0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.
Quote from: RoversAlias on August 09, 2018, 11:37:44 pmQuote from: dickos1 on August 09, 2018, 07:49:18 pmQuote from: selby on August 09, 2018, 07:41:29 pm 1969, no football manager is cheap, the better value is in the loan market for two reasons for us this season. It gives our new manager more time to assess where we need improving, and there is a better standard of player available for the money, and more choice. All the players who are not in their clubs thoughts and were up for transfer up to 5 o'clock today are now up for loan, plus players who do not make the premiership squads and those without clubs. Dickos, I can see your logic in numbers and quality, but I am hoping, and don't think it will be very hard, to make better use of the players at his disposal, especially positional, and probably tactically. Baudry and Williams were no good to us sat watching.I agree mcann May get more out of the players and that’s still to be seen. But my worry is injuries, if we get the injuries we got last year, mcann will be struggling Why do you keep calling him "mcann"?Sorry, do you not know who I mean?
Quote from: dickos1 on August 09, 2018, 07:49:18 pmQuote from: selby on August 09, 2018, 07:41:29 pm 1969, no football manager is cheap, the better value is in the loan market for two reasons for us this season. It gives our new manager more time to assess where we need improving, and there is a better standard of player available for the money, and more choice. All the players who are not in their clubs thoughts and were up for transfer up to 5 o'clock today are now up for loan, plus players who do not make the premiership squads and those without clubs. Dickos, I can see your logic in numbers and quality, but I am hoping, and don't think it will be very hard, to make better use of the players at his disposal, especially positional, and probably tactically. Baudry and Williams were no good to us sat watching.I agree mcann May get more out of the players and that’s still to be seen. But my worry is injuries, if we get the injuries we got last year, mcann will be struggling Why do you keep calling him "mcann"?
Quote from: selby on August 09, 2018, 07:41:29 pm 1969, no football manager is cheap, the better value is in the loan market for two reasons for us this season. It gives our new manager more time to assess where we need improving, and there is a better standard of player available for the money, and more choice. All the players who are not in their clubs thoughts and were up for transfer up to 5 o'clock today are now up for loan, plus players who do not make the premiership squads and those without clubs. Dickos, I can see your logic in numbers and quality, but I am hoping, and don't think it will be very hard, to make better use of the players at his disposal, especially positional, and probably tactically. Baudry and Williams were no good to us sat watching.I agree mcann May get more out of the players and that’s still to be seen. But my worry is injuries, if we get the injuries we got last year, mcann will be struggling
1969, no football manager is cheap, the better value is in the loan market for two reasons for us this season. It gives our new manager more time to assess where we need improving, and there is a better standard of player available for the money, and more choice. All the players who are not in their clubs thoughts and were up for transfer up to 5 o'clock today are now up for loan, plus players who do not make the premiership squads and those without clubs. Dickos, I can see your logic in numbers and quality, but I am hoping, and don't think it will be very hard, to make better use of the players at his disposal, especially positional, and probably tactically. Baudry and Williams were no good to us sat watching.
You can argue that we actually had/have a decent core squad, but Ferguson was unable to get the best out of them.
Nobody has suggested we’ve lost people who made telling contributions. What has been said is we’ve lost more players than we’ve brought in and last season we were very light in certain positions. If mason gets injured we only have Lund if Andrew gets injured we only have Amos, if Marquis gets injured we’ve nobody. Rate them or not, Williams, Alcock, Garrett, mandeville, were all decent options when players were injured and we’ve not replaced them. Houghton and baudry were two of our most important players and they’ve gone. We haven’t invested the money we’re now saving on the players that left.
No my phone just swaps it to mcann so couldn’t be bothered to keep altering it. I like McCann, and I’ll be happy clapping about him against the doom mongers come November time no doubt. My whole point has been we haven’t really strengthened the squad this summer not that our budget is rubbish. We were told we had more money to spend but we’ve saved a load in wages over the summer and not re-invested it that’s my only point and it would be the same view if Ferguson was still here.
Quote from: dickos1 on August 09, 2018, 11:40:06 pmNobody has suggested we’ve lost people who made telling contributions. What has been said is we’ve lost more players than we’ve brought in and last season we were very light in certain positions. If mason gets injured we only have Lund if Andrew gets injured we only have Amos, if Marquis gets injured we’ve nobody. Rate them or not, Williams, Alcock, Garrett, mandeville, were all decent options when players were injured and we’ve not replaced them. Houghton and baudry were two of our most important players and they’ve gone. We haven’t invested the money we’re now saving on the players that left.Dickos, how many full backs do you expect a league 1 club to have. As you stated we have 4 !!!Personally I think the quality of the squad has improved.Why have you gone all negative? Last season you lambasted anyone you thought was being negative.The football last season was turgid in the main.This season will not be. Where we will finish is open to debate of course, but it will be exciting with plenty of goals at both ends. A top 6 finish is possible but we need to match the numbers in the opposition midfield if we are to achieve our goal. McCann will utilise the loan market when he needs to. I for one am excited about the ride ahead. It might take a month or two to get it right but there is huge potential with this squad. Let’s see if McCann can get much more from it than DF did.I think he will.3-0 on Saturday is my prediction.
....Baudry, Williams, Evina, Alcock, all gone and we’ve replaced those with Crawford and Anderson. Are you attempting to tell me Crawford and Anderson are on more than baudry, Williams, evina, Alcock?Not to mention the loan departures of mandeville, Garrett, and the loss of houghtons wage contribution. It’s obvious the wage bill has decreased I’m not sticking to any line
Being a solid replacement for injuries and suspensions doesn’t necessarily mean they’ve made a telling contribution does it? I think you’re constantly missing the point either consciously or not. Last season we struggled with injuries, massively at times. Yet we’ve let more players go than we’ve recruited. Therefore when injuries strike again we’re going to be in a worse scenario than last year. Baudry, Williams, Evina, Alcock, all gone and we’ve replaced those with Crawford and Anderson. Are you attempting to tell me Crawford and Anderson are on more than baudry, Williams, evina, Alcock?Not to mention the loan departures of mandeville, Garrett, and the loss of houghtons wage contribution. It’s obvious the wage bill has decreased I’m not sticking to any line
Quote from: dickos1 on August 10, 2018, 12:19:12 am....Baudry, Williams, Evina, Alcock, all gone and we’ve replaced those with Crawford and Anderson. Are you attempting to tell me Crawford and Anderson are on more than baudry, Williams, evina, Alcock?Not to mention the loan departures of mandeville, Garrett, and the loss of houghtons wage contribution. It’s obvious the wage bill has decreased I’m not sticking to any line Keep to the facts."Crawford and Anderson." and Taylor and Watters (development).We also had loans out last season - check this little lot out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017%E2%80%9318_Doncaster_Rovers_F.C._season#Loans_outIt really is 2 + 2 = -5 with you this season
Quote from: dickos1 on August 10, 2018, 12:19:12 amBeing a solid replacement for injuries and suspensions doesn’t necessarily mean they’ve made a telling contribution does it? I think you’re constantly missing the point either consciously or not. Last season we struggled with injuries, massively at times. Yet we’ve let more players go than we’ve recruited. Therefore when injuries strike again we’re going to be in a worse scenario than last year. Baudry, Williams, Evina, Alcock, all gone and we’ve replaced those with Crawford and Anderson. Are you attempting to tell me Crawford and Anderson are on more than baudry, Williams, evina, Alcock?Not to mention the loan departures of mandeville, Garrett, and the loss of houghtons wage contribution. It’s obvious the wage bill has decreased I’m not sticking to any line Exactly! Not a single one of them made a telling contribution, therefore we haven't really lost anything, unless you wish to move the goal posts and talk about solid replacements! You just keep muddying the waters so as to try and prove a point.And as I keep repeating, and you keep ignoring, the players you mentioned were not on above average salaries at the club (apart from one). Evina, who you've included a few times, had his wages covered by Crawley as a loanee, and yet in your column you claim the savings in loaning out Mandeville and Garrett. You can't have it both ways.
Quote from: silent majority on August 10, 2018, 07:21:47 amQuote from: dickos1 on August 10, 2018, 12:19:12 amBeing a solid replacement for injuries and suspensions doesn’t necessarily mean they’ve made a telling contribution does it? I think you’re constantly missing the point either consciously or not. Last season we struggled with injuries, massively at times. Yet we’ve let more players go than we’ve recruited. Therefore when injuries strike again we’re going to be in a worse scenario than last year. Baudry, Williams, Evina, Alcock, all gone and we’ve replaced those with Crawford and Anderson. Are you attempting to tell me Crawford and Anderson are on more than baudry, Williams, evina, Alcock?Not to mention the loan departures of mandeville, Garrett, and the loss of houghtons wage contribution. It’s obvious the wage bill has decreased I’m not sticking to any line Exactly! Not a single one of them made a telling contribution, therefore we haven't really lost anything, unless you wish to move the goal posts and talk about solid replacements! You just keep muddying the waters so as to try and prove a point.And as I keep repeating, and you keep ignoring, the players you mentioned were not on above average salaries at the club (apart from one). Evina, who you've included a few times, had his wages covered by Crawley as a loanee, and yet in your column you claim the savings in loaning out Mandeville and Garrett. You can't have it both ways.Move the goal posts? As I said in my original post nobody has suggested we’ve lost players that made a telling contribution although thinking about it, how you can attempt to say baudry didn’t make a telling contribution is baffling. Look at the results when he played and the results when he didn’t. The squad is weaker surely a club that wants to progress should be getting stronger each year, yet we are starting this season with a weaker squad than we had last season. The wage bill has been reduced.Yet you keep trying to tell everyone it hasn’t!I’ve never said they were on above average wages but if we lose 4/5 players on average wages and 1 player on above average and replace them with 3 players on an average wage then we’ve a lot of money left over haven’t we which hasn’t been re-invested. I’m pretty sure we would have still been paying some of evinas wages and I’m pretty sure we were paying some of houghtons and kongolas so yes it is both ways.
Quote from: dickos1 on August 10, 2018, 08:15:23 amQuote from: silent majority on August 10, 2018, 07:21:47 amQuote from: dickos1 on August 10, 2018, 12:19:12 amBeing a solid replacement for injuries and suspensions doesn’t necessarily mean they’ve made a telling contribution does it? I think you’re constantly missing the point either consciously or not. Last season we struggled with injuries, massively at times. Yet we’ve let more players go than we’ve recruited. Therefore when injuries strike again we’re going to be in a worse scenario than last year. Baudry, Williams, Evina, Alcock, all gone and we’ve replaced those with Crawford and Anderson. Are you attempting to tell me Crawford and Anderson are on more than baudry, Williams, evina, Alcock?Not to mention the loan departures of mandeville, Garrett, and the loss of houghtons wage contribution. It’s obvious the wage bill has decreased I’m not sticking to any line Exactly! Not a single one of them made a telling contribution, therefore we haven't really lost anything, unless you wish to move the goal posts and talk about solid replacements! You just keep muddying the waters so as to try and prove a point.And as I keep repeating, and you keep ignoring, the players you mentioned were not on above average salaries at the club (apart from one). Evina, who you've included a few times, had his wages covered by Crawley as a loanee, and yet in your column you claim the savings in loaning out Mandeville and Garrett. You can't have it both ways.Move the goal posts? As I said in my original post nobody has suggested we’ve lost players that made a telling contribution although thinking about it, how you can attempt to say baudry didn’t make a telling contribution is baffling. Look at the results when he played and the results when he didn’t. The squad is weaker surely a club that wants to progress should be getting stronger each year, yet we are starting this season with a weaker squad than we had last season. The wage bill has been reduced.Yet you keep trying to tell everyone it hasn’t!I’ve never said they were on above average wages but if we lose 4/5 players on average wages and 1 player on above average and replace them with 3 players on an average wage then we’ve a lot of money left over haven’t we which hasn’t been re-invested. I’m pretty sure we would have still been paying some of evinas wages and I’m pretty sure we were paying some of houghtons and kongolas so yes it is both ways. I asked for somebody to tell me who we had lost, from last season, who had made a telling contribution. You responded by saying we were down on numbers and listed several players who you claim were solid replacements. In other words it's a numbers game with you? But then again it isn't because you keep telling everyone we have a weaker squad than a year ago. So it's not numbers then?Williams, Alcock, Garrett and Mandeville were not decent options, you can spin it as often as you like, but they weren't, otherwise they would still be here.
Quote from: silent majority on August 10, 2018, 08:58:36 amQuote from: dickos1 on August 10, 2018, 08:15:23 amQuote from: silent majority on August 10, 2018, 07:21:47 amQuote from: dickos1 on August 10, 2018, 12:19:12 amBeing a solid replacement for injuries and suspensions doesn’t necessarily mean they’ve made a telling contribution does it? I think you’re constantly missing the point either consciously or not. Last season we struggled with injuries, massively at times. Yet we’ve let more players go than we’ve recruited. Therefore when injuries strike again we’re going to be in a worse scenario than last year. Baudry, Williams, Evina, Alcock, all gone and we’ve replaced those with Crawford and Anderson. Are you attempting to tell me Crawford and Anderson are on more than baudry, Williams, evina, Alcock?Not to mention the loan departures of mandeville, Garrett, and the loss of houghtons wage contribution. It’s obvious the wage bill has decreased I’m not sticking to any line Exactly! Not a single one of them made a telling contribution, therefore we haven't really lost anything, unless you wish to move the goal posts and talk about solid replacements! You just keep muddying the waters so as to try and prove a point.And as I keep repeating, and you keep ignoring, the players you mentioned were not on above average salaries at the club (apart from one). Evina, who you've included a few times, had his wages covered by Crawley as a loanee, and yet in your column you claim the savings in loaning out Mandeville and Garrett. You can't have it both ways.Move the goal posts? As I said in my original post nobody has suggested we’ve lost players that made a telling contribution although thinking about it, how you can attempt to say baudry didn’t make a telling contribution is baffling. Look at the results when he played and the results when he didn’t. The squad is weaker surely a club that wants to progress should be getting stronger each year, yet we are starting this season with a weaker squad than we had last season. The wage bill has been reduced.Yet you keep trying to tell everyone it hasn’t!I’ve never said they were on above average wages but if we lose 4/5 players on average wages and 1 player on above average and replace them with 3 players on an average wage then we’ve a lot of money left over haven’t we which hasn’t been re-invested. I’m pretty sure we would have still been paying some of evinas wages and I’m pretty sure we were paying some of houghtons and kongolas so yes it is both ways. I asked for somebody to tell me who we had lost, from last season, who had made a telling contribution. You responded by saying we were down on numbers and listed several players who you claim were solid replacements. In other words it's a numbers game with you? But then again it isn't because you keep telling everyone we have a weaker squad than a year ago. So it's not numbers then?Williams, Alcock, Garrett and Mandeville were not decent options, you can spin it as often as you like, but they weren't, otherwise they would still be here.If we’re down on numbers then the squad overall is weaker. That’s self explanatory. It’s not just me who’s pointing out the fact we haven’t re-invested the money we’re saving from last season. Some of the most respected posters on here such as Jonathon, wing commander have also had the same thoughts regarding the lack ofReplacements in certain positions but for some reason you just keep coming at me. Just because players have left it doesn’t mean they werent good cover for us last season.
Copps signed a new contract on reduced terms the others were all under contract and I’m not sure when they get older it goes up each year it’s more likely to go down.
Quote from: dickos1 on August 10, 2018, 12:05:46 pmCopps signed a new contract on reduced terms the others were all under contract and I’m not sure when they get older it goes up each year it’s more likely to go down. Your doing it again! Since when does your opinion become a fact?The difference between you and the posters you mention is that they read what I write and then adjust their position. Unfortunately with you the determination to argue your point means that you change your position on a continuous basis and ignore valid reasons that differ with your view. You also post stuff as fact because it suits you to do so, despite having no proof or knowledge that it's right to do so.You argue budgets, salaries and reasons for managers leaving when you have absolutely nothing to base that upon apart from your opinion. Despite me offering the right version you continue to argue, there's no debate with you, just your strongly held view which gets repeated over and over.
" we’re down on numbers then the squad overall is weaker. That’s self explanatory."How is that true? A squad can be filled with dross and players who don't get a game, then those can be shipped out for better players but you don't have to replace them all like for like.I posted last week in one thread directly comparing our departures to our incomings in terms of perceived quality and it worked out that we were maybe only one down on last season's squad. I'm not doing it again but when you look at our squad overall it is at least as strong if not stronger than last year on the face of it. Signing loads of new players doesn't always equate to a better team, it doesn't work that way.