Voll Blau Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 Which is THE best team? Just so we can know at 2:00, rather than 5:00, whether you think he's got it right.
tickler28 Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 First tactic...get the ball out wide and pull their wingers back forcing long ball. Look to deliver early balls into Ulloa Plan B long ball from back up to Ulloa with Nugent feeding off knock downs and Cambiasso in advanced role
Voll Blau Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 See Palace pre match thread. To be fair he will never pick my team. These are the things I don't want to see: Vardy on the wing De Laet at left back (Konchesky scored our last winning goal remember and has a left foot) I want either Albrighton or Mahrez on right Kramaric in a 4-4-2 only....he's not a number 10 Hammond and James in a 2 or add Cambiasso only if you play Nugent or Mahrez behind Ulloa First tactic...get the ball out wide and pull their wingers back forcing long ball. Look to deliver early balls into Ulloa Plan B long ball from back up to Ulloa with Nugent feeding off knock downs and Cambiasso in advanced role Reckon the Thais should just hire you tbh. Shot in the dark but are you a fussy eater?
tickler28 Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 Reckon the Thais should just hire you tbh. Shot in the dark but are you a fussy eater? No I like it plain and simple. To give an example I don't want a roast dinner without roast potatoes (Ulloa without a recognised right winger) Nor do I want a burger without sauce (De Laet at LB) So no not fussy just normal
Harry - LCFC Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 Because we're too old to have teenage infatuations and support the club not individuals? The majority of people want Pearson to stay, we've seen that from the polls done on this forum. I take it you aren't going to argue that the majority (most of them adults) are prone to immaturity? You've kind of flipped Wookie's question a bit I think. It isn't a case of trying to discover what causes people to want Pearson to stay, that's the standard opinion. The non-standard opinion - wanting him to go - is the one which needs explaining. The grumpy and the crankier individuals on the right seem to be the personalities that tend to hold the view more than most.
Mark_w Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 No I like it plain and simple. To give an example I don't want a roast dinner without roast potatoes (Ulloa without a recognised right winger) Nor do I want a burger without sauce (De Laet at LB) So no not fussy just normal You just want, according to the Palace pre-match thread, Mahrez in a position he's never played before. But of course De Laet can't play at Left Back even though he's done it plenty of times in his career. Keeping it nice and simple.
Voll Blau Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 No I like it plain and simple. To give an example I don't want a roast dinner without roast potatoes (Ulloa without a recognised right winger) Nor do I want a burger without sauce (De Laet at LB) So no not fussy just normal Please promise me you'll never open a themed restaurant. Not sure you've quite nailed the concept.
SecretPro Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 Which is THE best team? Just so we can know at 2:00, rather than 5:00, whether you think he's got it right. That argument doesn't hold any weight. If you truly believe Vardy as a winger and Drinky/King as a midfield pairing is a good choice then go ahead, I'll see you in the championship. It's not like last week everyone was slating the team selection after the loss. I think most people were utterly baffled when the teamsheet was released. I genuinely think every city fan (or the ones with a brain) can see that drinky/king has never been a good choice and playng an out of form striker on the wing is a bit grim. The only person that hasn't recognised this has been Pearson for whatever reason.
Dan Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 4-4-2 should be binned. It's a crap formation at this level. We don't even play it when Nugent plays. Notice the correlation.
Miquel The Work Geordie Posted 7 February 2015 Posted 7 February 2015 If Pearson keeps us up you can say he's better than Adams, until then he's achieved no more but on a far better budget. The top flight is a very different place in comparison to ten years ago though, the amount of money being pumped into it nowadays completely eclipses that in Adams' era. Naturally Pearson's budget will be better but it's relative to the situation nowadays where it seems you have to spend considerably to have any chance of staying up; it wouldn't make it any less of an achievement, other clubs are spending horrid amounts.
Dickov22 Posted 7 February 2015 Posted 7 February 2015 4-4-2 should be binned. It's a crap formation at this level. We don't even play it when Nugent plays. Notice the correlation. I agree. 3 in the middle always
seenitall Posted 7 February 2015 Posted 7 February 2015 Reckon the tide will turn if we lose today....should be an easy win for us, so the turning will be justified if we lose
Webbo Posted 7 February 2015 Posted 7 February 2015 The top flight is a very different place in comparison to ten years ago though, the amount of money being pumped into it nowadays completely eclipses that in Adams' era. Naturally Pearson's budget will be better but it's relative to the situation nowadays where it seems you have to spend considerably to have any chance of staying up; it wouldn't make it any less of an achievement, other clubs are spending horrid amounts.Adams got us promoted while we were in administration that's an amazing achievement. As for the money it's relative as every other team was in the same boat then and are now.
Guest Col city fan Posted 7 February 2015 Posted 7 February 2015 Adams got us promoted while we were in administration that's an amazing achievement. As for the money it's relative as every other team was in the same boat then and are now. Exactly right...it's all relative. This is why Martin O'Neil did amazing things at this football club. This money argument gets on my thruppeny bits. We have spent the arse end of twenty million on just two players. That's not exactly 'not spending' is it. Only this season, we've broken the club transfer record not once, but twice. And still sit bottom. If we do get relegated this season, without a doubt, it will have been one Helluva bad season.
Mark_w Posted 7 February 2015 Posted 7 February 2015 That argument doesn't hold any weight. If you truly believe Vardy as a winger and Drinky/King as a midfield pairing is a good choice then go ahead, I'll see you in the championship. It's not like last week everyone was slating the team selection after the loss. I think most people were utterly baffled when the teamsheet was released. I genuinely think every city fan (or the ones with a brain) can see that drinky/king has never been a good choice and playng an out of form striker on the wing is a bit grim. The only person that hasn't recognised this has been Pearson for whatever reason. What argument do you think I'm making? He said there is a, singular, best team and I wanted to know what it was so that we can know whether he agrees with it as soon as the team sheet is out. That's literally all I've done there, any deeper meaning you've taken from it is imaginary.
CosbehFox Posted 7 February 2015 Posted 7 February 2015 Adams got us promoted while we were in administration that's an amazing achievement. As for the money it's relative as every other team was in the same boat then and are now. We cheated that season in many ways. He managed to keep a squad of PL players happy and stop them for joining other clubs bar Piper and Marshall.
Babylon Posted 7 February 2015 Posted 7 February 2015 We cheated that season in many ways. He managed to keep a squad of PL players happy and stop them for joining other clubs bar Piper and Marshall.How did we cheat?We sold numerous players like Savage, Rowett, accepted bids for Muzzy and basically everyone was pretty much up for sale the admin season.
Babylon Posted 7 February 2015 Posted 7 February 2015 That argument doesn't hold any weight. If you truly believe Vardy as a winger and Drinky/King as a midfield pairing is a good choice then go ahead, I'll see you in the championship. It's not like last week everyone was slating the team selection after the loss. I think most people were utterly baffled when the teamsheet was released. I genuinely think every city fan (or the ones with a brain) can see that drinky/king has never been a good choice and playng an out of form striker on the wing is a bit grim. The only person that hasn't recognised this has been Pearson for whatever reason. I'd imagine "those with a brain" realise those two only started playing in the middle due to injury and suspension. It's not like Pearson woke up one day and dropped everyone else for them.
Bettsj2 Posted 7 February 2015 Posted 7 February 2015 How did we cheat? We sold numerous players like Savage, Rowett, accepted bids for Muzzy and basically everyone was pretty much up for sale the admin season. This. Several players agreed to pay cuts too if memory serves. Remember the home game against Forest? Squad was so threadbare, we had to play Benjamin and Tommy Wright up front. Still beat them though !
CosbehFox Posted 7 February 2015 Posted 7 February 2015 How did we cheat? We sold numerous players like Savage, Rowett, accepted bids for Muzzy and basically everyone was pretty much up for sale the admin season. We were maintaining a wage bill way beyond what we could afford. That is a fact like it or not. That we ripped off tons of small sub-contractors hardly goes down as our greatest hour. I like this club more than most but it's not great that we dipped into administration.
ian_marshall Posted 7 February 2015 Posted 7 February 2015 We were maintaining a wage bill way beyond what we could afford. That is a fact like it or not. That we ripped off tons of small sub-contractors hardly goes down as our greatest hour. I like this club more than most but it's not great that we dipped into administration. I agree that what happened to the sub-contractors wasn't a great representation of our club but many forget that the club tried everything it possibly could to avoid administration and the consequences that brought upon those associated with it. If I recall correctly they had their hand forced by a former player's agent who issued a winding up order against the club and then it became a free for all with all the main creditors scrambling to get their hands on virtually any asset they could to avoid losing out. Unfortunately in those situations the small boys are the ones that come off worst but I don't think that this was ever the clubs intention.
inckley fox Posted 7 February 2015 Posted 7 February 2015 How did we cheat? We sold numerous players like Savage, Rowett, accepted bids for Muzzy and basically everyone was pretty much up for sale the admin season. Piper, Marshall...
inckley fox Posted 7 February 2015 Posted 7 February 2015 I'm not belittling Adams' achievement in keeping our heads above water, though it's true that he inherited some very good players at the wrong end of their career who had been knocked for six by Taylor's ineptitude, but still had another season or two in them. He certainly didn't cheat. It's madness that we solve the problem of smaller clubs over-stretching to compete with bigger clubs by crippling the smaller clubs. It's not a major criticism of Adams that he went for lots of older players on short-term deals, but other managers with similar restrictions before (Pleat, Little) took a different approach, and after (Levein, Pearson) and some of them did well off it. It wasn't true that there was no alternative, and the policy he went for created a 'revolving door' at the club. It was never realistic for Levein - who had even less money than Adams had had in summer 2004 when he spent a million and brought in Williams, Wilcox, Gudjonsson, Tiatto, Keown, Connolly, Gudjonsson, Makin, Gemmill, Pressman and Dublin - to restructure the playing squad entirely in a year, and reduce the wage bill massively. Whereas Levein left something of a legacy (Hume and Stearman, who he developed, McAuley who he scouted, all brought in fees, Fryatt was a key part of future success, Kisnorbo was a decent player for us for three seasons and so on), Adams didn't. Unfortunately, Adams' took too long to figure out which of the huge influx of new players fitted into his set-up, his younger players (Canero, Morris, Williams, Gudjonsson, Connolly, Priet, Brooker, Curtis) didn't work out often enough, and somebody else had to sort out the mess. And nobody got it right until Pearson. A lot of our better managers have, at some point or another, had a miserable budget to play with. While it excuses much of what Pleat, Adams, Levein and Kelly got wrong, it still doesn't change the fact that they got it wrong where others got it right. And in the case of Adams the consequence was almost a decade of restructuring.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.