FBC POD - Watford [H] the verdict ...... it was OK, no more than that

[Robbored]

8 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Evening @Davefevs

Something has to change though, strip out the Hull, Boro and Watford(a) games and that's 21 goals in 25 league games. Quite frankly that's appalling and I've very thankful that our defence has been as good as it has (in general) this season.

The changes Manning made at Oxford last Summer were radical, with a large turnover of players. Maybe he's planning something similar for us. I can't see any of the OOC players staying and surely others like Naismith, Cornick, Wells or even possibly Mehmeti will either be replaced or shipped out on loan.

 

We can't just keep treading water in this division. We obviously haven't got massive scope to spend, but we have to change the dynamic of the team somehow.

In essence, can I see Conway firing the goals to get us into the playoffs. No I can't unfortunately.

I’d accept ‘treading water’ for the remainder of the season. With 18 games to play no way can I see us reaching the pray-offs unless something extraordinary happens - like run of consecutive wins.

I also think that we’ve seen all the transfer activity for this window which makes the summer window that much more interesting - I expect BT has potential signings lined up hopefully to get business done early. 

I know I bang on about it but in my view City need a CF of the Famara type. big, strong and powerful who’s good in the air.

Hopefully such a player is on Mannings  summer shopping list.

[JP Hampton]

1 hour ago, Silvio Dante said:

Well. It’s possible we keep Tommy then. As long as man is still alive, and as long as woman can survive.

Wonder what they’ll find at 3535

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Evening @Davefevs

No I don't see him moving from playing a lone striker.

The thing that struck me on Saturday was that we only made 3 subs, because in all honesty, there was no sub that could improve us whilst still keeping the same formation (never going to risk it at 1-1).

Something has to change though, strip out the Hull, Boro and Watford(a) games and that's 21 goals in 25 league games. Quite frankly that's appalling and I've very thankful that our defence has been as good as it has (in general) this season.

The changes Manning made at Oxford last Summer were radical, with a large turnover of players. Maybe he's planning something similar for us. I can't see any of the OOC players staying and surely others like Naismith, Cornick, Wells or even possibly Mehmeti will either be replaced or shipped out on loan.

Max is an adequate keeper, but his distribution either has to improve for us to progress, or likewise we need someone better.

We are a solid championship team (based on our defensive solidity). But in the last 3-4 seasons our lack of goals have stopped us from getting into those precious playoff spots.

Standing still isn't an option. We are still losing money hand over fist and need to sell players once again just to stay within FFP.

We can't just keep treading water in this division. We obviously haven't got massive scope to spend, but we have to change the dynamic of the team somehow.

Evening back at you!

He could’ve brought Mehmeti on for either Twine or Knight….freshness if nothing else?  Mehmeti has generally been bright recently.  If he’s wedded to this 3421-ish system, I think he is gonna waste resources but that’s another debate.

The more worrying thing is actually the regression of open play creativity. That wasn’t the plan was it?

There is an Improving trend in transitional attacks from well-triggered pressing, even if shots haven’t materialised.  Trust the process, eh!

And set-piece got a huge jolt on Saturday with 12/15 shots coming from dead-ball situations.  I’m not snobby, I’ll take goals wherever they come from, and I appreciate some chances from set-plays will’ve initially been created from good open play.  The same happens vice-versa though, so it’s not necessarily a one-way street.

Thankfully we are still defending at similar levels.

It’s a bit of a conundrum at this point.

I will continue to monitor, not seen the magic piece of the jigsaw yet.

 

[Bobtherobin]

24 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Evening @Davefevs

No I don't see him moving from playing a lone striker.

The thing that struck me on Saturday was that we only made 3 subs, because in all honesty, there was no sub that could improve us whilst still keeping the same formation (never going to risk it at 1-1).

Something has to change though, strip out the Hull, Boro and Watford(a) games and that's 21 goals in 25 league games. Quite frankly that's appalling and I've very thankful that our defence has been as good as it has (in general) this season.

The changes Manning made at Oxford last Summer were radical, with a large turnover of players. Maybe he's planning something similar for us. I can't see any of the OOC players staying and surely others like Naismith, Cornick, Wells or even possibly Mehmeti will either be replaced or shipped out on loan.

Max is an adequate keeper, but his distribution either has to improve for us to progress, or likewise we need someone better.

We are a solid championship team (based on our defence of course). But in the last 3-4 seasons our lack of goals have stopped us from getting into those precious playoff spots.

Standing still isn't an option. We are still losing money hand over fist and need to sell players once again just to stay within FFP.

We can't just keep treading water in this division. We obviously haven't got massive scope to spend, but we have to change the dynamic of the team somehow.

In essence, can I see Conway firing the goals to get us into the playoffs. No I can't unfortunately.

Just because LM had a high turnover of players for Oxford it doesnt mean he can do that and make it work for every club. I dont see how we can afford it for a start. I actually think we have steadily been improving our squad since Ashton left. Knight, Atkinson, Sykes, TGH, Dickie and even Tanner. McCrorie looks like he has potential as well, and when fit Naismith is a good (possibly squad) option. It makes no sense to rip it up and start again, surely its about continuing to evolve. I think if we add a better CF option and a better GK to complement that group as well as Twine on loan then we are going in the right direction. The talk of an overhaul on the podcast was ridiculous imo. 

[JP Hampton]

So at what point or what would need to happen, for the lone striker idea to be parked. I’m not convinced Tommy’s the right person up front, in fact would anyone be doing better if the problem is service?

 I believe he’s got a lot of skill and obviously things could change with more service but at the moment it’s the same formation and same scenario. Tommy’s on for an hour then replaced by Wells with the same issues.  
 

[NcnsBcfc]

6 minutes ago, Robbored said:

I’d accept ‘treading water’ for the remainder of the season. With 18 games to play no way can I see us reaching the pray-offs unless something extraordinary happens - like run of consecutive wins.

I also think that we’ve seen all the transfer activity for this window which makes the summer window that much more interesting - I expect BT has potential signings lined up hopefully to get business done early. 

I know I bang on about it but in my view City need a CF of the Famara type. big, strong and powerful who’s good in the air.

Hopefully such a player is on Mannings  summer shopping list.

This season does have a feeling of petering out at 8 or so games to go doesn't it? With us finishing anywhere between 9th to 15th.

ie absolutely no progression yet again, with a £22m loss from last season and who knows this one (of course we have the Scott money)?

With that in mind, the appointment of Manning is ambitious. Up until that point we had stagnated in the division, without the ability to really make positive change.

I'm forever thankful to NP, that unlike previous occasions we haven't dropped into L1, in order for that "Revolution" to take place. 

[NcnsBcfc]

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Evening back at you!

He could’ve brought Mehmeti on for either Twine or Knight….freshness if nothing else?  Mehmeti has generally been bright recently.  If he’s wedded to this 3421-ish system, I think he is gonna waste resources but that’s another debate.

The more worrying thing is actually the regression of open play creativity. That wasn’t the plan was it?

There is an Improving trend in transitional attacks from well-triggered pressing, even if shots haven’t materialised.  Trust the process, eh!

And set-piece got a huge jolt on Saturday with 12/15 shots coming from dead-ball situations.  I’m not snobby, I’ll take goals wherever they come from, and I appreciate some chances from set-plays will’ve initially been created from good open play.  The same happens vice-versa though, so it’s not necessarily a one-way street.

Thankfully we are still defending at similar levels.

It’s a bit of a conundrum at this point.

I will continue to monitor, not seen the magic piece of the jigsaw yet.

 

Thanks Dave,

I think like Joe Edwards at Millwall, there's been some pragmatism here

He obviously has a vision of how he wants to play, but the reality is he doesn't have the players in order to do it.

My only fear with the Twine situation is that we end up like we did with Eliasson , where he was doubled (sometimes trebled teamed) and we had no other options.

I'm looking forward to seeing Atkinson back. I think him and Dickie at set pieces will be a real force with Twine's delivery.

Edited January 22 by NcnsBcfc

[NcnsBcfc]

9 minutes ago, Ryan said:

Just because LM had a high turnover of players for Oxford it doesnt mean he can do that and make it work for every club. I dont see how we can afford it for a start. I actually think we have steadily been improving our squad since Ashton left. Knight, Atkinson, Sykes, TGH, Dickie and even Tanner. McCrorie looks like he has potential as well, and when fit Naismith is a good (possibly squad) option. It makes no sense to rip it up and start again, surely its about continuing to evolve. I think if we add a better CF option and a better GK to complement that group as well as Twine on loan then we are going in the right direction. The talk of an overhaul on the podcast was ridiculous imo. 

Why do think it's "ridiculous"? Maybe SL will allow some of the "nest egg" to be used?

He has a vision of how he wants to play and this team in my opinion isn't able to implement it, in a way that improves our creativity and goal scoring.

We're not going to get into the playoffs unless we do something different. A good defence is only good for midtable, if you're not scoring goals at the other end of the pitch.

Naismith will be coming into the last year of his contract, will be 32 next month and unlike Matty James seems to have serious calf issues that mean his availability is not great (only 22 games last season).

I like him as a player, but would he get into our defence or midfield at present or even improve us in that area?

The two signings of Murphy and Stokes demonstrate an acknowledgement that we need creativity up the pitch and it's not coming through from the Academy as it stands.

Naismith will be a decent earner who will be 33 Feb next year, with no new contract coming. If that's the case,  I can't see him as part of our future plans.

The other names you've mentioned are either new signings this season, or players that have signed contract extensions. They will be part of the revamp.

Jury still out on Mehmeti. He may still come good and I'm glad he's getting another opportunity as I think NP had made his mind up (Manning said it was virtually agreed that he was going on loan to Oxford in this window if NP was still there). But he needs to improve next season. Really hard for him as he was only in non league a few years ago, nobody said being a Championship footballer was easy of course.

[Davefevs]

8 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Thanks Dave,

I think like Joe Edwards at Millwall, there's been some pragmatism here

He obviously has a vision of how he wants to play, but the reality is he doesn't have the players in order to do it.

My only fear with the Twine situation is that we end up like we did with Eliasson , where he was doubled (sometimes trebled teamed) and we had no other options.

I'm looking forward to seeing Atkinson back. I think him and Dickie at set pieces will be a real force with Twine's delivery.

I’m not sure how to answer that Neil.

I don’t see Twine as “key man dependency” and I certainly didn’t Eliasson either (I’ll leave it at that!!).  Re Twine, if he is going to become important as you’re hypothesising, I’d seriously question our head-coach and his ability to create a team / coach what he has.  That would be a terrible indictment imho.  A good coach would coach the team to take advantage of overloading a single player.

Thats maybe not what you’re suggesting.  But it would suggest that the hierarchy didn’t really understand what they were getting.

[frenchred]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’m not sure how to answer that Neil.

I don’t see Twine as “key man dependency” and I certainly didn’t Eliasson either (I’ll leave it at that!!).  Re Twine, if he is going to become important as you’re hypothesising, I’d seriously question our head-coach and his ability to create a team / coach what he has.  That would be a terrible indictment imho.  A good coach would coach the team to take advantage of overloading a single player.

Thats maybe not what you’re suggesting.  But it would suggest that the hierarchy didn’t really understand what they were getting.

The bit in bold would be no surprise at all!

[W-S-M Seagull]

40 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Why do think it's "ridiculous"? Maybe SL will allow some of the "nest egg" to be used?

He has a vision of how he wants to play and this team in my opinion isn't able to implement it, in a way that improves our creativity and goal scoring.

We're not going to get into the playoffs unless we do something different. A good defence is only good for midtable, if you're not scoring goals at the other end of the pitch.

Naismith will be coming into the last year of his contract, will be 32 next month and unlike Matty James seems to have serious calf issues that mean his availability is not great (only 22 games last season).

I like him as a player, but would he get into our defence or midfield at present or even improve us in that area?

The two signings of Murphy and Stokes demonstrate an acknowledgement that we need creativity up the pitch and it's not coming through from the Academy as it stands.

Naismith will be a decent earner who will be 33 Feb next year, with no new contract coming. If that's the case,  I can't see him as part of our future plans.

The other names you've mentioned are either new signings this season, or players that have signed contract extensions. They will be part of the revamp.

Jury still out on Mehmeti. He may still come good and I'm glad he's getting another opportunity as I think NP had made his mind up (Manning said it was virtually agreed that he was going on loan to Oxford in this window if NP was still there). But he needs to improve next season. Really hard for him as he was only in non league a few years ago, nobody said being a Championship footballer was easy of course.

This sort of statement really gets my blood flowing. 

In my opinion Manning should be able to adapt to the team that he has. If he can't do that, then I'd be very sceptical about him spending any significant amount of money because there is no guarantees that will bring improved results/performances. 

[NcnsBcfc]

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

This sort of statement really gets my blood flowing. 

In my opinion Manning should be able to adapt to the team that he has. If he can't do that, then I'd be very sceptical about him spending any significant amount of money because there is no guarantees that will bring improved results/performances. 

But that's exactly what I've said. He has had to be pragmatic and adapt to the players he has at his disposal.

Now.with Twine in, there will be further adaptation around utilisation of set pieces in a way in which we didn't really utilise them before.

I'm pretty sure Twine won't be here next season,  so yet another change will be needed next season.

My point is we can't go back to the current status quo in the way we play as it's evidently not being productive enough in either goals or points.

So a new rationale to the way the team plays will in my opinion be have to be struck.

Manning will have a view over what he wants, call it his "vision". Much the same as every other new manager. The sticking point will be whether the chairman and owner release some of the "nest egg" in order for it to be funded.

I do sense in our movements in the window so far a sea change coming in the summer.

Edited January 22 by NcnsBcfc

[NcnsBcfc]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I’m not sure how to answer that Neil.

I don’t see Twine as “key man dependency” and I certainly didn’t Eliasson either (I’ll leave it at that!!).  Re Twine, if he is going to become important as you’re hypothesising, I’d seriously question our head-coach and his ability to create a team / coach what he has.  That would be a terrible indictment imho.  A good coach would coach the team to take advantage of overloading a single player.

Thats maybe not what you’re suggesting.  But it would suggest that the hierarchy didn’t really understand what they were getting.

I agree that the hierarchy are trying to recreate a Bristol City Mckenna. In much the same way Millwall, Swansea and Plymouth are as well (young coaches, seen as progressive in their thinking).

I'm betting that JL et al had no real idea of what they were getting, and what its going to cost to implement the changes he wants to make (the Ajaz bid of £2.5m shows they are willing to entertain it at least)

Edited January 22 by NcnsBcfc

[FNQ]

13 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

I agree that the hierarchy are trying to recreate a Bristol City Mckenna. In much the same way Millwall, Swansea and Plymouth are as well (young coaches, seen as progressive in their thinking).

I'm betting that JL et al had no real idea of what they were getting, and what its going to cost to implement the changes he wants to make (the Ajaz bid of £2.5m shows they are willing to entertain it at least)

We’d value most of our players at >£2.5m.. how can we improve our current squad by paying less?

[NcnsBcfc]

Just now, FNQ said:

We’d value most of our players at >£2.5m.. how can we improve our current squad by paying less?

We can't, that's the market price at the moment.

The point is that we haven't spent that sort of money since Wells? (Stand to be corrected if wrong)

Certainly Holden and Pearson weren't able (for a multitude) of reasons to spend that sort of money. Indeed Pearson was told the wage budget was fully but we seem to have found some new money for Murphy and Stokes (500k) and the remainder of Twine's salary that wasn't covered by Weimann's WBA loan.

And the perm signing of TGH being bought forward.

Certainly a bit of a different mantra coming from the board at the moment about money becoming available.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Were either of McCrorie or Knight £2.5m or were they just up to £2m?

[Sheltons Army]

16 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

I agree that the hierarchy are trying to recreate a Bristol City Mckenna. In much the same way Millwall, Swansea and Plymouth are as well (young coaches, seen as progressive in their thinking).

I'm betting that JL et al had no real idea of what they were getting, and what its going to cost to implement the changes he wants to make (the Ajaz bid of £2.5m shows they are willing to entertain it at least)

If I’m understanding what you are saying Neil , that in essence JL and BT didn’t understand LMs , playing philosophies , how rigid he was in them ,  or what requirements he would need in types of player profile etc

Well........ I know not many rate the hierarchy at the moment but that would be simply brain numbingly stupid - beyond comprehension 

One , of the first , surely the first , questions to LM when meeting surely had to be about his playing ethos , and the current squad with a view to what if any trading would be required , the feasability , and the cost

 

If not the JL and BT need to get a job at Burger King

Assuming that they really aren’t that ridiculously stupid one can only assume that unless LM wasn’t fully honest at that time (Which I find exteremely unlikely) they’ve supported and accepted LMs ideas and will now have to back him in terms of squad overhaul to whatever degree.

I think the ins and outs in the next two windows will be very very revealing for lots of reasons and reveal more about LM , JL & BT

Let’s hope the plan is good and is executed well

Recruitment always massively significant in terms of progress but they’ve picked their man , and now have to back him - they’ve put a lot of faith in him , and pressure on him

They need to get recruitment spot on for , (and with) him 

Theres a ride coming ......

 

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Whilst it's great that the sale of Scott has afforded us some scope. We still don't have a huge amount to spend on players and of course our wage budgets are lower than a few years ago out of necessity.

For me the signing of Twine demonstrates short term mentality up until the summer.

I'll try and keep the financial chat brief, but by my reckoning under the current system we have up to £10-15m in headroom to this season, perhaps the same again next year..How if looks 2 years hence I'd have to try and analyse and guesstimate. 

That's net of any sales, ie before.

How much we want to spend, how quickly etc- risk v reward, that's a matter for the hierarchy. TV money rising will also mean we can spend more, on the downside new FFP regs if they materialise changes the calculus again.

In fact with a fair wind maybe £15-20m could be reinvested- if not up by 2025-26 then yes issues again.

Edited January 22 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

23 minutes ago, FNQ said:

We’d value most of our players at >£2.5m.. how can we improve our current squad by paying less?

Coaching the ones you have, exploiting the market (finding gems), tactical nous.

8 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

I think the ins and outs in the next two windows will be very very revealing for lots of reasons and reveal more about LM , JL & BT

 

I think we will have a pretty clear idea in the next fortnight!

FWIW I know we tried to sign Twine, but at least we didn’t buckle and pay what Burnley wanted, nor have we gone on a mad spending spree (yet).  You could argue, we’ve used a bit of the cup run money (tbc).

[Sheltons Army]

7 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Coaching the ones you have, exploiting the market (finding gems), tactical nous.

I think we will have a pretty clear idea in the next fortnight!

FWIW I know we tried to sign Twine, but at least we didn’t buckle and pay what Burnley wanted, nor have we gone on a mad spending spree (yet).  You could argue, we’ve used a bit of the cup run money (tbc).

I’m glad in a number of ways Dave that we didn’t fork out the asking price for Twine

It gives LM a chance to have a good look at him at Championship Level and I hope he puts existing  views somewhat to one side and makes a good honest assessment of Twines suitability for us and what he wants and the level he wants.

There is no doubt he brings something different and his good relationship with LM should give him a decent chance to show what he can provide 

But I really hope LM is honest in his updated assessment , very focused ,before we consider what fee we would be willing to pay.

Ultimately , If he’s keen to get him here permanently, which tbh , everything looks that way , then it will be interesting to see how we play our hand in the summer

 

[Sheltons Army]

18 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Coaching the ones you have, exploiting the market (finding gems), tactical nous.

I think we will have a pretty clear idea in the next fortnight!

FWIW I know we tried to sign Twine, but at least we didn’t buckle and pay what Burnley wanted, nor have we gone on a mad spending spree (yet).  You could argue, we’ve used a bit of the cup run money (tbc).

As a side note I like the Murphy & Stokes signings , and that strategy of trying to get ahead of the game and picking the apples just before they ripen so to speak

Not all will work out , (and accepting the OOC market is a very important pond now )but in comparison to fees for established Championship players they are in relative terms ‘cheap punts, and quite likely to pick us up a fee even if they don’t force their way through here.

I really like these type of signings , The profiles look good and not far off a no lose ‘gamble’ 

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

As a side note I like the Murphy & Stokes signings , and that strategy of trying to get ahead of the game and picking the apples just before they ripen so to speak

Not all will work out , (and accepting the OOC market is a very important pond now )but in comparison to fees for established Championship players they are in relative terms ‘cheap punts, and quite likely to pick us up a fee even if they don’t force their way through here.

I really like these type of signings , The profiles look good and not far off a no lose ‘gamble’ 

I think the OOC market will be interesting.

My gut feel is that we won’t see players of the age / experience of the likes of James and Naismith, we will aim younger.

Its a fascinating game of guesswork at this point.

[Sheltons Army]

15 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I think the OOC market will be interesting.

My gut feel is that we won’t see players of the age / experience of the likes of James and Naismith, we will aim younger.

Its a fascinating game of guesswork at this point.

Yes , I can see released U23 Premier League type signings or younger OOC

Theres definitely a market but one of the reasons I like and always have hope in the Murray and Stokes type signings*  , is that without a long academy grooming they’re out in men’s football , albeit at lower levels ,and showcasing themselves with natural talent 

From the glimpses we’ve had they clearly both have something about them , and natural ability ,and hunger  which are always a great start 

Theres always a chance of finding a real diamond , actually , probably more so than an academy groomed 

 

* Accepting we may have to wait 12-18 , months for any first team showings and tbf to LM / BT can’t be categorised as first team recruitment - but something quite exciting to watch out for

Edited January 23 by Sheltons Army

[FNQ]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Coaching the ones you have, exploiting the market (finding gems), tactical nous.

When we sold AS and AS we included sell on clauses so we could benefit from a progressive club doing exactly what you’ve mentioned above.. not sure why we have to consistently remain near the bottom of the food chain especially when we now have some scope to move. I guess we’ll have to disagree on how we interpret tactical nous.

[Son of Fred]

11 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Surprised at the low evaluation (and valuation) of Tommy.

He's scoring at a goal every other game(ish) in a mid-table team, who also happen to be a low scoring team.  Odds not stacked in his favour, plus playing a system that isn’t a perfect fit.

Other team’s recruitment departments will be looking beyond some of those (perceived negative) factors.

I recall a certain LM saying pre-Southampton, that Tommy scores from crosses, pull-backs, etc, and he (LM) needs to find a way to get us in behind teams to service Tommy.  Not seen any evidence of that bar Huddersfield (a) when Sykes and Knight carved their left-back up.

So I think he’s doing a pretty decent job.

Would be great to see Syksey back!...

Any good news on that front, Dave???

[NcnsBcfc]

8 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

If I’m understanding what you are saying Neil , that in essence JL and BT didn’t understand LMs , playing philosophies , how rigid he was in them ,  or what requirements he would need in types of player profile etc

Well........ I know not many rate the hierarchy at the moment but that would be simply brain numbingly stupid - beyond comprehension 

One , of the first , surely the first , questions to LM when meeting surely had to be about his playing ethos , and the current squad with a view to what if any trading would be required , the feasability , and the cost

 

If not the JL and BT need to get a job at Burger King

Assuming that they really aren’t that ridiculously stupid one can only assume that unless LM wasn’t fully honest at that time (Which I find exteremely unlikely) they’ve supported and accepted LMs ideas and will now have to back him in terms of squad overhaul to whatever degree.

I think the ins and outs in the next two windows will be very very revealing for lots of reasons and reveal more about LM , JL & BT

Let’s hope the plan is good and is executed well

Recruitment always massively significant in terms of progress but they’ve picked their man , and now have to back him - they’ve put a lot of faith in him , and pressure on him

They need to get recruitment spot on for , (and with) him 

Theres a ride coming ......

 

 

I think the point I'm trying to make @Sheltons Army is that i believe that JL and BT actually thought we had a squad capable of making the top 6.

The fact that we weren't doing that, is one of their justifications (rightly or wrongly) for sacking Pearson.

Manning no doubt will have opened their eyes to the limitations of the current squad and the need to bring in new players (as you've said the signings of Murphy and Stokes show some planning for the future already).

@Davefevs have you noticed that the agent Phil Korklin (@philkorklin on Twitter/X) is the agent for both Twine and Stokes.

He seems to also be the agent of a number of lower league players who are making an impact. His client list is certainly one to watch. 

[Davefevs]

6 hours ago, FNQ said:

When we sold AS and AS we included sell on clauses so we could benefit from a progressive club doing exactly what you’ve mentioned above.. not sure why we have to consistently remain near the bottom of the food chain especially when we now have some scope to move. I guess we’ll have to disagree on how we interpret tactical nous.

I’m talking about exploiting inbound recruitment.  We don’t want to rely on spending £2.5m plus as our only way of improving our squad.

re Sell-ons, Devil’s advocate says we did that with Brownhill, Kelly and Webster…and we didn’t get a bean (yet)!  The likelihood with Scott and Semenyo is that they are that bit younger, so we ought to get something when they move.  The last sell-on of any note was Bolassie!!  We did get some for Freeman and Szmodics.

How can tactical nous be up for debate?  Surely a manager with better tactical nous than another can turn that advantage into points over a season?

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Son of Fred said:

Would be great to see Syksey back!...

Any good news on that front, Dave???

Dunno, LM said he was very close last week pre-Watford.

15 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

I think the point I'm trying to make @Sheltons Army is that i believe that JL and BT actually thought we had a squad capable of making the top 6.

The fact that we weren't doing that, is one of their justifications (rightly or wrongly) for sacking Pearson.

Manning no doubt will have opened their eyes to the limitations of the current squad and the need to bring in new players (as you've said the signings of Murphy and Stokes show some planning for the future already).

@Davefevs have you noticed that the agent Phil Korklin (@philkorklin on Twitter/X) is the agent for both Twine and Stokes.

He seems to also be the agent of a number of lower league players who are making an impact. His client list is certainly one to watch. 

Yes, James Piercy mentioned it last week.

[The turtle]

11 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Evening back at you!

He could’ve brought Mehmeti on for either Twine or Knight….freshness if nothing else?  Mehmeti has generally been bright recently.  If he’s wedded to this 3421-ish system, I think he is gonna waste resources but that’s another debate.

The more worrying thing is actually the regression of open play creativity. 𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗮𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻 𝘄𝗮𝘀 𝗶𝘁?

There is an Improving trend in transitional attacks from well-triggered pressing, even if shots haven’t materialised.  Trust the process, eh!

And set-piece got a huge jolt on Saturday with 12/15 shots coming from dead-ball situations.  I’m not snobby, I’ll take goals wherever they come from, and I appreciate some chances from set-plays will’ve initially been created from good open play.  The same happens vice-versa though, so it’s not necessarily a one-way street.

Thankfully we are still defending at similar levels.

It’s a bit of a conundrum at this point.

I will continue to monitor, not seen the magic piece of the jigsaw yet.

 

Exactly, exactly, exactly!

But it even started v west ham. Half the world now thinks we are a battle hardened dirty team, beating up a southern softie - so much so we moved north geographically.  Was that the plan?

V Watford , to watch most of our danger coming from set pieces and crosses. My first feeling was ok so manning is adding another method in how we attack teams. Good.

But then it's like wait, player pathway? All teams playing a certain way? All future coaches at all levels will be hired playing a certain way?

Without being in the room during certain conversations! I'm pretty sure it didn't go..... Right guys, so we're all happy with looking most dangerous from set pieces and crosses each game? Excellent.

Could it be they think they've hired an ideology, presented an ideology and tried to convince us they are getting an ideology, based on who he was.

Whereas actually, they've got someone still learning, who wants his teams to play a certain way but will mix it up if needed (lessons learnt from previous clubs)??? All of a sudden, i can see a world where control is no longer a buzz word for a positive after a lost game.

 

[W-S-M Seagull]

9 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

If I’m understanding what you are saying Neil , that in essence JL and BT didn’t understand LMs , playing philosophies , how rigid he was in them ,  or what requirements he would need in types of player profile etc

Well........ I know not many rate the hierarchy at the moment but that would be simply brain numbingly stupid - beyond comprehension 

One , of the first , surely the first , questions to LM when meeting surely had to be about his playing ethos , and the current squad with a view to what if any trading would be required , the feasability , and the cost

 

If not the JL and BT need to get a job at Burger King

Assuming that they really aren’t that ridiculously stupid one can only assume that unless LM wasn’t fully honest at that time (Which I find exteremely unlikely) they’ve supported and accepted LMs ideas and will now have to back him in terms of squad overhaul to whatever degree.

I think the ins and outs in the next two windows will be very very revealing for lots of reasons and reveal more about LM , JL & BT

Let’s hope the plan is good and is executed well

Recruitment always massively significant in terms of progress but they’ve picked their man , and now have to back him - they’ve put a lot of faith in him , and pressure on him

They need to get recruitment spot on for , (and with) him 

Theres a ride coming ......

 

 

When LM first jointed I posted a few times that I didn't think JL and BT quite knew what they were getting with LM. 

To a lot of us it was quite clear that in this moment in time, he didn't quite suit what we have here. Others assured me that it could be fine. He would adapt to us etc. 

I think there has also been an element of he didn't realise what we had here either. 

To a certain extent I think he has adapted so credit for that. He's admitted publicly that he's had to role back on the information he gives the players. 

Whilst I wouldn't want to see LM sacked at this current moment in time, I suppose I'm of the view of being quite sceptical about allowing him to overhaul this squad. The squad is decent. It shouldn't need an overhaul. 

My worry is we overhaul the squad to suit Manning and then that still doesn't yield improvements and then we look back and think oh ****, we ripped up a decent squad for nothing.