Paddy McNair

[CaliFOXnia]

@Scotch 28 is ageing in that he's hardly a "young talent" is he..? He's probably got 2/3 years of his best football left before it's a real decline. Also in the sense that he's at 28 and probably not good enough for the Premier League (which is where out long term ambitions lie), and has done all the improving he's likely to do meaning we're again, highly unlikely to recoup what fee we may pay for him. 

All very valid points, I highlighted Vestegaard has been very poor for us and haven't defended his levels, however, we invested fifteen million quid on him and whatever we've paid/continue to pay in wages. He evidently performed well at Saints, hence why we signed him. I'd have thought it fairly common sense considering the glaring lack of options in other areas that IF we can't shift him, we try and rekindle some of the performance levels he showed before he came to us and utilise him as a back up option and try and find some creativity from somewhere before Aug 6th. 

Paddy McNair, IMO isn't anywhere near what we need. Coady, Faes, Souttar, Doyle (if we ever get it over the line), with Vestegaard in reserve / as a rotation option would suffice, JJ and arguably VK able to play a role centrally also would make us comfortable. 

What's needed is creativity and pace. Quickly. 

Edited 14 July 2023 by CaliFOXnia

[CaliFOXnia]

4 minutes ago, Sussex Fox said:

Or possibly Zach Awe 

Young, athletic, on a free transfer and if it's a backup option to 2/3 established starters then this makes alot more sense! 

[Scotch]

19 minutes ago, CaliFOXnia said:

@Scotch 28 is ageing in that he's hardly a "young talent" is he..? He's probably got 2/3 years of his best football left before it's a real decline. Also in the sense that he's at 28 and probably not good enough for the Premier League (which is where out long term ambitions lie), and has done all the improving he's likely to do meaning we're again, highly unlikely to recoup what fee we may pay for him. 

All very valid points, I highlighted Vestegaard has been very poor for us and haven't defended his levels, however, we invested fifteen million quid on him and whatever we've paid/continue to pay in wages. He evidently performed well at Saints, hence why we signed him. I'd have thought it fairly common sense considering the glaring lack of options in other areas that IF we can't shift him, we try and rekindle some of the performance levels he showed before he came to us and utilise him as a back up option and try and find some creativity from somewhere before Aug 6th. 

Paddy McNair, IMO isn't anywhere near what we need. Coady, Faes, Souttar, Doyle (if we ever get it over the line), with Vestegaard in reserve / as a rotation option would suffice, JJ and arguably VK able to play a role centrally also would make us comfortable. 

What's needed is creativity and pace. Quickly. 

I disagree. Defence was our number 1 problem last year IMO. If we had a better defence, we stay up. So it makes complete sense that defence is first priority to fix. Obv we will need to address creativity but growing up, the thing you would always hear when a new manager came in was, make them hard to beat first and foremost and you do that that with a good defence. 

 

[RowlattsFox]

Only benefit I could see from this is the versatility. Cover a few positions, won't kick up much of a fuss and hopefully would have a good attitude. You need a player like that in the squad, and depending on how much it costs it might be worth it. 

[CaliFOXnia]

20 minutes ago, Scotch said:

I disagree. Defence was our number 1 problem last year IMO. If we had a better defence, we stay up. So it makes complete sense that defence is first priority to fix. Obv we will need to address creativity but growing up, the thing you would always hear when a new manager came in was, make them hard to beat first and foremost and you do that that with a good defence. 

 

I don’t disagree, buddy. That’s the fundamentals isn’t it, if you don’t concede, you don’t lose. That said, I think we’re in a lot stronger position defensively than we are offensively as it stands (also, the drop in quality of opposition must be taken into account - we will be stronger defensively almost by default you would think). We’ve added and improved at the back with Coady and hopefully Doyle, keeping Faes if possible and Souttar. I’d argue that core is more than capable. I also wonder if Ben Nelson is anywhere near ready as a cover option, meaning instead of spending on another centre half, I’d rather us invest in some possible young, emerging, exciting talent that offers us some other dynamic in the final third. Especially if we’re resigned to losing Barnes.
 

We also desperately need at least one creative CM in the 8/10 role, Winks looks like he will occupy the 6, but other than him and KDH (Soumare..? Who knows at EFL Champ level) we just seem bare bones. 

[ARM1968]

Fuch off

[Scotch]

3 minutes ago, CaliFOXnia said:

I don’t disagree, buddy. That’s the fundamentals isn’t it, if you don’t concede, you don’t lose. That said, I think we’re in a lot stronger position defensively than we are offensively as it stands (also, the drop in quality of opposition must be taken into account - we will be stronger defensively almost by default you would think). We’ve added and improved at the back with Coady and hopefully Doyle, keeping Faes if possible and Souttar. I’d argue that core is more than capable. I also wonder if Ben Nelson is anywhere near ready as a cover option, meaning instead of spending on another centre half, I’d rather us invest in some possible young, emerging, exciting talent that offers us some other dynamic in the final third. Especially if we’re resigned to losing Barnes.
 

We also desperately need at least one creative CM in the 8/10 role, Winks looks like he will occupy the 6, but other than him and KDH (Soumare..? Who knows at EFL Champ level) we just seem bare bones. 

You're 100% right in terms of what we need offensively but I think McNair could help with that too though. 

 

Why have Vestergaard and Hamza in the team, taking up two sets of wages and two squad spaces when McNair could cover both the positions they do, cost more than half as much in wages as the pair of them and arguably do a better job because he (you would think if we sign him) fit the way Enzo wants to play, better. 

 

Obviously that depends on being able to sell Hamza and Vestergaard though. 

[ronnup]

Paddy Mcno

[James_lcfc]

His name is too similar to Paddy McCarthy so on that basis it's a no from me.

 

(He wasn't actually that bad, it was just a dark time)

[Merchant_Banker]

Amartey replacement.

[Ric Flair]

3 hours ago, Scotch said:

I disagree. Defence was our number 1 problem last year IMO. If we had a better defence, we stay up. So it makes complete sense that defence is first priority to fix. Obv we will need to address creativity but growing up, the thing you would always hear when a new manager came in was, make them hard to beat first and foremost and you do that that with a good defence. 

 

The thing is, we addressed some of our defensive issues in personnel with the signings of Kristiansen, Souttar and now Coady. We have a nucleus of more than capable defenders at this level, absolutely loads of them and yet we still keep on adding to them.

 

It was every bit a coaching issue as not having good enough defenders and many of the problems stemmed from a diabolical midfield and overall team fitness and work ethic.

 

Whilst this has been going on, we've lost nearly every creative player we own and Barnes is about to depart 😂😂

 

That club doesn't know whether their face is their harris and their harris is their face. 

[Merchant_Banker]

If we want two players for each position and are planning to play 3at the back then we need 6. If we exclude Vestergard then we would have 6 senior CBs.

[Ric Flair]

5 minutes ago, Merchant_Banker said:

If we want two players for each position and are planning to play 3at the back then we need 6. If we exclude Vestergard then we would have 6 senior CBs.

That's hugely unnecessary in a 25 man squad in the Championship. Kristiansen and Justin can play in a back 3 and if we genuinely were low on CB's we could go to a back 4. There's Ben Nelson too who'll possibly be kept around.

[Sunbury Fox]

A big fat 'no' to Championship journeymen in their late 20s with no resale value. 

[trooky]

No thanks, we don't need another CB

[Lesta2014]

11 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

That's hugely unnecessary in a 25 man squad in the Championship. Kristiansen and Justin can play in a back 3 and if we genuinely were low on CB's we could go to a back 4. There's Ben Nelson too who'll possibly be kept around.

Brunt is still here also although he wasn’t used in the 22 midweek so suggests he hasn’t made an impression so far. 

[Claudio Fannieri]

8 minutes ago, Lesta2014 said:

Brunt is still here also although he wasn’t used in the 22 midweek so suggests he hasn’t made an impression so far. 

Brunt is a bit like Iversen, seems a little limited in possession and in a Maresca team he is going to struggle big time, can’t see a future for him here, wouldn’t be shocked to see him leave for a fairly nominal fee to a league 1 or 2 club 

[Lesta2014]

2 minutes ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

Brunt is a bit like Iversen, seems a little limited in possession and in a Maresca team he is going to struggle big time, can’t see a future for him here, wouldn’t be shocked to see him leave for a fairly nominal fee to a league 1 or 2 club 

probably best for his career that he at least gets a loan move there. 

 

[Scotch]

Having watched us yesterday and read StriderHiryu's breakdown of our tactics, I'm even more convinced he would be a good signing giving his ability to play numerous positions. 

 

He could cover the out and out CB role that Coady played. He could cover the RCB role that Faes played (which would be his best position). He could cover the RB role, coming in to the midfield alongside Winks when in possession or he could even cover Winks' position. 

 

I don't think he would be a starter in any of these positions but if we could move on the likes of Vestergaard and Hamza, it makes sense to have one player who can provide back-up rather than two. Also with him being able to cover for Ricardo (alongside JJ who would be the obvious replacement) it would free JJ up to offer backup for that LB slot, coming in to CB to make the back 3 when we're on the ball, allowing us to also move on Thomas who doesn't suit that role. Giving us Doyle, VK and JJ as options there. 

 

So really, McNair coming in would give us scope to lose Hamza, Vestergaard and Thomas but still have better depth in numerous positions than we do now. Ofcourse, that would rely solely on being able to move those 3 on which is easier said than done. 

[South Shire Fox]

21 minutes ago, Scotch said:

Having watched us yesterday and read StriderHiryu's breakdown of our tactics, I'm even more convinced he would be a good signing giving his ability to play numerous positions. 

 

He could cover the out and out CB role that Coady played. He could cover the RCB role that Faes played (which would be his best position). He could cover the RB role, coming in to the midfield alongside Winks when in possession or he could even cover Winks' position. 

 

I don't think he would be a starter in any of these positions but if we could move on the likes of Vestergaard and Hamza, it makes sense to have one player who can provide back-up rather than two. Also with him being able to cover for Ricardo (alongside JJ who would be the obvious replacement) it would free JJ up to offer backup for that LB slot, coming in to CB to make the back 3 when we're on the ball, allowing us to also move on Thomas who doesn't suit that role. Giving us Doyle, VK and JJ as options there. 

 

So really, McNair coming in would give us scope to lose Hamza, Vestergaard and Thomas but still have better depth in numerous positions than we do now. Ofcourse, that would rely solely on being able to move those 3 on which is easier said than done. 

I think thats exactly why we are in the mess we are, players who are bought as squad players not good enough for the first 11 who we cannot shift. Build a better squad by improving the first 11

[Scotch]

5 minutes ago, South Shire Fox said:

I think thats exactly why we are in the mess we are, players who are bought as squad players not good enough for the first 11 who we cannot shift. Build a better squad by improving the first 11

Obviously that would be ideal but it's not always possible when you factor in finances and players available. 

The next best thing is replacing 3 players who are not good enough for the starting 11 for 1 player who isn't good enough for the starting 11 but can cover all the positions of the 3 that leave. 

[South Shire Fox]

11 minutes ago, Scotch said:

Obviously that would be ideal but it's not always possible when you factor in finances and players available. 

The next best thing is replacing 3 players who are not good enough for the starting 11 for 1 player who isn't good enough for the starting 11 but can cover all the positions of the 3 that leave. 

Amartey could cover 3 positions and we let him go? Might aswell just of kept him instead of paying a transfer fee for someone of similar ability and age if thats the route they go down

Edited 16 July 2023 by South Shire Fox

[frany104]

1 minute ago, South Shire Fox said:

Amartey could cover 3 positions and we let him go? Might aswell just of kept him instead of paying a transfer fee for someone of similar ability and age if thats the route they go down

He was on massive wages for a squad player. Squad players should be on peanuts not above the average wage if a Lower half PL player.

[Scotch]

1 minute ago, South Shire Fox said:

Amartey could cover 3 positions and we let him go? Might aswell just of kept him instead of paying a transfer fee for someone of similar ability and age if thats the route they go down

Because he was sh!t in all three positions.... Also, you're assuming he wanted to stay.... 

[South Shire Fox]

14 minutes ago, Scotch said:

Because he was sh!t in all three positions.... Also, you're assuming he wanted to stay.... 

Like Mcnair then? Hes been Middlesboroughs scape goat the last couple of seasons. I imagine we’d pay more in the Championship then Besiktas are paying him so id say there would of been a good chance if we actually wanted to keep him. Im glad hes gone btw, just saying its a similar jack of all trades/master of none we dont need imo

Edited 16 July 2023 by South Shire Fox