VulcanRam Posted August 14, 2016 Share Posted August 14, 2016 17 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: We reached two play offs, both could have gone either way so to say it's not good enough for promotion is wrong in my opinion. Also the fact that they made the football club a good place to be around, a good thing to invest in and more attractive for supporters would seem to indicate they were not a failure. Does losing at Wembley last year also mean Forestieri is not good enough for a team wanting promotion? By all means give Pearson a chance to build his own team, no problem there but don't go about it the way it looks like he is going to ie just ripping everything up and starting again. For one thing that will lead to a lot of the players that will be moved on losing a lot of value. That's fair enough mate, but when all is said and done, over 46 or 49 games you're promoted or you're not. And we haven't been, so my opinion is it's not been good enough to achieve that aim, whether it's by several games or several minutes. Funnily enough on your second point, I felt towards the end of the GSE time, the football club was exactly as you describe, not so much since Mel took over. That's no criticism of him by the way, he's invested millions and turned the club into a commercial beast, but something to me (I believe) has led to a little disconnect with the supporters. That might just be me though! I think the problem of ripping it up and starting again is that if he wants to do what he wants to do, its looking increasingly like he doesn't have a choice. He can't think that Brighton was great or yesterday was acceptable. It would be great if the players could simply adapt, and he did what McClaren did with Clough's squad but went one further. But that doesn't seem the case so far, so he may have backed himself into a corner. Still early days though. One more point, people talk about a tweak or an overhaul of the squad, as if there is nothing in between. What in people's opinions be of, say, two out two in during this window? Which category does that fall into? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
utisbug Posted August 14, 2016 Author Share Posted August 14, 2016 11 hours ago, Ninos said: 4-3-3. The group that we put out but don't stick with. 1-2 real impact players but sell first. One that plays to our midfield strength and encourages direct attacking play. Again, just answer the question, pal. Which player's aren't capable of doing it? Who would you buy to replace them? (I don't know who this fella "2 impact players" is) Our midfields strengths are to encourage direct attacking play....? George Thorne. Will Hughes. Jeff Hendrick. Direct football? You don't like 4-4-3, clearly (I'm still lost for where you discovered that I "love" that formation) nonetheless, its definitely the best line up for our side in my opinion, so what formation should we be playing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bessie1 Posted August 14, 2016 Share Posted August 14, 2016 "What's most important is the fight in the dog, not the dog in the fight". Of course, of course, tactics, formation, players playing where they're best - all important, all worth debating. But what concerns me most is for some months now our dog has (often) lacked fight. We get off our seats at an Idiakez free-kick, a mazy run by Commons - but also by a great tackle by Hughes (remember them) or a goal-saving block by anyone of our players. This shows team spirit, passion. Fans appreciate that IMO just as much as the silky skills. And the team spirit, the passion - it's not much on display at the moment. Regular posters might know why - but I certainly don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajstrawb Posted August 14, 2016 Share Posted August 14, 2016 I almost don't want it to work without Hughes in the side. The fact that he's not playing is criminal. But that being said, it is still early days and we are yet to see the big plan unfold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted August 14, 2016 Share Posted August 14, 2016 5 minutes ago, dajstrawb said: I almost don't want it to work without Hughes in the side. The fact that he's not playing is criminal. But that being said, it is still early days and we are yet to see the big plan unfold If he is not going to be the first name on the teamsheet we should sell him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajstrawb Posted August 14, 2016 Share Posted August 14, 2016 26 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: If he is not going to be the first name on the teamsheet we should sell him. Yeah I tend to agree. If we're not building the team around him there's almost no point him being there. Seeing his name on the bench when the teamsheet comes out hurts my eyes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajstrawb Posted August 14, 2016 Share Posted August 14, 2016 Just realised, you were being sarcastic there weren't you ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted August 14, 2016 Share Posted August 14, 2016 11 minutes ago, dajstrawb said: Just realised, you were being sarcastic there weren't you ? No I was being serious. If FFP is even a slight concern why would you have a £10m + player sat on your bench? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.