5 wins in 18 games….dreadful!

[mozo]

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

All does my head in when I hear "he needs his own players" 

The new Plymouth manager came in and despite it not being his squad he's doing decent with them. They are now 2 points behind us with a game in hand. 

Rob Edwards went in at Luton last November and despite it not being his squad, he got them promoted. 

There are plenty more examples of managers going into clubs and doing well with the existing squad. 

But because Manning is the chosen one, the golden boy he gets given a free pass apparently. 

For me, what we really need irrespective of whether our manager is Nige, Manning, Rob Edwards or some scouser down south is a solution to what we do in the final third.

If Manning gets to utilise Twine, Sykes and Mebude, with Conway up top, I'd expect him to eventually get a tune out of them (bearing in mind that two are new to the squad and one coming back from injury.

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 minute ago, Silvio Dante said:

 I think it’s a due diligence piece on both sides, because I can see a rationale where Liam was absolutely the right man to continue from Pearson.

If I said to you that I had a young progressive coach who’d cut his teeth at West Ham and Man City, and then been involved at the top end of the division below with two clubs, then it sounds like a cracking appointment.

I’m not going to repeat all the items about inflexibility, adaptability etc here - but they were all there below the surface with any real due diligence (and again, that’s not saying he won’t succeed but it is a rebuild not a continuity)

Similarly, I absolutely understand Liams reasons for taking the job - big club, level up etc. But I don’t think he did the due diligence on whether the squad fit what he wanted to do or understood how badly his new employers had handled things.

So, I think the club probably didn’t know exactly what they were getting - because I don’t think they were thorough enough in their recruitment. And that doesn’t surprise me with who led it. But it was in plain sight and I think they just looked at face value as opposed to doing a proper job.

I can't really argue with that. 

I posted before he was appointed that to me he didn't seem the right fit because he prefers 3 at the back and he likes possesion football. I'm surprised by due diligence was more robust than theirs. 

There is of course the possibility that he bluffed his way through the interview, told them what they wanted to hear and has come in and done his own thing regardless. But no evidence of that. I think there may have been some miscommunication between the two parties. 

I also said before that I think after us demolished Oxford in the friendly at the cup game I think that skewed Mannings thoughts. I think he came in here thinking that we were better than we were based on those results.

I don't think he accounted for the difference in level between us and them if that makes sense? I'll try to expand on that. I think he was in oar about how good we were against Oxford but failed to realise that we were so good because we were playing Oxford. Against other Championship teams, were not that good. 

The problem the club and Manning has now is that we now have no choice but to have a rebuild to whatever extent. However if the season continues how it has done then apart from the likes of Ian Gay, not many people are going to have patience for that rebuild. 

[GrahamC]

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

All does my head in when I hear "he needs his own players" 

The new Plymouth manager came in and despite it not being his squad he's doing decent with them. They are now 2 points behind us with a game in hand. 

Rob Edwards went in at Luton last November and despite it not being his squad, he got them promoted. 

There are plenty more examples of managers going into clubs and doing well with the existing squad. 

But because Manning is the chosen one, the golden boy he gets given a free pass apparently. 

Plymouth have had a significant churn in January, 3 loan players recalled, at least 4 signed.

Our recruitment was to permanently sign someone already here, bring in a kid with virtually no senior experience from Belgium & sign someone & immediately loan them back.

I’m agnostic on Manning but this is chalk & cheese.

Also arguable that Dewsnip is far better at his job than Tinnion.

[W-S-M Seagull]

11 minutes ago, mozo said:

I'm pretty sure we're not going to get front foot football of the Klopp gegenpress ilk from Manning.

Manning is trying to transition us from counter attacking to possession based as far as I can tell.

And that's the problem. 

We wanted a head coach who could get us playing the same sort of way Liverpool do, we have the players for that sort of style, but we appointed a guy who plays the complete opposite to that. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

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

I can't really argue with that. 

I posted before he was appointed that to me he didn't seem the right fit because he prefers 3 at the back and he likes possesion football. I'm surprised by due diligence was more robust than theirs. 

There is of course the possibility that he bluffed his way through the interview, told them what they wanted to hear and has come in and done his own thing regardless. But no evidence of that. I think there may have been some miscommunication between the two parties. 

I also said before that I think after us demolished Oxford in the friendly at the cup game I think that skewed Mannings thoughts. I think he came in here thinking that we were better than we were based on those results.

I don't think he accounted for the difference in level between us and them if that makes sense? I'll try to expand on that. I think he was in oar about how good we were against Oxford but failed to realise that we were so good because we were playing Oxford. Against other Championship teams, were not that good. 

The problem the club and Manning has now is that we now have no choice but to have a rebuild to whatever extent. However if the season continues how it has done then apart from the likes of Ian Gay, not many people are going to have patience for that rebuild. 

I've looked at Manning's Oxford games this season and he played a back 4 often.

Suddenly seems to have switched mid-season here even when perhaps two more natural options in Naismith and Atkinson aren't available for it, weird choices like Bell at wingback..makes little sense.

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

And that's the problem. 

We wanted a head coach who could get us playing the same sort of way Liverpool do, we have the players for that sort of style, but we appointed a guy who plays the complete opposite to that. 

Liverpool are almost always never a back 3 either.

Strategy in some ways seems all over the place.

Feels like we are I fear throwing a lot of mud around, and hoping something might stick.

Edited February 5 by Mr Popodopolous

[W-S-M Seagull]

Just now, Mr Popodopolous said:

I've looked at Manning's Oxford games this season and he played a back 4 often.

Suddenly seems to have switched mid-season here even when perhaps two more natural options in Naismith and Atkinson aren't available for it, weird choices like Bell at wingback..makes little sense.

I'm sure based on my research before that by the time he left Oxford they were playing a 3? Iirc he always wanted to play a 3 there but was limited to a 4? And at the first opportunity he switched to a 3. Same as hes done here really. 

[mozo]

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

And that's the problem. 

We wanted a head coach who could get us playing the same sort of way Liverpool do, we have the players for that sort of style, but we appointed a guy who plays the complete opposite to that. 

I think Bell, Knight and Conway would suit a Liverpool style perhaps, but Wells, Cornick and Mehmeti wouldn't in my opinion. You also have to question if Bell has the quality at this stage of his career to hit the levels we need.

As I've said before, I think we have a difficult mix of players in forward areas.

 

[mozo]

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

I'm sure based on my research before that by the time he left Oxford they were playing a 3? Iirc he always wanted to play a 3 there but was limited to a 4? And at the first opportunity he switched to a 3. Same as hes done here really. 

Being one of these modern trendy head coaches that he is I'd be surprised if he gets hung up on formations, but I could be wrong.

[Mr Popodopolous]

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

I'm sure based on my research before that by the time he left Oxford they were playing a 3? Iirc he always wanted to play a 3 there but was limited to a 4? And at the first opportunity he switched to a 3. Same as hes done here really. 

From the quick checks I made he did veer towards a back 3 more often than not in his final few weeks there yes.

1 minute ago, mozo said:

Being one of these modern trendy head coaches that he is I'd be surprised if he gets hung up on formations, but I could be wrong.

I'd argue there is a fundamental difference between a back 3 and a back 4 and how it affects the whole team dynamic or can be.

I also get flexibility, lopsided, possession v press versions of the above.

[mozo]

I've seen a few comments that the FA Cup isn't as important as the league and therefore we shouldn't be celebrating the performances that Manning has got in that Cup when our league form is poor.

It's an interesting one. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't really.

When we were drawn against West Ham in the third round, if Manning had put out the reserves we would have of course been soundly beaten, but, by the time we play Middlesbrough, we would have saved our players from 4 gruelling Cup games, which undoubtedly take their toll. Without those Cup games, our players would have been fresher for the league games and might have picked up more points.

Ultimately, you don't have that option. You have to go for it in the FA Cup.

Edited February 5 by mozo

[W-S-M Seagull]

10 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

From the quick checks I made he did veer towards a back 3 more often than not in his final few weeks there yes.

I'd argue there is a fundamental difference between a back 3 and a back 4 and how it affects the whole team dynamic or can be.

I also get flexibility, lopsided, possession v press versions of the above.

Yes. A back four can become a back 3 when a full back gets forward but that's completely different to setting up as a back 3 from the off. 

 

14 minutes ago, mozo said:

I think Bell, Knight and Conway would suit a Liverpool style perhaps, but Wells, Cornick and Mehmeti wouldn't in my opinion. You also have to question if Bell has the quality at this stage of his career to hit the levels we need.

As I've said before, I think we have a difficult mix of players in forward areas.

 

I think Wells and Cornick are excellent pressers of the ball. It's one of the reasons Cornick was brought in. Hence why he is now pretty much out of the door because we no longer play that pressing game..

Edited February 5 by W-S-M Seagull

[exAtyeoMax]

27 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Plymouth have had a significant churn in January, 3 loan players recalled, at least 4 signed.

Our recruitment was to permanently sign someone already here, bring in a kid with virtually no senior experience from Belgium & sign someone & immediately loan them back.

I’m agnostic on Manning but this is chalk & cheese.

Also arguable that Dewsnip is far better at his job than Tinnion.

That's the underlying problem. If Tins is responsible for setting the style of play etc then we're doomed. If Manning is being dictated to, there's not much he can do. Shout about it and he'll be booted out.

[Silvio Dante]

3 minutes ago, mozo said:

I've seen a few comments that the FA Cup isn't as important as the league and therefore we shouldn't be celebrating the performances that Manning has got in that Cup when our league form is poor.

It's an interesting one. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't really.

When we were drawn against West Ham in the third round, if Manning had put out the reserves we would have of course been soundly beaten, but, by the time we play Middlesbrough, we would have saved our players from 4 gruelling Cup games, which undoubtedly take their toll. Without those Cup games, our players would have been fresher for the league games and might have picked up more points.

Ultimately, you don't have that option. You have to go for it in the FA Cup.

I think it can be true that the cup is both more and less important than the league, and the importance has to be driven by relative performance elsewhere - in our case going for it in the cup was needed both because of helping to establish a new manager and because of the season meandering.

What is also true is that cup form is often an outlier to the league form, both because of relative motivation of us and the opponents, and as you say because of fatigue (but, to be clear, we’ve only played two extra games currently so it’s not crippling our schedule to the extent that performances should suffer).  For that reason I think it’s always reasonable to predominantly judge performance on league games.

[mozo]

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

Yes. A back four can become a back 3 when a full back gets forward but that's completely different to setting up as a back 3 from the off. 

 

I think Wells and Cornick are excellent pressers of the ball. It's one of the reasons Cornick was brought in. Hence why he is now pretty much out of the door because we no longer play that pressing game..

Wells and Cornick are willing pressers, but I'm not sure they've got the pace and athleticism to do it effectively week in week out, like Bell and Knight can. Cornick's pretty slow on the turn.

12 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

I think it can be true that the cup is both more and less important than the league, and the importance has to be driven by relative performance elsewhere - in our case going for it in the cup was needed both because of helping to establish a new manager and because of the season meandering.

What is also true is that cup form is often an outlier to the league form, both because of relative motivation of us and the opponents, and as you say because of fatigue (but, to be clear, we’ve only played two extra games currently so it’s not crippling our schedule to the extent that performances should suffer).  For that reason I think it’s always reasonable to predominantly judge performance on league games.

I think the two extra games makes a difference at this stage of the season especially, not just physically but also mentally with the heightened excitement levels. Maybe I'm overestimating (no idea), but my feeling is that by the time we play Middlesbrough, then 3 days later Southampton, I would be amazed if we are able to out-hustle the opposition in those games. What I'm pretty much expecting is that we'll get easily beaten and for the anti-Manning sentiment to grow stronger as a result, but that's football I guess. Our next full week between games is after QPR and before Shef Wednesday. I suspect that our next win will be at Hillsborough, but let's see.

Edited February 5 by mozo

[Supersonic Robin]

1 hour ago, Numero Uno said:

Exactly. Liam has had some good games and some poor ones so far, a real mixed bag. The one consistent element, however, is we certainly haven't been playing FRONT FOOT FOOTBALL. Anyone who says that is talking utter bollocks and in denial. Friday was actually the complete opposite.....it was back foot "try and survive for a 0-0" football..........AT HOME. That performance took me back two years and there are no excuses for that when the squad we have is not even close to being as poor, any more, to justify getting so comprehensively out-thought, out-muscled and outplayed. Similarly with individual players some have improved (e.g. Tanner), some have not really changed at all (e.g. Max) and others have regressed alarmingly such as Sam Bell and, I would argue albeit less alarmingly, even Conway. Again, a really mixed bag that is bordering at the lower end of achievement generally.

Not picking on you in particular, N.U, but I really don't understand this obsession with "positive front-foot football".

We are a club stuck midtable in the Championship, who haven't come close to promotion to the Premier League in well over a decade. The idea that we (and 99.9% of other clubs) can be picky about the style in which we try to win games is ridiculous to me.

Perhaps once we've won our 3rd Champions League in a row, then we'll start worrying about the style in which we're winning. For now, let's simply worry about playing winning football.

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, mozo said:

In the main, I'm trying to highlight NP examples whereby they illustrate that something isn't a problem caused by LM, but were pre-existing.

But you’re framing responses back to me that suggest I thought it was all rosy under Nige. In particular the way he played his front three was probably the thing I moaned about the most…and thought he could improve.

But…even though it was far from perfect attacking under Nige, it has got worse under Manning.  I can’t ignore that. That is not to say it won’t / can’t change, just merely observing the current “results”

If I was to be really selective (but I’m not, I try to balance) and ignore:

• Chances from set-pieces
• Chances from high-press turnovers in the opposition final third

our open attacking play under LM borders on a huge regression.  That goes against the grain of appointing someone like Manning.  He’s minimising opportunities to counter-attack, preferring to start attacks in a structured way, but not getting results.  I feel it is worthy of discussion, especially after 15 (18) games.

 

 

[Silvio Dante]

6 minutes ago, mozo said:

Wells and Cornick are willing pressers, but I'm not sure they've got the pace and athleticism to do it effectively week in week out, like Bell and Knight can. Cornick's pretty slow on the turn.

I think the two extra games makes a difference at this stage of the season especially, not just physically but also mentally with the heightened excitement levels. Maybe I'm overestimating (no idea), but my feeling is that by the time we play Middlesbrough, then 3 days later Southampton, I would be amazed if we are able to out-hustle the opposition in those games. What I'm pretty much expecting is that we'll get easily beaten and for the anti-Manning sentiment to grow stronger as a result, but that's football I guess. Our next full week between games is after QPR and before Shef Wednesday. I suspect that our next win will be at Hillsborough, but let's see.

I think (without going all football manager!) what you have to look at the expectation would be of both board and manager at the start of any season in respect of cups. Clearly, a lot is dependent on the draw you get, but when planning, I’d say a fair assumption for a side at Championship level would be that you’d at least navigate the opening rounds of the league and FA cups - some seasons more, some seasons less. So you work on an average season of 50 games.

All we’ve done here is have (as stands) 52 games due to the two replays - and only one more game than expectations at the moment. This isn’t some kind of stamina sapping run to semi finals, it’s meeting the broad average expectation for a team at this level.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Yes, last season we had 53 games but it didn't necessarily impact on our League form.

After Christmas ie post WBA we has the unbeaten run and in general were top 10 for points accrued from Millwall away to QPR away.

What was it 32 pts 22 games? Top 10 or right in and around it.

Edited February 5 by Mr Popodopolous

[bristolborn_and_red]

36 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said:

That's the underlying problem. If Tins is responsible for setting the style of play etc then we're doomed. If Manning is being dictated to, there's not much he can do. Shout about it and he'll be booted out.

If this is the case then he really does need to shout about it and take the risk that goes with it otherwise he's just a puppet.

[Mr Popodopolous]

In fact the squad thinned out after Janaury which created a bigger risk if anything.

In:

Haikin, Cornick, Mehmeti

Out:

Bentley, Klose, Massengo, Semenyo, Martin.

Loaned out Bajic, sold Towler and Low.

Plus of course Baker had retired, not truly replaced.

Edited February 5 by Mr Popodopolous

[mozo]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

But you’re framing responses back to me that suggest I thought it was all rosy under Nige. In particular the way he played his front three was probably the thing I moaned about the most…and thought he could improve.

But…even though it was far from perfect attacking under Nige, it has got worse under Manning.  I can’t ignore that. That is not to say it won’t / can’t change, just merely observing the current “results”

If I was to be really selective (but I’m not, I try to balance) and ignore:

• Chances from set-pieces
• Chances from high-press turnovers in the opposition final third

our open attacking play under LM borders on a huge regression.  That goes against the grain of appointing someone like Manning.  He’s minimising opportunities to counter-attack, preferring to start attacks in a structured way, but not getting results.  I feel it is worthy of discussion, especially after 15 (18) games.

 

 

Apologies if I've framed it like that. Not my intention. I'm not a Manning acolyte either, I'd never heard of the bloke before this season. And I'm totally open to the possibility that he will turn out to be the wrong appointment. Like you, I'm not willing to make firm and final judgements about him after a few months. I do seem to be more sympathetic to him at this stage than you are, but that could change either way. 

5 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

I think (without going all football manager!) what you have to look at the expectation would be of both board and manager at the start of any season in respect of cups. Clearly, a lot is dependent on the draw you get, but when planning, I’d say a fair assumption for a side at Championship level would be that you’d at least navigate the opening rounds of the league and FA cups - some seasons more, some seasons less. So you work on an average season of 50 games.

All we’ve done here is have (as stands) 52 games due to the two replays - and only one more game than expectations at the moment. This isn’t some kind of stamina sapping run to semi finals, it’s meeting the broad average expectation for a team at this level.

Fair enough. Weirdly, I thought both City and Coventry looked leggy in the second half of that game, but maybe that's just me.

[Sir Geoff]

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

And that's the problem. 

We wanted a head coach who could get us playing the same sort of way Liverpool do, we have the players for that sort of style, but we appointed a guy who plays the complete opposite to that. 

Yep we needed a Klopp clone but got Pep instead.

[1960maaan]

I said I would give it until February to judge Manning , I think I will give it until the end of the month and I'll tell you why.

He came in and started with the back 4 that had seen a slight upturn in form, if not always results.
He stated his preferred formation was a 3/5 and we went to that even before we had 3 fit CB's. The one thing that the change in system has caused is less chances created . Conway has looked lost at times on his own, flashes of the player when we do create something , but a lot of the time he looks like a front lying defender, just chasing and closing.

Then as there is a lot of chat about recruitment. The Club would do a lot towards that, finding players for the Coach to chose from. Manning already knew and liked Mehmeti and signed his old mate Twine . Then signs a wide forward / winger , who we don't know if he will cope with the Championship. 

To my mind something has to change to fit some/all/any of these into the team. 
He wanted Twine as a 10 apparently , so 2 up top ? I'd be happy with that, but he doesn't seem to like 2 strikers.
2 10s ? Sykes must surely play when fit and has played there , so Twine % Sykes behind TC ?
Front 3 ? TC must be central , Sykes seems a must on the right side and him and McCrorie looks like it could work. Twine will play , but does LM see him wide ?

This is why I will give him more time before I criticise him too much. This is where he has to earn his corn.
He has seen the squad, got some players he likes and the window is shut. He now has to adapt his thinking and mould the players into something that works and that in essence is a Coaches job. We can't buy a ready made team, we were in a massive transition and pretty much bargain hunting for a couple of years so the squad was always likely to be a project.
Now Manning has to work some magic or go the way of so many Managers of the recent past. 

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

17 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Yep we needed a Klopp clone but got Pep instead.

Also not a back 3 manager in the main. Although he uses it somewhat more than Klopp.

[Steve Watts]

Regardless of formation

Regardless of form

Regardless of personnel available

This past 18 games has had the odd flash, but overall has been the most bored I have ever been, watching us, in over 40 years of going down there.  That is wholly down to the manager and the style of football we are watching.  Will I continue to go? Yes.  Will I renew my season ticket? Yes.  Is it because I believe it will improve? Nope.  Is it because I hope it will? Yep.  And I think that's what most City fans keep doing it for.  We just hope it will get better and bring us some success and/or entertainment.  But as always, it's the hope that kills you...

The trouble is that the cup run has brought more punters through the door which no doubt the board are patting themselves on the back for and thinking that more and more Bristolians are lapping it up.  The reality is, as soon as this cup run ends, the gates will go south fast...because there is nothing entertaining going on down there whatsoever.  

I genuinely don't recall being this disillusioned by things at the Gate.  I include the Pulis and Osman era's.  During those era's we were poor, but this is just mind numbingly dull. 

[Davefevs]

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

All does my head in when I hear "he needs his own players" 

The new Plymouth manager came in and despite it not being his squad he's doing decent with them. They are now 2 points behind us with a game in hand. 

Rob Edwards went in at Luton last November and despite it not being his squad, he got them promoted. 

There are plenty more examples of managers going into clubs and doing well with the existing squad. 

But because Manning is the chosen one, the golden boy he gets given a free pass apparently. 

2 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Plymouth have had a significant churn in January, 3 loan players recalled, at least 4 signed.

Our recruitment was to permanently sign someone already here, bring in a kid with virtually no senior experience from Belgium & sign someone & immediately loan them back.

I’m agnostic on Manning but this is chalk & cheese.

Also arguable that Dewsnip is far better at his job than Tinnion.

For some additional context, here’s who they lost:

Two fairly heavy minutes players in Azaz and Kesler-Hayden, plus less in Cundle.

This is what they’ve brought in:

1 hour ago, Sir Geoff said:

Yep we needed a Klopp clone but got Pep instead.

I really hoped LM would be adaptable like he said he was, not fixed like we are seeing.

He has opportunity with a couple of players near return (Sykes and Twine) to show us LM-ball.

If he can’t show us that over the next 6-8 weeks (assuming no major injuries elsewhere), then I really begin to worry.  I’ve had my initial appraisal period, on a A-E scale, he’s a C-minus.  By the end of March, I will’ve seen another 9 league games…24 in total.

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

For some additional context, here’s who they lost:

Two fairly heavy minutes players in Azaz and Kesler-Hayden, plus less in Cundle.

This is what they’ve brought in:

I really hoped LM would be adaptable like he said he was, not fixed like we are seeing.

He has opportunity with a couple of players near return (Sykes and Twine) to show us LM-ball.

If he can’t show us that over the next 6-8 weeks (assuming no major injuries elsewhere), then I really begin to worry.  I’ve had my initial appraisal period, on a A-E scale, he’s a C-minus.  By the end of March, I will’ve seen another 9 league games…24 in total.

I think Sykes has been out since January 1st, any idea on his return?

[Mr Popodopolous]

@Countryfile

They said a few weeks for Sykes so it's hardly out of the realms of expected absence.

Mid February I reckon. Southampton at Home? Middlesbrough Away if a bit lucky.

Edited February 5 by Mr Popodopolous

[Silvio Dante]

1 minute ago, Countryfile said:

I think Sykes has been out since January 1st, any idea on his return?

According to Ian on FBC, definitely Middlesbrough and if not that definitely Southampton from an impeccable source.

[mozo]

1 hour ago, 1960maaan said:

I said I would give it until February to judge Manning , I think I will give it until the end of the month and I'll tell you why.

He came in and started with the back 4 that had seen a slight upturn in form, if not always results.
He stated his preferred formation was a 3/5 and we went to that even before we had 3 fit CB's. The one thing that the change in system has caused is less chances created . Conway has looked lost at times on his own, flashes of the player when we do create something , but a lot of the time he looks like a front lying defender, just chasing and closing.

Then as there is a lot of chat about recruitment. The Club would do a lot towards that, finding players for the Coach to chose from. Manning already knew and liked Mehmeti and signed his old mate Twine . Then signs a wide forward / winger , who we don't know if he will cope with the Championship. 

To my mind something has to change to fit some/all/any of these into the team. 
He wanted Twine as a 10 apparently , so 2 up top ? I'd be happy with that, but he doesn't seem to like 2 strikers.
2 10s ? Sykes must surely play when fit and has played there , so Twine % Sykes behind TC ?
Front 3 ? TC must be central , Sykes seems a must on the right side and him and McCrorie looks like it could work. Twine will play , but does LM see him wide ?

This is why I will give him more time before I criticise him too much. This is where he has to earn his corn.
He has seen the squad, got some players he likes and the window is shut. He now has to adapt his thinking and mould the players into something that works and that in essence is a Coaches job. We can't buy a ready made team, we were in a massive transition and pretty much bargain hunting for a couple of years so the squad was always likely to be a project.
Now Manning has to work some magic or go the way of so many Managers of the recent past. 

 

 

14 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

For some additional context, here’s who they lost:

Two fairly heavy minutes players in Azaz and Kesler-Hayden, plus less in Cundle.

This is what they’ve brought in:

I really hoped LM would be adaptable like he said he was, not fixed like we are seeing.

He has opportunity with a couple of players near return (Sykes and Twine) to show us LM-ball.

If he can’t show us that over the next 6-8 weeks (assuming no major injuries elsewhere), then I really begin to worry.  I’ve had my initial appraisal period, on a A-E scale, he’s a C-minus.  By the end of March, I will’ve seen another 9 league games…24 in total.

I agree with both of you that if Manning can't use Twine and Sykes to improve our attacking play, then that's a worry. Having said that, both players are coming back from injury so it might not be instant gratification.