Mcguane

[Toffee dog]

A player with a very good pedigree as a young player who obviously slipped down the league pyramid. Will be interesting to what his ceiling is, who is already suggesting he could be a very important player for us if he continues to play as he is showing on the few games he has played for us.Very promising signs of a Mcguane & Knight partnership.

[Mr Popodopolous]

15 hours ago, BCFCGav said:

I do wonder if we should recall TGH though, given Williams injury sounding a bad one. We’re light of midfield cover, unless Murphy is ready.

While it ain't broke don't fix it on one level yet I too wonder given a)The injures in specific positions and b) Ability of TGH to cover RB and or RWB as well as midfield.

Agree on McGuane, seems to have helped to free up Bird and Knight as you say.

[Port Said Red]

I feel slightly less worried about the return of Josh Brownhill than before, it will be his biggest test but I really believe that Marcus has it in him to keep him quiet.

[Magicdaps]

I thinks he's been excellent.  

The biggest thing for me is the balance he brings to our midfield.  His role as the defined DFM player (although he's prepared to break forward on occasion) just brings a lovely balance to the middle of the pitch, and he's quick, recovers well, and covers the ground so effectively.  Knight can be Knight and play box to box in the knowledge that MM is always on the cover, and Bird can be Bird and impact the game at the top end of the pitch.  All 3 of them are comfortable on the ball and willing to take responsibility. 

I think the three of them compliment each other perfectly.

I like Joe but I don't see him getting back in anytime soon ahead of any of these 3.  I think the main reason is that Joe is a bit of an all-rounder and doesn't do any of the MF elements brilliantly.  He does them all competently so is a worthy back up, but the current 3 seem more like specialists in the roles that they are playing in. 

It's obviously a long season so these 3 aren't going to play every minute between them, but I think they should, and will be, our default starting 3. 

I've not read the whole thread so the point may well of already been made...

[Betty Swallocks]

A very funny thread to read from start to finish.

Why did we sign him? 

[Port Said Red]

2 minutes ago, Betty Swallocks said:

A very funny thread to read from start to finish.

Why did we sign him? 

You're right, I have just looked back and some of the earlier comments are almost actionable.

[Gol]

4 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

You're right, I have just looked back and some of the earlier comments are almost actionable.

I’ll hold my hands up there had a shocker! 
 

delighted to be wrong though he’s been quality long may it continue!

[REDOXO]

We used to have a classic thread sub forum. I’d really like to see that make a comeback as this thread would be up there with the best of them

 

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

I certainly questioned why we bought him, as he wasn't getting games when we were shocking, and in that context he looked very much a vanity buy, however now he's getting game time, if he keeps up his performances he could very well be a good buy.  I still stand by the fact our midfield is way way to bloated. 

[HTC Red]

On 06/10/2024 at 19:22, Snufflelufagus said:

Why did we sign him?

 

On 06/10/2024 at 19:33, glynriley said:

Because the previous manager raised a shed load of cash, by selling the family silver, thus making his own job more difficult, then the failed league one manager decided to shower his pet monkey with gifts. 
 

All aided and abetted by the chief monkey appointer of course. 

 

On 06/10/2024 at 20:15, fly in the air said:

another question jon lansdown should be asking. why sign a player when you have no intention on player. Pathetic Manning and yes man Tinnion 

 

On 06/10/2024 at 20:37, Baldyman said:

It does smack of a favour to a mate doesn’t it ? Seemed odd that we’d consider an Oxford reject good enough for us in the first place but to sign him and never play him smacks of nepotism . Particularly after ditching a young player we’d only recently paid a substantial fee for .

Would like to congratulate the above posters for their incredible foresight. Embarrassing. 

[PHILINFRANCE]

9 hours ago, Magicdaps said:

I thinks he's been excellent.  

The biggest thing for me is the balance he brings to our midfield.  His role as the defined DFM player (although he's prepared to break forward on occasion) just brings a lovely balance to the middle of the pitch, and he's quick, recovers well, and covers the ground so effectively.  Knight can be Knight and play box to box in the knowledge that MM is always on the cover, and Bird can be Bird and impact the game at the top end of the pitch.  All 3 of them are comfortable on the ball and willing to take responsibility. 

I think the three of them compliment each other perfectly.

I like Joe but I don't see him getting back in anytime soon ahead of any of these 3.  I think the main reason is that Joe is a bit of an all-rounder and doesn't do any of the MF elements brilliantly.  He does them all competently so is a worthy back up, but the current 3 seem more like specialists in the roles that they are playing in. 

It's obviously a long season so these 3 aren't going to play every minute between them, but I think they should, and will be, our default starting 3. 

I've not read the whole thread so the point may well of already been made...

I haven't actually seen them applauding each other , but I do agree that MM appears to be a useful and welcome addition to our midfield.

Not only does he protect our defence, similarly to Matt James, but he also seems to give that 'bite' that often seems to be lacking when Joe Williams is unavailable.

[Lavington Robin]

MM is the only suggestion I have made on the Transfer forum around 12 months ago. Whilst Brannigan was the one everyone talked about I felt he didn’t fit our profile mostly due to age. But MM seemed to be a real LM player who I really hoped would join us but was unsure of any restrictions some mentioned from The U’s. My biggest surprise was how long before he was given a chance. I think & hope he will become even better & more expansive in time. He’s certainly given Knight an even more of a free role which is great to see.

[Baldyman]

3 hours ago, HTC Red said:

 

 

 

Would like to congratulate the above posters for their incredible foresight. Embarrassing. 

Thanks for your input there HTC .MM has indeed been a revelation and I’m over the moon for him and us .He’s looked more assured with every game .   However , at the time of my comment he WAS rejected by Oxford and he HAD NOT kicked a single ball for us having sat on his arse since the start of the season ! At no point did I suggest he would never kick a ball for us in future nor did I suggest he was no good  so not sure what fore sight I used ? I do however bow to your incredible ability to use hind sight so well . 

[Davefevs]

30 minutes ago, Lavington Robin said:

MM is the only suggestion I have made on the Transfer forum around 12 months ago. Whilst Brannigan was the one everyone talked about I felt he didn’t fit our profile mostly due to age. But MM seemed to be a real LM player who I really hoped would join us but was unsure of any restrictions some mentioned from The U’s. My biggest surprise was how long before he was given a chance. I think & hope he will become even better & more expansive in time. He’s certainly given Knight an even more of a free role which is great to see.

Ditto

[TDarwall]

It's always dangerous to "go too early" on a player (good or bad), but MM does look a really smart addition.

It also demonstrates how circumstantial these things can be; under Buckingham he couldn't get a game in Lg1 for Oxford. I'm sure he can't "only" play for LM, but it is obviously a combo that works really well.

 

[Fjmcity]

13 hours ago, HTC Red said:

 

 

 

Would like to congratulate the above posters for their incredible foresight. Embarrassing. 

There will be no embarrassment though. Which is ultimately the most embarrassing thing about it

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, TDarwall said:

It's always dangerous to "go too early" on a player (good or bad), but MM does look a really smart addition.

It also demonstrates how circumstantial these things can be; under Buckingham he couldn't get a game in Lg1 for Oxford. I'm sure he can't "only" play for LM, but it is obviously a combo that works really well.

 

McGuane still started a lot of games under DB, in fact he started every game under him until gameweek 34, when he missed out of 2 squads due to a quad injury.  Came on us sub in GW36 and then started the next 3.

On 12th Match (they lost 5-0 that day) DB said:

He then missed (dropped) the next 4 (GW39-43) and made a few sub appearances as Oxford clung onto a play off place.  Made two sub appearances in the playoffs.

I’m not sure where the “DB didn’t play him” really came from?

[TDarwall]

45 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 

I’m not sure where the “DB didn’t play him” really came from?

I may have made it up! I was sure I'd read stuff from Oxford fans, maybe they were saying that he (MM) wasn't anywhere as effective under DB?

In any event, looks a good fit for us.

 

[Silvio Dante]

Often go back to the George Elek comments on LM joining (see below), after which I said based on Eleks comments I’d really like to sign McGuane (and that was purely based on those, as opposed to ITK).

On signing, and in view of relative involvement to start with, it seemed a signing that made sense (swap one squad player in TGH for another), and it’s not unreasonable to say without the injuries MM wouldn’t have got the opportunity as Williams was first choice (MM came in when JW suspended vs Leeds but then bench vs Preston, coming on when JW injured).

He’s done all you can to date which is take the opportunity and take it well. After three starts though, I’m going to (as detailed on the Bird thread) reserve full judgement until we have a bigger sample. But if he continues as he’s started, then there will be only one judgement that can be made.

Edited November 11 by Silvio Dante

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, TDarwall said:

I may have made it up! I was sure I'd read stuff from Oxford fans, maybe they were saying that he (MM) wasn't anywhere as effective under DB?

In any event, looks a good fit for us.

 

Maybe not as effective, but he did get picked.

Aye.

[Manor Born]

Occasional Oxford poster here - I don't get much right but stuck up for McGuane the day after you signed him. Maybe I know more than I think. We're certainly missing this sort of player at the moment!

 

[downendcity]

Anyone else getting a similar feeling to GJ's play off final team.

A collection of other teams misfits and cast offs, some of our own league 1 team and some local lads, a team that struggled fir goals and strikers that didn't score many as I recall, but they came together as a whole greater than the sum of their parts.

I'm slightly generalising and am sure posters will point out players who weren't misfits or cast offs, but hopefully you get my drift.

[Topper 123]

GOOD PLAYER 

[TDarwall]

8 minutes ago, downendcity said:

Anyone else getting a similar feeling to GJ's play off final team.

 

Not for me. With GJ we (for once) rode the crest of the momentum wave after getting promoted.

Some positive signs in recent games, but this league is brutal & we could easily amass nil points from Burnley & Watford if we're not right on it.

We seem to be in the familiar position of "nearly" being contenders, an extended decent run to Xmas would see us being closer to the real deal, but it wouldn't shock me if we have a bit of a downturn. As others have said, it's still unclear if we can unlock sides that sit deep & you only have to go back to the Stoke game for a defensive calamity.

[broodje]

On 12/10/2024 at 15:51, Shauntaylor85 said:

Infuriating isn’t it. Nigel developed Semenyo and Scott, sold them, then was told he can sign Ayala on a free transfer who is past it! Yet we are happy to now create spaces for someone who had half a dozen good games under Manning at Oxford. And we wonder where our issue lies……

[REDOXO]

A lot of posters with low posting counts on threads today. 
 

For my tuppence this bloke has taken his chance pretty well. Is he going to go on to fulfill Arse/Barca potential who knows. But a good start!
 

He is the sort of player (tough that can carry the ball run hard and get a tackle in) that teams that want to go somewhere must have. I’m hoping my crystal ball is accurate and he becomes an essential player for us! 

[INCRED]

5 hours ago, downendcity said:

Anyone else getting a similar feeling to GJ's play off final team.

A collection of other teams misfits and cast offs, some of our own league 1 team and some local lads, a team that struggled fir goals and strikers that didn't score many as I recall, but they came together as a whole greater than the sum of their parts.

I'm slightly generalising and am sure posters will point out players who weren't misfits or cast offs, but hopefully you get my drift.

Something has clicked recently and from adversity sometimes there is hope. The terrible news of LMs son passing away so suddenly, the reaction from the fans & players has brought everyone together and dissipated a lot of negativity 

I sincerely hope that this apparent togetherness is the little bit of extra that pushes us on in games and ultimately gets us in a position to challenge for promotion 

[Spike]

On 09/11/2024 at 19:20, broodje said:

Am I wrong? Vyner is awful in a back three unless he has a deep sitting wing back because he uses the players either side of himself to stay in position. When he played on the right side of the back three he'd go too far forward with his positioning because he'd try to position himself been his middle center back and wing back which when countered would see him too advanced in the line and he'd either over commit or leave a space that was exploited.

In the back 4 he sits next to his CB partner because that ensures a straight line unlike in the back 3. Don't get me wrong, he got better, but was still prone to it and just because the pundits didn't talk about it or even see it a lot of our fans seem to be oblivious to the fact that Vyners biggest issue as a center back is that his decision making and positioning let him down. He's definitely improved but he's far more comfortable and reliable in a back two paring.

[Mallorcan Red]

On 10/11/2024 at 19:14, Betty Swallocks said:

A very funny thread to read from start to finish.

Why did we sign him? 

It just yet more confirmation 99.9% of us on OTIB really don’t have the slightest clue about managing a championship football club or buying, training and selling football players. We just like everyone to think we do. Plus to be honest what else is there to do?

[SecretSam]

On 11/11/2024 at 13:00, downendcity said:

Anyone else getting a similar feeling to GJ's play off final team.

No. Although Manning seems to like signing his old boys...

[SecretSam]

On 11/11/2024 at 18:08, INCRED said:

Something has clicked recently and from adversity sometimes there is hope. The terrible news of LMs son passing away so suddenly, the reaction from the fans & players has brought everyone together and dissipated a lot of negativity 

I sincerely hope that this apparent togetherness is the little bit of extra that pushes us on in games and ultimately gets us in a position to challenge for promotion 

I wanted to say something like this, but couldn't find the right words. Well put. Chapeau.

[Davefevs]

5 hours ago, Spike said:

Am I wrong? Vyner is awful in a back three unless he has a deep sitting wing back because he uses the players either side of himself to stay in position. When he played on the right side of the back three he'd go too far forward with his positioning because he'd try to position himself been his middle center back and wing back which when countered would see him too advanced in the line and he'd either over commit or leave a space that was exploited.

In the back 4 he sits next to his CB partner because that ensures a straight line unlike in the back 3. Don't get me wrong, he got better, but was still prone to it and just because the pundits didn't talk about it or even see it a lot of our fans seem to be oblivious to the fact that Vyners biggest issue as a center back is that his decision making and positioning let him down. He's definitely improved but he's far more comfortable and reliable in a back two paring.

The general problem when we play a back-3 (whoever plays there) is that we end up with 3 marking 1, sometimes 3 marking 0 if the opposition striker drops in to receive the ball.  That leaves everyone else overloaded.

I think there is an unconscious “we are playing a back-3, someone else must be marking if I’m spare”.

[Mr Popodopolous]

30 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

The general problem when we play a back-3 (whoever plays there) is that we end up with 3 marking 1, sometimes 3 marking 0 if the opposition striker drops in to receive the ball.  That leaves everyone else overloaded.

I think there is an unconscious “we are playing a back-3, someone else must be marking if I’m spare”.

Agreed Dave. Overloading is a concern of mine albeit in another sense- Wingbacks can be a key outlet in a back 3/5 and if the opposition can go 2 v 1 frequently they can either bypass or at minimum negate the key outlet in a different type of overloading..wingback(s) having to consistently firefight or worse be exposed defensively.

Maybe that risk isn't quite so big but the 3 CBs vs 1 striker and 1 Attacking mid say..spare man, if that spare man is say a fully fit in form Naismith that can turn it on the opposition as he can play deepest midfield and in a back 3 but that aside.. 

[Spike]

On 20/11/2024 at 09:34, Davefevs said:

The general problem when we play a back-3 (whoever plays there) is that we end up with 3 marking 1, sometimes 3 marking 0 if the opposition striker drops in to receive the ball.  That leaves everyone else overloaded.

I think there is an unconscious “we are playing a back-3, someone else must be marking if I’m spare”.

Yeah they're is definitely a case of this but work Vyner I've watched him for years straying from a position in a back 3, you put Dickie, Naismith, Atkinson etc on the other side and they do it to significant less. Put Vyner in a back 4 and the problem practically disappears which just shows it's not just the tactics because if it was you'd see the CB on the other side making the same mistake over and over, but that doesn't happen.

I've said it before, Vyner is a great center back with the right formation and teammates around him but he's not the leader type and he needs a good CB next to him in order to shine. I've always said in a defence you have a lead defender and a +1, Vyner is the +1 kind of defender which is why I think we miss Dickie so much at times as he's a lead defender who doesn't need another defender to compliment his game. 

[Davefevs]

4 minutes ago, Spike said:

Vyner is a great center back with the right formation and teammates around him but he's not the leader type and he needs a good CB next to him in order to shine

 

[Davefevs]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cwy5z8kr9v9o

[The Nest Egg]

He's some bloody player isn't he. Brilliant last night even if he - alongside the rest of the team - faded considerably after Watford's goal.

[Harry]

On 09/11/2024 at 19:09, Nuno Gomes said:

Strangley Robins TV had Cole Skuse on before the game.  Arguably our last best DM (and so underrated by so many).  McGuane has the hallmarks of being our next.

Marlon Pack says hello ……

[cheddarwedlocker]

His new song is class aswell.