duncanjwitham

If you think back to that Chorley FA cup game, where we had to put out the academy lads against non-league defenders, the big issue was our lack of physicality.  We just got out-muscled and couldn't let out superior technical skills shine.  When you watch Brown play against teams at this level, you see none of that, he looks big and strong and his better movement and technique is shining though.   Obviously that doesn't guarantee he'd be good enough at higher levels, but it's certainly a good start.

I was trying (and failing, clearly) to have the craic. He's obviously very promising, but he's a country mile off the likes of Gayle, though I'd expect that given he's just a kid. one to look forward to, I reckon.

We signed 11 outfielders in the summer, only 3 of them have started more than 15 league games (Nelson, Nyambe and Wilson).  Bradley is next on 12 and Ward on 10.  You aren't making an impact if you aren't getting on the pitch.  The players we've signed either seem to have persistent injury/fitness issues, or they aren't being selected over the players that were already here (most of whom also signed on frees).  Obviously you're not going to get every signing right, and not every player is signed with the intention of being a regular starter (I deliberately didn't include Vickers, for example) but if you get to mid-March and less than half your summer signings have hit double figures for starts, then that's really not a good sign.

We signed 11 outfielders in the summer, only 3 of them have started more than 15 league games (Nelson, Nyambe and Wilson).  Bradley is next on 12 and Ward on 10.  You aren't making an impact if you aren't getting on the pitch.  The players we've signed either seem to have persistent injury/fitness issues, or they aren't being selected over the players that were already here (most of whom also signed on frees).  Obviously you're not going to get every signing right, and not every player is signed with the intention of being a regular starter (I deliberately didn't include Vickers, for example) but if you get to mid-March and less than half your summer signings have hit double figures for starts, then that's really not a good sign.

Ahhh, so you're moaning about people bringing up unrelated stuff out of context in other threads, by bringing up unrelated stuff out of context in another thread... 😉 FWIW I haven't seen the press conference you're referring to, or seen people talking about it, so I have no clue what the issue is.
I do think it's more than reasonable to be talking about why we are barely playing our major January signing though.  And Radio Derby certainly thought it was a significant enough answer from Barker to snip it out and post it on social media.  It's not like it's some random comment amongst a load of other stuff either, it's a a near-3 minute clip just talking about that one issue.

You could make the exact same argument about the pro-Warne lot as well.  There are a group of people on here (not saying you are one of them) that will refuse to accept any criticism of Warne at all, will defend even the most dreadful decisions to the hilt, immediately start blaming everyone else when we lose etc.  
It would have been very easy for Barker to basically say that CBT has been unlucky with injuries, has struggled to get his fitness up and they're working on it and leave it there.  But he goes well beyond that, saying CBT has struggled with training intensity, found it a shock, "he's going to have to adapt to us, we can't adapt to him", "if he doesn't adapt he'll fall by the wayside" etc.  None of that is normal stuff.  When you spend money on someone for the first time in 4 years, to have the coaching staff using the phrase "charity minutes" about him playing only 2 months later, it's clear something has gone very, very wrong.  To be clear, I'm not necessarily saying Warne or the coaching staff are at fault, it could be the recruitment staff, the medical staff, whoever negotiated with CBT (it they made promises about starting games or whatever), we don't know from the outside looking in.  But I can't believe we intended spending £400k on the guy just to have him twiddling his thumbs on the bench while he built his fitness up.
I'm not sure many people are really doing that here.  I think more than anything, we're all confused as to why a player that was playing and contributing every week at another League One club, is suddenly barely fit enough to get on the pitch here.

For accounting purposes, the players "value" is what you've cost to acquire him (transfer fees, agents fees etc) amortised (i.e. spread out) over the length of his contract.  Cashin will be valued at near £0m in the accounts because we've not really paid anything to get him.  The same with Bird, and any other player who has come through our academy.  The £2m is basically the remainder of Bielik's contract, plus a few other bits and bobs.

According to Whoscored:
Devante Cole has 17 goals and 3 assists so is only 2 behind Mendez-Laing's 22..
May, Rhodes, Jamie Reid, Bishop and Mason-Clarke next, all on 18
According to Transfermarkt:
Mendez-Laing is on 23
May is on 20
Mason-Clarke has 19
Paddy Lane and Poku are on 18 (along with the others listed above)

You almost don't realise what a freakishly good season he's actually having until you look at the stats:

He's 4 clear of anybody else for assists, and if my maths is right, 4 clear of anybody else for combined goals + assists as well. 

It's almost like by giving him minutes in senior football, he's starting to find his feet and earn himself more minutes.  Amazing.  Who'd have thunk it...

From what the Peterborough fans said when we signed him, he mostly played as a winger for them, and when he did play at wingback he wasn't as good.  It doesn't really matter though where he played for them though - he's clearly not good enough defensively to play wingback IMO.  And it's the same with Wilson - AFAIK he did play there for them, but he's not good enough defensively to play wingback every week for a team that wants to be getting promoted from this league.  It's like describing Louis Sibley as a wingback by trade because he's played there a bunch of times for us - he clearly isn't one either.  NML and Barkhuizen both played as wingbacks at their previous clubs  - again they clearly aren't wingbacks.
If you want to play wingbacks, you *have* to have players that can play that position properly - it's the most important part of that setup - and if you don't have them you are going to get killed on one side of the game or the other (defensively or offensively).  There will be games where you can get away with it (like yesterday), but you can't get away with it every game if you want to be winning things.

The thing is, you can't afford to play Nyambe as a wingback (or Elder for that matter), no matter the circumstances, because in a 352, your wingbacks *have* to be a major part of your attack.  If you have any intention of being a top team, you simply cannot go into games with your primary wide players not really wanting to cross the halfway line, and just hoping that NML does some magic or you score from a set piece or something.
The big issue is that despite 3 transfer windows and umpteen signings, we still don't have a single actual wingback.  It's a highly specialised position, where you *need* to be able to contribute offensively and defensively.  We seem to have a ragtag bunch of fullbacks and wingers that can do half the job.

We've been over this so many times. But you clearly cannot grasp it and feel you have to surface whenever the first team win a game.
Ok, here it is again, please try to understand it this time....
We do not "hate" Warne.
We just believe he should do better with the squad he has, the resources that he has available and make better use of the academy.
We do not agree with many of his team selections, his tactics or his substitutions.
Yes, we beat a very poor, low lying Port Vale, rah, rah, rah but can you look further than that - at the longer term future of the club?

From what the Peterborough fans said when we signed him, he mostly played as a winger for them, and when he did play at wingback he wasn't as good.  It doesn't really matter though where he played for them though - he's clearly not good enough defensively to play wingback IMO.  And it's the same with Wilson - AFAIK he did play there for them, but he's not good enough defensively to play wingback every week for a team that wants to be getting promoted from this league.  It's like describing Louis Sibley as a wingback by trade because he's played there a bunch of times for us - he clearly isn't one either.  NML and Barkhuizen both played as wingbacks at their previous clubs  - again they clearly aren't wingbacks.
If you want to play wingbacks, you *have* to have players that can play that position properly - it's the most important part of that setup - and if you don't have them you are going to get killed on one side of the game or the other (defensively or offensively).  There will be games where you can get away with it (like yesterday), but you can't get away with it every game if you want to be winning things.

From what the Peterborough fans said when we signed him, he mostly played as a winger for them, and when he did play at wingback he wasn't as good.  It doesn't really matter though where he played for them though - he's clearly not good enough defensively to play wingback IMO.  And it's the same with Wilson - AFAIK he did play there for them, but he's not good enough defensively to play wingback every week for a team that wants to be getting promoted from this league.  It's like describing Louis Sibley as a wingback by trade because he's played there a bunch of times for us - he clearly isn't one either.  NML and Barkhuizen both played as wingbacks at their previous clubs  - again they clearly aren't wingbacks.
If you want to play wingbacks, you *have* to have players that can play that position properly - it's the most important part of that setup - and if you don't have them you are going to get killed on one side of the game or the other (defensively or offensively).  There will be games where you can get away with it (like yesterday), but you can't get away with it every game if you want to be winning things.

The thing is, you can't afford to play Nyambe as a wingback (or Elder for that matter), no matter the circumstances, because in a 352, your wingbacks *have* to be a major part of your attack.  If you have any intention of being a top team, you simply cannot go into games with your primary wide players not really wanting to cross the halfway line, and just hoping that NML does some magic or you score from a set piece or something.
The big issue is that despite 3 transfer windows and umpteen signings, we still don't have a single actual wingback.  It's a highly specialised position, where you *need* to be able to contribute offensively and defensively.  We seem to have a ragtag bunch of fullbacks and wingers that can do half the job.

The thing is, you can't afford to play Nyambe as a wingback (or Elder for that matter), no matter the circumstances, because in a 352, your wingbacks *have* to be a major part of your attack.  If you have any intention of being a top team, you simply cannot go into games with your primary wide players not really wanting to cross the halfway line, and just hoping that NML does some magic or you score from a set piece or something.
The big issue is that despite 3 transfer windows and umpteen signings, we still don't have a single actual wingback.  It's a highly specialised position, where you *need* to be able to contribute offensively and defensively.  We seem to have a ragtag bunch of fullbacks and wingers that can do half the job.

We’re definitely warming up with that back 4…

I really liked the theory that was laid out in the final couple of years of Mel’s tenure (frightening sentence, I know). The idea that over half the first team would be made up of academy players, with high quality loans to cover shorter term gaps and good signings brought in to cover areas where there were no players coming through. I thought this was quite a good model in the modern day. It would attract youngsters with high ceilings to the club as their was a clear path to the first team, build confidence with other clubs to lend us their best talent, and allow us to spend decent money on players as academy players would be pure profit. It seemed to align academy with first team and present a good vision for a modern sustainable football club. 
 
I think we were maybe a couple of seasons from seeing it come to fruition too. We were looking at having a team/squad with the potential of having Knight, Bird, Sibley, Thompson, Delap, Gordon, Kellyman, Cashin, Ebosele, Buchanan, Whitaker, Plange, and Williams all drawn from our own academy in it. We all know why it never happened, and the initial idea behind it may have been pushed by outside factors, but looking at the idea on paper it showed a club well aligned in philosophy, both in development and recruitment.
At the moment I don’t really know what the plan is. Academy players don’t seem to be anywhere near it. That might be due to the club being gutted and them not being to the standard but they never seem to be given a chance. The recruitment seems to be focused on older players, but they don’t appear to fit a system. Cocu spoke about having all teams playing the same way so younger players can step up, which seems really sensible, but currently our first team doesn’t seem to have a consistent way of playing let alone something aligned through the age groups. I think we could do with really setting out a clear goal and a philosophy and working towards it. It would really allow supporters to buy into the vision and direction. Build trust and patience. And, as I think supporters often back their academy graduates the most, really build a unity between team and fans. 

Best I could tell, we started in a back 4, went to a back 3 when Sibley came on (at left wingback), then went back to a 4 when CBT came on (Sibley went into midfield and Cashin went back to left back).

I think it's reasonably fair to say (given both of their post-Derby careers so far) that while Rooney was the public face of the operation, probably did the motivation, public speaking etc and had the contact book of mates to call, Rosenior was the footballing brains behind the operation.  And that's not meant as a slight on Rooney, he was excellent at that other stuff. And he's by no means the only manager who's basically needed a good right-hand man to compensate for his own weaknesses.

I think it's reasonably fair to say (given both of their post-Derby careers so far) that while Rooney was the public face of the operation, probably did the motivation, public speaking etc and had the contact book of mates to call, Rosenior was the footballing brains behind the operation.  And that's not meant as a slight on Rooney, he was excellent at that other stuff. And he's by no means the only manager who's basically needed a good right-hand man to compensate for his own weaknesses.

I think it's reasonably fair to say (given both of their post-Derby careers so far) that while Rooney was the public face of the operation, probably did the motivation, public speaking etc and had the contact book of mates to call, Rosenior was the footballing brains behind the operation.  And that's not meant as a slight on Rooney, he was excellent at that other stuff. And he's by no means the only manager who's basically needed a good right-hand man to compensate for his own weaknesses.

I think it's reasonably fair to say (given both of their post-Derby careers so far) that while Rooney was the public face of the operation, probably did the motivation, public speaking etc and had the contact book of mates to call, Rosenior was the footballing brains behind the operation.  And that's not meant as a slight on Rooney, he was excellent at that other stuff. And he's by no means the only manager who's basically needed a good right-hand man to compensate for his own weaknesses.

The thing with Sibley at left back is, he's good going forwards, but less good when he has to do some proper defending.  Last night, against a pretty poor, out of form team, at home, should have been an obvious game to use Sibley there.  They didn't really get at Cashin all that often, certainly not to the extent where you're thinking Sibley would have struggled.