Pen 3 Posted 20 June 2014 Posted 20 June 2014 Ok, trying to provoke a discussion, if you saw Muzzy's comments in the Mercury you'll know where this stems from. Winning is about mental approach as much as fitness; there's no point in playing any game if you don't think you can win right? why can't a newly promoted team win at Anfield, or Old Traffford? And if they can, where does the idea that fourth from bottom is success come from? Interested to know what you think..
Fez of Mahrez Posted 20 June 2014 Posted 20 June 2014 This might just be semantics but you don't aim to finish 17th in any league. You aim to get as many points as you can and if that's only good enough to finish 17th, it's whether you judge that as a success or not.
Swarles Barkley Posted 20 June 2014 Posted 20 June 2014 Not sure for others, but for me i would take/be happy with fourth from bottom right now but not necessarily aim for fourth from bottom. Obviously we should aim for as high as possible but thats not a sensible plan. Im sure pearson would be saying to the players to have set targets for the season and then see where we are at that stage, and if worse comes to worse at least we are still in the PL for another season
Lionator Posted 20 June 2014 Posted 20 June 2014 Nobody will plan to finish 17th. The aim isn't to finish 17th.
Guest kristianity77 Posted 20 June 2014 Posted 20 June 2014 The 17th thing is just a figure of speech. The idea is to stay up in the first season (which it is)
Sampson Posted 20 June 2014 Posted 20 June 2014 There's a difference between your aims and what you'd settle for. Our players should be aiming to win every game, but at the end of the season I think most of us fans will settle for 17th that's all.
Guest Sharpe's Fox Posted 20 June 2014 Posted 20 June 2014 I think the aim is to get as many points as we can.
Captain... Posted 20 June 2014 Posted 20 June 2014 There is 2 aspects to this, one is as others have said we are not aiming for 17th, but we will see that as a successful season, MON only every spoke of securing survival then anything after that was a bonus. The other aspect of it is we have to be realistic, we can't expect to go to Anfield or Old Trafford and compete on our terms and win. We need to set-up not to lose in those games, not necessarily play for a draw, but focus on being solid at the back, not commit men forward unnecessarily and utilize our speed on the break. And accept that a 1-0 defeat at the Emirates is not actually a disaster.
BoneDog Posted 20 June 2014 Posted 20 June 2014 Aim for the sky. Reach for the stars. And we don't want no parachute because we're staying up there.
Grewks Posted 20 June 2014 Posted 20 June 2014 Well the QPR approach of spend millions, dispand the team and aim for mid-table certainly worked..... At the start of last season Hull and Palace continually stated their aim was to stop up, they didn't care how just as long as they did. Cardiff on the other hand with the help of Vincent Tan were constantly stating how they were going to achieve X,Y and Z. Which teams aims were better? QPR and cardiff....or Palace and Hull??
MattGamble92 Posted 20 June 2014 Posted 20 June 2014 When you go out on that pitch you go to get the 3 points. No matter who it is against. So any aims are inconsequential and this theory is bullshit.
_Fatboyslow_ Posted 21 June 2014 Posted 21 June 2014 42 points is the target, any more is a bonus. Not aiming for 17th place. Simple
Nick Posted 21 June 2014 Posted 21 June 2014 I actually think we will take big scalps this season - players will raise their games like a cup final.... it's the likes of Stoke Burnley Swansea West Brom West Ham etc that will likely muller us!
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 21 June 2014 Posted 21 June 2014 EVERY team in the Premiership will be aiming to get as many points as they can. The philosophy will be the same, the ability will be different.
Guest Col city fan Posted 21 June 2014 Posted 21 June 2014 EVERY team in the Premiership will be aiming to get as many points as they can. The philosophy will be the same, the ability will be different. Spot on..
Blanesta Posted 21 June 2014 Posted 21 June 2014 When people talk about 4th from bottom it's just another way of saying stopping up. It's not talking about the extent of their ambition!
Guest Posted 25 June 2014 Posted 25 June 2014 Steve Bruce challenged his players at Hull to win a minimum of ten games last season. They did and did so in style, particularly after judicious additions to the squad in the January transfer window. Nigel should be thinking along the same lines. This strategy, along with a dozen or so draws will see us home and dry. Survive in the Premiership in year one, consolidate in years two and three and then with our ambitious owners who knows?
nc_fox Posted 26 June 2014 Posted 26 June 2014 When looking at the fixtures and the transfer we brought in, I can see us breaking top fifteen as long as the guys play up to their potential. I for on was surprised that Palace stayed up last year with their squad, and I think we could surprise some people as well. Will we compete for Europe? More than likely not, but I think we can give teams some headaches.
The Doctor Posted 26 June 2014 Posted 26 June 2014 Ok, trying to provoke a discussion, if you saw Muzzy's comments in the Mercury you'll know where this stems from. Winning is about mental approach as much as fitness; there's no point in playing any game if you don't think you can win right? why can't a newly promoted team win at Anfield, or Old Traffford? And if they can, where does the idea that fourth from bottom is success come from? Interested to know what you think.. Because as a newly promoted team, we'll be expected to go back down. Hence survival would be a success. It's not the limit of anyones ambitions, it's simply saying that survival is the first aim - which any sensible manager of a smaller prem team (like ourselves) would agree with.
sylofox Posted 26 June 2014 Posted 26 June 2014 I'm hoping for a mid finish 11th 10th. But right now if offered 17th I would rip that fvcking arm off. 17th now or risk playing the season and going down no brainer to me.
ealingfox Posted 26 June 2014 Posted 26 June 2014 Steve Bruce challenged his players at Hull to win a minimum of ten games last season. They did and did so in style, particularly after judicious additions to the squad in the January transfer window. Nigel should be thinking along the same lines. This strategy, along with a dozen or so draws will see us home and dry. Survive in the Premiership in year one, consolidate in years two and three and then with our ambitious owners who knows? They won ten games exactly, and lost over 20, scoring the 4th fewest goals. They didn't get to 40 points. Not exactly 'in style', they were only marginally better than the 3 relegated teams. Confident that they're more likely to go down than us.
Mark_from_USA Posted 26 June 2014 Posted 26 June 2014 They won ten games exactly, and lost over 20, scoring the 4th fewest goals. They didn't get to 40 points. Not exactly 'in style', they were only marginally better than the 3 relegated teams. Confident that they're more likely to go down than us. Spot on. Hull almost bottled it in the end. I definitely don't think we should be thinking like Hull. Number one, out incumbent squad is batter than theirs was. Therefore we should expect better results. I also don;t think we will be waiting on additions in January. I fully expect Pearson and co to assemble and put forth a squad they believe will provide consistency, just like last season.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.