Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

If Kangasniemi doesn't play again in our next game when the club constantly peddles "3 game week" narrative as a reason to rotate, I'll be bamboozled. I expect him to slot in so we can see what he's all about, he's a permanent addition after all.

Posted
Just now, TheGoldenGod said:

If Kangasniemi doesn't play again in our next game when the club constantly peddles "3 game week" narrative as a reason to rotate, I'll be bamboozled. I expect him to slot in so we can see what he's all about, he's a permanent addition after all.

Hard (even a bit silly )to drop any of the back four after two clean sheets in a row

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, FoxinNotts said:

Hard (even a bit silly )to drop any of the back four after two clean sheets in a row

We've got a big squad for the level, only 7 subs, 3 game weeks regularly and both CBS played 90 mins. Sometimes you don't have a choice when your players look shattered across the board too.

Edited by TheGoldenGod
  • Like 1
Posted
18 hours ago, Salieri said:

Ideal scenario would be if Aluko could cover both lb and rb positions, that would make room for Kangasniemi on the bench. Can’t seeing him ditching Thomas completely though 😕

To be fair to Thomas, this is the least he's ever deserved to be dropped.

Posted
18 hours ago, drew said:

Hopefully this is the start of signing players that will have a resale value in 2/3 years so we can star this long term rebuild project to get back to the EPL.

It was our downfall holding onto players when we had rediculous offers for them.

I was hoping that, but Cullen, Chaplin and Burns look likely to join the don't offer anything and nobody else will ever buy them pile.

Posted

The window might've closed, but it's hard to say the best team without seeing everyone play or how they fit.

 

I'd have had Burns ahead of Howell when they signed, but not now and I wouldn't have Thomas as centre back ahead of actual centre backs but he's somehow been an upgrade.

  • Like 2
Posted

Tough to say without seeing any of the new lads playing. But I think this is our current best 18:

 

McCarthy (💀)

Ravizzoli

JJ

Aluko

Souttar

O'Hora

Ila

McCarthy 

Thomas

Page

Braybrooke 

Howell

Alves

Chaplin

Burns (on very thin ice)

Watson

Bristric

Riis

 

Which means Faes, Okoli, Cullen, Reid, Coulibaly, Doyle and Lundstram don't currently make the bench. We need another CM in there somewhere so Lundstram or Doyle probably come in for Burns or maybe a defender which at the moment is probably going to be Ila.

 

We're actually pretty stacked for the level.

  • Like 1
Posted
On 02/09/2026 at 09:48, davieG said:

I think I'll wait until I've seen some of these newbies play before assuming they're better. It's not as if we haven't had new players recently that have turned out to be gash.

TBH, off the top of my head, I can't think of many permanent signings that I wouldn't have returned and had the money back if that was an option. I can think of plenty that I would, though.

Posted
3 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Tough to say without seeing any of the new lads playing. But I think this is our current best 18:

 

McCarthy (💀)

Ravizzoli

JJ

Aluko

Souttar

O'Hora

Ila

McCarthy 

Thomas

Page

Braybrooke 

Howell

Alves

Chaplin

Burns (on very thin ice)

Watson

Bristric

Riis

 

Which means Faes, Okoli, Cullen, Reid, Coulibaly, Doyle and Lundstram don't currently make the bench. We need another CM in there somewhere so Lundstram or Doyle probably come in for Burns or maybe a defender which at the moment is probably going to be Ila.

 

We're actually pretty stacked for the level.

I assume the second McCarthy is MacFarlane? 😃

  • Haha 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...