LondonBristolian

Replying to your comments in your post, which obviously don't show here now but I think our out of contract players broadly fall into two camps - although it's not necessarily known or obvious who is in which category. There will be the players who will expect to get offers elsewhere and the challenge is making sure they don't drop off in commitment levels as their minds move towards the future. Then there will be the players who will fear they need to prove themselves - either to stay at the club or to get a decent offer if they leave. Those players will have the desire to do well but there is a risk they'll make mistakes due to feeling the pressure and that their morale or confidence will drop. Two very different challenges for Pearson to manage.

When James got injured, we'd had a run of good performances, gone several games unbeaten and then held our own in narrow defeats against perhaps the two best teams in the division. Since then we've had 1 win in 5 games and looked utterly abject at times. That is not a coincidence and anyone who wonders what James brings to the team just needs to see how we look without him on the pitch.

To be fair to Glastonbury, all festivals are facing eye-watering hikes in the costs of staging it next year for a variety of reasons. It's easy to say other festivals haven't put their prices up as much but customers are going to see a lot of cuts at those festivals. Even some of the ones this year, stages had disappeared or there were significantly less staff onsite. Few festivals - if any - are going to be able to afford to deliver the same quality at the same price.

Bottom line is he's under-21 and not in the first team squad. Whatever the reasons for that, the U-21 squad is a rational place to be. I'm sure he'd rather be in the first team squad but he needs to demonstrate that he has to be included. I don't think he has purely been dropped because of the contract situation but reluctance to sign a contract plus not demonstrating he's an essential inclusion is obviously leading to other players being given a chance in his stead.

I don’t buy for a second we are going to make a change but, for me, the absolute fundamental would be getting a manager who was ready to work with the players and staff we have, continue to use youth and who has the same vision as Pearson for the culture of the club. The absolute last thing we need is someone coming in to rip everything up and start again.

I have it on good authority the board are indeed weighing up their options. The buffet company for their next meeting can do finger options or a hot buffet selection which - whilst appealing on paper - runs increased risk of food spillage down people's shirts. It's a real 50/50 as to which way they are going to go on this one.

Or move Scott to RWB and Sykes behind a front two. (Not advocating for it so much as pointing out it is a third possibility).

Maybe I'm being naive but I honestly think, whilst we're in a period of poor form - exacerbated by injuries - we're not going to be sucked into a serious relegation battle. We absolutely need more squad depth and consistency and we could struggle with a few longer-term injuries but the flip side is we could go into the second half of the season with Kalas, Wilson, James, Naismith and Benarous all fit and available plus the likes of Weimann and Dasilva in better form than they are now and we'd look like a very different team. I certainly don't think we're promotion candidates but I'd still expect the mid-table finish I expected all along.

I did not know that but that makes it even more complex. I don't want to be judgemental but how the Hell can anyone defend someone who does that to their daughter?

With both Weimann and Dasilva, I think one factor is that symbolism matters. Pearson has shown he's ruthless in dropping players not performing - and that's a good approach - but the likes of Bentley and Martin are going to get annoyed with the inconsistency if Weimann and Dasilva get picked week-in and out irrespective of performance. I think Dasilva is better than Pring and I think Weimann is essential to how we play but I think taking them out the team for a game or two sends a clear signal that everyone has to perform to keep their place.

If it is true, I I would guess almost definitely not the fact he is a millionaire. The problem with abusive relationships is you get into a position where you're abused because someone has destroyed your confidence and self-worth to a point where you view abuse as something you deserve and an "acceptable" price to pay for staying with someone who has convinced you that you can't cope with them. If she has gone back to someone who has destroyed her confidence and self-worth to the point where she's convinced she can't cope without him, the financial situation isn't really the key factor. People who get lured back into horrific relationships need support rather than criticism.

I'm not worried as long as everyone gets fit and stays fit but we don't have the squad depth to sustain many injuries, especially to key players. In that sense, I'm not sure that's really any different to what we all knew pre-season and what we all knew where we were playing well. It's just we're now in the spot where the injuries have happened. Rationally speaking, I don't really see why anyone should be more or less worried than they were in the summer or even more or less worried than they were in September when we were playing well. Hard to be rational when we're losing though.

I don't necessarily agree with you because I think we lose Semenyo in areas he is more effective but I do think what you're proposing is going to be a lot easier with Kalas fit again. And I'm stuck for a better option at RWB right now...

This is fundamentally the issue. We've gone for this formation and system because it suits the players but it only suits the players if: Wilson is fit Naismith is fit James is fit Weimann is fresh and on form Right now, none of those four things are the case yet we're persisting with a formation that suits players that are either off the pitch and out of form. I know Pearson has limited options to work with and I don't think there are easy answers but - whilst I absolutely back the work he is doing changing the culture of the club and the way he's built a strong first XI - he simply isn't finding ways to adapt to who is available, rather than who we want available.

Not saying I think you are wrong but do you know for sure there were interested parties willing to part decent sums and that they were places Weimann wanted to go? I think theoretical offers are often more appealing than the real ones. I also think - on form - Weimann is crucial to how we play. The question is how to get him firing again.

I do wonder how a Semenyo, Conway and Wells trio would do. Conway and Wells have an understanding and Semenyo has pace, power and the ability to make things happen.

You'd have got away with it if you hadn't immediately changed into them, right in the middle of the aisle...

I think "bullshit" can be about syntax as well as about content. I actually agree with you that LJ does not need to bullshit. He's a clever guy and he did a much better job for us than he often gets credit for. Keeping us in the Championship gradually improving and changing the culture from a League One club to a Championship club isn't glamorous but it was needed and an achievement. My impression is that his critical flaw is that he lacks the confidence in his own judgment. Hence the times he'd second-guess himself making changes that confused the players more than the opposition, or the beginning of 2019/20 then he ripped off the pre-season plan after one defeat against Leeds, or the times in interviews when he uses complex and alienating language. He's certainly smart enough not to need to bullshit. But, when he phrases things in a needlessly complex way that throws even himself (as others have said, he misuses the word "percentile" where he simply means "percentage"), he looks like a bullshitter and sounds like a bullshitter so can have no complaints when people call him a bullshitter.

I think it shows that people can put too much emphasis on terrible results. (I remember us losing 6-0 at Ipswich in that season we finished fourth). Over a 5 game period, three scrappy one-nils, a nil-nil and a nine-nil defeat would "feel" terrible. Everyone would feel we weren't playing well, we were about to get found out and the football was dire. Meanwhile two five-nil wins and three unlucky one goal defeats would "feel" a lot better as we'd all think we were playing well but were unlucky. But the first scenario gets you four more points than the second. So what does this prove? I honestly have no idea.

In terms of players playing right now, and who are of an age where they could still contribute, Luke Ayling is probably the one who'd improve the team the most. I think Kelly is better (but left-sided), Webster is better but a bit too similar to our other defenders and I loved Tammy when he was here but his is not a priority position. In terms of anyone I've ever seen play for us. I think Marvin Elliott in his first season vintage is the player who'd improve us the most. Maybe an odd choice but - as @IAmNick says, a lot of my favourite players played for us at League One level and I'm not sure they'd actually be as good as we hoped in the Championship today.

I agree with this. I don't think there's any issue at all with the sentiment of what he said. I'm pretty sure after the Norwich game Pearson said we deserved a result and nobody batted an eyelid. But he's said it in an utterly ludicrous way that alienates fans and leaves him open to ridicule. I don't think fans are that confused by the nuance of what he says. It's just everybody's met enough bullshitters in their lives to know when they are in the presence of one.

I've long thought Palace is the most obvious "fit" for Semenyo in terms of Premier League teams and their style of football. But I also think Football League World only gets things right very occasionally and, when they do, it's by accident rather than design.

Am I right in thinking the players that haven't are Tanner, Benarous, Bajic, Kalas, Bell and Kadji?

I've got mixed feelings on that. I certainly think we need to have an eye on the future but I'd hate to go back to the days under Gary Johnson where we sometimes cut our nose off to spite our face by freezing out players in the last year of their contract who could still bring something to the team. I think whoever is doing the best in training should get the shirt but would agree that - where there is not a lot to choose between the goalkeepers - it's better to give a chance to someone who can make a case for the long term.

Massive shame for him and for us. Sykes has had some decent games but still looks to me like a midfielder playing at wing back. Felt it was only a matter of time before Wilson forced his way in. Bit of an opportunity for Tanner to try to grab though...