Jump to content

Is this a top 6 team/squad


Archied

Top 6 team / squad  

219 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, cheron85 said:

...But I have to admit I've turned on Roos a little now - His complete inability to judge the ball in the air is horrific and costly - He's about 3 inches taller than most other players and with his reach he should be able to deal with every cross but his judgement is poor - Great shot stopper, great distribution, poor decision making - And I think he's actively got worse this season than last.

I agree. I have never rated Roos, well before Wembley! But he's all part of the current keepers as sweepers viewpoint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply
6 minutes ago, cheron85 said:

Usually I agree with most of your positions but this one we're gonna have to disagree on

We haven't had a consistent good DM since Eustace - With the breaking of Thorne we've been crying out to address that for years and someone has finally done it with (hopefully) a long term solution

Mate I wasn't trying to imply that it was a bad thing we spent that money on Bielik, No. I am happy with that.

What my main point was is that we are lacking the profilic striker and to get that we need to spend money.

5m on Waghorn was a waste in my opinion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

You were the one making a point of some fans holding a grudge - you didn't make any allowance for their other reasons. You don't want to allow other fans opinions to be valid, you are the one being condescending matey.

Unlesss I had typed "the only reason some people are against Cocu is because of the Forest team selection" then I've made every allowance for other reasons.

It's not my job to make other people's arguments for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Squid said:

Mate I wasn't trying to imply that it was a bad thing we spent that money on Bielik, No. I am happy with that.

What my main point was is that we are lacking the profilic striker and to get that we need to spend money.

5m on Waghorn was a waste in my opinion

I disagree with that too ? 

He's not an out and out striker (IMO) but provides something across every part of an attacking 3 (in the 4-3-3 formation we played last year) - He's your classic utility striker 

I don't think he's the natural predator that Marriott is or the striker Martin is but give him 3 chances a game and he'll take 1 - I think Martin and Marriott are both goal every 2 chances players - But when was the last time we gave any of them more than 1 chance a game? 

There are goals in Martin, Marriott, Waggers and Lawrence - They also all provide something a bit different - I think we're just not giving them enough chances

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Coconut said:

What exactly is it about the piss poor performances & record under Lampard when he didn't have Mason Mount available (but did have Keogh, Tomori, Wilson, Bryson, Huddlestone, Johnson...) that makes you think he'd be doing a better job with the current squad

Maybe it's the fact that even without those players, we still had an identity about us and looked like we knew what we were doing. That is why I gave the Southampton home game as an example. No mount, no Wilson. Our attack compromised of Holmes, Lawrence and Marriott. Exactly the same as it is now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Rammy03 said:

Maybe it's the fact that even without those players, we still had an identity about us and looked like we knew what we were doing. That is why I gave the Southampton home game as an example. No mount, no Wilson. Our attack compromised of Holmes, Lawrence and Marriott. Exactly the same as it is now.

It also had Keogh & Tomori in defence so we could pass it out from the back, hold a high line without worrying about leaving space in behind and allowed us to push up onto the opposition more.

It also had a Jack Marriott who was fit enough to have started 14 of our previous 16 matches, That's not 'exactly the same as it is now', not by a long shot.

Your romanticised view of even the bad games under Lampard is a fantasy.

There were plenty of games where we looked completely toothless, void of ideas, incapable of putting three passes together, completely reliant on Harry Wilson to provide a spark. That isn't the sign of a team who 'always knew what they were trying to do'.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Coconut said:

It also had Keogh & Tomori in defence so we could pass it out from the back, hold a high line without worrying about leaving space in behind and allowed us to push up onto the opposition more.

It also had a Jack Marriott who was fit enough to have started 14 of our previous 16 matches, That's not 'exactly the same as it is now', not by a long shot.

Your romanticised view of even the bad games under Lampard is a fantasy.

There were plenty of games where we looked completely toothless, void of ideas, incapable of putting three passes together, completely reliant on Harry Wilson to provide a spark. That isn't the sign of a team who 'always knew what they were trying to do'.

Hold a high line? You make it sound like we were pressing Southampton into their own half. While I agree that there were plenty of games where we looked toothless, those mainly came away from home. Now that sort of form is emerging in our home games. It's becoming permanent. We lack identity. We can't win a game of football. Your willingness to accept this dross is the worry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say Marriott is a top 6 player, with the right support. Last season he had it with Mount and Wilson. He should have played more, I think that's mostly agreed. Scored 3 playoff goals when it mattered. But he is the sort of striker - probably like most - that thrive on attacking play and talent around him.

In a team like WBA, Fulham or even Bristol I think he'd be banging them in this season.

He seems a bit out of favour and fitness but I think he's one to keep on with as his natural finishing is the best I've seen at the club for a long time.

I agree with comments that Bogle and Bielek are good enough, and i would personally add Lawrence to the list, albeit very inconsistent - but he is a matchwinner.

4 isnt enough. Last year we had 3-4 more, I don't need to name...

I expect even relegated teams have 2 or 3 decent top 6 players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, PhilGeeWasMyIdol said:

I would say Marriott is a top 6 player, with the right support. Last season he had it with Mount and Wilson. He should have played more, I think that's mostly agreed. Scored 3 playoff goals when it mattered. But he is the sort of striker - probably like most - that thrive on attacking play and talent around him.

Can't agree. Marriott has 14 in 61 for us, hardly a brilliant goal scoring record for a top 6 player. He's overrated due to scoring a few in the playoffs, his all round play isn't brilliant and outside of purple patches he's not contributed a whole lot. Add in his inability to be fit, and he's a mid table level Championship player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...