2 on loan, one completely signed purely for pozzi trading. That he's managed to fit in and prove useful is pure fluke.
I’m not sure not signing a RWB makes keeping Pedro and Sarr worse. In my opinion keeping Pedro and Sarr gives us that bit of quality we need to actually go up . RWB could be completely irrelevant if we play 433 which I believe we should given the personnel we have .
I’m not spinning anything . Just Merely ascerting that I think the squad ox good enough for promotion and that’s what matters ,
In my opinion, based on extensive evidence. Versus your opinion based on dogmatic negativity. Sure, yes.
Is the evidence ‘overwhelming’? It may tip one way, I agree. But it’s a bit hyperbolic to suggest it’s so strong if it’s based on what ageing players did 2 years ago in defence (some of whom are featuring regularly who didn’t back then) and international caps for fairly average-to-poor nations. Don’t get me wrong, I look at our squad and think it’s better than most at this level - certainly in attack. But some of the things being said about defence and midfield really don’t work when you investigate further.
In my first reply to Moog I gave the following players as examples that Sarr/JP haven't been surrounded by absolute crap: Bachmann Gaspar Sierralta Hause Kamara, Louza Choudhury Kayembe/Asprilla. I think the only ageing player in that group is Gaspar, and even with him the evidence suggests he'll still be decent at this level. That's before mentioning Sema, Ekong, Okoye, Dele-Bashiru, Ngakia*, all a decent age and proven at Championship level or equivalent. Then we get on to the ageing players, that imo, are closer to the description that Moog gave, but imo, are still capable of average performances at this level: Cathcart, Kabasele, Cleverley, Gosling. A mixed bag, sure, but hard to argue the majority of the squad isn't better than crap, at Championship level at least.
If you say so. I respectfully disagree with both your conclusion and your assessment of the strength of your evidence.
All fair enough - but a lot of that reads like it’s your opinion of how they have performed before - and to honest, most of them can be questioned. I’m not saying you’re wrong but there’s debate to be had for sure. Very few (I accept there are some) are cut and dried ‘he did great’ or ‘he did ****’. Hence why I don’t think it’s ‘overwhelming evidence’.
What other evidence do we have to judge them as potential players at this level, apart from how they have performed? Bachmann, Sierralta, Ekong, Sema, TDB, Davis (forgot about him) have all excelled/done pretty well in the Championship in the last 2 years, and are decent ages. Asprilla so far, too. Kamara, Louza, Choudhury, Hause have all performed reasonably in the Premier League. Okoye and Kayembe have performed well in leagues roughly equivalent to the Championship. Gaspar, Cleverley, Gosling, Kabasele, Cathcart I accept are ageing and may be worse than their performances of 2 years ago. Hopefully we don't have to rely on them too frequently from now on, hence why I gave the strongest line up in my original reply. I don't think the above is anything other than fair assessments of our current squad's performances in the recent past.
I was listening to a pod (yes, I like pods, although - and I can’t emphasise this enough - I don’t have a pod of my own) which was discussing the squad after the end of the transfer window. They made the point that there had been some good incoming personnel but that there were areas of the squad that had not been strengthened as much as they might like. They said that was inevitable. Only the Man City’s of this world can go out and deal with every perceived weakness. Other clubs do their best but will never have a perfect window, especially when financial restrictions are considered. Will the current squad cope at a higher level? No, of course not. Will it achieve this season’s goals? There’s a decent chance. And that is something to be optimistic about. So far, a reflection of points made in more articulate fashion elsewhere on this forum. But there were two differences. The first is that the participants were journalists who are also fans of the club - indeed one has played for the club back in the day - not simply fans. And the second is that the club they are discussing is - Arsenal. To be clear, I am not comparing Arsenal to Watford. But I found it fascinating to hear clear parallels in the way the fans of both clubs can view their club and its prospects, despite the wild differences between the clubs themselves and the leagues in which they reside. Not sure if there’s a point - just thought it was interesting.
It's not easy to have quality strength in depth in every position, but it's not rocket science to get a good XI together, especially when we had the missing piece of the jigsaw in our grasp only to inexplicably let the deal go
And yet RE is of the opinion we are OK, with Ngakia and Gaspar, in his opinion, up to the task on the right (I’m guessing that’s what you are primarily referring to - unless you believe that our ideal starting XI is missing elsewhere).
No matter how good those two are (and to be honest, seeing Kamara preferred there doesn't exactly help his case as he's definitely hampered on his wrong side), Laird would have been better. We had him in our grasp, but decided on the much older and much less aggressive (and probably more expensive!) Gaspar, while paying way over the odds for Bayo at a time where we're clearly so strapped for cash that Papa Pozzo had to transfer £16m to us just to keep us afloat...
Did we? I haven’t seen anywhere that we considered it a binary choice. And Ngakia has been injured, so we do not know whether RE would have used him instead of Kamara. Are you saying that Laird is “the answer”? With him we have the perfect squad, without him a disaster? Or just another factor to be balanced against more positive outcomes? Which takes us back to the point - no squad is ever perfect. The crucial factor is how the squad compares with others in the relevant competition. And ours looks pretty good overall.
Judging by pre-season, Ngakia must be ahead of Kamara (it was only when Ngakia got injured that Kamara started to play RWB), but still, Ngakia, for all his qualities and athleticism, isn't the most attacking full-back around, whereas Laird is. Without injuries, we definitely have 10 really good options we can fit in a team, Laird would have made that a full XI, I'd still have had concerns about the squad even if he'd come (though again, we could have mitigated that by not going for stupid deals as I've mentioned)
All reasonable points. Do you agree that, in the context of the Championship, our squad - for all that it might be better - looks pretty good?
Unfortunately Edwards toeing the party line has torpedoed the obvious argument. He has made his bed and will now be the fall guy if the season doesn’t go well and the owners will skip along uncriticised. Generally the way here. Edwards will be the patsy (and deservedly so). And then there will be muttering that things will change/lessons will learned by the goons up top.
I do agree with this. My point would be for a small incremental outlay/effort it could have increased 10-20% with 2 additions. Given the carnage that awaits us if we don’t go up not taking this uplift is arrogant stupidity in my view. Or we are indeed verging on bankruptcy. Hopefully it’s just stupidity.
I think in most areas we have some excellent options, and while we have some degree of depth in some areas, in others, we are creaking. Fancy us to get play-offs, but I think automatics might be a stretch, albeit we can strengthen (or greatly weaken!) our squad in January
Seven minutes of a podcast on Minecraft ten years ago. The anniversary is in two weeks and will match the one at the Vic on Tuesday. I accept that this probably isn't you.
Hopefully a mixture of (long-overdue) financial prudence and circumstance (not every deal failing is necessarily our fault).
“The lady doth correct too much” would be more accurate. Although not as far as gender self-identification is concerned.
