Entertainment after a hard week in work.

[Londonlisa2001]

I’d be very sure that our ownership have long term plans, that includes the time to be bedding in players. The league is very different to recent years and we have teams in there that are worth about £200m. £15m spend in a single window is peanuts comparison to other teams in the league and what their players have been signed for. Southampton had ONE player on the bench that they spent that on, nearly every one of their players cost that. Wrexham spent £10m on Broadhead, Birmingham spent £10m on Kyogo, Ipswich spent £17m on Egeli. You have to spend just to stay with the rest of the league. All the above are no more than 2 points above us. It’s a work in progress, let’s keep supporting them. Being negative isn’t going to help them.

I’m sure this argument is one which works on the ownership. Luckily for some.

But it is missing the point of people’s frustration.

Irrespective of value of individual players, or whether a team has a squad costing twice or, for that matter, ten times more than ours does, the team should, by now, be showing at least some small signs of progress.
By now, I’d expect the management team to have worked out what formation will work best with our squad, what roles will be adopted by our players, what tempo we are aiming for, what type of press, do we play out or lump it, do we create space on the sides or through the middle. Do we play two ‘8s’ or one ‘8’ and one ‘10’. Do our wingers tuck in and allow our full backs to overlap, or do our wingers stay wide and allow space inside them. Do we concentrate on possession or on swift press and counter attack. Etc etc etc.

At present, we have no defined shape, formation, type of play. An overarching system into which various squad members swap in and out depending on form, opposition, how many games we are playing and so on.

We are throwing stuff at the pitch every week to see what sticks. And at the moment, nothing much is.

Our first year in the premier league last time showed that having a system that works for the players we have stands up well even when teams are worth tens of millions more than ours. No one is saying that that is the only style that will work, but having some idea of a style, whatever that is, is even more necessary when you’re competing against bigger budgets.

There will always be bigger budgets in this division. Because there are much bigger clubs than us playing in it. Doesn’t mean to say we can’t be clever about it.

We will always be bedding players in. As we will always have loans and will always be hoping that one or more of our signings is sold at a profit and will need replacing. A manager with a strong sense of what he is trying to achieve will make this necessary turbulence in the squad far less disruptive.

I think the club had to appoint Sheehan after last season as any other appointment would have led to ructions if the new appointment had started off the season in the way we have. But you and I both know that he won’t be here this time next year unless something dramatic changes. That’s not negative. It’s realism.

 

[Londonlisa2001]

I don't think there's anything that LOB did for us last season that Ethan Galbraith isn't capable of doing this time around so you'd have to assume that there's more to it than that.

Galbraith isn’t even remotely similar to O’Brien. Totally different type of midfielder.

 

[CommonCents]

I’m sure this argument is one which works on the ownership. Luckily for some.

But it is missing the point of people’s frustration.

Irrespective of value of individual players, or whether a team has a squad costing twice or, for that matter, ten times more than ours does, the team should, by now, be showing at least some small signs of progress.
By now, I’d expect the management team to have worked out what formation will work best with our squad, what roles will be adopted by our players, what tempo we are aiming for, what type of press, do we play out or lump it, do we create space on the sides or through the middle. Do we play two ‘8s’ or one ‘8’ and one ‘10’. Do our wingers tuck in and allow our full backs to overlap, or do our wingers stay wide and allow space inside them. Do we concentrate on possession or on swift press and counter attack. Etc etc etc.

At present, we have no defined shape, formation, type of play. An overarching system into which various squad members swap in and out depending on form, opposition, how many games we are playing and so on.

We are throwing stuff at the pitch every week to see what sticks. And at the moment, nothing much is.

Our first year in the premier league last time showed that having a system that works for the players we have stands up well even when teams are worth tens of millions more than ours. No one is saying that that is the only style that will work, but having some idea of a style, whatever that is, is even more necessary when you’re competing against bigger budgets.

There will always be bigger budgets in this division. Because there are much bigger clubs than us playing in it. Doesn’t mean to say we can’t be clever about it.

We will always be bedding players in. As we will always have loans and will always be hoping that one or more of our signings is sold at a profit and will need replacing. A manager with a strong sense of what he is trying to achieve will make this necessary turbulence in the squad far less disruptive.

I think the club had to appoint Sheehan after last season as any other appointment would have led to ructions if the new appointment had started off the season in the way we have. But you and I both know that he won’t be here this time next year unless something dramatic changes. That’s not negative. It’s realism.

It’s not an argument, just the situation. All managers will have to show progress at any club. It depends what your threshold of review is, which I would guess is a sliding scale based on the influx of change. 29 players I believe the turnover number was, that’s not just an on field conundrum for a manager to navigate but an off field one too where new relationships and understandings need to be formed. It really is just reality that these things take time to work and develop, it’s now just a matter of how much time you see as an acceptable timeframe. I’m encouraged by the direction of the club so won’t get bogged down in short term performance concerns. My concerns will only come if there is no attempt to adapt and no positive momentum in performances. Currently it’s far too early to make those judgements.

 

[Londonlisa2001]

It’s not an argument, just the situation. All managers will have to show progress at any club. It depends what your threshold of review is, which I would guess is a sliding scale based on the influx of change. 29 players I believe the turnover number was, that’s not just an on field conundrum for a manager to navigate but an off field one too where new relationships and understandings need to be formed. It really is just reality that these things take time to work and develop, it’s now just a matter of how much time you see as an acceptable timeframe. I’m encouraged by the direction of the club so won’t get bogged down in short term performance concerns. My concerns will only come if there is no attempt to adapt and no positive momentum in performances. Currently it’s far too early to make those judgements.

We have regressed in terms of on field momentum rather than progressed.

I agree with the wider point re man management etc.

I would point out though that there have been a number of games where 7 or 8 of the starting line up were here last season. One, I think at least, had 9 of the 11.

So the scale of change is somewhat over egged on the field at least.

Anyway - as I’ve said, I think it’s too soon to change at the moment, but it genuinely isn’t great. Not the results, but the performances. I’m obviously not a lone voice either - a quick look at attendances tells a story. Particularly in the kids’ stand.

Let’s all hope it starts to look better very soon.

 

[CommonCents]

We have regressed in terms of on field momentum rather than progressed.

I agree with the wider point re man management etc.

I would point out though that there have been a number of games where 7 or 8 of the starting line up were here last season. One, I think at least, had 9 of the 11.

So the scale of change is somewhat over egged on the field at least.

Anyway - as I’ve said, I think it’s too soon to change at the moment, but it genuinely isn’t great. Not the results, but the performances. I’m obviously not a lone voice either - a quick look at attendances tells a story. Particularly in the kids’ stand.

Let’s all hope it starts to look better very soon.

I’d probably make the point that last season was an over performance, not one that was realistically sustainable. Barring late runs in seasons we have been hovering around 14th-17th for years now. A bit like Russell when we went on a run of 9/10 games at the end of his tenure. This season was always going to regress to the mean in some form or other, there will be bad runs and there will be good runs but I expect a fair aim will be top 10 come the end of it all and use that as a springboard to build from.

With our starting lineup, that’s the product of rotation as opposed to preference. Burgess, Galbraith, Inoussa, Stamenic are the core starters with Yalcouye also getting a fair share of game time, so the usual lineup would still see around half a side that is new to each other and then 5 subs many who will be the new depth options.

Performances are disjointed at the moment and you won’t have anyone disagree but these are the key challenges for a manager to work out, how does he figure this out and get a new side more cohesive, time will tell in that but we all have to back him to find the solutions.

 

[tardylum]

I’d probably make the point that last season was an over performance, not one that was realistically sustainable. Barring late runs in seasons we have been hovering around 14th-17th for years now. A bit like Russell when we went on a run of 9/10 games at the end of his tenure. This season was always going to regress to the mean in some form or other, there will be bad runs and there will be good runs but I expect a fair aim will be top 10 come the end of it all and use that as a springboard to build from.

With our starting lineup, that’s the product of rotation as opposed to preference. Burgess, Galbraith, Inoussa, Stamenic are the core starters with Yalcouye also getting a fair share of game time, so the usual lineup would still see around half a side that is new to each other and then 5 subs many who will be the new depth options.

Performances are disjointed at the moment and you won’t have anyone disagree but these are the key challenges for a manager to work out, how does he figure this out and get a new side more cohesive, time will tell in that but we all have to back him to find the solutions.

I would think Idah should be a priority along with the four you mentioned considering the money spent.

I would not have Yalcouye in that tier of player or importance for us based on what he has shown so far as a loanee.

 

[CommonCents]

I would think Idah should be a priority along with the four you mentioned considering the money spent.

I would not have Yalcouye in that tier of player or importance for us based on what he has shown so far as a loanee.

We only play 1 up front and Vipotnik has been one of the form strikers in the league. No doubt Idah will be a regular starter but he isn’t yet.

Yalcouye tends to start every other game, he’s 19 and not accustomed to English football yet so not one that is going to be playing Sat-midweek-Sat.

Disagree on him though, think he’s been very good and one of the few central players we have that can drive through the middle and cause problems - QPR incident aside.

 

[tardylum]

Very good? That is terribly generous to him. He started the first two games and has only started three of the next nine. With one being the sending off.

He is young and adapting so my expectations are low out of fairness to him but because he is just on loan we probably need his impact to be more immediate.

 

[Londonlisa2001]

I’d probably make the point that last season was an over performance, not one that was realistically sustainable. Barring late runs in seasons we have been hovering around 14th-17th for years now. A bit like Russell when we went on a run of 9/10 games at the end of his tenure. This season was always going to regress to the mean in some form or other, there will be bad runs and there will be good runs but I expect a fair aim will be top 10 come the end of it all and use that as a springboard to build from.

With our starting lineup, that’s the product of rotation as opposed to preference. Burgess, Galbraith, Inoussa, Stamenic are the core starters with Yalcouye also getting a fair share of game time, so the usual lineup would still see around half a side that is new to each other and then 5 subs many who will be the new depth options.

Performances are disjointed at the moment and you won’t have anyone disagree but these are the key challenges for a manager to work out, how does he figure this out and get a new side more cohesive, time will tell in that but we all have to back him to find the solutions.

I agree re last season. Plus we had O’Brien of course - still think he is a big miss…

I meant this season to be honest. I think we were better five or six games ago than we are now. In terms of shape and intent.

Our depth is undoubtedly better. Although we’re still bringing in Fulton!

I am, as yet, unconvinced our spine is strong enough. We’ll see. But I think we needed a midfielder in the mould of O’Brien (think Pratley, Bodde etc etc) to work alongside Galbraith. And I fundamentally disagree with him not playing a ten. Widell looked promising the other night. Probably our brightest spark to be honest. So it’s time he had a go, bringing on Cullen was a waste of time.

 

[CommonCents]

Very good? That is terribly generous to him. He started the first two games and has only started three of the next nine. With one being the sending off.

He is young and adapting so my expectations are low out of fairness to him but because he is just on loan we probably need his impact to be more immediate.

Yes I class him as someone who has been very good, great energy, good progressive running through the middle. He’s started half our games and affected them positively in the main. I like him a lot.

 

[Londonlisa2001]

Very good? That is terribly generous to him. He started the first two games and has only started three of the next nine. With one being the sending off.

He is young and adapting so my expectations are low out of fairness to him but because he is just on loan we probably need his impact to be more immediate.

Here I will agree with cc. Yalcouye is the one midfield player who shows signs of being able to receive the ball, turn and drive. He hasn’t done it for a game or two, but his ability to instantly turn is promising.

I tend to agree about loan players needing to be instant impacts though. Otherwise we are developing for other clubs.

 

[K23]

Galbraith isn’t even remotely similar to O’Brien. Totally different type of midfielder.

I put a post on the Widell thread relevant to this. Don't want to repost the whole thing so here's a link if you're interested.

Post in thread 'Widell'

Friday at 5:45 PM

Just a thought but bear with me on this. I’ve been thinking about the impact Widell had on Wednesday and in my head I felt like I was watching something parallel to the effect Lewis O’Brien had on the team during the latter stages of last season. I’m not saying LOB was a world beater, he isn’t as he‘d be playing at a higher level if he was but for me, the main ingredient that LOB brought to the team was a non-stop busy positivity where everything was done at pace and going forward along the lines of what MGW did for Forest last season. This had 2 significant impacts on us. The first was...

• K23

• 

 

[Glyn1]

Good points, but you missed another very important factor.

Most EFL clubs - and we are by no means alone in this - get their pricing wrong. We've been in a de facto cost of living crisis since the banking crash in 2008. Most people are gradually getting poorer. Yet they want to charge up to £35-40 a pop in some cases. Couple that with the lack of entertainment value, and people will decide they can find better value for money elsewhere.

It really winds me up to see clubs with vast swathes of seats covered with tarpaulins. They'd rather do that, than bring the prices down to make it accessible to more people's pockets. It's just greed, and it's short sighted as well in the long

 

[Glyn1]

If you're a couple in your twenties with a kid who wants to see the Swans but you're in England, then taking your child to the match means £100 plus for the train, plus 2 nights' accommodation, plus the tickets. I don't know the answer.

 

[Ringwood]

Similar point to above.. it costs me £200 for a home game with my son everything included tickets to fuel. Each season ive been more selective of home games and favour away games. The club is pricing the ordinary fan out of the game. 5K empty seats is alarming yet nothing changes to bring the community together on the pitch entertainment or pricing structure.