Greatness_Since_1884 Posted 27 January 2013 Share Posted 27 January 2013 I agree that altogether in one side, considering the limited game time some have had, it was maybe a step too far for guys who would individually be dependable Championship players. I just wonder whether our next game being in midweek rather than the weekend swayed Nigel to play the side he did? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swalker Posted 27 January 2013 Share Posted 27 January 2013 To be honest though: Schlupp IS definitely good enough at this level. Waghorn has shown that he is good enough just needs a run in the team but he was showing great promise when he had that run in the team earlier this season. I'd agree Futacs and Vardy aren't good enough but we also have the likes of Knockaert who can and has played up front. But focusing on the strikers who actually play no team has better strikers who play week in week out than Nuge and Wood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finn Claw II Posted 27 January 2013 Share Posted 27 January 2013 Some might argue that our 'second string' would have a chance in this division- Logan, Moore, Whitbread, St. Ledger, Schlupp, Gallagher, King, Wellens, Dyer, Futacs, Waghorn Perhaps that should be the team for the replay, if they're all available and we're worried about fixture congestion. This - though I'd like some CM cover. While it would never happen can we recall Danns if say King was injured? He's better than Wellens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Libertine Dream Posted 27 January 2013 Share Posted 27 January 2013 I'd like a couple more additions but its not a be all and end all, we have a fair few versatile players. Our backup players would get in the majority of other sides in this league. I feel yesterday was all down to Wellens playing, we lacked impetus, options and width because most the time the team had to compensate for him. The strikers looked particularly bad because our only outlet was the long ball. We missed having either Drinky or James more than anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indierich06 Posted 28 January 2013 Share Posted 28 January 2013 Defence: We've been solid all season regardless of which players we've had in there - they've all contributed to us having the best defence in the league. I think we're fine in terms of cover here, especially once St Ledger and Whitbread are back to full fitness - hopefully we'll keep hold of Schlupp for the time being too, to cover us at LB. Midfield: We have a lot of fantastic options in midfield (Knocks, Drinkwater, King, James, Marshall) and we can still call on the likes of Dyer, Gallagher and Schlupp to play in there, which gives us fairly good backup and there's always the loan market if needs be. Attack: Wood and Nugent pick themselves. It's highly unlikely that they'll both get season-ending injuries, so provided we've got one of those two up front, I would have no worries about pairing either of them with Waghorn, Vardy or Futacs. People are quick to forget that Wood has been here less than a month so far and this team has been there or therabouts the whole season without him in the side, so our backup options can't be that bad really. Of course, the goal tallies of our backup strikers could be better, but this is a team game and the strikers we've got in reserve have helped us win games by bringing more to the team than just goals. So I'd have no problem at all if we kept the squad the way it is at the minute, I don't see any point in collecting players - especially when we're still yet to shed some of the high earning failures off of our books. Pearson has always utilised the loan market excellently when he's needed to, so I wouldn't be too worried if a key player gets injured - NP and his staff will definitely have contingencies in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facecloth Posted 28 January 2013 Share Posted 28 January 2013 Defence: We've been solid all season regardless of which players we've had in there - they've all contributed to us having the best defence in the league. I think we're fine in terms of cover here, especially once St Ledger and Whitbread are back to full fitness - hopefully we'll keep hold of Schlupp for the time being too, to cover us at LB. Midfield: We have a lot of fantastic options in midfield (Knocks, Drinkwater, King, James, Marshall) and we can still call on the likes of Dyer, Gallagher and Schlupp to play in there, which gives us fairly good backup and there's always the loan market if needs be. Attack: Wood and Nugent pick themselves. It's highly unlikely that they'll both get season-ending injuries, so provided we've got one of those two up front, I would have no worries about pairing either of them with Waghorn, Vardy or Futacs. People are quick to forget that Wood has been here less than a month so far and this team has been there or therabouts the whole season without him in the side, so our backup options can't be that bad really. Of course, the goal tallies of our backup strikers could be better, but this is a team game and the strikers we've got in reserve have helped us win games by bringing more to the team than just goals. So I'd have no problem at all if we kept the squad the way it is at the minute, I don't see any point in collecting players - especially when we're still yet to shed some of the high earning failures off of our books. Pearson has always utilised the loan market excellently when he's needed to, so I wouldn't be too worried if a key player gets injured - NP and his staff will definitely have contingencies in place. The only thing I would really disagree with there is the midfield, because you've kind of lumped them all in together. Wide players I think we're ok. We have Knocky, Marshall, and Dyer who are really fighting for a starting spot. Then we have Gally, and Schlupp as back up too. But central midfield, we have James, Drinky, and King vying for a starting spot, but after that we have nothing. Everyone has already said Wellens is finished, and he's our only back up. If one of the main three got injured we'd have no cover at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indierich06 Posted 28 January 2013 Share Posted 28 January 2013 The only thing I would really disagree with there is the midfield, because you've kind of lumped them all in together. Wide players I think we're ok. We have Knocky, Marshall, and Dyer who are really fighting for a starting spot. Then we have Gally, and Schlupp as back up too. But central midfield, we have James, Drinky, and King vying for a starting spot, but after that we have nothing. Everyone has already said Wellens is finished, and he's our only back up. If one of the main three got injured we'd have no cover at all. At which point I'm sure Pearson would go into the loan market. Even if Marshall broke his leg and Drinkwater tore his hamstring, you'd still have Dyer and King to come in, which is more than good enough for us at the moment. We can't bring in players just to be backup to the backup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facecloth Posted 28 January 2013 Share Posted 28 January 2013 At which point I'm sure Pearson would go into the loan market. Even if Marshall broke his leg and Drinkwater tore his hamstring, you'd still have Dyer and King to come in, which is more than good enough for us at the moment. We can't bring in players just to be backup to the backup. Oh I'm sure Pearson would, I'm just saying we aren't cover totally adequately in central midfield as we are in other areas, and that you had lumped the whole midfield together, which you can't really do when talking about that area of the team. You actually wrote "call on the likes Dyer, Gallagher and Schlupp to play in there" and nobody would ever put any of those three anywhere near a central midfield position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolhandfox Posted 28 January 2013 Share Posted 28 January 2013 Simply we can't afford to have better fringe players, are wage bill is big enough! I can't see us doing a lot of business until we get Danns, Beckford, Wellens off the wage bill, the owner have money but not a bottomless pit. I think NP has done a great job with the squad. Even under O'Neill we only had 11-13 good players, we had the same issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolhandfox Posted 28 January 2013 Share Posted 28 January 2013 The only thing I would really disagree with there is the midfield, because you've kind of lumped them all in together. Wide players I think we're ok. We have Knocky, Marshall, and Dyer who are really fighting for a starting spot. Then we have Gally, and Schlupp as back up too. But central midfield, we have James, Drinky, and King vying for a starting spot, but after that we have nothing. Everyone has already said Wellens is finished, and he's our only back up. If one of the main three got injured we'd have no cover at all. I would agree we are limited in central midfield areas bodies wise, would like to see us look for a loan player in this area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indierich06 Posted 28 January 2013 Share Posted 28 January 2013 We do need another striker, if not two. Waghorn, Vardy and Futacs are average at best, even Forest have a better set of strikers than us in Sharp, Cox, Blackstock and Henderson. Forest have better strikers than us do they? We've scored 10 more goals than they have, we're 9 points ahead of then and 8 places above them in the table. I think I'd rather keep our striking options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 28 January 2013 Share Posted 28 January 2013 Forest have better strikers than us do they? We've scored 10 more goals than they have, we're 9 points ahead of then and 8 places above them in the table. I think I'd rather keep our striking options. They have better depth. Wouldn't say they have better strikers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indierich06 Posted 28 January 2013 Share Posted 28 January 2013 They have better depth. Wouldn't say they have better strikers. I wouldn't even say their depth is particularly good either - they have more players in their squad but the quality of those players is dubious. They remind me of us last season really - get a few 'names' in and expect to take the league by storm, end up around 9th or 10th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 28 January 2013 Share Posted 28 January 2013 I wouldn't even say their depth is particularly good either - they have more players in their squad but the quality of those players is dubious. They remind me of us last season really - get a few 'names' in and expect to take the league by storm, end up around 9th or 10th. I wouldn't say it's brilliant, it's better than ours though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolhandfox Posted 28 January 2013 Share Posted 28 January 2013 I would get rid of Wellens, Vardy and Beckford. Don't think they are good enough for us. Someone has to want them first, can't see the club wanting to make a loss on Vardy after 20 games. Unless Beckford start scoring for Hudderfield, we will have sell him also at a massive loss We are going to struggle to give Wellens away due he's wages, may heave to pay him off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.