September 25, 2018, 06:00:11 AM

Author Topic: [News]Sandro linked with move back to Malaga  (Read 9781 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

January 17, 2018, 07:20:16 PM
Read 9781 times
Offline

GLewis

NSNO Subscriber
As always need to bare in mind that the player might only want to go back to Spain.

If he doesn’t ever envisage settling here then there’s not many options for us.


January 18, 2018, 11:33:14 PM
Reply #1
Offline

GLewis

NSNO Subscriber
A big factor that hasn’t really been mentioned...I don’t think he wants to be here.

Ooh, me, me...

As always need to bare in mind that the player might only want to go back to Spain.

If he doesn’t ever envisage settling here then there’s not many options for us.

;)

January 19, 2018, 12:26:02 AM
Reply #2
Offline

GLewis

NSNO Subscriber
Reckon we’ve overstretched on wages

It’s easy to forget because players are either injured or have been woefully out of form but we’ve got way more senior players than ever, probably.

Eg CBs, Mori is probably on the lowest wage and I’m guessing he’s on a decent whack.

Then we’ve got Holgate who will be on more than your standard, brought through young defender.

CMs, again Besic on probably the lowest wage but he’s about 7th choice (which should be an academy player etc).

Strikers, Niasse on 50k will be the lowest of him, Tosun and Sandro.

If some of the more expensive players don’t want to stick it out or look miles off the pace it’s not as easy to just think £5m a year is ok to write off, when that could be spent on someone who either wants to be here or is more likely to adapt.

5 years ago we’d have had no choice but to give these players 18-24 months to sort it out as they’d have been first sub (at worst). Now they’re not even in the squads.


January 19, 2018, 01:11:52 AM
Reply #3
Offline

GLewis

NSNO Subscriber
Spot on.

And the crazy thing is, we've never had this many options, and yet we've rarely looked collectively worse (apart from pre-Moyes days)

But that can't be the coaching or tactics, though, as it upsets a few on here if you suggest that.

It HAS to be that EVERY player we've brought in (bar maybe Pickford) is FAR worse than we thought they were going to be.

It's the ONLY explanation.

I do think we have too many players.

If you have a choice of 3 players for one position it’s very tempting and much easier to pick b if a has a bad game, likewise moving on to c when b doesn’t work out.

If c hasn’t played for 2 months is he likely to be in tune with whatever the manager wants? Probably not so we’re back to option a. Ad infinitum.

If you’ve got 6 players for 4 positions you’re much more likely to put a lot of effort into making them better. It’s easier to focus on individuals.

Also the two options not picked will pay more attention as they know they’ll be playing soon.

So we need a trim but we also need a settled plan which can identify which players are surplus.

January 19, 2018, 01:16:45 AM
Reply #4
Offline

GLewis

NSNO Subscriber
I always thought we were wank when moyes had too many options. There were times, few admittedly where he tried rotation and failed

When we had the bare eleven was when we were at our best

2008 to 2009 was great for this as an example.

We had about 5/6 senior midfielders who knew their roles but this also meant that Rodwell / Gosling got plenty of minutes and they were slotting into a unit that knew what it was doing.

In defence we had 3 CBs options, so all played. 

At left back, one of the CB options would cover there, meaning the other 2 were playing.

If Hibbert was injured, Neville played RB freeing up a midfield slot etc.

It was top level quality in couple of areas and probably one or two players short of numbers (eg no Arteta replacement) from being ideal.