Jump to content

5 years- any constant trends?


TuffLuff

Recommended Posts

As there seems to be quite a bit of ‘having your cake and eating it’ on certain threads over the last few days I thought it might be an idea of swinging debate into something more constructive/thoughtful.

Ive seen a lot of people willing to use the term bottlers but little into why they think its actually occurring. So, is there anything we are doing season after season you think is wrong? 

Heres a few to get started:

Attitude of players/fans- Now, I tried to be careful with my wording here but I’ve been working outside and I’m cold so bugger it. What I’m trying to say is the feeling that we deserve to win games. That kinda ‘oh we will beat so and so Saturday and get back on track’ or sometimes that mood walking to Pride Park that feels blasé, like the game doesn’t matter as it’s not the crunch time of a season. Then you see that out on the pitch too, that feeling of not needing to push out of second gear, which has hung around since Mac’s second season. There’s been a feeling of that since we got near the top this year unfortunately and its hung around for a few seasons. We have good players, a line up of players who should be competing at the top, but you need to earn the right to be there. I guess that lack of killer instinct applies here.

Manager Pragmatism- This is something that applies to all the managers we’ve had I think, but a lack of seeing a problem/or willing to change something before it’s too late. I think Rowett and Mclaren (2nd season onwards) especially can both be criticised for not having a different option to change games when necessary which has caused us to drop points, essentially not having plan b’s. If your plan A has flaws, your good run will only last a limited amount of time. Which leads me nicely too...

An overall lack of a balanced 11 - Now this isn’t such a constant trend per se, but something I notice in good runs over ‘not so good’ runs. Last season we certainly struggled for this and possibly under the Clement/Wassell season. But to me, balanced means you don’t have two players trying to run into one position, everyone has something to contibute/a bit different and I suppose everyone has their little area of the pitch that is ‘theirs’. When all is said and done, that is what was so good in that first season under Mac 1. Everyone had a clear role and I think in more recent seasons that this has become more evidently lacking. For example, there is little doubt in my mind the reason Lawrence got the plaudits on Saturday was because Palmer does a completely different job to Vydra and that suited him more. Anyway ive rambled (and ive maybe not got my point over very well), speaking of Vydra one last point to make.

Our reliance on one player- I’ll try and make this brief. Basically, last year = Ince. This year = Vydra. We’ve set up teams that suit one players attributes rather than others and we suffer for it. Not a knock on either player, but I just don’t think it makes a successful side. Again, this falls back into the balance point but you need to be getting the best out of every cog rather than just one. On this point, people will also look at the Mac reliance on Martin maybe and say it’s the same, but I’d argue that side had as much importance based in the Eustace/Thorne position (hence why the injuries we suffered macs second season we so disasterous). Other played off that spine and contributed massively to why it’s when that system has worked we have got our best results. Anyway this isn’t a thread for ‘pro’ anything, there isn’t a right or wrong way of playing.

Theres probably be others, but I just thought it might be a more interesting debate than the Rowett vs Mclaren rubbish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 6
  • Created
  • Last Reply

First off I'd say you are dead right about Thorne/Eustace. They were the engine of that team. I maintain though, that despite the fact that in top gear it was great to watch and I loved it with a capital L .. It was frail. 

I am enjoying this team at least as much because it is more flexible .. It's still not right balance or contribution wise but an empty hole can be more easily filled and the wheels go round reasonably well

I think the "expectation" thing is true .. We do expect. If you think In terms of support, facilities and freedom from debt, add in half decent history/pedigree and we aren't quite where we might reasonably hope to be. .. Where's that ? .. I think as a club we wouldn't be punching above our weight as a mid table Prem team. Dreaming of a good cup run and an outside chance of Europe. 

I think GR can get the balance right but so much depends on the time he is given, the huge gap in money between Prem and championship and Mel's willingness to keep pumping money in. If it was a question of designing and building a house, taking your time, getting it right with no rush while you live with your mate then it wouldn't be a problem. But so much is finance driven. I guess Mel is spending between 1 and 2 million every month just to keep us on an even keel. He isn't a charity and no matter how much he loves Derby he needs us to be in the Prem, he needs a return and like us is looking for an instant fix - far from easy.

On the one player issue ... I don't think we do depend on Vydra to quite the degree you or the numbers suggest. Palmer slotted in nicely and Lawrence or Weiman could also, without sending the gearbox into a frenzy.... let's be straight .. Our wide men are not cntributing anything like enough and the likes of George and Bradders haven't scored as much as they should .. That isn't set up .. They have had shots and chances and been in good positions but they are not putting them away regularly enough. 

Dunno really .. Bit of a ramble from me too but I like your musing and thoughtfulness :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...