Right then, where does the blame lie?

Nano said:
It's a long term thing and you can't just look at individual things in isolation. Our squad isn't getting better and you have to include the loans because that is money we are spending. We are as weak now as any time since relegation.

Forss is a weird one because I assume the recruitment team were recruiting a striker and not a winger so is him not being good enough as a striker but being good enough as a winger a win or a loss for the recruitment team?

Nearly having a good 11 isn't a ringing endorsement. Especially when 2 of them play in the same position.

I agree Dieng is a good keeper but we have signed 7 keepers in the last 3 years so that's a lot of trial and error to get there.

We don't have a good enough fullback on either side. Smith was a weak link last season and needed improving but we had too many other holes to fill that he wasn't a priority and we have no real back-up because Dijksteel isn't trusted. We still need 2 new quality fullbacks (maybe Ayling and Thomas are them long term but for now we don't know). We also started the season with Coulson! as our full back.

We have been trying, and failing, to replace Howson for at least 3 years. That can only be classed as a failure. We still haven't done it and if we lose Hackney as well then we are down to just a 36 year old Howson (if he gets another contract) and Barlaser.

We have 2 strikers in our squad and one of them we were trying to send to Plymouth. The other one wasn't even there when we started the season. It was unbelievably risky to but all our eggs in that one belated basket.
Click to expand...
I disagree with some of that. Smith was a more than adequate right back, in my opinion of course. Left back, open to debate, I guess.

If me naming a few good purchases by the recruitment team is not looking at things in the round then neither is naming a few bad ones. That has to work both ways.

The argument about forss is a silly one, he was either worth the money and has gone up in value or he hasn't. That has to be the only metric, surely?

I have no idea if we have been trying to replace howson for the last 3 years, so that is specualtion. We are getting to the point where we will have to replace him. You might argue that Hackney removed that need last season, to an extent. Barlaser for all the cack he gets thrown at him, is a decent player and I do seem to recall that Howson wasn't particularly well thought of by fans when he first joined either.

You are right, we do tend to start the season with a partial squad. I have no idea if other teams do the same, but it is likely they do too. This is a result of the transfer window not the recruitment team.

I am not suggesting the team has got everything right, but with massively reduced spending in recent years, and some very good sales, they are definatley showing a net positive on the balance sheet.

I don't agree the team is weaker this season than last. I agree the 11 we may be putting on the pitch is not as good, but that is again down to injuries. You cannot ignore that. Bare in mind, the team last year failed. You may even say they flattered to decieve. We were very poor in the last weeks of the season and pretty bad in 2 games against coventry in the playoff semi. The league this season is arguably stronger than last, it's not even a certainty that last season team would be in the playoffs this season, given how poorly our season ended.

You seem to be ignoring issues that every other team in the division will have and assuming it's just our recruitment team. They can identify targets, but, they have to be within the financial constraints placed on them and want to come. Plenty of the recruitment is out of the recruitment teams hands.
 
Laughing said:
It isn't sustainable to finance a club on a 4 month plan.
Click to expand...

But surely it isn't sustainable to run a football club without strikers?

Why was it sustainable to sign a left back and a right back on loan with no real longterm benefit beyond 'a 4 month plan', but not a striker?

Why did we try to get a couple of right wingers in it seems?

All of these signings or attempted signings fall into the 'not much point if we only have a 5% chance of promotion' category.

But after not having a fit striker for a good chunk of the season, we 'chose' to sustainably sign another number ten, then sell our other two number tens, then loan two full backs and sell a youth striker.

If we were keeping our powder dry and soldiering on till the next window as a club ethos, I could understand that to an extent.

But we very specifically haven chosen to not sign a striker all season, after bidding £6 million - £7million for one late in the August window and desperately needing another for months. The removal of Crooks and Rogers and their goal involvement has just exasperated the situation. It was an idiotic decision to make, reeked of throwing in the towel and has instantly proven to be so, as 'half a yard offside' Greenwood along with everyone else who isn't a striker we've played up there is barely looking like scoring.

The club have very clearly chosen to do this, presumably for a good reason in their eyes, but the keeping the resources for another go next season doesn't stack up really when you consider the other signings.

We knew Lath was out for at least another month, we knew Coburn was barely able to play and was carrying an issue that meant we couldn't use him, and we'd just lost Jones for 7 to 8 weeks.

Our answer to this was to sell Rogers, Crooks and Kavanagh and not replace any of them.
 
Last edited:
Caesium137 said:
But surely it isn't sustainable to run a football club without strikers?

Why was it sustainable to sign a left back and a right back on loan with no real longterm benefit beyond 'a 4 month plan', but not a striker?

Why did we try to get a couple of right wingers in it seems?

All of these signings or attempted signings fall into the 'not much point if we only have a 5% chance of promotion' category.

But after not having a fit striker for a good chunk of the season, we 'chose' to sustainably sign another number ten, then sell our other two number tens, then loan two full backs and sell a youth striker.

If we were keeping our powder dry and soldiering on till the next window as a club ethos, I could understand that to an extent.

But we very specifically haven chosen to not sign a striker all season, after bidding £6 million - £7million for one late in the August window and desperately needing another for months. The removal of Crooks and Rogers and their goal involvement has just exasperated the situation. It was an idiotic decision to make, reeked of throwing in the towel and has instantly proven to be so, as 'half a yard offside' Greenwood along with everyone else who isn't a striker we've played up there is barely looking like scoring.

The club have very clearly chosen to do this, presumably for a good reason in their eyes, but the keeping the resources for another go next season doesn't stack up really when you consider the other signings.

We knew Lath was out for at least another month, we knew Coburn was barely able to play and was carrying an issue that meant we couldn't use him, and we'd just lost Jones for 7 to 8 weeks.

Our answer to this was to sell Rogers, Crooks and Kavanagh and not replace any of them.
Click to expand...
I didn't say we shouldn't get a striker. I said we shouldn't jump on a striker for the sake of a body. Any decent striker wouldl ikely have incurred a loan fee, it would be that I was oppossed to. If a decent striker could have been brought in on loan for a small, or no fee, and it fits our needs, then yes. Furthermore, to the end of the season isn't running a club with no strikers.

The 5% promotion chance is something posters have said, not the club. The club will be looking beyond this season and quite rightly so. It has no bearing on the debate.

We didn't specifically decide not to sign a striker, unless you know something I don't? We decided that there wasn't a viable option available that suited our model in the January transfer window.

As fans we can all be generous with the clubs money, the club have to take a much longer view, 10 years, 100 years 200 years. If we are to have a club to support it has to survive in perpetuity.
 
Laughing said:
I have no idea if we have been trying to replace howson for the last 3 years, so that is specualtion. We are getting to the point where we will have to replace him. You might argue that Hackney removed that need last season, to an extent. Barlaser for all the cack he gets thrown at him, is a decent player and I do seem to recall that Howson wasn't particularly well thought of by fans when he first joined either.
Click to expand...
In the last few years we have signed these midfielders listed below. Howson has been getting on for a while and we've only renewed his contract late in the season or after the season has ended. We also had Tav and McNair playing in midfield in this time.

Morsy, Payero, Siliki, Crooks, Boyd-Munce, Barlaser, Mowatt, McGree

We've undoubtedly tried to replace him. We paid a lot of money for some of them. Payero was reported as up to £5m, Siliki hada good pedigree and was a loan with an obligation to buy which we managed to get out of thankfully. Barlaser was signed after Hackney had emerged and he's clearly supposed to be Howson's replacement because he's completely different to Hackney but he's not ever going to be as good as Howson.

Laughing said:
The argument about forss is a silly one, he was either worth the money and has gone up in value or he hasn't. That has to be the only metric, surely?
Click to expand...
Not really. We're talking about whether they are a good judge of a player's ability. If they've said he's a player that is seen as a goalscorer but could be utilised in other areas/positions then that's good judgement. If they said he's a fox in the box who will score tap ins but contribute nothing else then their judgement can be questioned. If they have just got lucky then can you accept their advice in the future?

Laughing said:
You seem to be ignoring issues that every other team in the division will have and assuming it's just our recruitment team. They can identify targets, but, they have to be within the financial constraints placed on them and want to come. Plenty of the recruitment is out of the recruitment teams hands.
Click to expand...
The recruitment team isn't just the scouts. I am grouping in everyone involved with making transfers happen from the scouts to the people that put the deals together including Scott, Bausor and Gibson because I presume they still have a say.

Laughing said:
I don't agree the team is weaker this season than last. I agree the 11 we may be putting on the pitch is not as good, but that is again down to injuries. You cannot ignore that. Bare in mind, the team last year failed. You may even say they flattered to decieve. We were very poor in the last weeks of the season and pretty bad in 2 games against coventry in the playoff semi. The league this season is arguably stronger than last, it's not even a certainty that last season team would be in the playoffs this season, given how poorly our season ended.
Click to expand...
It is massively weaker. We had a full strength team early in the season and we weren't winning matches. Without injuries we'd have been at best where Sunderland are because we don't have good enough fullbacks or forwards, we'd have seen less of VDB and Rogers so we'd have less money as well. We still wouldn't have a player anywhere near as good as Akpom was playing 10. We are lacking quality, not quantity. The injuries have just reduced our quantity but not really our quality because our 2nd string and 1st string are both similar. We have no star players this season where we had 3 or 4 last year.
 
I’m not sure the ambition of the club really was to get in the play off’s this season, we are in a rebuild phase, the players brought in the summer in the main had little or no experience of this league and for most of them it was a step up. They will take time to adapt, think many were brought in with an eye to next season. With the the strength of the 3 teams coming down, this season for 21 of the 24 clubs was going to be a tough ask. Things have been compounded with injuries, but even if we had everyone fit for the majority the season, I only think we would have been in the edges of the play offs at very best. Only reason we’re even with any grasp is the teams below the top 3 are pretty average, Ipswich aside but I think they are being sussed out now.
For me all bodes well for next season, but I don’t expect major investment, 3 or 4 players, £10m spent max, maybe Hackney & Mcgree will be sold for the right fees, if so we will need to replace but wouldn’t expect us to spend more than a third of fees recouped on them. SG is trying to drag us in to a more sustainable model, this is the reality now
 
Nano said:
In the last few years we have signed these midfielders listed below. Howson has been getting on for a while and we've only renewed his contract late in the season or after the season has ended. We also had Tav and McNair playing in midfield in this time.

Morsy, Payero, Siliki, Crooks, Boyd-Munce, Barlaser, Mowatt, McGree

We've undoubtedly tried to replace him. We paid a lot of money for some of them. Payero was reported as up to £5m, Siliki hada good pedigree and was a loan with an obligation to buy which we managed to get out of thankfully. Barlaser was signed after Hackney had emerged and he's clearly supposed to be Howson's replacement because he's completely different to Hackney but he's not ever going to be as good as Howson.


Not really. We're talking about whether they are a good judge of a player's ability. If they've said he's a player that is seen as a goalscorer but could be utilised in other areas/positions then that's good judgement. If they said he's a fox in the box who will score tap ins but contribute nothing else then their judgement can be questioned. If they have just got lucky then can you accept their advice in the future?


The recruitment team isn't just the scouts. I am grouping in everyone involved with making transfers happen from the scouts to the people that put the deals together including Scott, Bausor and Gibson because I presume they still have a say.


It is massively weaker. We had a full strength team early in the season and we weren't winning matches. Without injuries we'd have been at best where Sunderland are because we don't have good enough fullbacks or forwards, we'd have seen less of VDB and Rogers so we'd have less money as well. We still wouldn't have a player anywhere near as good as Akpom was playing 10. We are lacking quality, not quantity. The injuries have just reduced our quantity but not really our quality because our 2nd string and 1st string are both similar. We have no star players this season where we had 3 or 4 last year.
Click to expand...
On my phone at the minute nano. I'll answer after dinner.
 
Hammies_Tash said:
I’m not sure the ambition of the club really was to get in the play off’s this season, we are in a rebuild phase, the players brought in the summer in the main had little or no experience of this league and for most of them it was a step up. They will take time to adapt, think many were brought in with an eye to next season. With the the strength of the 3 teams coming down, this season for 21 of the 24 clubs was going to be a tough ask. Things have been compounded with injuries, but even if we had everyone fit for the majority the season, I only think we would have been in the edges of the play offs at very best. Only reason we’re even with any grasp is the teams below the top 3 are pretty average, Ipswich aside but I think they are being sussed out now.
For me all bodes well for next season, but I don’t expect major investment, 3 or 4 players, £10m spent max, maybe Hackney & Mcgree will be sold for the right fees, if so we will need to replace but wouldn’t expect us to spend more than a third of fees recouped on them. SG is trying to drag us in to a more sustainable model, this is the reality now
Click to expand...
Hammies_Tash said:
I’m not sure the ambition of the club really was to get in the play off’s this season, we are in a rebuild phase, the players brought in the summer in the main had little or no experience of this league and for most of them it was a step up. They will take time to adapt, think many were brought in with an eye to next season. With the the strength of the 3 teams coming down, this season for 21 of the 24 clubs was going to be a tough ask. Things have been compounded with injuries, but even if we had everyone fit for the majority the season, I only think we would have been in the edges of the play offs at very best. Only reason we’re even with any grasp is the teams below the top 3 are pretty average, Ipswich aside but I think they are being sussed out now.
For me all bodes well for next season, but I don’t expect major investment, 3 or 4 players, £10m spent max, maybe Hackney & Mcgree will be sold for the right fees, if so we will need to replace but wouldn’t expect us to spend more than a third of fees recouped on them. SG is trying to drag us in to a more sustainable model, this is the reality now
Click to expand...
That's great, however one big issue the players we have signed are rubbish apart from RVB
 
It's not about blame.
No problems, only solutions.
We need an investment strategy in decent players with a proven record.
We can still find talented Isaiah Jones type players on dog-schitt park, but we also need some class and experience in the side.
Need a big shake-out in the summer.
 
We had a Ferrari of a squad last season, albeit on tick. Instead of replacing it with a more sensible yet still very capable squad we decided to buy a kit car complete with a fragile fibreglass body kit and we're now faced with a massive rebuild and a need for a load of replacement parts.
 
dooderooni said:
We had a Ferrari of a squad last season, albeit on tick. Instead of replacing it with a more sensible yet still very capable squad we decided to buy a kit car complete with a fragile fibreglass body kit and we're now faced with a massive rebuild and a need for a load of replacement parts.
Click to expand...
Good analogy. Who would you say is our carburettor?
 
Whoever decided not to buy a striker in January

We won’t be in the premier league again while Gibson is running things
 
Well, it’s Saturday night six o’clock and yet another atrocious performance. I think blame is the right word.

NOT acceptable. Are you confident that the people who have made the decisions that have lead to this situation will do better next time?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top