Liam Pre Wolves - Not Expecting Business

[Silvio Dante]

8 minutes ago, mozo said:

 

This would be easier for me to grasp if there were examples of strikers that we could have snapped up had we not spread the money on a variety of players. £3m doesn't get you much in the striker market, and doesn't seem to be an obvious Ivan Toney or Victor Gyokores. 

I think (holds breath) you’re actually agreeing with me here on the striker point. The two signed in the summer were (in my parlance) punts, but from the clubs perspective were certainly intended to be first choice(s). Liams got a lot of faults, but I can’t believe his plan at this stage of the season was for Wells to be the main man by a street. 
 

So, now Wells is the main man, the question of “we need a striker” pivots to whether (with one up top) we get a better striker than Wells in a reasonable budget. As you aptly point out, £3m (ballpark) on two separate players hasn’t got us much in the current market and I’d  neither trust or give the money to the recruitment team (collective) to get it right in January.

So you’re then left with the options of sticking with Wells or spending silly money. And it’s possible that £5-£6m may have got us better value in the summer. But spending that now means £10m on strikers alone this year - and as pointed out by @1960maaan, even a £5m player isn’t a guarantee.

Your question in the summer isn’t “what did £3m get you” - it’s “what did £5m get you” (answer: T Conway). We paid our money, we took our choice, and we ain’t getting any better than Wells this month without breaking the bank so it’s really not worth doing it. Project the projects innit.

[Davefevs]

58 minutes ago, Mikjizzle said:

don't really know what you are trying to say by telling me budgets are budgets? We don't know what the budget is or how moveable it is as we don't work for the club. But every business can constantly adapt and change a budget. 

I would love for someone to explain what the issue is with bringing in a player if it adds value to the team. I don't think we buy for the sake of buying but if the right player was available then it's a no brainer for me - even if that one player is a slight gamble. One player can make a difference. I've not read anything coherent about the reason it would be bad if we signed a good player that could make us better. 

I guess it comes down to “just one more, just one more” mentality. Which is what did for LJ when he said “just give me Wells and I guarantee playoffs”, and when playoff chances were gone and Wells wasn’t even starting…he paid with his job.

Of course budgets can flex, I was being a bit facetious about the ease at which you think players can just be moved on to justify spending now.  And yet still advocating a gamble signing…whilst making allowances for Armstrong and Mayulu as not all signings will work.

Hence my position is to not problem solve by recruitment. Especially for a young, modern, progressive, on-the-grass coach. Facetious again, but at what point does he prove he can use those skills?

[lenred]

23 minutes ago, mozo said:

Armstrong are  good additions

You can’t have typed that with a straight face. 

[numbeast]

The club have consistently said funding for transfers are dealt with on a case to case basis. I’m sure we won’t have millions to splash on a Championship experienced striker so we need to look at other markets this could be lower/non league or a player from abroad who has a good goal return over the last 2 or 3 years .

I’m not sure about the rules regarding foreign player who don’t fit the number of internationals etc but if there is a way to sign a player as we have done with Hirakawa that’s going to be, in my opinion, the best route to get a decent to good goal scorer on the cheap.

If we do find a gem like this who scores regularly their value would soar keeping uncle Steve and FFP happy. I think we need to take a gamble whilst not going “all in” I’m not advocating a Fally type striker with potential but someone who hits the net. There are plenty of quality players out there I just hope our scouting/recruitment team have found some.

Edited January 9 by numbeast

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I guess it comes down to “just one more, just one more” mentality. Which is what did for LJ when he said “just give me Wells and I guarantee playoffs”, and when playoff chances were gone and Wells wasn’t even starting…he paid with his job.

Of course budgets can flex, I was being a bit facetious about the ease at which you think players can just be moved on to justify spending now.  And yet still advocating a gamble signing…whilst making allowances for Armstrong and Mayulu as not all signings will work.

Hence my position is to not problem solve by recruitment. Especially for a young, modern, progressive, on-the-grass coach. Facetious again, but at what point does he prove he can use those skills?

LJ, should've made playoffs from there or the base probably that season. There was some bad luck wirh injuries but some of his tactical calls and selections did him few favours.

Wells was in red hot form for QPR when he signed, really excellent- 5 Goals and an Assist in 4. Season quite good too, 13 Goals and 3 Assists prior to joining us.

Palmer sliding balls to Weimann and Wells, did we try that much can't recall- to replicate the triangle with Afobe and Weimann?

[mozo]

9 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

I think (holds breath) you’re actually agreeing with me here on the striker point. The two signed in the summer were (in my parlance) punts, but from the clubs perspective were certainly intended to be first choice(s). Liams got a lot of faults, but I can’t believe his plan at this stage of the season was for Wells to be the main man by a street. 
 

So, now Wells is the main man, the question of “we need a striker” pivots to whether (with one up top) we get a better striker than Wells in a reasonable budget. As you aptly point out, £3m (ballpark) on two separate players hasn’t got us much in the current market and I’d  neither trust or give the money to the recruitment team (collective) to get it right in January.

So you’re then left with the options of sticking with Wells or spending silly money. And it’s possible that £5-£6m may have got us better value in the summer. But spending that now means £10m on strikers alone this year - and as pointed out by @1960maaan, even a £5m player isn’t a guarantee.

Your question in the summer isn’t “what did £3m get you” - it’s “what did £5m get you” (answer: T Conway). We paid our money, we took our choice, and we ain’t getting any better than Wells this month without breaking the bank so it’s really not worth doing it. Project the projects innit.

I do agree with you that we should stick with what we've got.

If I grant you the phrase 'punts', I think you look around in the Championship and you see a lot of punts. Celar at QPR has netted the same number of goals as Mayulu. 

Borough bought Burgzorg for the kind of money we were spending, but I'm not exactly jealous.

You mention Conway as an example, but he was unique. There weren't any opportunities like that for us in the Championship, we're there?

I'm personally happy for the squad to remain as is, and to see if we can attain that acceptable improvement on last season.

Even if we spaffed £10m on a striker now, it wouldn't guarantee a significant improvement. So let's get to the summer.

[petehinton]

38 minutes ago, mozo said:

I do think we're being a bit hypercritical here. I personally think that Twine, McNally and McGuane add quality to the squad, so that's that's three. I know it's contentious, but I think Hirakawa and Armstrong are  good additions, who will both take time but het better. Mayulu is an enigma. We shall see.

I don't see that as a terrible transfer window, and I haven't taken the liberty of throwing Bird in the mix, or indeed the potential of Stokes.

I do though, understand the frustration that we've spent money, but currently don't have a first choice striker.

But is it that easy...?

How much was wasted? Hard to say.

Don't forget, in the summer we have Wells and Cornick out the door. Bell and SPH at junctions in their career (huge opportunity for them, but they've got to take it).

So then we've got 2, no let's be fair, Mayulu may need a loan. TBC.

This would be easier for me to grasp if there were examples of strikers that we could have snapped up had we not spread the money on a variety of players. £3m doesn't get you much in the striker market, and doesn't seem to be an obvious Ivan Toney or Victor Gyokores. 

We'd be insane to let Wells go, and I personally don't think he will. Snap with Belly. Cornick isn't even treated as a first team player anyway, so that makes no real odds.

 

Bring anyone in now, and you're saying to Wells he's a gonner, which I can't see how you can do. Or you're saying to Seb PH he's a gonner, which won't go down well now. Or you admit defeat on Armstrong / Fally, which again, will go down like a bucket of sick & they're even harder to shift out the door.

 

Fally & Sincs were bought for now, they weren't projects, let's not try and kid ourselves. Improve them for the now then!

 

I'd 'allow' him a loan, if Fally goes out on loan himself. Not that that would exactly be a cheap option, and not that we have any success in recent history with striker loanees...!

[Mikjizzle]

14 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I guess it comes down to “just one more, just one more” mentality. Which is what did for LJ when he said “just give me Wells and I guarantee playoffs”, and when playoff chances were gone and Wells wasn’t even starting…he paid with his job.

Of course budgets can flex, I was being a bit facetious about the ease at which you think players can just be moved on to justify spending now.  And yet still advocating a gamble signing…whilst making allowances for Armstrong and Mayulu as not all signings will work.

Hence my position is to not problem solve by recruitment. Especially for a young, modern, progressive, on-the-grass coach. Facetious again, but at what point does he prove he can use those skills?

but we still aren't spending as much as what we did under LJ. The squad doesn't concern me, it's not particularly large compared to the rest of the division and some players are out of contract soon & some will move on in other ways, as happens every season. 

I advocate for gamble signings if we can improve our hit rate at it, which I think we need to learn from. But we are in a market where we have to make signings that are seen as a gamble, as we can't afford the proven championship players (particularly goalscorers).

I don't see the point in shutting the door because one or two signings weren't right- it's a continual process of trading players and improving through all means possible to me. We should strive to add value in every possible way - if something isn't right or goes wrong (e.g. a signing), we learn from it and go again. 

I know we disagree on what Manning has improved us on anyway so I won't get in to that part. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

What if we had made a play for Stansfield instead of the 2, Wells, Cornick and Bell still on books in and around it.

It isn't as simple as to go down, you can spend what you like if relegated and at this level we could have probably afforded him under FFP on a 5 year or more deal.

He would he a leader for the here and now and years to come and or a tradeable asset.

Now we are a bit stuck.

Edited January 9 by Mr Popodopolous

[mozo]

26 minutes ago, petehinton said:

We'd be insane to let Wells go, and I personally don't think he will. Snap with Belly. Cornick isn't even treated as a first team player anyway, so that makes no real odds.

 

Bring anyone in now, and you're saying to Wells he's a gonner, which I can't see how you can do. Or you're saying to Seb PH he's a gonner, which won't go down well now. Or you admit defeat on Armstrong / Fally, which again, will go down like a bucket of sick & they're even harder to shift out the door.

 

Fally & Sincs were bought for now, they weren't projects, let's not try and kid ourselves. Improve them for the now then!

 

I'd 'allow' him a loan, if Fally goes out on loan himself. Not that that would exactly be a cheap option, and not that we have any success in recent history with striker loanees...!

TBH I was actually happy with Armstrong's input earlier in the season, before Wells got his go. So, for me, he's a player for now. But he's not the finished article and nor should he be.

We're in the speculative market (Silvio calls them punts). They're not all going to be a roaring success. I know we have good reason to be cynical about the hierarchy at City, but I think this resentment around the strikers is a bit overblown. 

All of the above (minus Cornick) have an opportunity to prove themselves. Wells has to earn a deal, and really I'd be surprised if we offer him what he wants. I think he'll go.

But yeah, I agree with you that we that we should stick with what we've got and let's appraise in the summer. 

We all like to think we're professional scouts. We think we know how Mayulu's career is going to pan out, and Armstrong, and Bell. But footballers careers are not predictable. If they were, Harry Kane would have spent the last ten years at Norwich. 

 

[Jose]

Happy with Armstrongs input? Are you serious? 
 

Other than he can’t control a ball, looks poor with the ball at his feet, is out worked by a 34 year old Wells and can’t finish for toffee I fully agree with you. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

11 minutes ago, mozo said:

TBH I was actually happy with Armstrong's input earlier in the season, before Wells got his go. So, for me, he's a player for now. But he's not the finished article and nor should he be.

We're in the speculative market (Silvio calls them punts). They're not all going to be a roaring success. I know we have good reason to be cynical about the hierarchy at City, but I think this resentment around the strikers is a bit overblown. 

All of the above (minus Cornick) have an opportunity to prove themselves. Wells has to earn a deal, and really I'd be surprised if we offer him what he wants. I think he'll go.

But yeah, I agree with you that we that we should stick with what we've got and let's appraise in the summer. 

We all like to think we're professional scouts. We think we know how Mayulu's career is going to pan out, and Armstrong, and Bell. But footballers careers are not predictable. If they were, Harry Kane would have spent the last ten years at Norwich. 

 

Unless we go up this year, it could stsrt to regress next year IMO.

Wells out, Cornick persona non grata.

Mayulu, Armstrong, S-P-H, Bell..we'll struggle for goals and invaluable experience will be leaving again.

Who leads the attack, who are the wise old heads In the place.

[Jose]

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Unless we go up this year, it could stsrt to regress next year IMO.

Wells out, Cornick persona non grata.

Mayulu, Armstrong, S-P-H, Bell..we'll struggle for goals and invaluable experience will be leaving again.

Who leads the attack, who are the wise old heads In the place.

Don’t forget about inevitably selling any of our better players. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, Jose said:

Don’t forget about inevitably selling any of our better players. 

There isn't really the need from an FFP angle tbh but it is highly possible.

Of course if we decide next year is the go for it year, get that Prime Years Striker who can either lead the attack or facilitate the others it changes..would still keep Wells as a Player Coach minimum however.

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

There isn't really the need from an FFP angle tbh but it is highly possible.

Of course if we decide next year is the go for it year, get that Prime Years Striker who can either lead the attack or facilitate the others it changes..would still keep Wells as a Player Coach minimum however.

Not an FFP worry indeed, but a bigger question over whether SL uses the “remaining” Scott money to invest in the squad or to reduce his own funding of the losses!  

[Mr Popodopolous]

For avoidance of doubt our record when Wells starts?

6-4-4

Pretty painful when he doesn't. Obviously he missed one via injury vs West Brom and we were srill making sure v Luton, came off bench at Sunderland.

3-6-3 is the other side.

[MythikRobins]

34 minutes ago, mozo said:

TBH I was actually happy with Armstrong's input earlier in the season, before Wells got his go. So, for me, he's a player for now. But he's not the finished article and nor should he be.

We're in the speculative market (Silvio calls them punts). They're not all going to be a roaring success. I know we have good reason to be cynical about the hierarchy at City, but I think this resentment around the strikers is a bit overblown. 

All of the above (minus Cornick) have an opportunity to prove themselves. Wells has to earn a deal, and really I'd be surprised if we offer him what he wants. I think he'll go.

But yeah, I agree with you that we that we should stick with what we've got and let's appraise in the summer. 

We all like to think we're professional scouts. We think we know how Mayulu's career is going to pan out, and Armstrong, and Bell. But footballers careers are not predictable. If they were, Harry Kane would have spent the last ten years at Norwich. 

 

Agreed, on your point with Armstrong. I can’t see a world where the club doesn’t view his signing as at least a slight "success". He’s come in and is doing exactly what he was doing at QPR—maybe even slightly better here. Unless we were expecting a miracle, we got exactly what was advertised, and now we can focus on building the rest. 

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

6 hours ago, westonred said:

I dont think we will get a better opportunity of reaching the top six so it will show the clubs lack of ambition if they dont try on build on what we have by bringing in a decent striker.

Maybe as people have said the board don't trust the recruitment team after they spunked lots of cash on two league one standard strikers

We seem to always buy for the future hoping it'll turn out to be another Kodjia type player we can sell for vast profits It's time we buy for the Now and not the future 

Why?  Who’s to say we won’t have a better opportunity next season?  We might have fewer injuries, Armstrong and Mayulu will have had another year to come good, Stokes and other promising young players will be a year older, plus potentially weak teams coming down from the Prem.  As I and others have said before, a new striker won’t necessarily make all the difference.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just now, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Why?  Who’s to say we won’t have a better opportunity next season?  We might have fewer injuries, Armstrong and Mayulu will have had another year to come good, Stokes and other promising young players will be a year older, plus potentially weak teams coming down from the Prem.  As I and others have said before, a new striker won’t necessarily make all the difference.

League will be harder near year IMO.

Look who is likely to come down, one of the sides coming up too.

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

League will be harder near year IMO.

Look who is likely to come down, one of the sides coming up too.

Southampton and Ipswich?  Not so sure they’ll be strong next season.  Ipswich will lose players; Southampton are poor…

Edited January 9 by The Dolman Pragmatist

[NDW4CITY]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I guess it comes down to “just one more, just one more” mentality. Which is what did for LJ when he said “just give me Wells and I guarantee playoffs”, and when playoff chances were gone and Wells wasn’t even starting…he paid with his job.

Of course budgets can flex, I was being a bit facetious about the ease at which you think players can just be moved on to justify spending now.  And yet still advocating a gamble signing…whilst making allowances for Armstrong and Mayulu as not all signings will work.

Hence my position is to not problem solve by recruitment. Especially for a young, modern, progressive, on-the-grass coach. Facetious again, but at what point does he prove he can use those skills?

I agree with all of this. In seasons past with us being in a similar position, I would have advocated for some January recruitment. History, though, tells us that we are pretty shite in that regard (Diony, Kent, Cornick, Lansbury,TGH, Mebude et al ), at least as far as making a positive impact on the rest of that season. With the backing LM has already received, it's on him now to do the "coachy" thing and bring out the best in the players he has at his disposal. One caveat would be if we had the opportunity get a "Bird" type of signing, where a player that can impact 25/26 is available in a deal that works for us. 

 I also include Tinnion in this discussion about showing they have what it takes. To me, he has more to prove than LM in regards to recruitment. Let them both be judged at the end of the season. If we actually make it to the play offs or are in the mix, great. I would be happy for them to continue and see how far we progress. I would also expect the Lansdowns to back this improvement and really go for it next season. 

If we fall away, as we have done in similar situations, then for me, it's the end of the line for both of them.

But no investment in January is, to me, the smart way to go.

[Mr Popodopolous]

14 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Southampton and Ipswich?  Not so sure they’ll be strong next season.  Ipswich will lose players; Southampton are poor…

I dunno..it could be either way but the problem is take last year..Leeds, Leicester and Southampton are powerhouses at Championship level.

Add wealthy owners, add Parachute Payments and they can be so formidable. Ipswich and their squad is incomparable to laat season, they'll lose players but keeping McKenna is key.

Leicester could have FFP issues on a few fronts, but that permitting..

At the other end Birmingham I do wonder how the FFP regs will catch them as I have my questions there.

Maybe it'll be similar in some ways but I'm inclined to believe stronger.

Edited January 9 by Mr Popodopolous

[NDW4CITY]

42 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

League will be harder near year IMO.

Look who is likely to come down, one of the sides coming up too.

Name me an 'easy' Championship season for a team like us. If you have the Leicester/Leeds/Ipswich/Southampton type of season like last year, those teams are so far ahead, that any promotion aspirations for the rest are vanishingly small. If it's more of an even season where there are no runaway leaders (rarer) it generally means the teams are more or less of the same level, and every game is a dog fight. Still equally tough in my opinion. We just need to focus on making BCFC as competitive as possible and kind of hope for the best. 

Edited January 9 by NDW4CITY

[Red Skin]

9 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

So with no incomings the club either (a) thinks we have enough to get top six, or (b) doesn’t want to spend the money to help try to ensure top 6 as it will be too expensive

c) thinks we need a striker to have a chance at top 6, but doesn't want to publicly undermine players if he isn't able to secure funds to get one. 

Edited January 9 by Red Skin

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, NDW4CITY said:

Name me an 'easy' Championship season for a team like us. If you have the Leeds/Ipswich/Southampton type of season like last year, those teams are so far ahead, that any promotion aspirations for the rest are vanishingly small. If it's more of an even season where there are no runaway leaders (rarer) it generally means the teams are more or less of the same level, and every game is a dog fight. Still equally tough in my opinion. We just need to focus on making BCFC as competitive as possible and kind of hope for the best. 

Yeah fully get that. Maybe 'easy' was the wrong implied term by me, more open maybe more accurate.

What I mean is..

*Norwich and Watford first year Post Parachutes, major drop, bit of retrenchment albeit that may only increase over time.

*West Brom under a Business Plan, not quite so strong, Corberan going can't be underestimated either.

*Blackburn are doing fantastically but at the same time, uncertainty with the owners and how they can fund..ongoing court case(s) there in India.

*3 who came down aren't quite as strong as the 3 who went up..Sunderland albeit underachieving last year have emerged brilliantly and added some leaders to a young and talented squad.

*Birmingham staying up may have seen them grow albeit they dropped.

*Cardiff, Coventry, Hull, Preston..2 have fallen, 2 have fallen off a cliff.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just watching it now..

"Don't sign the finished article"..in most cases that will only take you so far. Leader of the attack feels such a key role, it risks being a bit of a Development Centre really.

Play some decent football, beat some teams we shouldn't, lose to some teams we shouldn't but I don't think it is likely to progress us to the next level any time soon.

Edited January 9 by Mr Popodopolous

[mozo]

Just now, Mr Popodopolous said:

Just watching it now..

"Don't sign the finished article"..in most cases that will only take you so far. Leader of the attack feels such a key role, it risks being a bit of a Development Centre really.

Play some decent football, beat some teams we shouldn't, lose to some teams we shouldn't but I don't think it is likely to progress us to the next level any time soon.

I do agree with that. Had we spent £10m on a striker and not brought in Yu, McGuane, Twine and McNally. Would we better off? Hard to say.

[ExiledAjax]

48 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Ipswich will lose players

And their manager.

[One Team]

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Just watching it now..

"Don't sign the finished article"..in most cases that will only take you so far. Leader of the attack feels such a key role, it risks being a bit of a Development Centre really.

Play some decent football, beat some teams we shouldn't, lose to some teams we shouldn't but I don't think it is likely to progress us to the next level any time soon.

Our signing “strategy” is a bit off for me. 

I think you need a mix of youth and experience, but above all a team not individuals. 

Personally I think Cotts had the best approach and a mindset of winning the thing, not settling for the play offs (yes I get that was league one). 

[NDW4CITY]

9 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Yeah fully get that. Maybe 'easy' was the wrong implied term by me, more open maybe more accurate.

What I mean is..

*Norwich and Watford first year Post Parachutes, major drop, bit of retrenchment albeit that may only increase over time.

*West Brom under a Business Plan, not quite so strong, Corberan going can't be underestimated either.

*Blackburn are doing fantastically but at the same time, uncertainty with the owners and how they can fund..ongoing court case(s) there in India.

*3 who came down aren't quite as strong as the 3 who went up..Sunderland albeit underachieving last year have emerged brilliantly and added some leaders to a young and talented squad.

*Birmingham staying up may have seen them grow albeit they dropped.

*Cardiff, Coventry, Hull, Preston..2 have fallen, 2 have fallen off a cliff.

Totally get it. PP clubs will always have an advantage...whether they use it to their advantage is the question (and unfortunately most do).

Promoted teams could be an Ipswich or maybe they could be a Wycombe/Rotherham.

The other group is really in the lap of the gods. Who would have forecast the seasons Blackburn and Sunderland are having. Next year will be just the same - we just don't know which clubs it will be.

That's why I say we need to focus on us. If LM gets us to a respectable finish I think he deserves more time and budget in the summer. As I said in a previous post, I do not wish to see any significant investment this month. Let BT and LM prove they've got it (or not, as the case may be).   

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, One Team said:

Our signing “strategy” is a bit off for me. 

I think you need a mix of youth and experience, but above all a team not individuals. 

Personally I think Cotts had the best approach and a mindset of winning the thing, not settling for the play offs (yes I get that was league one). 

Not sure how viable pursuing the League title is for us tbh or even Top 2.

Parachute Clubs, way ahead. Without a change to the Rules and distribution we are struggling big time. Ipswich pulled a 1 in 20 Season IMO, Sunderland they scored well in a range of metrics, had one of the youngest squads but arguably in some cases one of the most talented.

Moore (okay backup), Mepham, Browne all experience in the spine- Connolly and Isidor 24, 26 iirc just that bit on top but maybe not so much Connolly. Le Fe could be icing on the cake- don't even think they needed to sell Jack Clarke for FFP!

Sacking Mowbray was an error, as was their tunnel vision on youth.

[And Its Smith]

42 minutes ago, Red Skin said:

c) thinks we need a striker to have a chance at top 6, but doesn't want to publicly undermine players if he isn't able to secure funds to get one. 

I would like to think that by now he knows what funds he has!

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, MythikRobins said:

Agreed, on your point with Armstrong. I can’t see a world where the club doesn’t view his signing as at least a slight "success". He’s come in and is doing exactly what he was doing at QPR—maybe even slightly better here. Unless we were expecting a miracle, we got exactly what was advertised, and now we can focus on building the rest. 

I guess a simple way of looking at it is that he was signed to be the main striker, with Mayulu and him sharing the main minutes, Wells as back-up / 3rd choice.  Nobody at the club expected Wells to be first choice and so important.  If they did, they’d have recruited a type more similar to Wells.  In many respects, Wells has bailed recruitment out.

25 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Just watching it now..

"Don't sign the finished article"..in most cases that will only take you so far. Leader of the attack feels such a key role, it risks being a bit of a Development Centre really.

Play some decent football, beat some teams we shouldn't, lose to some teams we shouldn't but I don't think it is likely to progress us to the next level any time soon.

Whilst I agree, I don’t like the context it’s being used in, ie that they wouldn’t be expecting them to be capable “now”.  The inference is “ready now, potential to be better and grow with us / be sold on”, not “ready in the future for this level”.  I find it a bit disingenuous.  That is why we looked abroad, because of supposed value there / lack of value here.

[George Rs]

9 hours ago, Sandhurst Red said:

I think this is smoke and mirrors. Lessons learned from over promising before.

With 3 likely departures before end of window (including Atkinson) I would be amazed if we don't strengthen and add at least 1, if not 2 players.

Think the departures won’t matter, even with the striker crisis Cornick hasn’t got any minutes this season so don’t think the club will be rushing to replace him. 

Unless there is a big sales I can’t see us doing anything more then maybe a single loan signing. 

[Red Skin]

1 hour ago, And Its Smith said:

I would like to think that by now he knows what funds he has!

Maybe, but for the right player you may need to push the budget.  If that budget isn't forthcoming then you may not go to your second choice in January and review things in the summer. 

[IAmNick]

6 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Leeds are in a bit of a League of their own for aggregate XG and XPts data but Burnley are very interesting, 12-15 better off than their underlying xGD by one site. Burnley habe a rock solid defensive structure though even if xG against is 11 worse than actual- Trafford?

Don't think Sheffield United look amazing in some ways..but again they get it done.

Blackburn, Sheffield Wednesday, Watford, West Brom and by some metrics Middlesbrough are our big competition. Could argue Swansea and Norwich too, the latter have a lot of Goals at both ends.

It does feel like the League is more open this time.

Without wanting to derail this into an xG discussion, you'd have to know how the model worked and how it was trained to understand how accurate it is for a range of teams. If it's trained on the entire football league - or more, then you'd perhaps expect good teams/strikers to overperform, and poor ones to underperform. If it's better than that, and there are ways to compensate for it depending on the features they use, then there could well be other factors.

No model is perfect of course, and there are quite a few xG ones! It might sound silly, but there's actually not that much data to train them on (yet). At work we routinely train our machine learning models on many hundreds of millions of rows of input data without thinking twice - how long until we get that many shots as input!

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

Without wanting to derail this into an xG discussion, you'd have to know how the model worked and how it was trained to understand how accurate it is for a range of teams. If it's trained on the entire football league - or more, then you'd perhaps expect good teams/strikers to overperform, and poor ones to underperform. If it's better than that, and there are ways to compensate for it depending on the features they use, then there could well be other factors.

No model is perfect of course, and there are quite a few xG ones! It might sound silly, but there's actually not that much data to train them on (yet). At work we routinely train our machine learning models on many hundreds of millions of rows of input data without thinking twice - how long until we get that many shots as input!

To be a bit more City specific, I think where we are and our underlying numbers aren't too far apart.

Leeds I looked are Top also for Shots, Shots on Target, have conceded the least Shots and Shots on Target as well as most Possession.

Burnley aren't that high for Shots 9th iirc but they are efficient..in actual fact though, 21 Goals Scored in 24 League Games. Not the thread for it but so good defensively, efficient is what I'd call them.

Agree on the general point, there are also different models and or versions of XG of course. Individual players something else again.

21 minutes ago, Red Skin said:

Maybe, but for the right player you may need to push the budget.  If that budget isn't forthcoming then you may not go to your second choice in January and review things in the summer. 

Do you then subtract from the Summer 2025 budget- bring some forward?

[Lew-T]

So what’s the plan going forward? Looking at this window and beyond to the Summer.

If we are happy to settle with what we have, which again is a middling Bristol City, when is the right time? Or have we fluffed that already? Because what we have in Armstrong and Mayulu… I’m still yet to see.

It actually grates me that we’ve spent so much money on these two. They don’t suit our style or even personality, at all.

[mozo]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I guess a simple way of looking at it is that he was signed to be the main striker, with Mayulu and him sharing the main minutes, Wells as back-up / 3rd choice.  Nobody at the club expected Wells to be first choice and so important.  If they did, they’d have recruited a type more similar to Wells.  In many respects, Wells has bailed recruitment out.

Whilst I agree, I don’t like the context it’s being used in, ie that they wouldn’t be expecting them to be capable “now”.  The inference is “ready now, potential to be better and grow with us / be sold on”, not “ready in the future for this level”.  I find it a bit disingenuous.  That is why we looked abroad, because of supposed value there / lack of value here.

Forgive me (again) Dave, but my alternative view on this is that the hierarchy of first choice, second choice etc that you're commenting on here is less important here than the fact that this is a meritocracy. Armstrong started well, had a loss of form. Mayulu didn't take his chance, but Wells did. Armstrong might end up leading the line again, but obviously injury has delayed his opportunity. Equally, I'd like nothing more than to see Sam Bell grasp his chance when he's played down the middle, and show us that he can realise the potential that we thought he had when he was an academy hotshot. I wouldn't be bemoaning Armstrong and Mayulu, just happy that amongst the four of them, someone had risen to the top, and a homegrown player at that. Similarly, of Wells is having a twilight renaissance, all good.

[Davefevs]

Just now, mozo said:

Forgive me (again) Dave, but my alternative view on this is that the hierarchy of first choice, second choice etc that you're commenting on here is less important here than the fact that this is a meritocracy. Armstrong started well, had a loss of form. Mayulu didn't take his chance, but Wells did. Armstrong might end up leading the line again, but obviously injury has delayed his opportunity. Equally, I'd like nothing more than to see Sam Bell grasp his chance when he's played down the middle, and show us that he can realise the potential that we thought he had when he was an academy hotshot. I wouldn't be bemoaning Armstrong and Mayulu, just happy that amongst the four of them, someone had risen to the top, and a homegrown player at that. Similarly, of Wells is having a twilight renaissance, all good.

I agree, that’s exactly as it should be.  No forgiveness required, brother Mozo! 

What do I always say - “manager’s summer plans often go out the window by end of September (if not earlier)”.

I don’t actually give a toss who gets picked, and who does well, as long as they do.  Bristol City fan, remember!

All I’m doing is critiquing the spending (wasting?) of money on two summer signings that were the plan.  Wells didn’t start one preseason game as the one-up-top, nor any game until Middlesbrough (a), our 10th league game of the season!  The plan back-fired in that respect.

On that basis of that critique, I’d suggest that Liam doesn’t look to problem solve by recruiting, but use what he has in-house, he might surprise himself….again.  I’m also not convinced we’d get recruitment right either…in a tougher, more expensive window.  Armstrong won’t get much of a chance to get back in, if we go and sign someone either, will he?

So, Liam, you have 4 strikers, Wells, Armstrong, Bell, and Mayulu…you don’t need another. 

[TDarwall]

22 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 

So, Liam, you have 4 strikers, Wells, Armstrong, Bell, and Mayulu…you don’t need another. 

Agree entirely. We can't afford a striker good enough to "move the dial". I really hope we don't waste money on a youngster from the Prem.

Personally I don't rule out Sinclair making a reasonable impact once fit.

[Mr Popodopolous]

7 minutes ago, TDarwall said:

Agree entirely. We can't afford a striker good enough to "move the dial". I really hope we don't waste money on a youngster from the Prem.

Personally I don't rule out Sinclair making a reasonable impact once fit.

He may make a reasonable impact but won't be enough of one IMO.

A lot depends on Wells really.

"Can't afford", that's up to SL to an extent.

Edited Thursday at 22:48 by Mr Popodopolous

[TDarwall]

29 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

He may make a reasonable impact but won't be enough of one IMO.

A lot depends on Wells really.

"Can't afford", that's up to SL to an extent.

I think "won't attract" applies as much as "can't afford" to be honest.

 

[The Masked Man]

Some of our better recent signings have been players who've already proved they can play in the Championship (Dickie, McNally, Knight). Neither Mayulu nor Armstrong had done that and I think it's therefore fair to call them punts. I'd also argue Twine was also a slight punt as he's shown flashes of form in the Championship but not had a season where he's lit up the charts. Unless we're signing a player who has done what we want them to do in the Championship there's an element of risk and to take that away would involve sums of money we're not going to spend.

I think that Mayulu and Armstrong both have some positive attributes and some areas they need to work on. They could both come good in time. The gamble there is you have no idea how long that will take and what state other areas of the team will be in by the time they do and how competitive the Championship will be. I don't think there are any easy answers. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, TDarwall said:

I think "won't attract" applies as much as "can't afford" to be honest.

 

God knows what the EFL must think of Birmingham then, how much did they spend on Stansfield alone and their Gross Expenditure..my reading of the Rules is that it isn't as they imply some get out, Relegation I mean.

I digress, we could have with Amortisation afforded Stansfield IMO albeit 5 year deal minimum and no Mayulu or Armstrong.

Thomas-Asante coming into a stable side and being the focal point, experienced not but yet peaked could have been a nice alternative and not broke the bank.

[MythikRobins]

The question for me isn’t so much whether the strikers we’ve signed are good or bad, but more about the profiles we’ve scouted and chosen to bring in. Take Fally, for example—he’s capable aerially, a strong finisher with both feet, likes the ball to feet, but is largely a passenger in the press. Miles Leaburn is similar in profile, so would he be a good fit for us? Can we afford to have a player up top who’s a passenger in the press, or do we need someone like Wells, who puts himself about?

Clearly, by signing Fally, the decision was made that we could accommodate having a less effective presser up front; otherwise, we wouldn’t have signed him. Yet now that he’s here, he’s getting no game time. Is that because he’s poor in the press, or is there another reason? I imagine most fans would say it’s the former, but I’m more inclined to believe it’s something else—after all, his lack of pressing was evident before we signed him.

I do think Armstrong’s profile actually suits us. He can stretch the defense and act as a deterrent against teams pinning us in with a high line, thanks to his unique pace and power. Even without much involvement on the ball, his presence alone likely has that effect. However, if a team sits deep, he becomes largely ineffective. I personally think he's actually more suited to one up top than either Wells or Fally. Its just the issues with most other parts of his game that are hard to overlook.

[FNQ]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

So, Liam, you have 4 strikers, Wells, Armstrong, Bell, and Mayulu…you don’t need another. 

Of course Dave on paper you are correct… but the reality is, is that when Nahki leaves the pitch, typically on the hour, it leaves a massive void which none of the other three can fill. Since NW made his first start this season against Boro we’ve only scored one goal (pen vs Sheff Utd) after swapping Nahki out. That’s a worry in itself, but just imagine when Nahki gets injured?

Edited Thursday at 23:34 by FNQ
Just noticed another in the last minute vs Plymouth

[Davefevs]

3 very good posts

11 minutes ago, The Masked Man said:

Some of our better recent signings have been players who've already proved they can play in the Championship (Dickie, McNally, Knight). Neither Mayulu nor Armstrong had done that and I think it's therefore fair to call them punts. I'd also argue Twine was also a slight punt as he's shown flashes of form in the Championship but not had a season where he's lit up the charts. Unless we're signing a player who has done what we want them to do in the Championship there's an element of risk and to take that away would involve sums of money we're not going to spend.

I think that Mayulu and Armstrong both have some positive attributes and some areas they need to work on. They could both come good in time. The gamble there is you have no idea how long that will take and what state other areas of the team will be in by the time they do and how competitive the Championship will be. I don't think there are any easy answers. 

You can probably add Bird to that list too.  Of the four, you can also probably say in three of the cases (Knight, Dickie and Bird) we found the “flaw” the market (ala Moneyball) and exploited it.

Knight - 100 plus Championship games, international, playing in the wrong division for a cash strapped club and only a year left on his contract.  Ignore that he was exactly what Pearson needed to compliment the rest of his midfield. £1.750m.

Bird - 100 plus Championship games, playing in the wrong division for a cash strapped club and only 6 months left on his contract.  Credit for brokering the loan back deal that helped Derby get promoted.  £0.750m.

Dickie - 100 plus Championship games, been looked at by PL clubs, but in a dip of form and only a year left on his contract. £0.600m.

McNally - a bit different, only 60+ championship appearances, but part of a team that reached the playoffs.  Had enough games at Lg1 to attract a Parachute Payment club.  £2.000m (guess)

Why did we deviate so far away from that, not just in terms of the ones we signed, but the ones we missed out on too?

I know they’re both strikers and strikers come at a premium, but we’ve spent more on the pair that we did on Knight, Bird and Dickie…and for what impact?  Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think either are duds, but I don’t think they suit Bristol City.  Having now seen various manifestations of Liam Manning’s way of playing, I don’t get how either really could’ve got all of the way through the sausage machine and to a point of signing.

8 minutes ago, MythikRobins said:

The question for me isn’t so much whether the strikers we’ve signed are good or bad, but more about the profiles we’ve scouted and chosen to bring in. Take Fally, for example—he’s capable aerially, a strong finisher with both feet, likes the ball to feet, but is largely a passenger in the press. Miles Leaburn is similar in profile, so would he be a good fit for us? Can we afford to have a player up top who’s a passenger in the press, or do we need someone like Wells, who puts himself about?

Clearly, by signing Fally, the decision was made that we could accommodate having a less effective presser up front; otherwise, we wouldn’t have signed him. Yet now that he’s here, he’s getting no game time. Is that because he’s poor in the press, or is there another reason? I imagine most fans would say it’s the former, but I’m more inclined to believe it’s something else—after all, his lack of pressing was evident before we signed him.

I do think Armstrong’s profile actually suits us. He can stretch the defense and act as a deterrent against teams pinning us in with a high line, thanks to his unique pace and power. Even without much involvement on the ball, his presence alone likely has that effect. However, if a team sits deep, he becomes largely ineffective. I personally think he's actually more suited to one up top than either Wells or Fally. Its just the issues with most other parts of his game that are hard to overlook.

Yep, easier to find the reasons they don’t fit, than the reasons they do.

I wonder whether there was anything in the Conway stuff that made them desperate to go with something other than “Conway and Wells are too similar”.  You could argue Wells suffered in those opening 10 games by not being selected. 

5 minutes ago, FNQ said:

Of course Dave on paper you are correct… but the reality is, is that when Nahki leaves the pitch, typically on the hour, it leaves a massive void which none of the other three can fill. Since NW made his first start this season against Boro we’ve only scored one goal (pen vs Sheff Utd) after swapping Nahki out. That’s a worry in itself, but just imagine when Nahki gets injured?

You know what I’ve only looked at his impact on the pitch not once he’s left, although by looking at the records of his replacements, I knew it wasn’t good…hadn’t realised it was so stark!

(we also scored through Armstrong v Plymouth too, but your point stands.

Key-man dependency.

I thought Bell did fine in 2 out of 3 of his sub appearances too, so not willing to concede it’s a complete void, but I do wonder what Manning is gonna do in terms of subs when all four are fit.

Would you try and bring someone in?

If yes, would someone have to go out first, or are you happy to ride with it?

[Colemanballs]

6 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I know they’re both strikers and strikers come at a premium, but we’ve spent more on the pair that we did on Knight, Bird and Dickie…and for what impact?  Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think either are duds, but I don’t think they suit Bristol City.  Having now seen various manifestations of Liam Manning’s way of playing, I don’t get how either really could’ve got all of the way through the sausage machine and to a point of signing.

I agree with your general point. However, I do feel that Armstrong would suit the change of approach / style we've seen over the last 3 games. If, as I fear, Manning reverts to a more possession focused approach, then, yes, Armstrong is not suited to that.

[TDarwall]

7 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

God knows what the EFL must think of Birmingham then, how much did they spend on Stansfield alone and their Gross Expenditure..my reading of the Rules is that it isn't as they imply some get out, Relegation I mean.

I digress, we could have with Amortisation afforded Stansfield IMO albeit 5 year deal minimum and no Mayulu or Armstrong.

Thomas-Asante coming into a stable side and being the focal point, experienced not but yet peaked could have been a nice alternative and not broke the bank.

The $64,000 question is, does Stansfield (sufficiently) move the dial? I dont know enough about him to say whether he'd suit us.

Never been that impressed with Thomas Asante, don't think he's got lots of goals in him at this level.

[FNQ]

8 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Would you try and bring someone in?

If yes, would someone have to go out first, or are you happy to ride with it?

Yes, I’d try and bring someone in, someone experienced along the likes of, but not necessarily, an Andre Gray type whose proven and could reliably shuffle with Nahki and do a job up top. The real question should be though, should SL support Liam if Liam himself feels he needs a better option, and for me the answer would be a resounding yes.. just because mistakes were made in the summer should not now mean that’s the end of it, the show must go on. If there’s now no confidence in Liam, then make a change and back a new manager to success but at least have a go. I’d try to offload either of SA or FM out on loan but wouldn’t be too perturbed or surprised if no one wanted them either… not my money . I’d keep and use Sam Bell.

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, Colemanballs said:

I agree with your general point. However, I do feel that Armstrong would suit the change of approach / style we've seen over the last 3 games. If, as I fear, Manning reverts to a more possession focused approach, then, yes, Armstrong is not suited to that.

I guess my overriding thought is - can you imagine Vyner playing into Armstrong’s feet for a deft touch to Twine, for a third-man run to Knight….like Plymouth (a)?  I can’t.

I can see him as an outlet for channel-ball, but that’s only part of the current way of playing.

The “beauty” (too strong a word) of the current verticality of our plan, is that it’s direct passes into players feet / body, not into space / channels.

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 hours ago, TDarwall said:

The $64,000 question is, does Stansfield (sufficiently) move the dial? I dont know enough about him to say whether he'd suit us.

Never been that impressed with Thomas Asante, don't think he's got lots of goals in him at this level.

I reckon Stansfield could have. He can score goals..12 Goals, 2 Assists in a relegated side age 21..a Scouting Report.

https://scoutingstats.ai/player/jay-stansfield-1175/

BTA? Sometimes it can be too about the pressing, the hold-up, link..for a side like us perhaps it makes a difference as opposed to direct Goals and Assists. He is entering prime years now and although poor at Coventry, they've been quite poor verbatim this season.

https://scoutingstats.ai/player/brandon-thomas-asante-681/

Edited Friday at 14:05 by Mr Popodopolous

[mozo]

15 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I agree, that’s exactly as it should be.  No forgiveness required, brother Mozo! 

What do I always say - “manager’s summer plans often go out the window by end of September (if not earlier)”.

I don’t actually give a toss who gets picked, and who does well, as long as they do.  Bristol City fan, remember!

All I’m doing is critiquing the spending (wasting?) of money on two summer signings that were the plan.  Wells didn’t start one preseason game as the one-up-top, nor any game until Middlesbrough (a), our 10th league game of the season!  The plan back-fired in that respect.

On that basis of that critique, I’d suggest that Liam doesn’t look to problem solve by recruiting, but use what he has in-house, he might surprise himself….again.  I’m also not convinced we’d get recruitment right either…in a tougher, more expensive window.  Armstrong won’t get much of a chance to get back in, if we go and sign someone either, will he?

So, Liam, you have 4 strikers, Wells, Armstrong, Bell, and Mayulu…you don’t need another. 

Agree wholeheartedly Mr F

7 hours ago, Colemanballs said:

I agree with your general point. However, I do feel that Armstrong would suit the change of approach / style we've seen over the last 3 games. If, as I fear, Manning reverts to a more possession focused approach, then, yes, Armstrong is not suited to that.

Yeah I'm looking forward to seeing how that works.

[Philly The Kid]

On 09/01/2025 at 14:38, Mikjizzle said:

yep - although I have a feeling they couldn't have got away with that now with FFP. But similarly, Brentford spent a lot on their way to the premier league. Bottom line is, if you want to get promoted more often than not you have to spend some money. We have spent a little bit this summer but nothing like most clubs that go up.

Fans on here complain about us not being good enough whilst we sit pretty much where our spending/wages would have us in the table, but at the same time strangely don't want us to spend money to keep improving.  

SL has said on many occasions he sees sustainability as the only way forward. They have a budget and once it's gone it's gone. He's been asked before to come up with funds to 'get us over the line' which haven't worked and we've ended up in a mess as a result.
Whilst I don't necessarily disagree with what you say, The fact SL keeps banging on about sustainability clearly indicates that unless there's an exceptional circumstance where a signing will make the difference between promotion or not then he won't keep throwing money to people who's judgment is suspect.
My gripe is how the people who run the club take us for mugs by telling us we're a top 6 squad who should be doing better when it's clear to everyone we're actually a mid table squad with the ability to have a nibble at the tails of the play off places without managing to get there.

[Mr Popodopolous]

On 09/01/2025 at 14:38, Mikjizzle said:

yep - although I have a feeling they couldn't have got away with that now with FFP. But similarly, Brentford spent a lot on their way to the premier league. Bottom line is, if you want to get promoted more often than not you have to spend some money. We have spent a little bit this summer but nothing like most clubs that go up.

Fans on here complain about us not being good enough whilst we sit pretty much where our spending/wages would have us in the table, but at the same time strangely don't want us to spend money to keep improving.  

Brentford spent a lot, but never came close to breaking FFP as they sold stupidly high amounts.

I'm not sure how much non Parachute Clubs are spending at times, save for Middlesbrough thks season.

[BCFCOFSWEDEN]

Armstrong scored 3 times in 61 games for QPR and Mayulu scored 6 times in the Austrian League last season.

How could anyone think that they would be the answer for us to reach top 6?

I dont even think Tinnion thought that? 

We must all pray that Wells dont get injured and that Mannings stop to take him out in minute 60. Because then we only have a striker 2/3 of the game!

Im sure we have lost many points because it stands in Mannings manual that you shall always change the striker in minute 60…..Even if he is the best man on the ground!(For example the Plymouth game)

If we dont get a new striker in january we will maximum reach place 12 in the League table!

 

COYR 

 

[fly in the air]

what is so frustrating u see clubs like sunderland who are 3 points of the top with a fantastic midfield signing a midfielder ftom Italy to help what they have. we have wells and 2 poor strikers and our manager saying we are not likely be doing anything this window.  

[Severn Beach Pigeon]

On 09/01/2025 at 18:00, Mr Popodopolous said:

League will be harder near year IMO.

Look who is likely to come down, one of the sides coming up too.

Then 3 months into next season it will be called "the weakest championship for years", just like it has the last 10 years

[Full nelson]

Strikers which are scoring goals are not for sale. We will just end up with someone else's Fally at an extra cost for how desperate we are for one. 

I can't see the need for a striker this Jan, it won't get us into the top 6 as the teams there already are just better than us with ambition. 

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, Severn Beach Pigeon said:

Then 3 months into next season it will be called "the weakest championship for years", just like it has the last 10 years

The championship is the championship isn’t it?  Some years it might get spread out with a couple of clubs pissing it and / or a couple of rubbish teams, but the core is still really competitive.  Other years the whole league might be tight.  Doesn’t make it weaker or harder.

[BCFC31]

Clubs a joke we always do this we are 8th 2 points of the playoffs we desperately need a striker to get us over the line and what do the club go and do sign no one ! I swear this club is totally ******ed sometimes surely you Just go for it when in this position its the same as that time we were 2nd or something in the league then played wolves and we dropped like a stone due to the Club not signing the one or two we needed at the time to make a push.

[BCFC31]

On 09/01/2025 at 08:48, Silvio Dante said:

Not a huge amount here today - the biggest news is in the expected ins/outs (minimal) - but you don’t know how much is under the hat there - and the intent not to recall the loanees.

Notes:

- Dickie was ill before the game and has been ill this week, is a doubt for Wolves

- Naismith in contention for the weekend as is Sykes, both on the grass. Armstrong and Williams close but a bit further behind. Campbell-Slowey out for a while with calf injury

- In terms of team selection, will go into it trying to win but we have the depth to make tweaks and changes - won’t make wholesale changes though

- Possibly outgoings in next few days/weeks. Dont need to do major business but don’t expect any in. Many factors into that - size of squad already, finances, wage bill. Thinks the way they work players improve over the course of the season

- LM believes Rob Atkinson needed the loan for minutes and game volume. In respect of Mayulu, he wants to do well - he is making progress in training and getting better. There shouldn’t be any demands that he does it straight away and he’d rather keep him at the club under the coaching teams watch

- Yeboah - needs a lot of work, but attitude good, doing extra sessions, needs work to be in and around the first team

- No intent to recall Stokes, SPH or JKL

Yet sunderland are celebrating signing a champions league player. 

[BCFC31]

On 09/01/2025 at 10:32, petehinton said:

Who’d be out there that’s feasible money wise, and markedly better than what we have? We already overspent in the summer. We’d be going back to throwing money at our short term problems / issues. 
 

Getting players out the door isn’t as simple as just ‘letting them go’ either, as we’ve found out in recent years. 
 

If we were 1st / 2nd I’d absolutely understand the logic, but we aren’t exactly in some unmissable, generational opportunity atm. 

To be fair the first question you ask is not for us to answer, the club as an institution have highly paid staff to find these players... a full recruitment network and team supposedly working on recruitment constantly day in day out.

[Severn Beach Pigeon]

26 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

The championship is the championship isn’t it?  Some years it might get spread out with a couple of clubs pissing it and / or a couple of rubbish teams, but the core is still really competitive.  Other years the whole league might be tight.  Doesn’t make it weaker or harder.

No, I agree.

It's just a peeve of mine that every season (usually any time we move to having an outside chance of doing anything) the league gets declared "the weakest it's been for years" by someone on here.

Then usually a team gets pointed to as evidence- Ipswich last season, Luton the season before that and so on.

It's not someone done exclusively on here either, but I can almost guarantee that it will be said about the Championship at some point next season, it's already been said on here a few times for this season and it was definitely said about the last 2 seasons.

I think it's one of the more competitive seasons in the Championship for a while, this season. While that may not be a case for it being stronger or weaker than other years, I do think it makes a case for it to be harder as margins are finer in every game, packs aren't forming as distinctly as they might normally and so it's easier to be sucked back into a group from drawing 1 instead of winning.

Conversely, as points are being dropped by everyone, it is easier to reign teams back in if you are able to string together a run.

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, Severn Beach Pigeon said:

No, I agree.

It's just a peeve of mine that every season (usually any time we move to having an outside chance of doing anything) the league gets declared "the weakest it's been for years" by someone on here.

Then usually a team gets pointed to as evidence- Ipswich last season, Luton the season before that and so on.

It's not someone done exclusively on here either, but I can almost guarantee that it will be said about the Championship at some point next season, it's already been said on here a few times for this season and it was definitely said about the last 2 seasons.

I think it's one of the more competitive seasons in the Championship for a while, this season. While that may not be a case for it being stronger or weaker than other years, I do think it makes a case for it to be harder as margins are finer in every game, packs aren't forming as distinctly as they might normally and so it's easier to be sucked back into a group from drawing 1 instead of winning.

Conversely, as points are being dropped by everyone, it is easier to reign teams back in if you are able to string together a run.

Yeah, i was agreeing with you.

[Severn Beach Pigeon]

10 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Yeah, i was agreeing with you.

I got that, was just expanding a bit

[Amiga_Steve]

If I was DoF I would be going all out for Ben Mee just for some Chuckle Brothers esque "to Mee, to Yu" shenanigans. That's also why I shouldn't ever be DoF.

[Northern Red]

37 minutes ago, BCFC31 said:

Clubs a joke we always do this we are 8th 2 points of the playoffs we desperately need a striker to get us over the line and what do the club go and do sign no one ! I swear this club is totally ******ed sometimes surely you Just go for it when in this position its the same as that time we were 2nd or something in the league then played wolves and we dropped like a stone due to the Club not signing the one or two we needed at the time to make a push.

Are you okay?

[BCFC31]

2 minutes ago, Northern Red said:

Are you okay?

Are you okay ?