* The Unofficial “Official” Boro v Plymouth Match-Day Thread [02/24] *

[viv_andersons_nana]

Hang on mate, you’ve just demanded that he is, and I must bow down to that. Get a grip, it’s my opinion you don’t have to be a prat about it

Yep, I apologise for that little outburst.

I do still think Silvera was dreadful though. He wasn’t the only one in fairness but he should’ve been replaced at half time. Him, Ayling and Barlaser off, Clarke on and McNair in alongside O’Brien, Latte Lath up front and Dijksteel on at right back. We have such a lack of pace without Jones that you sort of have to play Dijksteel imo.

I’ve been very surprised at how bad Ayling looks. I thought he was a solid full back who would get up and down and cause problems, but the only problems he’s causing are for us. He’s been really poor.

 

[Otto42]

Understand the frustration with Silvera, he has some raw talent, today wasn’t his day, but am not sure what role he was being asked to play. Indeed not sure what the team set up was today, a stark contrast to last week when everyone seemed to know their job. All eleven were poor, it’s unfair to pick anyone out for being particularly poor!

 

[dooderooni]

I honestly think we could have used every player on our books today and it wouldn't have made any difference. We were as bad as we have been for a long time.

 

[BoroMart]

Yep, I apologise for that little outburst.

I do still think Silvera was dreadful though. He wasn’t the only one in fairness but he should’ve been replaced at half time. Him, Ayling and Barlaser off, Clarke on and McNair in alongside O’Brien, Latte Lath up front and Dijksteel on at right back. We have such a lack of pace without Jones that you sort of have to play Dijksteel imo.

I’ve been very surprised at how bad Ayling looks. I thought he was a solid full back who would get up and down and cause problems, but the only problems he’s causing are for us. He’s been really poor.

Fair play.

We disagree on Silvera. I’m not saying he was amazing, but he put the effort in, showed for the ball and carried us upfield.

Ayling and Thomas were both shocking, was Thomas playing in plimsoles he fell over about 4 times and the ball was like a hot potato to him.

Ayling, me too. He looks like someone who is a trier but just not very good. I guess he’s always been a player that relied on his fitness and that’s deserting him as he gets older.

Barlaser, just lacks physical side of the game, his strength, speed, fitness are really lacking

Yes we really lack pace jones and lath are really important. I’m guessing we didn’t want to risk another injury to lath as he is the boy fit striker. I’m sure he’ll start next week.

 

[r00fie1]

We had a short debate on whether Carrick had to take the “blame” for today's “performance”[?!] but concluded any combination of players proves we are bang average.
Not for the first time, we were absolutely dire.
Season ender game.
Expect the crowds will gradually drop now, other than for the Sheffield Wednesday and Leeds games.
We need to reinvest some of the £M`s from recently sold players, including Spence / Rogers / Chuba / Tav.
Where has £40M + gone?
Timely shambles considering the club has just told us to pay up for next season's season-cards!

 

[Andy_W]

You could see it happening though today. For all the possession we had (surprised it was 70%), we were never fluent or threatening. Full backs, wide men, midfield were all terrible today

Yeah, I don't disagree with that, but I've got some explanations or excuses as to why I think that's happening.

1: We don't have a striker, and the opposition will 100% know that, and 100% set up to counter that. Teams have figured this out.
2: We're also missing our best centre mid, centre back and also keeper (for some reason, there must be a reason mind, surely).
3: There's been lots of injuries, international duty and changes with the squad too, it's not going to be settled, it can't be, it's impossible.
4: Teams are more than happy to let us have the ball, as they know we don't have much to create with or create to
5: Our players will know full well that when we go behind we're in big trouble
6: Forss is not a lone Striker, so as much as he may look like the option, I don't think he is, and playing two up top is a risk which also means, playing a completely different style (possession and playing out is hard with two up top)

All of this just means we're a very easy target in so many ways, and it's difficult for Carrick as when he plugs one hole, it just opens up another. It's hard for the players too with changing roles, tactics etc, it's not like playing on the school field where it's simple to adapt from one system or position to the next as the opposition are not organised or experienced. Coming up against a good or even average side will massively expose us.

I think the expectation from most of the fans is too high also, with a more consistent squad and less injuries and distractions we're still not going to be anywhere near as good as last year overall, we're probably a 7th-10th team, but with those issues we're going to be worse, which is why we are where we are.

I don't think many of our fans quite understand the level of the problems we have, and it's easy to see in comments like "we beat Leicester away, but can't win at home". In reality, if Leicester had put their chances away anywhere near like they normally do, and had we finished like we normally do then we would have got battered. It was a good result but we were not better than them.

On Saturday that first and soft goal killed us, we had to take more risk after that but didn't have the players to do it. Plymouth exploited that very well, just like they should, and any team in the Championship should be capable of that as the margins are very fine. Had we got the first goal or there been no goals until half time I think we would have won.

We're going to keep having these problems until we get Lenihan, Hackney and Jones back, and Latte Lathe fully match fit (with no further injury risk). The side will improve massively (albeit still nowhere near last year), when they come back, but more importantly it gives us so many more options so we become much harder to set up against.

There are a lot of new lads who look promising in spells, but it's going to be hard to get the consistency out of them, until we're more settled.

 

[BoroMart]

We're going to keep having these problems until we get Lenihan, Hackney and Jones back, and Latte Lathe fully match fit (with no further injury risk). The side will improve massively (albeit still nowhere near last year), when they come back, but more importantly it gives us so many more options so we become much harder to set up against.

...and for the doommongers we have to remember only Akpom was ours of the key players last year. So we are down an akpom but up in about 5 or 6 other areas.If we can lose a key player but improve in 4 or 5 positions every year, we will become more consistent, and move up the table

 

[BoroMart]

We're going to keep having these problems until we get Lenihan, Hackney and Jones back, and Latte Lathe fully match fit (with no further injury risk). The side will improve massively (albeit still nowhere near last year), when they come back, but more importantly it gives us so many more options so we become much harder to set up against.

15 players have had serious injuries this season and two others were sold when we could have done with them Crooks and Rogers. The only players fit most of the season are: Glover, Jamie Jones, Engel, Barlaser, Gilbert and Greenwood. At a push 2 of those are starters. It's no wonder our season has been a damp squib.

It's beginning to look like the only outfield player who will start 75% or more of our league games is Rav, a 19 year old project

 

[Andy_W]

...and for the doommongers we have to remember only Akpom was ours of the key players last year. So we are down an akpom but up in about 5 or 6 other areas.If we can lose a key player but improve in 4 or 5 positions every year, we will become more consistent, and move up the table

Yup exactly, I forgot about Ramsey too, and Giles.

Akpom, Hackney, Archer, Giles, Lenihan, Steffen and Jones on this years form would all absolutely walk into this side, it's impossible to not miss that.

 

[Andy_W]

15 players have had serious injuries this season and two others were sold when we could have done with them Crooks and Rogers. The only players fit most of the season are: Glover, Jamie Jones, Engel, Barlaser, Gilbert and Greenwood. At a push 2 of those are starters. It's no wonder our season has been a damp squib.

It's beginning to look like the only outfield player who will start 75% or more of our league games is Rav, a 19 year old project

See I'm not that fussed on Rogers, I think £15m was a good price, and don't think he's any better than Azaz to be honest. Crooks was a good option, but if we're serious about wanting play-offs then he's not good enough, so I can understand that sale too if we got decent money for him.

Obviously cash in the bank is only any good if you can spend it mind, as we're going to really need to do that in the summer if we want play-offs.

If we've needed to sell players to pay the bills and keep the club afloat, then it is what it is, but I'd rather know either way.

 

[BoroMart]

See I'm not that fussed on Rogers, I think £15m was a good price, and don't think he's any better than Azaz to be honest. Crooks was a good option, but if we're serious about wanting play-offs then he's not good enough, so I can understand that sale too if we got decent money for him.

Obviously cash in the bank is only any good if you can spend it mind, as we're going to really need to do that in the summer if we want play-offs.

If we've needed to sell players to pay the bills and keep the club afloat, then it is what it is, but I'd rather know either way.

I agree Azaz is slightly ahead of Rogers right now, fast forward 18 months and Rogers will probably be miles ahead.

Crooks, agreed not good enough for where we want to be, but would have been an option to get through the injury crisis. I was happy enough with him being sold, and at a good price, but, it does hit us in the now

 

[r00fie1]

Agreed.
We all have to pay the bills, but we can't afford to let the team and stadium rot around us whilst we “balance the books”.
Other clubs, with much smaller attendances and capabilities, do well, if not better, than we have in recent years.
Look at Luton — for example [?!]

 

[Andy_W]

I agree Azaz is slightly ahead of Rogers right now, fast forward 18 months and Rogers will probably be miles ahead.

Crooks, agreed not good enough for where we want to be, but would have been an option to get through the injury crisis. I was happy enough with him being sold, and at a good price, but, it does hit us in the now

I'm not so sure Rogers will progress that much, he didn't progress that much here to be honest (other than in transfer fee). I hope he does though, but I'm also sort of glad he's gone to be honest, good time to cash in and it's far too much money for what we were getting out of him and he wouldn't have been anywhere near enough to secure us promotion. Good business overall I think (based on assumed £8m), but neither good enough for a regular in a top 3 champo team. Rogers is not going to be the next Grealish etc, who was playing in the champo at a similar age and destroying teams, like how we never even tackled him in like 2 seasons, and we were meant to be good.

Azaz has already played 140 senior games, and stepped up a level and performed in each of those years, and he's already got just as many league goals for us as Rodgers has. Sure Rogers got 5 goals in the cup, but they were all against terrible teams if we're being honest, apart from the Chelsea goal, but they were 6-0 up by then and had let their foot off the gas.

There's not even two years difference in age and Rogers is like 60 games behind, it's going to be hard for him to progress as he's not going to start any games, he's only played 9 minutes in a month, and all of those minutes in two games where the game was over, he never came on in the tight ones. His position is currently held by McGinn, Ramsey or maybe Tielemans, and whichever subs they have, so he's never starting over those.

The only thing I'm miffed about is the transfer fee structure, we've been conned again with these add ons (same thing happened with Spence), there is zero chance we get any of those as he's not going to play enough to get them. We basically lose £2m to city due to the sell on, so we've only really made £5m not the £14m people seem to think. If we do get any extras then city will get 25% of those too. Overall though £5m is not to be sniffed at, when to me we have got like for like and there's no risk of relegation/ promotion. If that gets us another couple of young players or pays some bills so we can spend another time, then I'm fine with that.

See, I don't think Crooks hits us either, sure we might have scraped another 3 points till the end of the season, but does it really make a difference whether we finish 10th or 11th etc? Cashing in is fine when your season is practically over I think, especially if the price is right. Crooks won't get anywhere near the starting 11 when we have Latte Lathe and Jones back, and now we're passed the AFCON/ ASIA cup player losses.

This may all sound a bit negative, but I think it's just realistic, it's going to take years to rebuild the squad with young lads on the cheap, but I'm fine with that if that's all the cash we have. We've got a fairly solid core of decent players, but will need maybe 3 top level championship players to do anything next year, and that will cost ££, I'm not convinced we have it.

 

[Andy_W]

Agreed.
We all have to pay the bills, but we can't afford to let the team and stadium rot around us whilst we “balance the books”.
Other clubs, with much smaller attendances and capabilities, do well, if not better, than we have in recent years.
Look at Luton — for example [?!]

Agreed, but turning around the style of the team as well as the structure will take a long time, if we're doing the buying players on the cheap option, and selling some promising players as we go. Turning a ship like that can take 3,5,10 years etc.

You have to keep in mind that most small clubs who do get promoted are either clubs which come down from above (so they're still riding on earlier luck/ timing), or ones which have been formulating a cheap sqaud for the future, and if that future comes (it's not when, it's a miracle) they only really get one shot at it. Worked for Luton last year, just, but they're going to come back down, and next year they will probably vanish. We might hopefully see Burnley vanish too. For every team that makes it doing this, there are many others who fail, as they're only really competing for the third spot, and there's like the 3rd worst prem team, and 10 champo teams gunning for that, and some of those champo teams are still getting parachute payments etc..

I think they problem we've had is we're seen as a wealthy side, but we're not that wealthy, especially compared to relegation teams or other wealthy champo sides with new owners injecting cash. It's like we've sort of tried to compete with spending money, but only in a half assed way, hence why we've only got close, and not close enough. We either need to spend a lot of cash and roll the dice, which has severely backfired a few times, or need to use the model of the smaller clubs, and just use whatever extra cash we do have when the time is right. This season wasn't the right time, as we had zero chance of replacing Akpom and Archers goals, as well as Ramsey and Giles creativity, especially as three of those were loans. We need our own players of that standard, ready made, but don't have the cash to buy them, so we're going to have to buy young lads cheap and hope to progress them over 2,3,4 years, either for the team, or to bump up the coffers.

From indeedio's accounting posts, as far as understand it we should now be in a very good position as far as FFP goes, so maybe we're gearing up for a big push, but I don't see us doing to that way to be honest, we're looking to be a lot more sustainable I think, and maybe trying to get the jump on those which aren't.

I also think we struggle more than most teams to recruit, purely due to our location, and I imagine this reduces our options maybe 50% at least.

 

[r00fie1]

Agreed, but turning around the style of the team as well as the structure will take a long time, if we're doing the buying players on the cheap option, and selling some promising players as we go. Turning a ship like that can take 3,5,10 years etc.

You have to keep in mind that most small clubs who do get promoted are either clubs which come down from above (so they're still riding on earlier luck/ timing), or ones which have been formulating a cheap sqaud for the future, and if that future comes (it's not when, it's a miracle) they only really get one shot at it. Worked for Luton last year, just, but they're going to come back down, and next year they will probably vanish. We might hopefully see Burnley vanish too. For every team that makes it doing this, there are many others who fail, as they're only really competing for the third spot, and there's like the 3rd worst prem team, and 10 champo teams gunning for that, and some of those champo teams are still getting parachute payments etc..

I think they problem we've had is we're seen as a wealthy side, but we're not that wealthy, especially compared to relegation teams or other wealthy champo sides with new owners injecting cash. It's like we've sort of tried to compete with spending money, but only in a half assed way, hence why we've only got close, and not close enough. We either need to spend a lot of cash and roll the dice, which has severely backfired a few times, or need to use the model of the smaller clubs, and just use whatever extra cash we do have when the time is right. This season wasn't the right time, as we had zero chance of replacing Akpom and Archers goals, as well as Ramsey and Giles creativity, especially as three of those were loans. We need our own players of that standard, ready made, but don't have the cash to buy them, so we're going to have to buy young lads cheap and hope to progress them over 2,3,4 years, either for the team, or to bump up the coffers.

From indeedio's accounting posts, as far as understand it we should now be in a very good position as far as FFP goes, so maybe we're gearing up for a big push, but I don't see us doing to that way to be honest, we're looking to be a lot more sustainable I think, and maybe trying to get the jump on those which aren't.

I also think we struggle more than most teams to recruit, purely due to our location, and I imagine this reduces our options maybe 50% at least.

Much of what you say is very, very, true. I'm hopeful that the green shoots we have seen this season will flourish next, with additional quality, experienced players — not journeymen, or those about to put their boots to rest in the shed. We did well holding out until Villa's third attempt to lure away Rogers and then guaranteed a good chunk with add-ons.

Although at the moment, it feels deflating and, room for optimism appears a little stifled: we’ve shown we can attract talent, but we need to work harder on giving our quality youngsters more minutes, especially as the season edges closer to its completion. We don't want to fork out high fees, or pay high loan wages for the likes of Saville, Fletcher, Assombalonga, Gestede, Hugill, Shotton, Braithwaite, Fischer, Steffan, Balogan, Connolly, Besic, Roberts, et, al… But neither do we need the likes of Bolassie, Peltier, Hall, Taylor, Lumley and Ayling.

We need to try to get it right, although there will always be a rogue trooper in the squad, who requires hooking out.

We need most of all to keep Michael Carrick ​

 

[Andy_W]

Much of what you say is very, very, true. I'm hopeful that the green shoots we have seen this season will flourish next, with additional quality, experienced players — not journeymen, or those about to put their boots to rest in the shed. We did well holding out until Villa's third attempt to lure away Rogers and then guaranteed a good chunk with add-ons.

Although at the moment, it feels deflating and, room for optimism appears a little stifled: we’ve shown we can attract talent, but we need to work harder on giving our quality youngsters more minutes, especially as the season edges closer to its completion. We don't want to fork out high fees, or pay high loan wages for the likes of Saville, Fletcher, Assombalonga, Gestede, Hugill, Shotton, Braithwaite, Fischer, Steffan, Balogan, Connolly, Besic, Roberts, et, al… But neither do we need the likes of Bolassie, Peltier, Hall, Taylor, Lumley and Ayling.

We need to try to get it right, although there will always be a rogue trooper in the squad, who requires hooking out.

We need most of all to keep Michael Carrick ​

Yeah, it feels deflating I think because we're destined for mid table, but have some really good foundations in place, and I think that's frustrating quite a few people.

Hopefully we can keep a hold of Carrick as he seems like the right man for the job, but I think we need to be getting him more involved with transfers, which I assume we're not doing at the minute other than him asking for a player for a position etc. I can't see him sticking around longer than 3 years if we're not pushing promotion or assembling a squad which is good enough, but we'll see I guess.

 

[BoroMart]

I'm not so sure Rogers will progress that much, he didn't progress that much here to be honest (other than in transfer fee). I hope he does though, but I'm also sort of glad he's gone to be honest, good time to cash in and it's far too much money for what we were getting out of him and he wouldn't have been anywhere near enough to secure us promotion. Good business overall I think (based on assumed £8m), but neither good enough for a regular in a top 3 champo team. Rogers is not going to be the next Grealish etc, who was playing in the champo at a similar age and destroying teams, like how we never even tackled him in like 2 seasons, and we were meant to be good.

Azaz has already played 140 senior games, and stepped up a level and performed in each of those years, and he's already got just as many league goals for us as Rodgers has. Sure Rogers got 5 goals in the cup, but they were all against terrible teams if we're being honest, apart from the Chelsea goal, but they were 6-0 up by then and had let their foot off the gas.

There's not even two years difference in age and Rogers is like 60 games behind, it's going to be hard for him to progress as he's not going to start any games, he's only played 9 minutes in a month, and all of those minutes in two games where the game was over, he never came on in the tight ones. His position is currently held by McGinn, Ramsey or maybe Tielemans, and whichever subs they have, so he's never starting over those.

The only thing I'm miffed about is the transfer fee structure, we've been conned again with these add ons (same thing happened with Spence), there is zero chance we get any of those as he's not going to play enough to get them. We basically lose £2m to city due to the sell on, so we've only really made £5m not the £14m people seem to think. If we do get any extras then city will get 25% of those too. Overall though £5m is not to be sniffed at, when to me we have got like for like and there's no risk of relegation/ promotion. If that gets us another couple of young players or pays some bills so we can spend another time, then I'm fine with that.

See, I don't think Crooks hits us either, sure we might have scraped another 3 points till the end of the season, but does it really make a difference whether we finish 10th or 11th etc? Cashing in is fine when your season is practically over I think, especially if the price is right. Crooks won't get anywhere near the starting 11 when we have Latte Lathe and Jones back, and now we're passed the AFCON/ ASIA cup player losses.

This may all sound a bit negative, but I think it's just realistic, it's going to take years to rebuild the squad with young lads on the cheap, but I'm fine with that if that's all the cash we have. We've got a fairly solid core of decent players, but will need maybe 3 top level championship players to do anything next year, and that will cost ££, I'm not convinced we have it.

I can’t agree, I think he came on leaps and bounds with us. I also understand the payment structure was designed so that even if he isn’t very successful we get more money. The structure was to get around ffp for Villa not to protect Villa from spending more than he was worth. I heard that even if they loan him out we get money.

 

[Andy_W]

I can’t agree, I think he came on leaps and bounds with us. I also understand the payment structure was designed so that even if he isn’t very successful we get more money. The structure was to get around ffp for Villa not to protect Villa from spending more than he was worth. I heard that even if they loan him out we get money.

Ah, ok on the first bit, each to their own

Hopefully you're right about the payment structure, would love to see the details, and hope we still get a chunk of it if he gets shipped on, like we're not going to get with Spence etc.

Wish we could have had more add ons or some add ons with Tav, as going to Bournemouth he was always going to play, so they would have at least been realistic.