An Imbalance In The Squad

[wookey]

Is this just a (football) management buzz word for "the squad is not good enough" or does it have a structural meaning?

[SnozRobin]

I think it means the poor players outweigh the good players (on a ratio of about 3 to 1).

[bcfcbs20]

I hope Del is referring to the lack of any decent left sided wingers no creative atk midfielders and piss poor defence.

[Bar BS3]

Judging by the players that played yesterday and the comments he has made today, it makes sense that he is reffering to the fact that we have no decent (recognised) right back and no decent left sided player - hence starting Albert on the left and having a midfielder at RB. (who was actually having a decent game until he was injured and replaced at half time)

We would all like a top notch creative midfielder, but i suspect that is not top of his list of priorities at the moment.

[Red-Robbo]

Skuse is a more than adequate RB and looks much more at home there then in CM.

I'm assuming he's referring to our lack of options in central midfield. As has been mooted elsewhere, Clarkson is a potential try in that position.

[Robbored]

I hope Del is referring to the lack of any decent left sided wingers no creative atk midfielders and piss poor defence.

I'm sure that's what he's referring to.

Plus players playing in unfamiliar positions because of the lack of balance. Skuse and Nyatanga are not natural full backs. They do an ok job but its not their preferred positions.The only area that City have an abundance of options is up front.

I expect he'll bring in a left sided player and another midfielder.

[Lita For Congo]

We would all love a Ball winning centre half to come in plus some fullbacks, but we need to address the midfield. Its been an issue for many a season now, only addressed with Hartleys year here, our midfield puts our shakey defence under alot of pressure and a signing or 2 of quality in that area could be key.

[Red-Robbo]

I'm sure that's what he's referring to.

Plus players playing in unfamiliar positions because of the lack of balance. Skuse and Nyatanga are not natural full backs. They do an ok job but its not their preferred positions.The only area that City have an abundance of options is up front.

Oh dear. *gets out megaphone*

SKUSE IS AN ACCEPTABLE DEFENDER BUT POOR MIDFIELDER.

Nyatanga hardly 'did OK' on Sunday. He was awful. It's central defender or nothing for him.

[havanatopia]

I think it means the poor players outweigh the good players (on a ratio of about 3 to 1).

not good to use ratios when 11 is a prime number.

[RedUn]

not good to use ratios when 11 is a prime number.

Thread refers to Squad

[Kid in the Riot]

Nyatanga hardly 'did OK' on Sunday. He was awful. It's central defender or nothing for him.

Agreed, thought Nyatanga was pretty much MOTM at Palace.

Oh for the days of Orr and McAllister. Both solid, natural fullbacks with plenty of fight who rarely missed games...and to think the amount of sh1t both of them got at times on here.

[funky monkey]

Agreed, thought Nyatanga was pretty much MOTM at Palace.

Oh for the days of Orr and McAllister. Both solid, natural fullbacks with plenty of fight who rarely missed games...and to think the amount of sh1t both of them got at times on here.

thats because they were areas which needed to be improved to be able to push for promotion but instead we went backwards. I was always a fan of Orr though as for McAllister ive never been a fan but i would even have him in the team at the moment which is worrying. As someone said before fullback is a specialist role and we are in desperate need of some.

[123456789000]

He's not necessarily talking about positions. He's talking about qualities. He means that we have too much of some qualities as opposed to others. For example, crossing in the team is generally good. However our end product from those crosses is very poor. The ability of the players to hit long balls far outweighs that of short pass ability. Our wingers are generally good at running with the ball but struggle to beat a man. Defence can put in a tackle but are not comfortable on the ball and hoof it up field too often. That's my take on it anyway.

[RedM]

I took it to mean what it says, ie we have little or no competition for some positions, whilst others have too many players competing for just one place.

Or is that really just too simple?

[bcfcbs20]

I think you hit the nail on the head redm.

[Robbored]

I took it to mean what it says, ie we have little or no competition for some positions, whilst others have too many players competing for just one place.

Or is that really just too simple?

Just add that because of the points you make we have the 'round peg in a square hole' scenario that McInnes referred to.

[Nibor]

I took it to mean what it says, ie we have little or no competition for some positions, whilst others have too many players competing for just one place.

Or is that really just too simple?

No, not too simple, perfectly right.

From a numbers point of view it looks alrightish. Ignoring the ones who haven't played more than a game or two yet we have:

2 GKs - 1 Aging, 1 Erratic

3 RBs - 1 ok to good young loanee, 1 oft injured young good 'un, 1 shit expensive one

2 LBs - 1 ok to good young loanee, 1 aging and at best average

5 CB - 1 over 34 with the brain but dodgy knee, a good young un, a slow lump, a panicker and a good one who looks likely to leave.

5 CM - 2 short ass deep passers who aren't much cop defensively, 1 all action physical ballwinner with the touch of a rapist who will run through brick walls but couldn't pass a parcel, 1 defensive midfielder who is fairly handy but doesn't cover much ground and 1 average local lad who is good at off the ball stuff and can pass but doesn't influence games and hasn't progressed in the last 4 years.

2 RW - 1 exciting young quick one who makes poor decisions still, 1 with no end product who's often played out of position.

2 LW - 1 who's made no impact and looks weak and the other we've not seen.

2 centre forwards, one good strong one on poor form, one totally new at this level who has at least enthusiasm.

3 strikers, 2 very good ones one of whom is running his contract and reputation down and one who is busting his ass off and frustrated at not being picked and has only a season and a half left. The third a poor striker who gets brushed off the ball easily.

That's 26 in the first team squad. At the end of the season we lose half the squad - James, Spence, Hunt, McGiven, McAllister, Carey, Fontaine, Stewart, Cisse, Johnson, JCR, Maynard & Clarkson. I'd have a guess that would free up something like £80-100k (bonuses, employers contribs etc) a week or just under half our total current wage bill.

It's only when you take into account the individual players the imbalance is apparent. There is some talent in the squad, but there aren't many in the list above who I'd want to keep... Maynard, Fontaine and maybe the loanees if they come good. We have some problems right now:

- Neither goalkeeper is free from silly mistakes.

- We don't have a reliable left sided player.

- We can't find a decent centre back partnership.

- We can't find a decent central midfield pair.

- We keep playing one up front because of the above so we haven't found a decent striker partnership either.

- When we play 451 pretending it's 433 we can defend a little if we don't let in an early goal but can't score.

- When we try 442 we can't defend.

Not an easy job by any means so above all fans must, absolutely must, be patient with the new management team as they figure out how to fix all this.

[Thornbury Red]

Think Stewarts got another year after this one. Thanks Copout!

[Nibor]

Think Stewarts got another year after this one. Thanks Copout!

Yep you're right. Expensive backup

[22A]

- We don't have a reliable left sided player.

THAT is an imbalance, so we play predominantly on the right.

Oppos know goalie will hit the ball to our right and the right sided players will then try to get it to our striker(s). Cut that ball out and City don't score. Meanwhile the oppos right wingers are playing against City's left side, so get through.

[Guest catcott_red1]

It means most of our players are shite and couldn't give a toss and we have about 2 that arent shit and do care this is therefore an unbalanced squad.

[Chivs]

I suspect the imbalance referred to is (in priority order):

1. Left midfield
2. Left midfield
3. Left midfield

I'm no football manager but I suspect DelBoy is thinking of a left-footed player who can get up and down the park, put a decent cross in, and occasionally help his fullback (of whom there will be a few) out.

[SJC]

I think there is a genuine imbalance in the squad and it's a concern for sure.

Millen stated there was, then simply exacerbated the problem with his signings. From his point of view it is understandable why he did but with a new manager and clean slate the lopsided nature is clear for all to see.

Killkenny stillneeds time to settle during a period of upheaval but, as of yet, he is a Lee Johnson clone with no hugely visible improvements. Spence was signed to play right back but is now stuck behind a centre midfielder playing makeshift, albeit doing a thoroughly decent job of it from the evidence I've seen.

With the apparent re-emergence of Clarkson we have five strikers vying for a maximum of two spots. Stead and Pitman are good players but surely one, or even none, would have sufficed at a time when Haynes was still at the club. That isn't to say I don't like either player, Pitman in particular was an excellent capture, simply that striker wasn't necessarily a priority without the consideration of Maynard leaving, which to be fair could have played it's part.

This isn't meant to be critical of Millen, he identified players that were not in his plans - Hunt, Cisse, Stewart, Johnson, Clarkson etc and signed accordingly, he can't be blamed for that. But a new man coming in now has a very inflated bunch to choose from, and it will take time for him to establish his own personal wheat from his own personal chaff.