| This squad upheaval question 10:46 - Aug 29 with 3816 views | Dyland |
Not sure how else it could have played out. We needed to sell players when they had value to rebuild the squad. I think it's pretty obvious Hurst was generally going to build his squad with players he knew about. All managers are the same, and they cut their cloth according to budgets.
The timing always had the potential to result in this start. I understand it's important to get a win and see more chances created (and cut out the defensive lapses), but this is what the majority of fans and the club wanted, so we need buy-in for a season at least, whatever that entails. Anything else is cutting off your nose to spite your face. This does not mean Hurst is immune from questioning, of course, but I think he needs (not deserves) the benefit of the doubt.
Importantly, we also need vociferous and unconditional support for the team on Sunday, even if we go behind, and even if that's by more than one goal. Unless it's in the final minute of course in which case I'm going to cry :)
COYFB
|  |
| |  |
| This squad upheaval question on 10:55 - Aug 29 with 3158 views | Steve_M |
The idea that we have to sell every player who wants to leave is a little misguided, there has to be a balance of looking after the club and we may not have got that bit right. Garner in particular we could really have done with keeping.
I'm quite happy with finishing lower mid-table this season, as long as we do so by winning a few matches well and creating a platform to build on for next season. Relegation on the other hand is not good, there is nothing good about a relegation season however much supposedly good football the team plays.
I think everyone will be behind the team on Sunday regardless, it will seem a long time since the Villa match by then despite it only being 15 days between them. The concern will be if we go behind early on, there was a marked turn from some at Hillsborough on Saturday after the first goal. |  |
| |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:04 - Aug 29 with 3122 views | ITFC_Forever |
People bleating about how many new players we brought in seem to forget we lost 13 (14 including Nydam) for various reasons, so there was always going to be a lot of new players to replace them.
Whether we were right to let them all go or not is another matter, but by my reckoning (and I'm bound to forget some), the following have left since the end of last season:
McGoldrick
Waghorn
Garner
Iorfa
CCV
Connolly
Carayol
Gleeson
Crowe
Webster
Celina
Hyam
Bru
And we should include Nydam in that as well as he's currently beyond use while he's out on loan.
And we have brought in:
Donacien
Nsiala
Graham
Harrison
Jackson
Chalobah
Edwards
Nolan
Roberts
Edun
So 10 in (and whoever I've forgotten) and 13(14) out. |  |
| |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:09 - Aug 29 with 3091 views | LeagueOne |
| This squad upheaval question on 10:55 - Aug 29 by Steve_M |
The idea that we have to sell every player who wants to leave is a little misguided, there has to be a balance of looking after the club and we may not have got that bit right. Garner in particular we could really have done with keeping.
I'm quite happy with finishing lower mid-table this season, as long as we do so by winning a few matches well and creating a platform to build on for next season. Relegation on the other hand is not good, there is nothing good about a relegation season however much supposedly good football the team plays.
I think everyone will be behind the team on Sunday regardless, it will seem a long time since the Villa match by then despite it only being 15 days between them. The concern will be if we go behind early on, there was a marked turn from some at Hillsborough on Saturday after the first goal. |
Agreed about Garner. I think if anything if we had kept some of Mick's established players in Webster, Didz, Waghorn and Garner and brought in the new faces the balance would have been much better. We clearly need the options.
I also hate to say it that so far I think we have some quality players in our U23's who should feel hard done by that some of these new faces are starting ahead of them, because without judging too early a few of them haven't looked up to standard yet, including a couple of established players with Bart being pretty horrific at times. In fact our U23's have been playing well this season and i'd rather see some of those lads get a chance then loaning it players from other sides we'll get nothing out of long term.
The only comparison I can think of is when Keane came in and I am just hoping it settles a lot quicker as our support is less patient these days and being bottom, even though meaningless at the moment, in a months time there will be a lot of upset if nothing has changed. |  |
| |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:11 - Aug 29 with 3080 views | Stadiumofdark |
| This squad upheaval question on 10:55 - Aug 29 by Steve_M |
The idea that we have to sell every player who wants to leave is a little misguided, there has to be a balance of looking after the club and we may not have got that bit right. Garner in particular we could really have done with keeping.
I'm quite happy with finishing lower mid-table this season, as long as we do so by winning a few matches well and creating a platform to build on for next season. Relegation on the other hand is not good, there is nothing good about a relegation season however much supposedly good football the team plays.
I think everyone will be behind the team on Sunday regardless, it will seem a long time since the Villa match by then despite it only being 15 days between them. The concern will be if we go behind early on, there was a marked turn from some at Hillsborough on Saturday after the first goal. |
Garner had some difficulty going on in his life, with access to kids from previous relationship. He also joined as he wanted to play for MickM.
Agree with your point though - got to look after ITFC in all this. |  | | |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:14 - Aug 29 with 3066 views | Dyland |
| This squad upheaval question on 10:55 - Aug 29 by Steve_M |
The idea that we have to sell every player who wants to leave is a little misguided, there has to be a balance of looking after the club and we may not have got that bit right. Garner in particular we could really have done with keeping.
I'm quite happy with finishing lower mid-table this season, as long as we do so by winning a few matches well and creating a platform to build on for next season. Relegation on the other hand is not good, there is nothing good about a relegation season however much supposedly good football the team plays.
I think everyone will be behind the team on Sunday regardless, it will seem a long time since the Villa match by then despite it only being 15 days between them. The concern will be if we go behind early on, there was a marked turn from some at Hillsborough on Saturday after the first goal. |
I don't disagree with that, but you take the point that their value may drop and you have to gamble the odds and play the best hand you can so you can have funds to rebuild. There's more to it than players wanting to leave, which brings us back of course to how MEG finances and budgets the club's affairs.
"... there was a marked turn from some at Hillsborough on Saturday after the first goal."
Sadly, not unbelievable at all. What the fook is wrong with some supporters. Spoiled brats doesn't do it justice. If it's a defensive howler in the last minute, fine... but when it's all still to play for it's mind boggling and will probably be the thing that finally makes me stop going. | |
| |
| Indeed on 11:16 - Aug 29 with 3052 views | Dyland |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:04 - Aug 29 by ITFC_Forever |
People bleating about how many new players we brought in seem to forget we lost 13 (14 including Nydam) for various reasons, so there was always going to be a lot of new players to replace them.
Whether we were right to let them all go or not is another matter, but by my reckoning (and I'm bound to forget some), the following have left since the end of last season:
McGoldrick
Waghorn
Garner
Iorfa
CCV
Connolly
Carayol
Gleeson
Crowe
Webster
Celina
Hyam
Bru
And we should include Nydam in that as well as he's currently beyond use while he's out on loan.
And we have brought in:
Donacien
Nsiala
Graham
Harrison
Jackson
Chalobah
Edwards
Nolan
Roberts
Edun
So 10 in (and whoever I've forgotten) and 13(14) out. |
It's a different argument who have come in. We are in effect a lower league team who've been promoted ;) | |
| |
| Keane had a better start, to boot on 11:21 - Aug 29 with 3017 views | Dyland |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:09 - Aug 29 by LeagueOne |
Agreed about Garner. I think if anything if we had kept some of Mick's established players in Webster, Didz, Waghorn and Garner and brought in the new faces the balance would have been much better. We clearly need the options.
I also hate to say it that so far I think we have some quality players in our U23's who should feel hard done by that some of these new faces are starting ahead of them, because without judging too early a few of them haven't looked up to standard yet, including a couple of established players with Bart being pretty horrific at times. In fact our U23's have been playing well this season and i'd rather see some of those lads get a chance then loaning it players from other sides we'll get nothing out of long term.
The only comparison I can think of is when Keane came in and I am just hoping it settles a lot quicker as our support is less patient these days and being bottom, even though meaningless at the moment, in a months time there will be a lot of upset if nothing has changed. |
Think it was the first or second away game we won quite convincingly. It did take ten odd games at home to win though (Derby)! | |
| |
| Indeed on 11:21 - Aug 29 with 3020 views | Steve_M |
| Indeed on 11:16 - Aug 29 by Dyland |
It's a different argument who have come in. We are in effect a lower league team who've been promoted ;) |
I can't help feeling that we're finding out how Shrewsbury would have done had they been promoted. Other than the two signed from them, every other signing is a player that I suspect Hurst was looking at it in that context.
That doesn't mean any of them are bad players or that it won't work. Just that it's a step up for a lot of players at the same time, but without the benefit of being promoted together. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| This squad upheaval question on 11:23 - Aug 29 with 3000 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
| This squad upheaval question on 10:55 - Aug 29 by Steve_M |
The idea that we have to sell every player who wants to leave is a little misguided, there has to be a balance of looking after the club and we may not have got that bit right. Garner in particular we could really have done with keeping.
I'm quite happy with finishing lower mid-table this season, as long as we do so by winning a few matches well and creating a platform to build on for next season. Relegation on the other hand is not good, there is nothing good about a relegation season however much supposedly good football the team plays.
I think everyone will be behind the team on Sunday regardless, it will seem a long time since the Villa match by then despite it only being 15 days between them. The concern will be if we go behind early on, there was a marked turn from some at Hillsborough on Saturday after the first goal. |
There is also a point to be made that it’s the managers job to keep players happy and wanting to do their best for the club
Agree with that though - no problem with taking a step back as part of a rebuild but the current position is worrying, as early as it is, and relegation would be an absolute failure |  |
| |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:25 - Aug 29 with 2969 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:04 - Aug 29 by ITFC_Forever |
People bleating about how many new players we brought in seem to forget we lost 13 (14 including Nydam) for various reasons, so there was always going to be a lot of new players to replace them.
Whether we were right to let them all go or not is another matter, but by my reckoning (and I'm bound to forget some), the following have left since the end of last season:
McGoldrick
Waghorn
Garner
Iorfa
CCV
Connolly
Carayol
Gleeson
Crowe
Webster
Celina
Hyam
Bru
And we should include Nydam in that as well as he's currently beyond use while he's out on loan.
And we have brought in:
Donacien
Nsiala
Graham
Harrison
Jackson
Chalobah
Edwards
Nolan
Roberts
Edun
So 10 in (and whoever I've forgotten) and 13(14) out. |
Not really sure you can include Crowe as an outgoing player really given he never played for us, and if you’re including the loanees in the outgoing list then you have to include Emmanuel and Downes as incoming players | |
| |
| Indeed on 11:26 - Aug 29 with 2958 views | ITFC_Forever |
| Indeed on 11:16 - Aug 29 by Dyland |
It's a different argument who have come in. We are in effect a lower league team who've been promoted ;) |
Yep... the quality of those brought in vs. those who have left is a slightly different debate, a number of the new ones are still yet to fully show they are what we need.
But in terms of numbers, we had to bring a lot in as a lot left.
Certainly it can be argued we need some more experience in there, so if there's any truth in the Batth and Jerome rumours, they might go some way to helping with that. | |
| |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:28 - Aug 29 with 2940 views | ITFC_Forever |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:25 - Aug 29 by C_HealyIsAPleasure |
Not really sure you can include Crowe as an outgoing player really given he never played for us, and if you’re including the loanees in the outgoing list then you have to include Emmanuel and Downes as incoming players |
I guess...
Downes returning is countered by Nydam going out, I guess Emmanuel returning is another one to the incoming list. | |
| |
| Yep on 11:34 - Aug 29 with 2910 views | Dyland |
| Indeed on 11:21 - Aug 29 by Steve_M |
I can't help feeling that we're finding out how Shrewsbury would have done had they been promoted. Other than the two signed from them, every other signing is a player that I suspect Hurst was looking at it in that context.
That doesn't mean any of them are bad players or that it won't work. Just that it's a step up for a lot of players at the same time, but without the benefit of being promoted together. |
Basically, it's squeaky bum/exciting/a disgrace (delete as appropriate).
I'm still enjoying the ride :) | |
| |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:35 - Aug 29 with 2906 views | PhilTWTD |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:11 - Aug 29 by Stadiumofdark |
Garner had some difficulty going on in his life, with access to kids from previous relationship. He also joined as he wanted to play for MickM.
Agree with your point though - got to look after ITFC in all this. |
Garner would have stayed if Town hadn't received the unexpectedly high offer they did from Wigan. |  | | |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:39 - Aug 29 with 2867 views | PJH |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:35 - Aug 29 by PhilTWTD |
Garner would have stayed if Town hadn't received the unexpectedly high offer they did from Wigan. |
That is interesting to know.
Upsets the Webster,Waghorn and Garner were all desperate to leave claims-at least in part. |  | | |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:42 - Aug 29 with 2840 views | PhilTWTD |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:39 - Aug 29 by PJH |
That is interesting to know.
Upsets the Webster,Waghorn and Garner were all desperate to leave claims-at least in part. |
He wanted to go back to the North-West but going into the final day Town were going to keep hold of him unless they received an over the top offer, which they did.
I think Waggy would have stayed as well had Town offered him the sort of terms on offer at Derby and Boro but I think PH saw his exit as providing the funds to rebuild more widely. | | | |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:43 - Aug 29 with 2827 views | Bluebell |
| This squad upheaval question on 11:35 - Aug 29 by PhilTWTD |
Garner would have stayed if Town hadn't received the unexpectedly high offer they did from Wigan. |
That puts a different light on it.
What a shame we agreed to accept the amount. He would have made a difference this year! |  | | |
| Indeed on 11:55 - Aug 29 with 2777 views | homer_123 |
| Indeed on 11:21 - Aug 29 by Steve_M |
I can't help feeling that we're finding out how Shrewsbury would have done had they been promoted. Other than the two signed from them, every other signing is a player that I suspect Hurst was looking at it in that context.
That doesn't mean any of them are bad players or that it won't work. Just that it's a step up for a lot of players at the same time, but without the benefit of being promoted together. |
Couple that with us going without a win and the confidence of those players stepping up a league or two is being hit. |  |
| |
| Keane had a better start, to boot on 12:03 - Aug 29 with 2745 views | LeagueOne |
| Keane had a better start, to boot on 11:21 - Aug 29 by Dyland |
Think it was the first or second away game we won quite convincingly. It did take ten odd games at home to win though (Derby)! |
He won the games with Jim's squad with ease as the season closed and then got rid of 17 players! | |
| |
| Keane had a better start, to boot on 12:08 - Aug 29 with 2721 views | itfcjoe |
| Keane had a better start, to boot on 12:03 - Aug 29 by LeagueOne |
He won the games with Jim's squad with ease as the season closed and then got rid of 17 players! |
Similar to Jewell.
Keane's squad was decent all things considered, and Jewell had done well with it after taking over and adding a couple - but then had a complete overhaul that summer with guys like Sonko, Bowyer, Ingimarrsson, etc whose legs had all gone.
The total overhaul very rarely works quickly, if at all. Sometimes it is required like when Mick came in after Jewell - but Keane, Jewell, and in my opinion hurst didn't need such a dramatic one. |  |
| |
| Keane had a better start, to boot on 14:02 - Aug 29 with 2564 views | Radlett_blue |
| Keane had a better start, to boot on 12:08 - Aug 29 by itfcjoe |
Similar to Jewell.
Keane's squad was decent all things considered, and Jewell had done well with it after taking over and adding a couple - but then had a complete overhaul that summer with guys like Sonko, Bowyer, Ingimarrsson, etc whose legs had all gone.
The total overhaul very rarely works quickly, if at all. Sometimes it is required like when Mick came in after Jewell - but Keane, Jewell, and in my opinion hurst didn't need such a dramatic one. |
Mick changed our squad gradually, rather than an immediate overhaul. Keane (rightly) said when he came in & had overseen 2 games that we needed 2 or 3 players & then went for a complete overhaul.
Yes, Jewell initially was sensible but then filled the squad with ageing loan players.
With several players out of contract, Hurst had little choice but to re-shape. Not sure he wanted to sell Webster and/or Waghorn, but presumably those deals were necessary so that he could afford some new blood. Unsurprisingly, it's taking time for the new team to gel & it's likely that some of Hurst's signings own't be up to the mark. |  |
| |
| This squad upheaval question on 14:19 - Aug 29 with 2522 views | FrimleyBlue |
I understand certain points of the need to sell etc
however
McGoldrick
Iorfa
CCV
Connolly
Carayol
Gleeson
Crowe
Webster
Celina
Hyam
Bru
With the youngsters coming in, I can't see how the above leaving couldn't have funded the players we have brought in? Plus the additional £ taken from the sale of 2 youngsters in the academy, That's without looking including Waghorn, Garner. |  |
| |
| This squad upheaval question on 14:32 - Aug 29 with 2469 views | Dyland |
| This squad upheaval question on 14:19 - Aug 29 by FrimleyBlue |
I understand certain points of the need to sell etc
however
McGoldrick
Iorfa
CCV
Connolly
Carayol
Gleeson
Crowe
Webster
Celina
Hyam
Bru
With the youngsters coming in, I can't see how the above leaving couldn't have funded the players we have brought in? Plus the additional £ taken from the sale of 2 youngsters in the academy, That's without looking including Waghorn, Garner. |
Garner I agree with.
Waggers though... this is my point... a call had to be made regarding his value now vs January/next summer. Add the better wages he was offered and in a team better placed to challenge in the short term.
"With the youngsters coming in..." assumes they are ready to feature regularly in a competitive first team squad, and are what Hurst wants/needs, and your argument breaks down before it starts Frimmers.
However, this is where the real question marks are over Hurst's first transfer window. Who arriving is better (and fitter!) than our own kids. Our concerns here are probably similar.
Needs time though :) | |
| |
| This squad upheaval question on 14:39 - Aug 29 with 2443 views | FrimleyBlue |
| This squad upheaval question on 14:32 - Aug 29 by Dyland |
Garner I agree with.
Waggers though... this is my point... a call had to be made regarding his value now vs January/next summer. Add the better wages he was offered and in a team better placed to challenge in the short term.
"With the youngsters coming in..." assumes they are ready to feature regularly in a competitive first team squad, and are what Hurst wants/needs, and your argument breaks down before it starts Frimmers.
However, this is where the real question marks are over Hurst's first transfer window. Who arriving is better (and fitter!) than our own kids. Our concerns here are probably similar.
Needs time though :) |
Ah, sorry I meant with the youngsters coming in, I meant his own, not ours.
Our funds have been used on bringing the youngsters with minimal championship experience, I can't see how losing those players didn't fund these and also requiring us to sell Waghorn.
I don't think Hurst tried to keep Waghorn personally, in his interviews he kinda sold Waghorn for the club, I think Wagga's personality was/is to big for hurst.
Hurst is used to managing kids, lets me honest, or those with minimal experience, he can get away with certain management skills. More experienced players, maybe not, and this is why I think he has had no choice but to go down the kid route.
For me the only signing I am currently happy with is Edwards, classy winger, ours and very good potential, possibly Nolan, but unsure if he will master this league. | |
| |
| gotcha on 14:45 - Aug 29 with 2428 views | Dyland |
| This squad upheaval question on 14:39 - Aug 29 by FrimleyBlue |
Ah, sorry I meant with the youngsters coming in, I meant his own, not ours.
Our funds have been used on bringing the youngsters with minimal championship experience, I can't see how losing those players didn't fund these and also requiring us to sell Waghorn.
I don't think Hurst tried to keep Waghorn personally, in his interviews he kinda sold Waghorn for the club, I think Wagga's personality was/is to big for hurst.
Hurst is used to managing kids, lets me honest, or those with minimal experience, he can get away with certain management skills. More experienced players, maybe not, and this is why I think he has had no choice but to go down the kid route.
For me the only signing I am currently happy with is Edwards, classy winger, ours and very good potential, possibly Nolan, but unsure if he will master this league. |
Nsiala also looks decent.
Edun and Chaloboah are more advanced prospects than Nydam and Downes, just... but yes, they aren't ours. I think it's simply too early to get the stick out on Hurst in this regard.
The jury is out though. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
