YorkshireRam

£2m + Haydon Roberts and Harry Cornick on permanent deals  🤞

20 minutes ago, Raich Carter said:

<sigh>Ok, Collins is the new Drogba. Not a pretty average L1 striker. And McG was misunderstood his entire career apart from 2 seasons where he had a good goal scoring record. In 15+. Kinda getting away from my point but I'm not discrediting - just trying to temper the over-the-top comments about Collins, that's all. 

Honestly, I'm just saying that he's getting plenty of chances so let's not make him out to be something his not. That was it. 

A Ford Focus is a bog standard car. He's a Ford Focus of a player. He's 33 and playing in League eff'ing One! It might be harsh but it's true. Yet he's a million times better player than I'd ever be - harsh but true! 

Sensationalism doesn't change the facts. I've not seen anyone saying anything daft about Collins, certainly not over-praising to the same extent he was vilified and overly-criticised before.

How many chances did he get against Cheltenham? 1... and he scored it. So from our most recent example, this argument falls flat on its face. 

Yes, compared to Messi, he's distinctly mediocre as a footballer. But for the level we're at, and what he's giving to the club, he's been a star this season, and deserves the praise he's getting. 

17 minutes ago, Bubbles said:

 

28 minutes ago, Raich Carter said:

Collins and McG have both had their best seasons ever* in this team. The common denominator is the team. Ergo, it's the team, not the player.

2018/19 Collins scored 25 goals at this level for Luton, Didzy's best season was likely 20/21 where he scored 8 in the PL, each goal there is worth 3/4 at this level. 

It's a bizarrely reductionist argument to try and discredit individual achievement. Rather we should be grateful to have had 2 players that are capable of hitting 20+ league goals a season? 

2 minutes ago, Srg said:

It would be, but how far down the list are we if that's the option we are looking at for our striking issues. May as well just have Lennon Wheeldon on the bench or something if that's what it would be for.

That's true. I suspect they may just be 'on the list' rather than active targets. If Collins continues as he is, he'll be first choice for the remainder of the season anyway, and convincing established players to join as backup is tricky, so I get the thinking- if that player in the squad is going to get limited minutes, that player may as well be a randomer and we can loan Brown out to somewhere he'll actually play regularly? 

2 minutes ago, Srg said:

You could look at it that way, but you could equally just wonder why we were so reluctant to give Brown minutes even when the opportunity arose, to then just do this... who's also a kid in the same situation. Would Warne even use him? He didn't Brown. All hypothetical of course, don't expect this is the guy we are even after.

Because not giving minutes to someone else's youngster, whilst ours plays regularly, is surely the best outcome for our academy prospect in that situation isn't it? 

I'm not sure keeping on playing him at this level is necessarily the best thing for his development. If he struggles to make an impact, there's a good chance it could damage his confidence. Getting regular gametime at non-league level, where he can hopefully get the knack of scoring goals in the men's game sounds spot on for where he's at. 

8 minutes ago, Srg said:

Aboh.

Scored a lot of goals in kids football... but so has Dajaune Brown. So what's the point?

Brown playing regular men's football is better for his personal development than warming the bench for us. I get that replacing like-for-like seems pointless from an overall squad point of view, but if a loan is the best move for the player, couldn't it be seen as a progressive thing that we're prioritising his development? Especially given some of the criticism aimed at Warne regarding youth.

5 minutes ago, simmoram1995 said:

 

Young strikers from Norwich and Brighton I’ve heard recently 

plus exploring championship players with few minutes - Gregory , Juke , Joseph at Leeds, and Maja at West Brom are some of the names I’ve heard.

Oxford guy has been allegedly concentrating on summer recruitment. 

 

Josh Maja on loan would be pretty spectacular 

4 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

I didn't think it was that subtle tbh.

It wasn't, I was being polite.

2 hours ago, duncanjwitham said:

I genuinely think if we stuck Bird further forward, put someone more mobile next to Hourihane and just told them their main job was to get the ball into Max Bird's feet as much as possible, we'd look miles better.  If we still want to get it wide and cross it, then we can do that, Bird is more than capable of feeding wide players from there.  We'd be much less susceptible to getting overrun in midfield.  We'd keep the ball better, so less aimless chasing around.  It might take a few extra passes to get the ball into the final third, but the quality will be so much better when we do.

Me manifesting that player being Ebou Adams and us signing him tomorrow:

24 minutes ago, Srg said:

I doubt it, but he would be the best one for us to let leave, that is for sure.

Would definitely prefer to keep Fornah, if it's between the two.

2 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Appears a pleasant chap, so that's one of Warne's main requirements in.

 

You really do have a strange habit of making even innocuous comments seem like you're trying to sneak an underhanded jibe in 😂

5 minutes ago, Caerphilly Ram said:

Jake Rooney - ACL Injury, probably not back this season or very late in the season depending on recovery.

Conor Washington - Ankle injury(?) due back some time in February.

Martyn Waghorn - Calf injury(?), due back some time in February.

Tyrese John-Jules - Hamstring tear, no due back date but sounded like months rather than weeks from what Warne said.

Craig Forsyth - Calf Injury, out for another 3 weeks

Callum Elder - Missed Cheltenham game with a hamstring complaint, Warne said on either Fri or Sat that he’s likely to be out for 10 days so slim chance he’s involved against Charlton but I wouldn’t want us to risk him if it’s hamstring related.

Korey Smith - suffered a knee injury a while back, was pictured in training pics a couple of weeks ago but DET now saying he suffered a setback so is unavailable.

Info taken from here and other bits I remembered;

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/derby-county-injury-latest-charlton-9056800?int_source=amp_continue_reading&int_medium=amp&int_campaign=continue_reading_button#amp-readmore-target

Given the Adams deal could be close, and this could herald the departure of a midfielder. Could Smith's 'setback' be very similar to CBT's ''injury'' before he signed for us? ie. a convenient excuse as to why he's not featuring in matchday squads...

I'll be honest, based on very little- I like the sound of this!

6 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

The thing is, genuine #10s/second strikers/whatever basically don't exist in modern football, unless you're doing something very, very specific (Leicester's title winning team is an example, where they almost gave up on possessing the ball and just sat deep and counterattacked).  There are very few small, pacy strikers any more (Owen, Defoe types) and where they do exist, they get stuck out wide (like Rashford).  And there are very few dribbly attacking midfielders any more (Kinkladze, Kaka types) and again where they do exist, they get stuck out wide (like Grealish).

If you have any desire to have meaningful possession, you have to have 3 central midfielders in some form or other.  That can be a straight 3, some kind of 4231 with the centre of the 3 dropping in, 442 with a wide midfielder tucking in (like Paul Coutts for us) or whatever, but you need bodies in there.  And that mostly means you have to play 1 central striker, and that needs to be someone that can play up front on their own, that you can play off (whether that being a Chris Martin dropping off and linking up, or an Ivan Toney/Callum Wilson style mobile, physical presence you can be more direct to).  You can't play a small/pacy/dribbly guy there on his own, and if you play 2 strikers together, you get overrun in midfield and your #10 doesn't get the ball anyway.

Teams that are playing 4231 mostly play with a creative passer in the middle of the 3 (De Bruyne, Bruno Fernandes etc), not a dribbler.  Teams are using false 9 type things to have strikers dropping into what used to be the number 10 role (Messi has done this, Firmino sort of, Martin for us).  When we used Vydra as a 10, we were basically doing what Leicester did - almost a back 6 sitting very deep, and a front 4 just trying to win us the game on their own.  And we had the textbook counterexample in the previous season, when Vydra really struggled to make an impact in a possession-heavy McClaren team.  We're seeing it happen this season when we play what's basically a 424 (with Barkhuizen, Sibley, TJJ as a 10), where we get overrun and they never get the ball.

I spent the whole of the time writing my comment trying to remember the term 'false 9' so cheers for jogging the memory on that one 😂

7 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

Teams that are playing 4231 mostly play with a creative passer in the middle of the 3 (De Bruyne, Bruno Fernandes etc), not a dribbler.

Good thing Bird can do both then 👀

21 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

That wasn't the point. I don't doubt that Warne wouldn't be allowed to spend £5.74 on a transfer. How could our overheads for the season ahead be any less than now when we have a better budget?

But the real point was "...how come we signed so many good players under Rosenior?" 

I've read the highlighted line 5 or 6 times now and still can't make sense of it...?

Rosenior likely had more wiggle room financially due to the combined wage bill being so low. Now the squad is much fuller, if the business plan is tied to spending limits, more wages on the books means we're far closer to that limit, and therefore have less money to offer as potential wages to new signings. Hence finding it harder to do deals as the business plan is tighter now our overheads are much larger. 

3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

What?

We recruited quality players. We didn't use all the budget.

Because it's likely not a rudimentary budget as you're envisioning it. It'll be 'cannot exceed £X per season', balanced against turnover and revenue margins. Beginning of last season, overheads would be so low, that getting deals done was easy. Now our running costs are substantially higher, working around the agreed plan will be trickier.

Doesn't that seem more likely than ''You can spend £5.74 on transfer fees this season Derby, now go spend it wisely''? 😂

I'm going to be positive and say 2nd. Performances have been faltering recently but we look more able of grinding out results. With players due back from injury, I think we're capable of going on another unbeaten run which will see us move into the automatic spots and hopefully stay there 🤞

Just now, RoyMac5 said:

If our budget and restrictions are now so onerous how come we signed so many good players under Rosenior? We were told our budget wasn't all used last season weren't and this seasons is better weren't we?

Because it'll be tied to loss limits and thresholds. When you have literally 3 senior players to your name, these values won't be high, whereas with a full squad, they will be. Hope this helps 👍

14 minutes ago, TomTom92 said:

Yep agree, it might have been starting off on a negative foot but more people would understand if our restrictions etc were more transparent. 

I'm not asking for unrealistic signings such as JCH etc. but given the pre Jan talk CBT and maybe 1 other if we're lucky is underwhelming.

I agree, think most fans feel similar, and this is where any perceived 'panic' is starting to come from. We all saw how lack of squad depth last season cost us. We're all desperate not to see the same happen again. 

Warne's not innocent in building expectation either as he's mentioned repeatedly recently wanting to get bodies through the door. However I've always got the impression from little things said here and there that he's actually finding it tough to get the players he wants, simply due to the restrictions placed upon him and the club.

It'd be fascinating to see how different our squad would look, and who Warne would have signed, if we didn't have any financial issues; as I suspect this is limiting our transfer dealings far more than many realise. 

34 minutes ago, ramsbottom said:

 What you're suggesting could work but Warne seems reluctant to play an actual midfielder in the No 10 bar Bird earlier in the season, he's much preferred NML or John-Jules (!!??!?!) in behind Collins.  Personally I'd like to see us with a proper 3 in the middle, Bird holding then Hourihane with Thompson/Fornah pushing on but I think that in turn will isolate Collins even more.  We've looked at our best when he has someone in behind him.  Whatever the formation I just want the midfielders to be in midfield, so many times we build up play and both of them are tucked in between the full back & winger and yards from each other, which doesn't help with picking up 2nd balls cause they're nowhere near their positions when the ball breaks into that area.  Cheltenham were picking up our clearances from their long balls so easily and if they had more creative players, they'd have done some real damage...

In fairness, #10s are literally referred to as 'second strikers', and are often dedicated forwards. Our best #10 in recent years was Vydra (who was a textbook trequartista). Firmino played this role in Klopp's gegenpress, and Rooney in later years played this role for Utd as well.

In your system, 'pushing' a midfielder in a 3 would make them more of an #8? So Warne playing a striker as a #10 in his 4231 does make sense, you just seem to prefer a traditional 433. 

1 minute ago, TomTom92 said:

Warne admitting that last years January killed us off. Repeats trick.

But its the fans fault for being entitled. 

I think the big realisation from this window is that we're not as flush as first thought, either through EFL restrictions or our own frugality. The message this time has been very clearly the club cannot put much money into signings. I'm guessing the restrictions we're still under are quite harsh but for some reason we're reluctant to throw the EFL under the bus by saying this explicitly. 

Having tight restrictions that massively limit our transfer dealings is absolutely not Warne's fault.

My main issue is the complete lack of tempering expectations from the club. Why did we ever come out and make comments about having a 'good budget', when in January we'd be having to do weird dealings like doing a permanent transfer as an initial loan? If the restrictions were still tight we should have been subtly warning fans that we likely still weren't able to spend transfer fees- everyone assumed Warne was being coy when he inferred this, turns out he was closer to the truth than we thought.

14 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

Lol. Mr Pedant strikes again. 😄 

Tell me how Warne plays the midfielders we already have.

Asking you to cite your sources to back up your unsubstantiated claims isn't pedantic, it's the bare minimum you need to do when making outlandish claims.

13 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

No, you are the one disagreeing with me - prove me wrong. Warne cares little for midfield and hasn't mentioned signing a holding mid for sure.

Burden of proof is on the one making the claim. Otherwise Hitchens' Razor applies: 'That can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence'.

28 minutes ago, Jubbs said:

Yet here we are with only one credible link to a player that's seemingly out of our price range. YAY.

All that means is the press don't know what's going on, let's not conflate that with nothing happening behind the scenes. Let's just wait and see; if this season's taught us one thing, it's that sometimes those who are quick to criticise often wind up eating their words... 👀

26 minutes ago, Jubbs said:

Very poor window, seemingly not learnt our lessons from last season.