Jump to content

brady1993

Member
  • Posts

    3,597
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

7,977 profile views
  1. Couldn't agree more. I've been saying it for a while (alongside you and a few others) the academy is the one major advantage we have as a club that we can draw upon to essentially punch above our weight but we have to be set up for it and have to take some of the teething pains as we put the rights thing in place for it flourish. The one thing I'll add, the short term "fast promotion" argument would have weight if it looked like that was what was going to happen. Last season we finished and right now we are looking for a finish that's more or less the same (within a few places). In what world does that look a fast promotion? That's my biggest biggest problem with Warne is we are doing neither a fast promotion nor building for the future.
  2. I mean not exactly. There are several reasons; - Style of football - Tactical naivety - Lack of adaptability - Poor management of fitness at times - Seemingly poor technical coaching - Lack of clear longer term planning - Confused transfer strategy - Seeming lack of willingness to develop academy players - Generally underperforming in terms of results and signs of it getting worse rather than better.
  3. I ask this genuinely and not facetiously but why ? What are you seeing that gives you that level of confidence? And what do you mean by succeed? Promotion? If so in what time frame?
  4. I agree and it's fine. Understand he can't do that and use the other players we have that can. Use Hourihane for what he can do not what he can't. It's been pretty been obvious since day 1 of being here that most of what he had left was a final ball and or shot. And also don't play him 3 games a week to knacker out what little stamina he has.
  5. Yes and no. You can make it easier for the player tactically. If hoofing is the easiest option and you don't want that then you can tactically set up the team and coach the team that their is a different default. And you play them where their current capabilities lay. Hourihane has never looked the absolutely most comfortable playing the deepest midfield role. He's too peripheral, hasn't got the best tactical awareness and is only ok under serious pressure with the ball. He's not got the legs for serious midfield running anymore but he can still be a difference maker in final 3rd, so... use him as that and don't expect from him what he can't do.
  6. I think that's part of what I come back to. I honestly feel that Warne is showing he's not what we would in spite of questions of squad quality. Tactical incoherence, unclear vision/longer term planning, lack of adaptability, mishandling player fitness, limited set of answers to problems, lack of accountability, flawed recruiting and lack of reaction to how a game unfolds are all issues he's demonstrated that have nothing to do with squad. A better squad more aligned to his sensibilities would only likely paper over these deficiencies. He isn't a bad manager and his coaches aren't bad coaches per se. But this is the wrong job for him and he's the wrong manager for us.
  7. Personally I think on paper we've got reasonable sections of the squad that are capable of playing well in the league above and then the rest are mostly good at this level. Is it the best squad in the league? Don't know on that front. Nor do I think anything aside top 2 is a a failure. I do however think with the ability at hand it should be pushing for top 2 rather than dreaming of trying to get that last play off spot. And I'm partly convinced of that purely because we are getting points on the board still despite poor management. I also think with where the quality areas are in the squad (i.e. midfield) we should be firmly in control of most games and would be with proper coaching. Weirdly I think we had a top 2 squad probably when Warne took over. I'm not saying it should have performed at that level because it takes time to click. But last season should have been focused on building momentum, squad familiarity and developing academy players into solid squad players and more. All so we could mount a serious challenge this year. It's what I find frustrating, it feels we've thrown a year down the drain only to be in a worse place.
  8. I'd say it was better in the way that it was coherent and was tactically sound. It was ugly at times but the plan was very clear and people knew what they were supposed to be doing. Tbh Rowett is the benchmark I put other pragmatic managers that we've seen against in recent years because with the others it was both ugly and bad rather than just ugly.
  9. To add to this players at this level and the championship can often big strengths but big weaknesses. So with the right manager in the right set up they look fantastic but with the wrong one they look like they don't belong at this level.
  10. I do wonder how much of that good footballer comment more meant that we'd play good football because of the players as opposed to tactically fitting those players. Maybe it's hyper critical in hindsight but the comment lacked depth as to how he was going to achieve it. When asked more specifically about tactics in that interview I can remember him saying something to the effect of football not being rocket science and he likes to get it wide quickly and get crosses in.
  11. Yeah that's the thing. I really feel like we could benefit who can afford to take a longer view development wise, somebody who still has skin in the game (there isn't the pressure to perform with a NED) and has been up until recently in touch with coaching. With a NED I often feel like they are people who've the game has passed them by and/or their view of it has been demonstrated as somewhat faulty.
  12. Before McClaren Bryson - Decent box to box player who'd mostly played in a two man midfield Martin - 3rd choice at Norwich, mostly played as a 10 off another striker. Russell - Primarily a striker who'd played in a 2 And we could go on....
  13. It's also league 1 and a bad league 1 at that we don't need as good as we had then. Sibley hits double figures comfortably if played for a whole season. Waghorn's hold up play is good enough and he has an understanding with Sibley (Cocu specifically paired the two when Sibley first broke the same). We've got ample ability in midfield and the playing out from the back will be good enough with coaching. McClaren also likely makes adjustments tactically to accommodate it not being the exact same set of players. For example you likely don't want to play with overlapping wingbacks and narrow wide forwards, its probably better to let nml and barkhuizen cheat a little and stay wide. It'd not be perfect but it'd have tactical coherence that'd let McClaren play to his strengths in coaching.
  14. It wouldn't be exactly the same tactically but Wildsmith Nyambe Nelson Cashin Forsyth Fornah Bird Sibley NML Waghorn Barkhuizen Would give McClaren something to work with, with the right coaching. And there in lies the rub: coaching We've got enough quality at our disposal for this division, we just need to name a balanced side that has tactical coherence and have it coached well enough.
  15. More than anything I think I'd like to see us get a more dedicated director of football in place. Somebody who can better guide the trajectory of the club's development all round from a playing perspective.
×
×
  • Create New...