who leaves if anyone.  I know it’s not as black and white as I paint it, but if those 3 players improve this squad / 2 players if you count Twine as already here, then I do think that can be enough of a difference-maker.  The margins ARE fine.

I don’t think LM thinks he’s getting 5-6 players on top of the scenario I set out above, nor is he getting oodles spent, but he he does exoect his squad for next season to have 2 to 3 (see above) players that improve the base he has now.

Hope that makes sense.

Where this changes is with the possibility that certain players leave, e.g. Conway, Naismith, Pring, etc, who might all have suitors for different reasons.

 

 

I don’t think we’re miles off in our reading - I think in practical terms Bird is a James as opposed to King replacement (as the latter isn’t really playing). I’d see Bird as a like for like there on which basis. So not necessarily a squad improvement from where we are now - get what you’re saying about Knight but he’s already here.

Twine/ the other 10 improves us “permanently” (debate whether that should be Twine elsewhere)

So for me from what is in the building today the key question is the Tommy one. If we bring in a 9 in addition to him it’s a definite squad enhancement. If we get a 9 and a “one for the future” it isn’t.

I’d find it hard to argue it’s three players up (plus Stokes etc) from what’s here. At most it looks like one. The key, as ever, will be what quality that new 10 and 9 are.

4 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Agree on both those figures for those two.

I'll just say that £15k is about the max we have been paying over the last couple of seasons. It's probably about what our top earners are on. We might stretch a bit towards £17k for someone really special, but more than that and I think we're at our limit.

So, if our limit is therefore players of the quality of Vyner, Knight, Twine - then it's about getting more of that standard in. Improve the depth of the squad and the breadth of the quality. 

Go from a strong first 15 to a strong first 17. It could be enough to just get us the 10 extra points we need (just 3 wins and 1 draw) to be in that playoff mix in 12 month's time.

Don’t disagree overall but I think what’s generally being pitched is a bit of a “like for like” - two major “ins” just equalises the two major “outs”. I’d also agree that we shouldn’t go outside the structure - one of the things Nige was always big on was that players should earn broadly similar. Ways and means around that (Signing on fee structure, bonus) mind.

So to go via your route I think it’s four players to account for the likely losses, and agree they can’t be ones for the future. The wildcard is Stokes who from reports might - just might - be akin to one of those major “ins”

2 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Good idea. 

I had to move because of the people sat behind us and the club were very hesitant to deal with them. The easy option was to just move us. 

You said you were in the Lansdown?

People behind you a bit annoying, knew very little about football and chatted shit constantly?

Wasn’t these guys was it?

1 minute ago, ExiledAjax said:

I think two properly ambitious and quality signings would be enough. 

But, I don't think this is the summer to sign "ones for the future" (especially given we already have Stokes, Murphy, and Bird).

If there ever was a time to go a little harder and spend two lots of £3m and £15k a week on some absolute class, it's now.

The irony there is that I’d envisage we’d have to pay a minimum of £3m for Twine and at least £15k a week, and whoever is buying Conway would expect to pay a minimum of £3m and £15k a week.

So, on those sums, it’s back to the squad being as it is broadly.

(Don’t disagree with the general thrust of argument but two quality signings that markedly improve us will be a bit more than that IMO)

4 minutes ago, One Team said:

Great post Pete. 

It’s with comments like this I am actually starting to warm a little to Manning, and at the very least have some sympathy.

If he can continue to carefully craft a “it’s not me it’s them” narrative (carefully as Nige did this very well to his downfall) then he will get fans on side. We all saw October/November for what it was after all, FBCs latest podcast confirming it. 

To your other point I understand it’s two signings at the moment. 

The broader question is that if it’s two signings whether that gives us enough to make a dent in the top six. If we assume we retain Williams but not James/King, and also assume we lose Conway, then we’re pretty much at a zero sum game (Bird for James, new 10 for Twine or Twine, new 9 for Conway).

Yes, we then have SPH and Stokes as young players to augment the squad but there aren’t any others obviously coming through.

As Bird for James can be argued as like for like, Twine for Twine is obviously like for like and the new 9 for Conway is going to be like for like broadly, then the question really is - are the current squad (as it’s not going to be markedly improved) good enough to give us what we want, and sub question, how does that play to the “his players” narrative

(For avoidance of doubt if Liam gets success without “his players” but adjusting to the squad he has then it takes away a major concern).

10 minutes ago, wendyredredrobin said:

Tommy Conway is nowhere near ready for a step up (and not sure he ever will be) and would be better off staying here at the moment.

Not sure we have seen enough of Twine to really judge him, but clearly not worth a seven figure transfer fee, at least yet.

Medube is a strange one.  Nobody really knows what has been going on with him, do they, though we have speculated 

If I had to lay odds on it I’d think that the only one who may be here next season is Twine, but I agree with your analysis of him in terms of value - the only thing I’d disagree on is in terms of pure scouting, if you’d seen someone seven times, then you’d be expected to make a call - no reason why that should change for someone we have on loan.

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Will be interesting to see, with Saturday being the last home game, whether there are any sentimental team selections?  Could be James, King and Williams last time in front of the AG crowd???

And Conway and Twine and Medube.