Dickie and McGuane

[And Its Smith]

Head and shoulders the two best players on the pitch tonight. Dickie absolutely immense on the floor and in the air. Immaculate positioning. McGuane, his best game yet.  Almost perfect with and without the ball. 
 

Funny how, consistently, when we spend smaller fees on players they do well. The bigger money signings tend to disappoint. The signing of McGuane looks a masterstroke 

[Sandhurst Red]

Thought McGuane had chances to pass quicker but such was his threat first half in midfield, Watford had no choice but to make changes. 

 

Dickie is just superb. If we can get Atkinson back to his best, what a combo those two could be as our CB options. 

[milo1111]

General theme is decent recruitment in midfield and defence undone by dog shit recruitment up front. 
 

so frustrating 

[Sandhurst Red]

Just now, milo1111 said:

General theme is decent recruitment in midfield and defence undone by dog shit recruitment up front. 
 

so frustrating 

Spot on. 

We looked so devoid of any ideas in the final 3rd.

Last 10 mins, you'd think we'd throw the kitchen sink at it. A bit more urgency, a bit more tempo. 

Nope - Fally just stood still, not even attempting to drag a defender out of shape. Unacceptable.

[sglosbcfc]

McGuane looks absolute class, written off by some on here before he had even kicked a ball! I didn't do that, but have to admit I never thought he would be as good as he looks at the moment. This could be the signing of the season.

[Charlie BCFC]

If we’re talking both teams Louza and Chakvetadze I thought were the game winners for me, thought they were excellent 

[bcfc_gaz]

I thought McGuane was great, really good pressing and breaking up play well. I thought he struggled a bit against Burnley, didn't seem to have any impact. 

[westonred]

Shout out to McNally also who had a great game

[spudski]

8 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

Head and shoulders the two best players on the pitch tonight. Dickie absolutely immense on the floor and in the air. Immaculate positioning. McGuane, his best game yet.  Almost perfect with and without the ball. 
 

Funny how, consistently, when we spend smaller fees on players they do well. The bigger money signings tend to disappoint. The signing of McGuane looks a masterstroke 

I agree. 

However...would we have seen this much of McGuane if it wasn't for Williams having injuries?

Would LM have picked him over a fit Williams?

McGuane is far better imo.

But has this come about by ' luck' rather than judgement?

Dickie has been consistently our best player in many games. 

[MarcusX]

8 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

Head and shoulders the two best players on the pitch tonight. Dickie absolutely immense on the floor and in the air. Immaculate positioning. McGuane, his best game yet.  Almost perfect with and without the ball. 
 

Funny how, consistently, when we spend smaller fees on players they do well. The bigger money signings tend to disappoint. The signing of McGuane looks a masterstroke 

I’m surprised it took so long to put McGuane into the team, he’s exactly what we needed for this style of football. He’s so good at picking the ball up off the back four and will happily have it in tight areas and move it on quickly to beat a press or play through the lines.

I really like him, long may it continue

[And Its Smith]

14 minutes ago, spudski said:

I agree. 

However...would we have seen this much of McGuane if it wasn't for Williams having injuries?

Would LM have picked him over a fit Williams?

McGuane is far better imo.

But has this come about by ' luck' rather than judgement?

Dickie has been consistently our best player in many games. 

 

2 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

I’m surprised it took so long to put McGuane into the team, he’s exactly what we needed for this style of football. He’s so good at picking the ball up off the back four and will happily have it in tight areas and move it on quickly to beat a press or play through the lines.

I really like him, long may it continue

Could well have just been getting him up to speed with the style 

[TDarwall]

2 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

 

Could well have just been getting him up to speed with the style 

It's not unusual than an injury forces a change which unearths a good solution.

Without a pre season centre forward injury crisis, Bobby Reid wouldn't have been played up top.

You'd have to think that LM was instrumental in bringing MM to the club.

[eardun]

26 minutes ago, spudski said:

I agree. 

However...would we have seen this much of McGuane if it wasn't for Williams having injuries?

Would LM have picked him over a fit Williams?

McGuane is far better imo.

But has this come about by ' luck' rather than judgement?

Dickie has been consistently our best player in many games. 

Bit harsh. Manning was getting dogs abuse on here for even signing McGuane - he clearly knew what he was capable of even if others didn’t. Also no great surprise that, like any signing, he would be given time to get up to speed/integrate. So I have no doubt that we would have seen plenty of McGuane even if Williams had been fit - unless Williams was MOM every week. Manning clearly rates him and you can see why. 

 

[spudski]

16 minutes ago, eardun said:

Bit harsh. Manning was getting dogs abuse on here for even signing McGuane - he clearly knew what he was capable of even if others didn’t. Also no great surprise that, like any signing, he would be given time to get up to speed/integrate. So I have no doubt that we would have seen plenty of McGuane even if Williams had been fit - unless Williams was MOM every week. Manning clearly rates him and you can see why. 

 

It was a question, not a statement.

You maybe right. 

I questioned it, because I'm still questioning LMs judgement with certain players, their ability, and in game management. 

[1960maaan]

40 minutes ago, spudski said:

I agree. 

However...would we have seen this much of McGuane if it wasn't for Williams having injuries?

Would LM have picked him over a fit Williams?

McGuane is far better imo.

But has this come about by ' luck' rather than judgement?

Dickie has been consistently our best player in many games. 

That's a very good point , he really struggled to get off the bench to start with . Ended up a sliding doors moment when Williams got injured. Managed 3 minutes in his first 9 games , I really did question why we had brought him in . 

5 minutes ago, eardun said:

Bit harsh. Manning was getting dogs abuse on here for even signing McGuane - he clearly knew what he was capable of even if others didn’t. Also no great surprise that, like any signing, he would be given time to get up to speed/integrate. So I have no doubt that we would have seen plenty of McGuane even if Williams had been fit - unless Williams was MOM every week. Manning clearly rates him and you can see why. 

 

I'm not so sure , with Williams available McGuane hadn't really featured . Even in those drubbings at Derby & Blackburn , or games we struggled to get a grip like Cardiff & Sheff W . As I said above , with Williams available he had 3 minutes at the end of a game we were 2-0 up in , felt like a timewasting Sub at that. 

Signs are it's turned out a very signing but I must admit I had started to wonder if we had signed him as a "cheap punt" . He had had a pre season , played friendlies and then spent 2 months with us without a game . 

[sunningdalered]

Personally, I think Rob is still finding his way back into things after his lay off. Just little things - like taking one extra touch before he moves the ball on, it's making me nervous. His gold standard is very high though, so not a criticism.

[eardun]

52 minutes ago, spudski said:

It was a question, not a statement.

You maybe right. 

I questioned it, because I'm still questioning LMs judgement with certain players, their ability, and in game management. 

I know where the question comes from! I’m just pointing out the irony of the questioning on here going from ‘why did he sign him?’ to ‘why did he not play him earlier?’ Well if he didn’t sign him, he couldn’t play him at all! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[petehinton]

Given Tinns comments at the FF last week, would imagine a whole lot of effort will be going into giving Dickie a new deal over the upcoming summer.

Think he would shoot straight up to highest paid player, by default.

[MarcusX]

1 hour ago, sunningdalered said:

Personally, I think Rob is still finding his way back into things after his lay off. Just little things - like taking one extra touch before he moves the ball on, it's making me nervous. His gold standard is very high though, so not a criticism.

He missed a couple of headers / interceptions yesterday letting it bounce where you'd not expect a defender to do so. See what you mean, he's not quite back to his fully best yet.

[Phantom]

10 hours ago, Sandhurst Red said:

Dickie is just superb. If we can get Atkinson back to his best, what a combo those two could be as our CB options. 

When was Atkinson ever "at his best"?

[Nogbad the Bad]

28 minutes ago, petehinton said:

Given Tinns comments at the FF last week, would imagine a whole lot of effort will be going into giving Dickie a new deal over the upcoming summer.

Think he would shoot straight up to highest paid player, by default.

Who do you think is in front of him atm?

[petehinton]

3 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

Who do you think is in front of him atm?

Vyner is certainly one 

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, eardun said:

Bit harsh. Manning was getting dogs abuse on here for even signing McGuane - he clearly knew what he was capable of even if others didn’t. Also no great surprise that, like any signing, he would be given time to get up to speed/integrate. So I have no doubt that we would have seen plenty of McGuane even if Williams had been fit - unless Williams was MOM every week. Manning clearly rates him and you can see why. 

 

There was dogs abuse, but there were a good few of us who thought he could be a decent signing…and looked beyond Buckingham not picking him a few times, at things like contract situation, etc.

[robin_unreliant]

11 hours ago, milo1111 said:

General theme is decent recruitment in midfield and defence undone by dog shit recruitment up front. 
 

so frustrating 

Midfield is decent but lacks goals. Good teams don't rely on their striker to score all the goals. Especially when playing one up top. What we lack is a goal scoring midfielder. We have players who can play it around nicely but generally are lacking quality in and around the penalty area.

[redkev]

12 hours ago, Sandhurst Red said:

Thought McGuane had chances to pass quicker but such was his threat first half in midfield, Watford had no choice but to make changes. 

 

Dickie is just superb. If we can get Atkinson back to his best, what a combo those two could be as our CB options. 

Can we play them upfront aswell

[Alessandro]

12 hours ago, milo1111 said:

General theme is decent recruitment in midfield and defence undone by dog shit recruitment up front. 
 

so frustrating 

Not sure it's quite so simple as that:

Bird - (one our our best signings) was "done" under NP and signed in Jan under LM - same as TGH.

 

So real Manning/Tinnion era signings are:

Fally - Juries still out 

Armstrong - Still early but feels miss 

Mebude - Miss 

Twine - Expensive luxury, jury out as yet to see any value on pitch 

Stokes - On loan, too early but not that young - older than Earthy, for comparison....

Murphy - God knows 

Yu - Good glimpses, but not tearing it up /

Earthy - Good glimpses, been useful /

McGuane - Looking very good, growing by the game 

McNally - Feels a very solid squad addition (which I guess TBF he was) - if not ripping up trees, improving by the game, will he be first choice when everyone is fit? /

 

It's not a great hit rate on that list - especially when we know, if not absolutely vital, our success is certainly largely hinging on savvy transfer dealings.

 

(Crude traffic light system for current contribution/affect on a team pushing for top 6, not future value)

 

 

[Selred]

2 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Stokes - On loan, too early but not that young - older than Earthy, for comparison....

 

This is harsh. Different pathway, and price to Earthy. More amber/green.

[Charlie BCFC]

30 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Not sure it's quite so simple as that:

Bird - (one our our best signings) was "done" under NP and signed in Jan under LM - same as TGH.

 

So real Manning/Tinnion era signings are:

Fally - Juries still out 

Armstrong - Still early but feels miss 

Mebude - Miss 

Twine - Expensive luxury, jury out as yet to see any value on pitch 

Stokes - On loan, too early but not that young - older than Earthy, for comparison....

Murphy - God knows 

Yu - Good glimpses, but not tearing it up /

Earthy - Good glimpses, been useful /

McGuane - Looking very good, growing by the game 

McNally - Feels a very solid squad addition (which I guess TBF he was) - if not ripping up trees, improving by the game, will he be first choice when everyone is fit? /

 

It's not a great hit rate on that list - especially when we know, if not absolutely vital, our success is certainly largely hinging on savvy transfer dealings.

 

(Crude traffic light system for current contribution/affect on a team pushing for top 6, not future value)

 

 

When was Bird ever a Nigel Pearson signing? If anything Murphy who you’ve listed on there was as it was basically agreed for the January window after he failed a medical.

 

Think you’re harsh on Stokes and I feel it is still too early to judge Armstrong and Mayulu, especially as they showed glimpses early on. Only definite miss for me is Mebude which I couldn’t get my head around personally

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 minutes ago, Charlie BCFC said:

When was Bird ever a Nigel Pearson signing? If anything Murphy who you’ve listed on there was as it was basically agreed for the January window after he failed a medical.

 

Think you’re harsh on Stokes and I feel it is still too early to judge Armstrong and Mayulu, especially as they showed glimpses early on. Only definite miss for me is Mebude which I couldn’t get my head around personally

We were linked with Bird in August 2023, I was keen on him then.

Perhaps he was on the Club rather than NP list but either way I'm glad we signed him.

Agree with the rest of your post.

[Alessandro]

45 minutes ago, Selred said:

This is harsh. Different pathway, and price to Earthy. More amber/green.

 

15 minutes ago, Charlie BCFC said:

When was Bird ever a Nigel Pearson signing? If anything Murphy who you’ve listed on there was as it was basically agreed for the January window after he failed a medical.

 

Think you’re harsh on Stokes and I feel it is still too early to judge Armstrong and Mayulu, especially as they showed glimpses early on. Only definite miss for me is Mebude which I couldn’t get my head around personally

All fair. I’m not writing anyone off necessarily, just talking about first team impact right now.

R.E Bird - My point is, of the two players that have been the biggest revelations, if you like, are Bird and McGuane.

And Bird was identified, scouted and deals going on while Pearson was here. But as you say, same could be said about Stokes, although the club would have known Bird was much more for the here and now after his loan back.

Edited Wednesday at 12:40 by Alessandro

[sglosbcfc]

59 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Not sure it's quite so simple as that:

Bird - (one our our best signings) was "done" under NP and signed in Jan under LM - same as TGH.

 

So real Manning/Tinnion era signings are:

Fally - Juries still out 

Armstrong - Still early but feels miss 

Mebude - Miss 

Twine - Expensive luxury, jury out as yet to see any value on pitch 

Stokes - On loan, too early but not that young - older than Earthy, for comparison....

Murphy - God knows 

Yu - Good glimpses, but not tearing it up /

Earthy - Good glimpses, been useful /

McGuane - Looking very good, growing by the game 

McNally - Feels a very solid squad addition (which I guess TBF he was) - if not ripping up trees, improving by the game, will he be first choice when everyone is fit? /

 

It's not a great hit rate on that list - especially when we know, if not absolutely vital, our success is certainly largely hinging on savvy transfer dealings.

 

(Crude traffic light system for current contribution/affect on a team pushing for top 6, not future value)

 

 

All opinions of course, but I remain convinced that a good number of your red crosses will be green spots in the next 12 months or so, Mebude aside of course.

[Fuber]

11 hours ago, Charlie BCFC said:

If we’re talking both teams Louza and Chakvetadze I thought were the game winners for me, thought they were excellent 

Chakvetadze is exactly the kind of number 10 we need.

Him or of ilk alongside Twine behind someone like Mayulu would cause non stop problems.

[Davefevs]

40 minutes ago, Fuber said:

Chakvetadze is exactly the kind of number 10 we need.

Him or of ilk alongside Twine behind someone like Mayulu would cause non stop problems.

A runner / dribbler.  I still think that type of 10 is better suited than a “passing” no10 per se.  I’m over-generalising, I know, but hope it makes sense.  And if we are to play 2 no10s, then unless we are gonna completely reshape the set up, eg something like 4321, then it implies a wingback system, 3421-box type set up.

[Silvio Dante]

1 hour ago, Charlie BCFC said:

When was Bird ever a Nigel Pearson signing? If anything Murphy who you’ve listed on there was as it was basically agreed for the January window after he failed a medical.

 

Think you’re harsh on Stokes and I feel it is still too early to judge Armstrong and Mayulu, especially as they showed glimpses early on. Only definite miss for me is Mebude which I couldn’t get my head around personally

Wasn’t that nasty man with no medical expertise Dave Rennie reticent to sign off on the deal and then we signed Murphy once the deconditioning bastard had left the club, therefore improving our injury record at a stroke?

(Pearson didn’t sign Murphy. Tinnion signed Murphy despite him carrying an injury/needing a long pre season)

[2015]

4 hours ago, petehinton said:

Given Tinns comments at the FF last week, would imagine a whole lot of effort will be going into giving Dickie a new deal over the upcoming summer.

Think he would shoot straight up to highest paid player, by default.

I find it hard to pick a better CB we've had since getting promoted in 2015. People will say Webster, but Dickie has been consistently good throughout his time. He has been an unbelievable signing for us.

[Charlie BCFC]

5 hours ago, Alessandro said:

 

All fair. I’m not writing anyone off necessarily, just talking about first team impact right now.

R.E Bird - My point is, of the two players that have been the biggest revelations, if you like, are Bird and McGuane.

And Bird was identified, scouted and deals going on while Pearson was here. But as you say, same could be said about Stokes, although the club would have known Bird was much more for the here and now after his loan back.

Fine, but you could argue the majority of our players we signed were looked at before Manning stepped in the door. Tinnion spoke just last week that we wanted Dickie when he was at Oxford, does that mean he’s a Dean Holden signing?

 

4 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

Wasn’t that nasty man with no medical expertise Dave Rennie reticent to sign off on the deal and then we signed Murphy once the deconditioning bastard had left the club, therefore improving our injury record at a stroke?

(Pearson didn’t sign Murphy. Tinnion signed Murphy despite him carrying an injury/needing a long pre season)

I agree that he’s considered a Manning signing I’m just playing devils advocate that if Bird is a Pearson signing then that would mean Murphy is. Ideally we needed him signed in the summer as like Hirakawa, he’d have been up to speed when the season started.

[Alessandro]

25 minutes ago, Charlie BCFC said:

Fine, but you could argue the majority of our players we signed were looked at before Manning stepped in the door. Tinnion spoke just last week that we wanted Dickie when he was at Oxford, does that mean he’s a Dean Holden signing?

 

I agree that he’s considered a Manning signing I’m just playing devils advocate that if Bird is a Pearson signing then that would mean Murphy is. Ideally we needed him signed in the summer as like Hirakawa, he’d have been up to speed when the season started.

My point is Manning wouldn’t have chosen, scouted Bird etc. That’s it.

I’m not laying any blame, or anything like that on Manning for transfers so you don’t need to defend him. 

Transfers are an ongoing thing, so ultimately it’s down to Tinnion and the recruitment team - but it’s clear Manning is involved heavily now - Fally, McGuane and Twine, for example, will be very much his picks.

[Davefevs]

49 minutes ago, Charlie BCFC said:

Fine, but you could argue the majority of our players we signed were looked at before Manning stepped in the door. Tinnion spoke just last week that we wanted Dickie when he was at Oxford, does that mean he’s a Dean Holden signing?

 

I agree that he’s considered a Manning signing I’m just playing devils advocate that if Bird is a Pearson signing then that would mean Murphy is. Ideally we needed him signed in the summer as like Hirakawa, he’d have been up to speed when the season started.

Did Tinnion say we actually wanted Dickie…or that we’d watched him a lot?  i can’t remember his exact words.  I believe we actually started watching him properly whilst at Cheltenham.

I think we have to stop looking at “he’s an x manager signing or not” as a general praise / blame theme, especially for true first “now” signings.  Undoubtedly Twine was heavily influenced by Manning, but we could easily be sat here today with Finn Azaz.  So many factors involved, timing being one of them.

Stokes and Murphy wouldve been totally different discussions to Bird or Twine for example.

Recruitment is a collective process.  As a group, they need to review objectively how well they think the last window went, regardless of when a player first watched / went on a list.

@Alessandro overlapped, think we are saying similar.

Edited Wednesday at 19:10 by Davefevs

[Ian M]

6 hours ago, Davefevs said:

A runner / dribbler.  I still think that type of 10 is better suited than a “passing” no10 per se.  I’m over-generalising, I know, but hope it makes sense.  And if we are to play 2 no10s, then unless we are gonna completely reshape the set up, eg something like 4321, then it implies a wingback system, 3421-box type set up.

Sounds like you'd have been a fan of Amorim's Sporting? They faced a lot of low block teams so he had them set up for the two 10s and/or the wing backs to break through the blocked passing lanes often by carrying the ball themselves into the area and cutting back for invariably the number 9 to tap in at the far post/edge of the 6 yard box.

 

[italian dave]

8 hours ago, Alessandro said:

Not sure it's quite so simple as that:

Bird - (one our our best signings) was "done" under NP and signed in Jan under LM - same as TGH.

 

So real Manning/Tinnion era signings are:

Fally - Juries still out 

Armstrong - Still early but feels miss 

Mebude - Miss 

Twine - Expensive luxury, jury out as yet to see any value on pitch 

Stokes - On loan, too early but not that young - older than Earthy, for comparison....

Murphy - God knows 

Yu - Good glimpses, but not tearing it up /

Earthy - Good glimpses, been useful /

McGuane - Looking very good, growing by the game 

McNally - Feels a very solid squad addition (which I guess TBF he was) - if not ripping up trees, improving by the game, will he be first choice when everyone is fit? /

 

It's not a great hit rate on that list - especially when we know, if not absolutely vital, our success is certainly largely hinging on savvy transfer dealings.

 

(Crude traffic light system for current contribution/affect on a team pushing for top 6, not future value)

 

 

“Jury out” = X kind of feels like you’ve reached your own conclusion before the jury has returned its verdict? Surely jury out is, by definition, an amber? 

[Alessandro]

7 minutes ago, italian dave said:

“Jury out” = X kind of feels like you’ve reached your own conclusion before the jury has returned its verdict? Surely jury out is, by definition, an amber? 

As I said - it’s crude and it’s in terms of my opinion of current first team contribution. And as I said, it’s not me writing anyone off. Just my opinion with what I’ve seen so far this season.

[Cityboy1954]

On 26/11/2024 at 23:28, Sandhurst Red said:

Spot on. 

We looked so devoid of any ideas in the final 3rd.

Last 10 mins, you'd think we'd throw the kitchen sink at it. A bit more urgency, a bit more tempo. 

Nope - Fally just stood still, not even attempting to drag a defender out of shape. Unacceptable.

Exactly how i saw it when these two are given a chance they seem to be sulking and uninterested.

[Shauntaylor85]

13 hours ago, robin_unreliant said:

Midfield is decent but lacks goals. Good teams don't rely on their striker to score all the goals. Especially when playing one up top. What we lack is a goal scoring midfielder. We have players who can play it around nicely but generally are lacking quality in and around the penalty area.

We’ve always lacked a class creative mid

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

We’ve always lacked a class creative mid

Scott we had..

Bird? Technically good, seems to be stuck between 2 roles.

Then there are different Profiles of creative midfielder, the Twine type or more someone that can slot between supporting the attack and  dropping into a 3..prefer the latter tactically.

What about Earthy if we were to play him in his best position?

[Superjack]

18 hours ago, spudski said:

I agree. 

However...would we have seen this much of McGuane if it wasn't for Williams having injuries?

Would LM have picked him over a fit Williams?

McGuane is far better imo.

But has this come about by ' luck' rather than judgement?

Dickie has been consistently our best player in many games. 

I think he would have eventually picked McGuane, for the same reason that he picks Twine.

One is justified.

[TDarwall]

6 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

 

Bird? Technically good, seems to be stuck between 2 roles.

I'm not sure where Bird is most effective.  I thought he would be a standard "do a bit of everything" central mid. However, on the games I've seen to date, he looks better as the advanced midfielder.

Right now it's hard to see him disrupting Kinght & McGuarne. However I am very much horses for courses & my concern is we try & shoehorn our best players in, even if that isn't the best formation for the game.

On Sat for example, I expect Plymouth to sit in & be resolute.  Does that need the same formation as playing Leeds who will have all the possession?  Probably not, for me.  

 

 

 

[grifty]

1 hour ago, TDarwall said:

I'm not sure where Bird is most effective.  I thought he would be a standard "do a bit of everything" central mid. However, on the games I've seen to date, he looks better as the advanced midfielder.

Right now it's hard to see him disrupting Kinght & McGuarne. However I am very much horses for courses & my concern is we try & shoehorn our best players in, even if that isn't the best formation for the game.

On Sat for example, I expect Plymouth to sit in & be resolute.  Does that need the same formation as playing Leeds who will have all the possession?  Probably not, for me.  

 

 

 

I would agree, do we need 3 CBs and a defensive LWB in that game? 
 

At least I’d be looking to play Roberts at LWB. You could then possibly drop McNally for Twine, McGuane plays a deeper role with Knight and Bird ahead and Twine in a floating role ahead.

I probably wouldn’t go straight for drop 1 CB for a striker 

[Davefevs]

9 hours ago, Cityboy1954 said:

Exactly how i saw it when these two are given a chance they seem to be sulking and uninterested.

Mayulu not helped by Twine running into the passing line he’s created and suffocating the space, on a couple of occasions.

[Red Skin]

On 27/11/2024 at 12:39, Alessandro said:

And Bird was identified, scouted and deals going on while Pearson was here. But as you say, same could be said about Stokes, although the club would have known Bird was much more for the here and now after his loan back.

The recruitment team was the same under both managers, wasn't it?  They would be the ones to do the leg work with the manage making to final call.  LM obviously sanctioned the deal, so try and credit it all to Pearson and none to Manning seems odd.  

You could argue Manning signings would be McGuane and Twine, but the credit for the rest of them - good or bad - lies with the recruitment team. 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Red Skin said:

The recruitment team was the same under both managers, wasn't it?  They would be the ones to do the leg work with the manage making to final call.  LM obviously sanctioned the deal, so try and credit it all to Pearson and none to Manning seems odd.  

You could argue Manning signings would be McGuane and Twine, but the credit for the rest of them - good or bad - lies with the recruitment team. 

I think what we will see over a longer period of time is the trend of the recruitment collective.  This isn’t all on Sean Gilhespy and his team per se.  They are the Recruitment Department, but they aren’t the “Recruitment Team”.

There are intangibles like - how good / clear was the brief / player profile submitted to Sean.  Reminds me of this:

I can only assume the search for the “9” was more detailed than “a physical forward who can run” or “a 9 who can stretch the pitch”, which is what we as fans were told what we were looking for.

I know one manager uses a series of data points, pretty bloody comprehensive too, to help sanity check the players he’s been given on the shortlist / in clips.

I’d imagine Liam is pretty thorough.

 

[Alessandro]

2 hours ago, Red Skin said:

The recruitment team was the same under both managers, wasn't it?  They would be the ones to do the leg work with the manage making to final call.  LM obviously sanctioned the deal, so try and credit it all to Pearson and none to Manning seems odd.  

You could argue Manning signings would be McGuane and Twine, but the credit for the rest of them - good or bad - lies with the recruitment team. 

I think either you’ve misread or misunderstood. 

I’ve not given any credit to Pearson, merely stated the fact that the Bird deal was done before Manning arrived.

That’s not credit Pearson or critical of Manning - other than to say he clearly has had some say in signings.

The rest of the signings I’ve given opinions on and the rest of the recruitment team I have big questions over.