CrackpotForeigner Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Any team with Beneke in wouldn't get relegated as IMO he is that good a player. The problem though lies when he isn't fit who will nick the goal for us to hang on to? Who will be our outlet to hold the ball or make defences sit deeper as they are worried about him? You can throw all the stats you like about win/loss like for like etc but for me I don't care about them what I do care about is enjoying watching us play. On this front Lambert is letting us down massively. He has turned into a negative manager. Against Burnley we had a go then either through confidence or managerial instruction we got deeper and deeper. Gabby who should be our outlet was deeper than grealish on countless occasions. Now that's got to be Lamberts idea as Gabby seems to drop at the first opportunity. Gabby was about mid-way in the oppo half when he gave the ball away leading to their pen iirc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Have a look how it compares to games against the same opposition last year I don't really see the relevance. QPR for example weren't in the premier league last season but we've still lost to them. I think comparing the 14 game mark across the two seasons gives a better means for comparison and it doesn't look good reading. I realised you wouldnt. It's relevant because to see if we have progressed it is fairer to compare our like for like performances . If you are going to say our defemce is weaker in the games played then to be fair you have to look at how that defence performed in the same games last year. There are so many variables to take into account for this kind of comparison that it proves nothing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumstopdogs Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 So what we can't lose to promoted teams tell that to Man Utd who lost to Leicester. And no it doesn't give a better means because it takes no notice of opposition but it suits your arguement. As for a comparison on the first 14 games there are 3 points in it which given the fixtures is nothing and not quite as bad as you suggest. Of course we can lose to promoted sides - don't recall saying we couldn't. Tell teams that got relegated by 3 points or less that it is nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Well at least you've attempted to answer the question of where you would have spent the money, but I'd like to remind you that nearly all of us (myself included) were wondering why we needed a backup striker, and then Benteke got injured and we realised exactly why we needed one. I disagree. We already had five strikers before Kozak signed. The problem, as I said at the time, is that it was a clear indicator of Lambert's tactical inflexibility that he didn't see himself being capable of coping without a target-man. Not to mention that if we had a more creative and offensive midfielder, that we perhaps wouldn't need to be so reliant on the target-man being fundamental to all our offensive play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Have a look how it compares to games against the same opposition last year I don't really see the relevance. QPR for example weren't in the premier league last season but we've still lost to them. I think comparing the 14 game mark across the two seasons gives a better means for comparison and it doesn't look good reading. I realised you wouldnt. It's relevant because to see if we have progressed it is fairer to compare our like for like performances . If you are going to say our defemce is weaker in the games played then to be fair you have to look at how that defence performed in the same games last year. There are so many variables to take into account for this kind of comparison that it proves nothing. It is a better comparison than just saying 14 games and not taking into account either the opposition or the run of games played. Unless of course the intention is not to be objective about the criticism and just want to criticise anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oaks Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 So he's given peanuts to spend in comparison to other clubs. He has to reshape an entire squad. He spends roughly 2M per player. he is expected to get his first choices for that and then when that fails for his second choices to be as good as his first choices. Then when some of the signings he makes or has had to take a chance on do not turn out to be world beaters and so described as "crap" (lets face it when you are spending peanuts then it is a gamble) he is criticised ? If you could get world beaters for 2M then Man citeh and Chelsea would not be spending 30MPlus on players and Manure would not be spending 350M assembling a squad of players. Sorry but thats the game we are in these days Exactly, people are complaining the success of a £1 million footballer in the premier league is like complaining that a McDonnalds hamburger didn't fill them up. The players he's spent over 3 million on are Benteke, Vlaar, Okore and Kozak. Now 2 of them are are 2 best players, and the other 2 look decent but we can't judge yet because of injury. We certainly haven't lost money on them. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Excluding Burnley and QPR the like for like record is Pts 15 this season as against 9 last season GD -8 this season -7 last season (this season we have conceded 15 last season we conceded 20) For me that is progress 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted December 5, 2014 Moderator Share Posted December 5, 2014 So what we can't lose to promoted teams tell that to Man Utd who lost to Leicester. And no it doesn't give a better means because it takes no notice of opposition but it suits your arguement. As for a comparison on the first 14 games there are 3 points in it which given the fixtures is nothing and not quite as bad as you suggest. Of course we can lose to promoted sides - don't recall saying we couldn't. Tell teams that got relegated by 3 points or less that it is nothing. Couldn't give a monkeys about them to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Condimentalist Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 FWIW I think he has done a fantastic job in the transfer market. My issue with him is tactical. I think the players he has bought in are capable of better than this. I sort of agree with that. I'm hoping to see some improvements in this regard over the course of the season, especially in games such as tomorrow's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted December 5, 2014 Moderator Share Posted December 5, 2014 FWIW I think he has done a fantastic job in the transfer market. My issue with him is tactical. I think the players he has bought in are capable of better than this. I sort of agree with that. I'm hoping to see some improvements in this regard over the course of the season, especially in games such as tomorrow's Likewise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 So he's given peanuts to spend in comparison to other clubs. He has to reshape an entire squad. He spends roughly 2M per player. he is expected to get his first choices for that and then when that fails for his second choices to be as good as his first choices. Then when some of the signings he makes or has had to take a chance on do not turn out to be world beaters and so described as "crap" (lets face it when you are spending peanuts then it is a gamble) he is criticised ? If you could get world beaters for 2M then Man citeh and Chelsea would not be spending 30MPlus on players and Manure would not be spending 350M assembling a squad of players. Sorry but thats the game we are in these days Exactly, people are complaining the success of a £1 million footballer in the premier league is like complaining that a McDonnalds hamburger didn't fill them up. The players he's spent over 3 million on are Benteke, Vlaar, Okore and Kozak. Now 2 of them are are 2 best players, and the other 2 look decent but we can't judge yet because of injury. We certainly haven't lost money on them. the main problem for me is that instead of initially using the players we already had and supplementing them with fewer but better players in the mold of vlaar, benteke, he bombed out or ignored alot of the existing players (but we still had them on the books) and then because he had done that he forced himself to spread his budget too thin. So we ended buying to fill out the squad with the likes of tonev, bennett, etc who were no better or actually worse than the players already at the club. fast forward on to this season and you have alot of the dross he signed sold or on loan, and guys who were already at the club when he arrived back in the fold as either regular first teamers, or first choice backups. hes basically wasted money to stand still. spending £20 mil on 3 or 4 of the vlaars, bentekes instead of 6 or 7 of the tonev quality players and i think we would be in a stronger position now. as many have mentioned, when he spends in the +£4 mil range, he generally gets good players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Excluding Burnley and QPR the like for like record is Pts 15 this season as against 9 last season GD -8 this season -7 last season (this season we have conceded 15 last season we conceded 20) For me that is progress I just don't get this. Why is last season the only thing that we compare to? His first year he got 42 points, why don't you expect progress from that 2 years later? Why is it just about the awful year last season? What about performances? 3 years on and any better than mcleish? If Grealish has a great rest of the season and scores 10 goals, then next season is awful and only gets 2. The following year he scores 5 and has an ok year. Would you say he'd progressed as a player? The fact we went backwards last year under him doesn't make this year then progress. Surely progress is over his time at the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Didiersix Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Lambo has been in Munich this week. Said he was watching training, had a few meetings. Seemed really happy about it - trying to hide a smile. Wonder what that is about? Any sources or is this just makey upey logic? Lambo has been in Munich this week. Said he was watching training, had a few meetings. Seemed really happy about it - trying to hide a smile. Wonder what that is about? Any sources or is this just makey upey logic? My source is Paul Lambert! He mentioned it at his press conference today. Said he had been over in Munich for a couple of days. Cool, thanks. Any ideas why he was in Munich? Seems an odd time of the season to go on a wee trip. Possibly getting a loan or coach in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted December 5, 2014 Moderator Share Posted December 5, 2014 Excluding Burnley and QPR the like for like record is Pts 15 this season as against 9 last season GD -8 this season -7 last season (this season we have conceded 15 last season we conceded 20) For me that is progress I just don't get this. Why is last season the only thing that we compare to? His first year he got 42 points, why don't you expect progress from that 2 years later? Why is it just about the awful year last season? What about performances? 3 years on and any better than mcleish? If Grealish has a great rest of the season and scores 10 goals, then next season is awful and only gets 2. The following year he scores 5 and has an ok year. Would you say he'd progressed as a player? The fact we went backwards last year under him doesn't make this year then progress. Surely progress is over his time at the club. I'm not sure how much progress can be expected when he is being out spent by most clubs and has been reducing the wage bill. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 That's a fair argument but he also inherited some decent players. As I also mentioned previously one of the arguments for giving a manager time is that they will build their team and install their ideas and plans. I think expecting to play better football than McLeish is a realistic expectations, I'd say after 3 years its quite a low expectations to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted December 5, 2014 Moderator Share Posted December 5, 2014 Well in my opinion the football we play while not being great is world's away from the shite McLeish dished up and McLeish inherited a far better squad and spent more money on individual players. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Excluding Burnley and QPR the like for like record is Pts 15 this season as against 9 last season GD -8 this season -7 last season (this season we have conceded 15 last season we conceded 20) For me that is progress I think "progress" is a bit OTT for that! "Partial recovery form a near terminal illness" sums it up better. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanky Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 Well in my opinion the football we play while not being great is world's away from the shite McLeish dished up and McLeish inherited a far better squad and spent more money on individual players. Can't say I agree. This side is the worst I have seen for some time. Although, as you say, some of that is due to how much the side is actually worth. Some of it the manager imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oaks Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 So he's given peanuts to spend in comparison to other clubs. He has to reshape an entire squad. He spends roughly 2M per player. he is expected to get his first choices for that and then when that fails for his second choices to be as good as his first choices. Then when some of the signings he makes or has had to take a chance on do not turn out to be world beaters and so described as "crap" (lets face it when you are spending peanuts then it is a gamble) he is criticised ? If you could get world beaters for 2M then Man citeh and Chelsea would not be spending 30MPlus on players and Manure would not be spending 350M assembling a squad of players. Sorry but thats the game we are in these days Exactly, people are complaining the success of a £1 million footballer in the premier league is like complaining that a McDonnalds hamburger didn't fill them up. The players he's spent over 3 million on are Benteke, Vlaar, Okore and Kozak. Now 2 of them are are 2 best players, and the other 2 look decent but we can't judge yet because of injury. We certainly haven't lost money on them. the main problem for me is that instead of initially using the players we already had and supplementing them with fewer but better players in the mold of vlaar, benteke, he bombed out or ignored alot of the existing players (but we still had them on the books) and then because he had done that he forced himself to spread his budget too thin. So we ended buying to fill out the squad with the likes of tonev, bennett, etc who were no better or actually worse than the players already at the club. fast forward on to this season and you have alot of the dross he signed sold or on loan, and guys who were already at the club when he arrived back in the fold as either regular first teamers, or first choice backups. hes basically wasted money to stand still. spending £20 mil on 3 or 4 of the vlaars, bentekes instead of 6 or 7 of the tonev quality players and i think we would be in a stronger position now. as many have mentioned, when he spends in the +£4 mil range, he generally gets good players. The biggest problem last year was his 2 big signings of the summer were out for most of the season. The reason he couldn't sign quality players was the restriction on wages. Nearly all his signings until this season were on less than £20,000 and most were less than £15,000 per week. The premier league average is £30,000 a week. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted December 5, 2014 Share Posted December 5, 2014 So he's given peanuts to spend in comparison to other clubs. He has to reshape an entire squad. He spends roughly 2M per player. he is expected to get his first choices for that and then when that fails for his second choices to be as good as his first choices. Then when some of the signings he makes or has had to take a chance on do not turn out to be world beaters and so described as "crap" (lets face it when you are spending peanuts then it is a gamble) he is criticised ? If you could get world beaters for 2M then Man citeh and Chelsea would not be spending 30MPlus on players and Manure would not be spending 350M assembling a squad of players. Sorry but thats the game we are in these days Nobody is asking for him to win the league or get into Europe. Remember, last season how people boasting that he can get a team to beat City, Arsenal etc (especially when the usual poor form happened). Guess what, as soon as those results are shown to be flukes, those who were boasting are now saying.. 'Well, we dont expect to win' Oh and he may not have had billions to spend, but I fail to see how that forces him to set the team up to defend, struggle to pass the ball, doesn't protect full backs, plays long ball in PATHETIC situations - for example Vrs QPR when Gabby was up front against Dunne and Caulker. Or when teams put 10 men behind the ball and we play **** counter attack! Are you telling me the money he spends forces some really really stupid tactical decisions? If he was that good, he'd have a bloody clue! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts