Next signing almost over the line....Happy about this?

[Holmowl]

15 minutes ago, Bluesteel. said:

Even if you’re moving Wilks and Windass into midfield then you’re dropping Byers or another to accommodate Bannan. If Windass or Wilks plays behind a lone striker then one of smith or Gregory miss out. May not matter as much with 5 subs but there are players there who will want a lot of game time and it will take some management.

Good point. Yes it will take some managing.

 

Smith played almost every minute for last season’s automatic teams.

 

Gregory started every game for us apart from his injury spell.

 

How do you fit Gregory, Smith and Windass into the Xl? You don’t. Not unless you move last year’s Player of the Season.

 

Interesting.

[TrickyTrev]

8 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

Good point. Yes it will take some managing.

 

Smith played almost every minute for last season’s automatic teams.

 

Gregory started every game for us apart from his injury spell.

 

How do you fit Gregory, Smith and Windass into the Xl? You don’t. Not unless you move last year’s Player of the Season.

 

Interesting.

It would be crazy to move Bannan this season to accommodate the extra forwards we are signing.

 

If it ain’t broken, don’t fix it.

 

 

[shandypants]

Ridiculously, in my opinion,  five subs are allowed this season; I believe this new rule will change the game strategy for every team this coming campaign. There will be plenty enough room for Gregory, Smith and Windass. 

[shandypants]

14 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

Good point. Yes it will take some managing.

 

Smith played almost every minute for last season’s automatic teams.

 

Gregory started every game for us apart from his injury spell.

 

How do you fit Gregory, Smith and Windass into the Xl? You don’t. Not unless you move last year’s Player of the Season.

 

Interesting.

I was quoting this in the above post. 

Edited June 26, 2022 by shandypants

[Ray Von shabba]

2 hours ago, Tewkesbury said:

Pato will still play, maybe somewhere else, hopefully at RWB.

Sow will leave.

 

But do you think that Windass and Gregory will be happy as 3rd and 4th choice?

TBH I wouldn't let Patterson go because he can play in many positions and will always be an asset on the bench.

If he'll be happy with that is another matter.

[Tewkesbury]

2 minutes ago, Ray Von shabba said:

TBH I wouldn't let Patterson go because he can play in many positions and will always be an asset on the bench.

If he'll be happy with that is another matter.

He considers himself a better defender than striker.

 

He played on the right a lot early on and was immense v Sunderland at RWB.

 

I'd like to see him at RB or RWB for an extended run.

 

He was as good as if not better in most positions than the people he replaced last season getting thrown in a different position every week, imagine what he could do in a fixed position, with his training geared to that position?

[Southie_Owl]

2 hours ago, Tewkesbury said:

 

But do you think that Windass and Gregory will be happy as 3rd and 4th choice?

Out of interest what players do you think would be happy to be 3rd and 4th choice at a football club?

 

Last season when Gregory (and Windass) were injured we had to call upon Paterson, Sow or Kamberi to play up front and they weren’t that great.  Having at least 4 decent strikers is needed to be title contenders in my opinion.

 

Last season Liverpool had Salah, Mane, Firmino, Jota, Luis Diaz, Origi, Minamino competing for a starting place in their side.  Not sure the Liverpool fans were worried about those players feelings about being left out - or having too many forwards.  When you are title chasers you need a big squad to help rest and rotate players and cover for injuries or suspensions.  

[CircleSeven]

31 minutes ago, shandypants said:

Ridiculously, in my opinion,  five subs are allowed this season; I believe this new rule will change the game strategy for every team this coming campaign. There will be plenty enough room for Gregory, Smith and Windass. 

This . Five subs means 15 outfield players each match. It’s going to be a totally different way of managing games. Plus the chance of all strikers remaining injury free is infinitesimal. I’d be way more worried if we had less strikers that’s for sure…

[CircleSeven]

19 minutes ago, Tewkesbury said:

He considers himself a better defender than striker.

 

He played on the right a lot early on and was immense v Sunderland at RWB.

 

I'd like to see him at RB or RWB for an extended run.

 

He was as good as if not better in most positions than the people he replaced last season getting thrown in a different position every week, imagine what he could do in a fixed position, with his training geared to that position?

Paterson is a genuine utility player. They are pretty scarce and always worth having on the books. For me I’d use him in defence, maybe as a CB, and then move him around to other positions if the need arises. 

[daleblue]

59 minutes ago, TrickyTrev said:

Given the system we play and the fact we don’t play with wingers or wide attackers we have the 6 that you have listed.

 

We could get rid of Paterson and Sow but that’s easier said than done and Paterson will still be on a Championship contract.

 

To me this signals an intent by Moore to “tinker” with the forward line on a regular basis and it’s my belief that this will be to the detriment of the club.

 

Regular changes to the attack won’t allow a decent partnership to develop and it’ll interfere with any attempt to create continuity, personally I’d like to see 2 forwards given a run of 10 to 12 games at the start of the season to see how the partnership develops. Preferably that would be Windass and Gregory, I look back at that goal at Oxford last season and there’s some really potential in that partnership but it needs to develop.

 

After our defeat to Huddersfield in the playoffs when talking about the number of strikers we had at the club, it was Andy Hinchcliffe who said ‘sometimes less is more’.

 

Wasn't it that Shakespeare bloke who said that, credit to Andy though if it wasn't.

[Southie_Owl]

Imagine being an opposition fan next season 

 

“Good news, Gregory got a knock in training so is being rested for todays game”

 

”Excellent, who they playing instead that donkey Paterson or Sow?”

 

Checks team sheet..  “Michael Smith”

 

”oh, balls”.  

[Tewkesbury]

32 minutes ago, Southie_Owl said:

Out of interest what players do you think would be happy to be 3rd and 4th choice at a football club?

 

Last season when Gregory (and Windass) were injured we had to call upon Paterson, Sow or Kamberi to play up front and they weren’t that great.  Having at least 4 decent strikers is needed to be title contenders in my opinion.

 

Last season Liverpool had Salah, Mane, Firmino, Jota, Luis Diaz, Origi, Minamino competing for a starting place in their side.  Not sure the Liverpool fans were worried about those players feelings about being left out - or having too many forwards.  When you are title chasers you need a big squad to help rest and rotate players and cover for injuries or suspensions.  

We used the other strikers sparingly, so none could get enough gametime to hit form. The only striker who got enough was Gregory.

 

Kamberi was 4 in 4 for starts, got dropped as soon as he didn't score.

Sow, 2 in 2, got dropped as soon as he didn't score.

Pato just got moved from pillar to post.

We also won 7 of the 8 games when Gregory was injured, so they didn't do too badly.

 

People forget, Gregory scored a quarter of his goals on the last 2 games, before that, after 29 starts he had the same amount of open play goals as Barry Bannan. He scored 2 in his first 8 games.  It took him all season and a formation change to hit form. He's not going to get that with the other 3 fit 

 

How many would they have scored, given the chance to play?

How many would he have scored, playing 60 minutes every other game like they did?

We'll never know.

 

As for Klopp and Liverpool, they're playing in at the top level in 4 competitions, you can't get any higher.

3rd and 4th at Liverpool is better than 1 and 2 at 99% of clubs.

 

We didn't get past the first knockout round in any competition and 47 teams finished higher. There are better options than us if you want to play.

[Barnsleyowl1996]

Not sure bannan would be as effective in a 2 . Over the last year we’ve seen him so much better now he’s pushed forward .

 

if we sign a left back we can swap between 4-3-3 4-2-3-1 and 3-5-2 

as it stands my team in the 3-5-2 would be

 

stockdale 

 

Iorfa 

henegan

ihiekiwe 

 

hunt

vaulks

byers

bannan

johnson

 

smith

gregory 

 

For the other formation as it stands

 

stockdale

 

hunt

iorfa

ihkikiwe 

palmer 

 

vaulks

byers

 

wilks

bannan

windass

 

smith 

 

It’s difficult with the attackers whether we want the 2 proper strikers or 1 of then

with a wilks / windass for that bit of pace / creativity. Think we will be flexible depending on team / situation. Obviously as we all now know the 5 sub rule will be massive . 

[CircleSeven]

3 minutes ago, Barnsleyowl1996 said:

Not sure bannan would be as effective in a 2 . Over the last year we’ve seen him so much better now he’s pushed forward .

 

if we sign a left back we can swap between 4-3-3 4-2-3-1 and 3-5-2 

as it stands my team in the 3-5-2 would be

 

stockdale 

 

Iorfa 

henegan

ihiekiwe 

 

hunt

vaulks

byers

bannan

johnson

 

smith

gregory 

 

For the other formation as it stands

 

stockdale

 

hunt

iorfa

ihkikiwe 

palmer 

 

vaulks

byers

 

wilks

bannan

windass

 

smith 

 

It’s difficult with the attackers whether we want the 2 proper strikers or 1 of then

with a wilks / windass for that bit of pace / creativity. Think we will be flexible depending on team / situation. Obviously as we all now know the 5 sub rule will be massive . 

With the five subs rule you could swap between those formations mid game, and I strongly suspect that’s what DM has in mind…

[Baldrick]

Let’s be honest, with our injury record it’s highly likely we’ll only have 2 strikers fit at any one time

[fpowl]

1 hour ago, Tewkesbury said:

He considers himself a better defender than striker.

 

He played on the right a lot early on and was immense v Sunderland at RWB.

 

I'd like to see him at RB or RWB for an extended run.

 

He was as good as if not better in most positions than the people he replaced last season getting thrown in a different position every week, imagine what he could do in a fixed position, with his training geared to that position?

Would you drop hunt from RB or RWB so  Patterson could get this extended run? 

[Tewkesbury]

4 minutes ago, fpowl said:

Would you drop hunt from RB or RWB so  Patterson could get this extended run? 

Absolutely.

 

Hunt is massively overrated compared to his contribution.

[Tewkesbury]

44 minutes ago, CircleSeven said:

Paterson is a genuine utility player. They are pretty scarce and always worth having on the books. For me I’d use him in defence, maybe as a CB, and then move him around to other positions if the need arises. 

But if we don't need him as a utility player, why not give him a pop at a fixed position.

 

If anyone has earned a place, it's him.

[Barnsleyowl1996]

13 minutes ago, CircleSeven said:

With the five subs rule you could swap between those formations mid game, and I strongly suspect that’s what DM has in mind…

Yes exactly pal . I see that happening. 
 

[paulrs]

Take the point about building partnerships but the combination of 5 subs plus our annual injury issues are going to motivate the manager to give himself more options.

 

The sub rule might be the making of some managers and the death of others. They’re all human and some around bound to get impatient and tinker too early if things aren’t working… others will use it to their advantage… some will use them to kill time. 
 

This new rule could help us a lot with our bigger squad but only if Moore doesn’t get dragged into too much in-game tinkering