Knock on Wood Posted 5 March 2013 Share Posted 5 March 2013 Surprising myself by saying this, but do we have an issue, with strength in depth? Sounds ridiculous with the amount of quality we have at the club, but is that the reason for defeats against Peterborough and Ipswich? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bayfox Posted 5 March 2013 Share Posted 5 March 2013 What strength in depth? We have no back up at Right Back or Left Back, 2 of our centre halves have been out for large parts of the season, leaving us relying on a kid. We only have 3 Centre Midfielders and we play 2 every game. I suppose you could say we had an fair few options up front, but that depends if you consider, vardy, waghorn and futacs as any good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knock on Wood Posted 5 March 2013 Author Share Posted 5 March 2013 What strength in depth? We have no back up at Right Back or Left Back, 2 of our centre halves have been out for large parts of the season, leaving us relying on a kid. We only have 3 Centre Midfielders and we play 2 every game. I suppose you could say we had an fair few options up front, but that depends if you consider, vardy, waghorn and futacs as any good. Exactly, honestly don't know why Pearson brought Kane in, when we needed defenders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfox Posted 5 March 2013 Share Posted 5 March 2013 I think the main problem is, if we get injuries or suspensions, then we have to call on Wellens, Gallagher and Vardy to be on the bench. And if we are in a losing situation, we have to rely on bringing these players on, and try and get us a result, which of course don't work. When James and Nugent are back, then it will be more than likely, Wellens and Vardy won't be on the bench, unless Pearson opts to start Nugent, Wood and Kane together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Cash Posted 5 March 2013 Share Posted 5 March 2013 I think the main problem is, if we get injuries or suspensions, then we have to call on Wellens, Gallagher and Vardy to be on the bench. And if we are in a losing situation, we have to rely on bringing these players on, and try and get us a result, which of course don't work. When James and Nugent are back, then it will be more than likely, Wellens and Vardy won't be on the bench, unless Pearson opts to start Nugent, Wood and Kane together. Which he will do because Nugent is his love child. #PearsonOut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hackneyfox Posted 5 March 2013 Share Posted 5 March 2013 Which he will do because Nugent is his love child. #PearsonOut Really? I think he's edging him out, seems more likely to go with Kane & Wood to me whilst perhaps trying to move Nugent out wide which he won't be happy about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5waller5 Posted 5 March 2013 Share Posted 5 March 2013 Yes ..... and it's been the same all season - the tired legs are starting to tell now and the niggling injuries - and we just don't have the quality on the bench to give someone a week off and rest. DD, Konch, Nuge, Knocky, De Laet, have all looked like they need a rest at various times this season ... but we've had to battle on with them out of form because we don't have good enough quality cover. I've said it all along - but the NP lovers point at the squad togetherness and would you rather have Sven's mercenaries instead of accepting there's a downside to this tiny squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyFromLE Posted 5 March 2013 Share Posted 5 March 2013 What strength in depth? We have no back up at Right Back or Left Back, 2 of our centre halves have been out for large parts of the season, leaving us relying on a kid. We only have 3 Centre Midfielders and we play 2 every game. I suppose you could say we had an fair few options up front, but that depends if you consider, vardy, waghorn and futacs as any good. I agree that we probably need a couple of back up players. At this stage of the season however I don't think we'd be able to get someone in on loan, who is just literally here to warm our bench - the point of the loan would be for them to get game time. Maybe NP needed to address this earlier. However. I wouldn't say we are "relying" on a kid (Keano) as he's been brilliant and shown a lot of promise. Defensively, regardless of our lack of "depth" we have been very good. I agree that we require more midfield cover, especially someone with a bit of strength. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 5 March 2013 Share Posted 5 March 2013 Yes ..... and it's been the same all season - the tired legs are starting to tell now and the niggling injuries - and we just don't have the quality on the bench to give someone a week off and rest. DD, Konch, Nuge, Knocky, De Laet, have all looked like they need a rest at various times this season ... but we've had to battle on with them out of form because we don't have good enough quality cover. I've said it all along - but the NP lovers point at the squad togetherness and would you rather have Sven's mercenaries instead of accepting there's a downside to this tiny squad. Would rather have a small squad than a bloated squad. We are a little top heavy in this squad that we have too many attackers and not enough defenders, and the balance isn't perfect, but I would rather see a smaller squad bolstered by loan signings, than have the likes of Ball and Paintsil doing nothing more than collecting a hefty pay check. NP's squad is much better than Sven's squad in all departments, including the main one, on the pitch, but it is not the size that is the problem but the balance. If we had Moore and Schlupp out on loan, but available for instant recall, then it would be ok, and replaced some of the midfield, Danns, Wellens and Gallagher. We do also need to reduce the number of strikers we have on the books, Nugent, Wood, Vardy, Waghorn, Beckford, Futacs, Schlupp, is too many, 3 are currently out on loan, and personally I would be happy to see Nugent and Wood as main strikers and Waghorn and Vardy as second string, but I am probably in the minority on here, but if we do bring someone in, be it Kane, or another, we need to let some of them go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5waller5 Posted 5 March 2013 Share Posted 5 March 2013 Would rather have a small squad than a bloated squad. We are a little top heavy in this squad that we have too many attackers and not enough defenders, and the balance isn't perfect, but I would rather see a smaller squad bolstered by loan signings, than have the likes of Ball and Paintsil doing nothing more than collecting a hefty pay check. NP's squad is much better than Sven's squad in all departments, including the main one, on the pitch, but it is not the size that is the problem but the balance. If we had Moore and Schlupp out on loan, but available for instant recall, then it would be ok, and replaced some of the midfield, Danns, Wellens and Gallagher. We do also need to reduce the number of strikers we have on the books, Nugent, Wood, Vardy, Waghorn, Beckford, Futacs, Schlupp, is too many, 3 are currently out on loan, and personally I would be happy to see Nugent and Wood as main strikers and Waghorn and Vardy as second string, but I am probably in the minority on here, but if we do bring someone in, be it Kane, or another, we need to let some of them go. I agree ... the balance is shocking .... And what was NP's first comment on the squad he inherited?? It's totally unbalanced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfox Posted 5 March 2013 Share Posted 5 March 2013 I really don't know why we loaned Moore out, he is our back up right-back. With St Ledger injured, and if De Laet get's injured we have nobody. Same applies to left-back, Konchesky has looked tired in parts this season, and hasn't played up to standards. Like now with James out, we have to bring Wellens on the bench. With Nugent out we have to bring in Vardy. If we end up struggling towards the end of the season, due to our depth, then Pearson is the one to blame, unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cc_star Posted 5 March 2013 Share Posted 5 March 2013 Wage bill almost £30m/year. Owner limited to pumping in a maximum of £6m in loans next season Do you not think the manager would have been more active if it was possible, any manager would be. Pearson had a load on loan last time he was here he'd do the same again if he could. Jesus Christ... Get fvcking real people. Pearson to blame? . Clueless muppets. As for the loaning out of Moore etc he can be recalled at any time, he needs to play & RDL/Morgan/Keane are miles better, so loan is good management! We have to sell to buy, we've blown all the monopoly money on a load of shite that it will /cost/ us to get off the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyFromLE Posted 5 March 2013 Share Posted 5 March 2013 Wage bill almost £30m/year. Owner limited to pumping in a maximum of £6m in loans next season Do you not think the manager would have been more active if it was possible Jesus Christ... Get fvcking real people. We have to sell to buy, we've blown all the monopoly money on a load of shite that it will /cost/ us to get off the books. Does this mean that we're, p, p, p, p, poor? We are still massive though, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson_6 Posted 5 March 2013 Share Posted 5 March 2013 We have to sell to buy, we've blown all the monopoly money on a load of shite that it will /cost/ us to get off the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cc_star Posted 5 March 2013 Share Posted 5 March 2013 Does this mean that we're, p, p, p, p, poor? We are still massive though, right? No we're loaded (well, indebted anyway) but it doesn't do any good under incoming rules. Investment (more debt) in the former of wages isn't possible without shuffling the deck... Konch, Beckford, Danns, Wellens & Gally departure the key but not possible until the summer & probably not possible until we make sizeable contribution to paying off their existing deals... Who knows maybe selling an asset/key player would allow more room to bring several players in & remain under the ceiling. For example would people be happy selling Kasper, Wood or Knockaert & using the freed up wages & fee received to bring 2/3 players in? This could be the world we're about to enter where the value of parent company wealth is eroded. It doesn't mean we HAVE to become a selling club, it's going to be all about shuffling the decks to remain under a ceiling & managing resources... Do we go for 35 ok players, or 22 better players, do we pay Premiership wages to a LB or a Keeper if it could fund 2 outfield players? That's what FFP is all about, whilst I agree with all that, we're so far over the ceiling I can see cuts being needed rather than strengthening, but that depends on how all this debt is restructured (fiddled) but ongoing wages will remain a problem that Pearson has to work under... Not over Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.