Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2017 11:45:43 GMT
Whether we stay up or go down, there's a overriding view that a player cull, to a greater or lesser extent, is required.
With all the comings and goings, I'm really not sure who we would be stuck with for contractual reasons at the end of the season.
Can anybody enlighten me please?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2017 11:57:35 GMT
Think Mahon, Hannah and James have another year, not sure who else.
Wherever we end up I'd keep Jones, Archer, Astles and Akintunde.
There's a player there in Nathan Brown, we have to help unlock his potential, could be a top player for us given the chance.
|
|
|
|
Post by jb on Dec 31, 2017 12:04:58 GMT
Think Mahon, Hannah and James have another year, not sure who else. Wherever we end up I'd keep Jones, Archer, Astles and Akintunde. There's a player there in Nathan Brown, we have to help unlock his potential, could be a top player for us given the chance. Agree with that but Astles really needs to work on himself. Absolutely love the bloke but the past two games have seen his physicality be exposed. The club should invest in his physical health as the returns would be there. I suppose having that disgrace McCombe next to him doesn’t help especially when he’s had class players like Heneghan and Hughes partnering him in recent years. |
|
|
|
Post by chesterken on Dec 31, 2017 12:47:21 GMT
Think Mahon, Hannah and James have another year, not sure who else. Wherever we end up I'd keep Jones, Archer, Astles and Akintunde. There's a player there in Nathan Brown, we have to help unlock his potential, could be a top player for us given the chance. I think Nathan is on his way back from his month long lone at Colwyn Bay; he hardly featured for then so if he can’t break into a team much lower down the leagues he’s not ready to feature for us just yet. A few more loan moves required until he plays some regular football. |
|
|
|
Post by Anders on Dec 31, 2017 12:49:24 GMT
Think Mahon, Hannah and James have another year, not sure who else. Wherever we end up I'd keep Jones, Archer, Astles and Akintunde. There's a player there in Nathan Brown, we have to help unlock his potential, could be a top player for us given the chance. Turnbull, Waters & Archer also contracted for next season. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2017 12:53:53 GMT
Thanks folks!
Does beg the question: Would they WANT to stay if we went down?
Then of course: Who would want them?
|
|
|
|
Post by tarvinblue on Dec 31, 2017 13:24:48 GMT
Thanks folks! Does beg the question: Would they WANT to stay if we went down? Then of course: Who would want them? Also begs the question as to who at the club got so wrapped up in emotion that they failed to logically rationalise that two year contracts are dangerous for a club like ours - particularly when handing them out to older players with a record of injury. Was it the same person/people that allowed JM to stay on and then handed him the Sam Hughes cash to blow as well? |
|
|
|
Post by massivefloodlights on Dec 31, 2017 13:29:10 GMT
The conference north is an absolute battleground of strong sides. Does anyone in the current squad really look like they’d be up to it? I’d say no.
|
|
|
|
Post by marner93 on Dec 31, 2017 13:29:30 GMT
Thanks folks! Does beg the question: Would they WANT to stay if we went down? Then of course: Who would want them? If they choose to walk, who gives a smeg where they go? However if you were in their shoes would you? I know I wouldn't a years extra of a guaranteed wage. |
|
|
|
Post by Harry Lime on Dec 31, 2017 13:49:47 GMT
Thanks folks! Does beg the question: Would they WANT to stay if we went down? Then of course: Who would want them? Also begs the question as to who at the club got so wrapped up in emotion that they failed to logically rationalise that two year contracts are dangerous for a club like ours - particularly when handing them out to older players with a record of injury. Was it the same person/people that allowed JM to stay on and then handed him the Sam Hughes cash to blow as well? My understanding is that the Operation Board, of the Board in general, don't interfere with what the manager does as long as he stays within budget. They allow him a free rein. If that's true, there isn't a club ethos or strategy which we follow. We just support whoever the manager is at the time. JMc wants to move training from MBNA to Saughall, off we go. Manager wants to sign older players on two year deals, we do. Etc. The manager is the professional in this process, so there is merit in this approach. However, I believe the Operational Board should give clear direction to the Manager on our vision. This should include the player profile, style of play etc. And ensure they adhere to it. A manager can do a great deal of damage to a club financially. Maybe we could take a two year chance on a Jordan Archer type player, but not a Turnbull type. Obviously the risk is Archer turns out to be Tom Peers and we're stuck with him for two years. We made a big deal about our visit to Southampton a few years back to learn their strategy. Obviously ignored it completely or found we just couldn't copy it. Ideally you'd want the club to carry on consistently from manager to manager without u turns everytime. Similar to a Watford, Southampton and Swansea. Where the manager just slots in and carries on. |
|
|
|
Post by tarvinblue on Dec 31, 2017 16:54:27 GMT
Also begs the question as to who at the club got so wrapped up in emotion that they failed to logically rationalise that two year contracts are dangerous for a club like ours - particularly when handing them out to older players with a record of injury. Was it the same person/people that allowed JM to stay on and then handed him the Sam Hughes cash to blow as well? My understanding is that the Operation Board, of the Board in general, don't interfere with what the manager does as long as he stays within budget. They allow him a free rein. If that's true, there isn't a club ethos or strategy which we follow. We just support whoever the manager is at the time. JMc wants to move training from MBNA to Saughall, off we go. Manager wants to sign older players on two year deals, we do. Etc. The manager is the professional in this process, so there is merit in this approach. However, I believe the Operational Board should give clear direction to the Manager on our vision. This should include the player profile, style of play etc. And ensure they adhere to it. A manager can do a great deal of damage to a club financially. Maybe we could take a two year chance on a Jordan Archer type player, but not a Turnbull type. Obviously the risk is Archer turns out to be Tom Peers and we're stuck with him for two years. We made a big deal about our visit to Southampton a few years back to learn their strategy. Obviously ignored it completely or found we just couldn't copy it. Ideally you'd want the club to carry on consistently from manager to manager without u turns everytime. Similar to a Watford, Southampton and Swansea. Where the manager just slots in and carries on. I completely understand that the manager needs to be given a certain element of free reign to sign players but, like you say, there should also have been some rational thinking from the board, setting out boundaries for him to operate in that work for us as a club. Again, it's another example of a lack of long term thinking and planning that is set to leave us in a financial and personnel crisis come the end of the season. It sounds like the operations board is where much of our problems lie. |
|
