Is the squad good enough for L1?

[Spudulike]

There has to be a reason why we have virtually replaced one set of relegation rats with another. What happen's to these player's once they sign for us? Ambition is left at the door as they arrive. 

 

Disappointed that some of the ex-player's from the most disasterous era in our history haven't come out and spilled the beans.

[Dan]

The squad, on the whole, is good enough to stay in League One.

 

I'm unsure if it's good enough to get promoted out of it.

 

Goalkeepers = huge, huge issue. I think even if you had this team semi organised, we would ship a few simply through not having a capable goalkeeper. We've given a two year contract to a bloke who is at least a year past retiring.

 

Full backs = Joseph looks too good for this level. Aluko looks extremely raw, has done well at times and shocking at others. Thomas will not kick a ball in the EFL after Rudkin's disgusting nepotistic contract expires. McFarlane has struggled, but I'm willing to give him a bit more benefit of the doubt - particularly given he's the only professional level left back at the club currently. Coulibaly is ****ing awful as well. Another player signed for the Premier League who can't hack the likes of Barnsley and Stevenage.

 

Centre halves = Total shitshow. Souttar is one player you can definitely say is hindered by the tactics. I actually think he'd be perfectly OK playing for somebody like Millwall, or Lincoln. But we're a terrible fit. O'Hora looks very poor. Okoli is a joke. Nelson is obviously done here, and Kangasniemi for whatever reason, probably more nepotistic ones doesn't really get a look in. I'm really unsure what pairing I'd even go for - probably Souttar and Kangasniemi, but at least fit the whole system around not playing ourselves into trouble.

 

Midfield = On paper one of our better areas but still sorely lacking some attributes, and bodies right in the centre when you come to think of it.. Page needs to get out of here before we anchor his career below his potential. We've failed him. Braybrooke I'm quite torn on. I've long said it with youth players that there needs to be more nuance. They get held to either a ridiculous standard or none at all. If Braybrooke is our 17th best player in the squad, then that is perfectly OK. It's a cheaper way to plug the gaps in your squad. I'm on the fence. Lundstram I'm again torn, has looked good in parts and rubbish in others. Another player on his way down. Smallbone is another high risk contract dished out, but he hasn't yet kicked a ball for the club so I won't entirely slag him off, yet, but he'd better deliver.

 

Attacking midfield / wide forwards = Very hit and miss. Alves looks tidy at times but you can write not far off exactly what I did for Braybrooke above. Howell looks OK in patches. Doyle the same. Watson looks pretty poor so far. Bob Reid is a phoney and totally done, and I'd imagine will have retired within 12 months - and probably would've retired within the last 12 months if we hadn't given the usual Rudkin contract. Burns could very well be Bob Reid all over again. Chaplin looks like yet another very unreliable piece of business. Cullen looks poor and offers little on top of what we already have, but I concede he probably finishes the season our second top goalscorer, he's the sort you might get away with if the others chip in. Swansea don't seem to be missing him a jot.

 

Strikers = My one non-caveated bit of praise is that Emil Riis looks good. I was expecting him to be worse than this, based on anecdotes from previous clubs. Maybe they are right and we are just so accustomed to joke players up front now though and merely an average one just seems good. But I can't really knock him. Bristric is the sort of signing I'd give a little more leeway with a bedding in period, but I am getting Carranza vibes, and what's worse is it appears we have paid enough to sign him that it has to be treated like quite a risky move, and one that's showing no signs of paying off.

 

The biggest issue in our squad is the absolutely ludicrous way it has been put together. I would urge anybody to go through our signings, particularly in the last three years, and just assess the exact number of them that came here on their way up, and the number of them that came here on their way down. It is so skewed towards the latter it is unbelievable - it's worse than a Turkish club. We have not bought a player from a lower league English club that has played significant first team minutes since James Justin - 7 years ago, and what do you know, a player who initially did well here, fell to bits in the malaise and now regularly starts for a very steady Premier League team. While we're still treating managers like consultants. I think literally any money we pay towards scouts is money wasted because we won't actually utilise anything they offer. Ipswich sign a steadily performing Wes Burns from Fleetwood for buttons, he grows with their club and leaves them when he's done. We don't look to replicate todays equivalent of this when they are absolutely out there. We just sign the shattered version of this player and put them on a contract that would be expected of a team pushing the play-offs in the Championship.

 

TLDR: On paper, it is better than this and shouldn't be in relegation contention, but it is a massively flawed squad in its construction and probably too much so that we'll get near to the promotion we have forced ourselves into needing. We're not a million miles off a point where we will need top 2 form for the remainder of the season to achieve just a top six finish - and that should be a sackable offence.

Edited 13 hours ago by Dan

[HankMarvin]

45 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

There has to be a reason why we have virtually replaced one set of relegation rats with another

I’m no detective but

Rangers league form for the small sample size 

P W D L FA pts ppm

7

1

5

1

6:7

8

1.14

No doubt fans asking the same question.

 

Rohl came in same players, and his form up until the post season split was 

P   W D L   F. A pts ppm

25

18

6

1

58:22

60

2.40

Edited 13 hours ago by HankMarvin

[Dan]

6 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

I’m no detective but

Rangers league form for the small sample size 

P W D L FA pts ppm

7

1

5

1

6:7

8

1.14

No doubt fans asking the same question.

 

Rohl came in same players, and his form up until the post season split was 

P   W D L   F. A pts ppm

25

18

6

1

58:22

60

2.40

I don't think he'll ever recover from Rangers. Rangers and then Leicester - two of the dumbest moves he, and the clubs could've made.

[MPH]

Mercury article today reckons this squad is good enough to compete in the championship…

[Pita]

Playing martins way no chance. Under a better manager then yes. 

[Long Eaton Fox]

I've been looking at the squad during the building of this  years promotion attempt. 15/16 out 15/16 in. After watching the home games so far this season it appears to me that a few  of the academy players have a chance, Page,  and bought in players, Riis. The rest are not good enough and it's just a random selection to make up the rest of the 11. So we'll be stuck with this crap for a while. I know some are injured and some youngsters untried. But it feels like it's back to the future.

[LeePhilpottsBaldSpot]

Easily.

 

But they're nowhere near good enough for the Champion's League, which is why trying to play like an elite club isn't working.

Edited 12 hours ago by LeePhilpottsBaldSpot

[em9999]

I wouldn't say a elite team even in the way we are trying to play 

 

A elite team isnt brain dead our players haven't got a working cell between them ..

 

 

[Foxmeister]

3 hours ago, Dan said:

The squad, on the whole, is good enough to stay in League One.

 

I'm unsure if it's good enough to get promoted out of it.

 

Goalkeepers = huge, huge issue. I think even if you had this team semi organised, we would ship a few simply through not having a capable goalkeeper. We've given a two year contract to a bloke who is at least a year past retiring.

 

Full backs = Joseph looks too good for this level. Aluko looks extremely raw, has done well at times and shocking at others. Thomas will not kick a ball in the EFL after Rudkin's disgusting nepotistic contract expires. McFarlane has struggled, but I'm willing to give him a bit more benefit of the doubt - particularly given he's the only professional level left back at the club currently. Coulibaly is ****ing awful as well. Another player signed for the Premier League who can't hack the likes of Barnsley and Stevenage.

 

Centre halves = Total shitshow. Souttar is one player you can definitely say is hindered by the tactics. I actually think he'd be perfectly OK playing for somebody like Millwall, or Lincoln. But we're a terrible fit. O'Hora looks very poor. Okoli is a joke. Nelson is obviously done here, and Kangasniemi for whatever reason, probably more nepotistic ones doesn't really get a look in. I'm really unsure what pairing I'd even go for - probably Souttar and Kangasniemi, but at least fit the whole system around not playing ourselves into trouble.

 

Midfield = On paper one of our better areas but still sorely lacking some attributes, and bodies right in the centre when you come to think of it.. Page needs to get out of here before we anchor his career below his potential. We've failed him. Braybrooke I'm quite torn on. I've long said it with youth players that there needs to be more nuance. They get held to either a ridiculous standard or none at all. If Braybrooke is our 17th best player in the squad, then that is perfectly OK. It's a cheaper way to plug the gaps in your squad. I'm on the fence. Lundstram I'm again torn, has looked good in parts and rubbish in others. Another player on his way down. Smallbone is another high risk contract dished out, but he hasn't yet kicked a ball for the club so I won't entirely slag him off, yet, but he'd better deliver.

 

Attacking midfield / wide forwards = Very hit and miss. Alves looks tidy at times but you can write not far off exactly what I did for Braybrooke above. Howell looks OK in patches. Doyle the same. Watson looks pretty poor so far. Bob Reid is a phoney and totally done, and I'd imagine will have retired within 12 months - and probably would've retired within the last 12 months if we hadn't given the usual Rudkin contract. Burns could very well be Bob Reid all over again. Chaplin looks like yet another very unreliable piece of business. Cullen looks poor and offers little on top of what we already have, but I concede he probably finishes the season our second top goalscorer, he's the sort you might get away with if the others chip in. Swansea don't seem to be missing him a jot.

 

Strikers = My one non-caveated bit of praise is that Emil Riis looks good. I was expecting him to be worse than this, based on anecdotes from previous clubs. Maybe they are right and we are just so accustomed to joke players up front now though and merely an average one just seems good. But I can't really knock him. Bristric is the sort of signing I'd give a little more leeway with a bedding in period, but I am getting Carranza vibes, and what's worse is it appears we have paid enough to sign him that it has to be treated like quite a risky move, and one that's showing no signs of paying off.

 

The biggest issue in our squad is the absolutely ludicrous way it has been put together. I would urge anybody to go through our signings, particularly in the last three years, and just assess the exact number of them that came here on their way up, and the number of them that came here on their way down. It is so skewed towards the latter it is unbelievable - it's worse than a Turkish club. We have not bought a player from a lower league English club that has played significant first team minutes since James Justin - 7 years ago, and what do you know, a player who initially did well here, fell to bits in the malaise and now regularly starts for a very steady Premier League team. While we're still treating managers like consultants. I think literally any money we pay towards scouts is money wasted because we won't actually utilise anything they offer. Ipswich sign a steadily performing Wes Burns from Fleetwood for buttons, he grows with their club and leaves them when he's done. We don't look to replicate todays equivalent of this when they are absolutely out there. We just sign the shattered version of this player and put them on a contract that would be expected of a team pushing the play-offs in the Championship.

 

TLDR: On paper, it is better than this and shouldn't be in relegation contention, but it is a massively flawed squad in its construction and probably too much so that we'll get near to the promotion we have forced ourselves into needing. We're not a million miles off a point where we will need top 2 form for the remainder of the season to achieve just a top six finish - and that should be a sackable offence.

👏👏👏

[Foxmeister]

2 hours ago, MPH said:

Mercury article today reckons this squad is good enough to compete in the championship…

I think Josh Holland has turned on Martin.

[Pliskin]

On paper it’s the strongest squad in the league. That’s a fact. If we employed let’s say Dyche tomorrow, we would still win the league. 

[Spion Kop]

10 hours ago, Narborough Road Fox said:

We're seeing so many poor performances from individuals that I'm starting to doubt this but am really interested in what others think. 

 

Martin has to go but I'm wondering whether we could get promoted if we got a really good manager (for me, that is anyone who bases the tactics on getting the most of the players we have and takes a hardline on poor performances) or whether our players are just not up to standard. It is obviously pretty shocking to be writing this about Leicester City in League One! 

 

 

The question has to be asked.

[desertfox2]

After Martin left Rangers they went from 8th in the league to a point off the top before the league split up.They fell away at the end but still ended up 3rd. The squad could well be capable of automatic promotion on paper but with this clown in charge it's hard to form an opinion. Rangers also made a good appointment in Rohl. Would the clowns running our club find someone decent or appoint another manager that is stealing a living? 

 

 

[HitchinFox]

On paper, yes.

 

Playing the way we do, no.

 

BCR is a perfect example of a player who, despite his qualities and Prem experience, is utterly ineffective and unsuitable to the demands of a direct, physical League One. 

[nnfox]

We're underperforming because of the manager's tactics, BUT I do have some sympathy for RM.  Putting to one side his possession obsession, he is correct in saying that it's individual errors that cost us.

 

We have a squad of football players who get paid to do nothing other than play football, it's their full time job.  Most of them will have been playing organised football since the age of 6 or 7 and for 10, 15, 20 years+ will have been coached by some of the best coaches around.  They don't go from playing Sunday mornings, coached by little Johnny's dad, to playing pro football.  It's reasonable to assume that all professional players can do the basics...  They can pass the ball 10-15 yards accurately, their first touch should be excellent, they should be able to read the game well enough to know when and how to mark a player and when to run with that player, they can strike the ball towards goal with power and accuracy more often than not, and their fitness levels should be good.  Time and time again, we see failings with these fundamental basics.

 

Russell Martin does not help with his tactical inflexibility.  He absolutely needs to play to the strengths of the team and not to some misguided ideology of how perfect football should be played.  However, it isn't his job to put the players through a remedial class to make them actual footballers.  Russell Martin needs to fine tune and motivate.  His system brings out the worst in the some of the players because they just aren't good enough.  For all his faults though, I'm certain that his tactics don't include misplacing simple passes, getting dispossessed before taking a second touch, letting attackers through unmarked and playing the ball out of play for no reason.

 

 

[ceebeefox]

Having seen all the games this season, and obviously last, I’m of a mind to say that there’s very little between the leagues once out of “best of the world premier “. So if we were crap playing this way last year, we will be crap this year. 

[Jakemoore]

Yes. This isn’t even a debate for me. The squad is top for this level. The manager is L2 or below. 

[Phil Mitchell]

Squad need to prove themselves good enough, not yet for me. Phil

Edited 4 hours ago by Phil Mitchell

[Rubbersoul]

Maybe it’s not as good as first thought BUT under an actual manager that isn’t on an ego trip and just plays ****ing normally we’d operate so much better. 

Edited 4 hours ago by Rubbersoul

[funkyrobot]

2 hours ago, Pliskin said:

On paper it’s the strongest squad in the league. That’s a fact. If we employed let’s say Dyche tomorrow, we would still win the league. 

Don’t agree with that. Goalkeepers alone we are towards the bottom League 1 in quality. We have the worst left back in the league without any doubt. We have numerous players significantly back down the slope from the peak in their careers and we lack any real physicality or pace. 

[Stadt]

There are some issues but other teams on the league have their own problems. Cartwright and TWB were signed by promotion contenders 

[Mark_w]

10 hours ago, funkyrobot said:

I actually think we have a much weaker squad than the cost and wages suggest. We are very poor in the goalkeeper position, conference north levels, we are league 2 level at left back at best. We have centre backs not comfortable with that ball other than teenager Kangasniemi. We have a number of lightweight players in midfield and attack with ok technique but with no physicality and little pace. Our pivot if it’s Lundstram can’t play on the half turn and we have one good striker. Overrated squad. 

We're in League One, if we have CBs who are comfortable with the ball then they will either be utterly atrocious defenders or they will be gone in January. We don't need to have CBs who are good on the ball, we just need to not play completely suicidal football.

[honeybradger]

9 hours ago, Dan said:

The squad, on the whole, is good enough to stay in League One.

 

I'm unsure if it's good enough to get promoted out of it.

 

Goalkeepers = huge, huge issue. I think even if you had this team semi organised, we would ship a few simply through not having a capable goalkeeper. We've given a two year contract to a bloke who is at least a year past retiring.

 

Full backs = Joseph looks too good for this level. Aluko looks extremely raw, has done well at times and shocking at others. Thomas will not kick a ball in the EFL after Rudkin's disgusting nepotistic contract expires. McFarlane has struggled, but I'm willing to give him a bit more benefit of the doubt - particularly given he's the only professional level left back at the club currently. Coulibaly is ****ing awful as well. Another player signed for the Premier League who can't hack the likes of Barnsley and Stevenage.

 

Centre halves = Total shitshow. Souttar is one player you can definitely say is hindered by the tactics. I actually think he'd be perfectly OK playing for somebody like Millwall, or Lincoln. But we're a terrible fit. O'Hora looks very poor. Okoli is a joke. Nelson is obviously done here, and Kangasniemi for whatever reason, probably more nepotistic ones doesn't really get a look in. I'm really unsure what pairing I'd even go for - probably Souttar and Kangasniemi, but at least fit the whole system around not playing ourselves into trouble.

 

Midfield = On paper one of our better areas but still sorely lacking some attributes, and bodies right in the centre when you come to think of it.. Page needs to get out of here before we anchor his career below his potential. We've failed him. Braybrooke I'm quite torn on. I've long said it with youth players that there needs to be more nuance. They get held to either a ridiculous standard or none at all. If Braybrooke is our 17th best player in the squad, then that is perfectly OK. It's a cheaper way to plug the gaps in your squad. I'm on the fence. Lundstram I'm again torn, has looked good in parts and rubbish in others. Another player on his way down. Smallbone is another high risk contract dished out, but he hasn't yet kicked a ball for the club so I won't entirely slag him off, yet, but he'd better deliver.

 

Attacking midfield / wide forwards = Very hit and miss. Alves looks tidy at times but you can write not far off exactly what I did for Braybrooke above. Howell looks OK in patches. Doyle the same. Watson looks pretty poor so far. Bob Reid is a phoney and totally done, and I'd imagine will have retired within 12 months - and probably would've retired within the last 12 months if we hadn't given the usual Rudkin contract. Burns could very well be Bob Reid all over again. Chaplin looks like yet another very unreliable piece of business. Cullen looks poor and offers little on top of what we already have, but I concede he probably finishes the season our second top goalscorer, he's the sort you might get away with if the others chip in. Swansea don't seem to be missing him a jot.

 

Strikers = My one non-caveated bit of praise is that Emil Riis looks good. I was expecting him to be worse than this, based on anecdotes from previous clubs. Maybe they are right and we are just so accustomed to joke players up front now though and merely an average one just seems good. But I can't really knock him. Bristric is the sort of signing I'd give a little more leeway with a bedding in period, but I am getting Carranza vibes, and what's worse is it appears we have paid enough to sign him that it has to be treated like quite a risky move, and one that's showing no signs of paying off.

 

The biggest issue in our squad is the absolutely ludicrous way it has been put together. I would urge anybody to go through our signings, particularly in the last three years, and just assess the exact number of them that came here on their way up, and the number of them that came here on their way down. It is so skewed towards the latter it is unbelievable - it's worse than a Turkish club. We have not bought a player from a lower league English club that has played significant first team minutes since James Justin - 7 years ago, and what do you know, a player who initially did well here, fell to bits in the malaise and now regularly starts for a very steady Premier League team. While we're still treating managers like consultants. I think literally any money we pay towards scouts is money wasted because we won't actually utilise anything they offer. Ipswich sign a steadily performing Wes Burns from Fleetwood for buttons, he grows with their club and leaves them when he's done. We don't look to replicate todays equivalent of this when they are absolutely out there. We just sign the shattered version of this player and put them on a contract that would be expected of a team pushing the play-offs in the Championship.

 

TLDR: On paper, it is better than this and shouldn't be in relegation contention, but it is a massively flawed squad in its construction and probably too much so that we'll get near to the promotion we have forced ourselves into needing. We're not a million miles off a point where we will need top 2 form for the remainder of the season to achieve just a top six finish - and that should be a sackable offence.

I agree with everything except for Braybrooke being 17th place in the squad and the similar implications with Alves.

 

Both have been in our top 5 players this season. It's fine if you think they're not good enough to be the best players on the team and carry us to promotuon but we have 6 other positions to improve in the starting XI before we get to those two.

 

If every position in our team was at Alves/Braybrooke level which is a 4-5/10 half the time and an 8 out of 10 the other half of the time we would be fine. Instead we have a team full of consistent 3/10s.

[Chelmofox]

1 hour ago, nnfox said:

We're underperforming because of the manager's tactics, BUT I do have some sympathy for RM.  Putting to one side his possession obsession, he is correct in saying that it's individual errors that cost us.

Really shocks me people see it this way. The system totally exposes any mistake, and its inconcevable that you go 90 minutes without making one. Our defenders make more passes the the entire opposition, meaning each pass has to be perfect. Our backline play a horrific high line but without pace intensity (coached this way), meaning the opposition either sit tight and wait for the appropriate pass to press (Barnsley goal), or you go long to either wing and expose the space (goals 1 and 2 for Peterborough). We have CB's (Okoli) attacking in the opponents box and the whole team getting caught out on transition, and before you know it we are 2 on 2 in our own half. Our players are knackered because they have to work 3 times as hard as the oppostion to get nowhere (we make 10 passes out the back to give the ball back to the goalkeeper, whilst being pressed, and also allowing the opposition to get back into a perfect defensive position).

 

Martin is completely defensively inept. Every team he has managed has the same issues. Defenders arent defenders, they are ball playing specialists who need to make 4x as many passes as they should, need to compress the opposition on the half way and need to pelt back at speed just to cover the space thats easy to expose. The actual defending part is secondary.

 

Peterborough spend the whole warmup pinging balls to each wing. They knew EXACTLY what do do. I cant believe no-one in our management team saw this and thought that maybe playing Aluko so far up the pitch was a mistake. After 2 or 3 warning signed before the goal, i cannot believe that the manager didnt see what was happening and tweaked it. When we went 1-0 down, i cant believe the the manager is waving the back line crazily high up the pitch again, leading to the 2nd goal.

Edited 3 hours ago by Chelmofox