This is starting to resemble the early days of the Peeters appointment.
The "noise" around the building of the squad then was about building from within. The challenge to such an approach is if the players "from within" are not yet ready individually or collectively to step up.
I do not think I have ever commented on Colins' contribution to this board but he does seem, at the moment, to be in overdrive in defence of "the realm".
The suggestion or "regime mantra" the squad needs to allow space for the youngsters to progress is only valid if those youngsters are ready to progress.
The assertion 3 or 4 will be regular first teamers suggest within a match day squad of 17 outfield players nearly 25% will be inexperienced and learning their trade in one of the most physically competitive divisions on the planet.
As we have seen there is a huge difference between the physicality of the U21 development league and senior football. For a young professional to be asked to step up to deliver consistently for a 46 game league season is a big ask.
It is physically and mentally exhausting. It is why even exceptional talents like Gomez and Lookman needed/ need to be managed otherwise you get burn out, loss of confidence and they start to go backwards. You risk doing significantly more harm than good
To base your squad building around having 3 or 4 of such players and then expect to be in the mix for even a play off place is foolhardy.
Colin could you please add some clarity by suggesting exactly who these 3 or 4 might be and why in performance terms they will offer more to the success of the team than their senior counterparts.
There is no magic number here. Every squad is different in terms of the balance of skills, ability physical and mental attributes, leadership and team skills.
However as with any business "project" the key is in the preparation so from the outset you build in the margins for eventualities and leave yourself the budget to cope with the unexpected or the unknown. If things do not work to plan you have the "wiggle room" to adjust, reinforce and move forward.
Even at the lowest level of the pyramid I never worked with a squad of less than 25 players.
You always need to carry/ have access to 3 goalkeepers familiar with the rest of the squad notably the back 4.
That leaves 22 outfield players.
At any given point in the season you are going to have;
- 10% on long term injuries. - 10% on short term injuries. - 10% with family, personal or domestic issues - 10% with a complete loss of form - 10% with a short term loss of form
Adding in 25% looking to take their first steps in the senior game and you are asking for trouble
All of that before you even address the ability for players to work with each other.
Every one of these risks you ignore at your peril. I welcome the use of the most senior U21 players stepping up to cover the margins and yes you always hope 1 or 2 will suddenly become stand out performers but base your campaign on a series of unproven youngsters or for that matter unproven overseas players all new to the division and you risk it falling apart.
In the past 30 months we have seen nothing remotely approaching the building of a professional football squad - it has been a lottery based on a great deal of wishful thinking and a series of "punts".
One of the best signings Powell ever made was Andy Hughes. He barely kicked a ball in anger but he provided the experience, the professionalism to provide precisely the level of cover for the squad to get the job done.
Remember the object of the exercise is supposed to be about getting the job done, to be competitive, to be successful. It is about giving the manager/ head coach the tools to do the job. The modern game is about game management and using the squad to provide you with the options to go win games.
Based on injuries and loss of form alone with only 22 outfield players in the squad as a coach you are then left with the 16/17 you want for the match day squad.
He is looking at quality rather than quantity as well as adding 3 to 4 youth players within that squad. Regardless if it is a football team/ squad or within the workplace it is better to have continuity rather than chopping and changing, players will be more settled and confident in the knowledge they will have a run of 10 games rather than 2 or 3 before they are dropped Injured. A prime example last season was Leicester with the infamous Tinker man in charge hardly rotated the team.
fixed it for you
The guy knows the league. So why not give him a chance before digging him out?
I think it is because he is the appointment of the regime. Slade has to achieve promotion as a minimum for fans to accept him in a kind of neutral fashion. I have always quite liked him as a bloke, but now he is at my club he has to deliver with no excuses.
This quote has now proven what certain fans of our club are like. We are not going to give him a chance as "t is because he is the appointment of the regime." Pathetic
Has anyone said we are not giving him a chance? No. Instead we are quite reasonably commenting on his quote about the size of a squad and, again, quite reasonably commenting on whether such a slim-line squad could carry some of the players we are speculating might still be with the club next season. All of that is perfectly acceptable. So if you could just stop slagging people off as being pathetic for no reason whatsoever it would be appreciated. Thank you.
BTW, if you beat a dog with a stick often enough....guess how it behaves when you wave another stick in front of it?
He is looking at quality rather than quantity as well as adding 3 to 4 youth players within that squad. Regardless if it is a football team/ squad or within the workplace it is better to have continuity rather than chopping and changing, players will be more settled and confident in the knowledge they will have a run of 10 games rather than 2 or 3 before they are dropped Injured. A prime example last season was Leicester with the infamous Tinker man in charge hardly rotated the team.
fixed it for you
The guy knows the league. So why not give him a chance before digging him out?
I think it is because he is the appointment of the regime. Slade has to achieve promotion as a minimum for fans to accept him in a kind of neutral fashion. I have always quite liked him as a bloke, but now he is at my club he has to deliver with no excuses.
This quote has now proven what certain fans of our club are like. We are not going to give him a chance as "t is because he is the appointment of the regime." Pathetic
BTW, if you beat a dog with a stick often enough....guess how it behaves when you wave another stick in front of it?
I guess the answer is not for the dog to stand on its back legs and go.... thats not a stick, now THIS is a stick
Really starting to make cringe how every tiny thing Slade has said is being scrutinised so close. I like thqt he was quite confident in his in interview and cock sure about his ability.
Let's just give him a go and see what he does I've got a feeling he will silence a lot of gobshites
Really starting to make cringe how every tiny thing Slade has said is being scrutinised so close. I like thqt he was quite confident in his in interview and cock sure about his ability.
Let's just give him a go and see what he does I've got a feeling he will silence a lot of gobshites
Really starting to make cringe how every tiny thing Slade has said is being scrutinised so close. I like thqt he was quite confident in his in interview and cock sure about his ability.
Let's just give him a go and see what he does I've got a feeling he will silence a lot of gobshites
Who the hell are you to refer to genuinely concnerned fans as 'Gobshites'? Slade seems like he's not the only one who is cocksure of himself.
He is looking at quality rather than quantity as well as adding 3 to 4 youth players within that squad. Regardless if it is a football team/ squad or within the workplace it is better to have continuity rather than chopping and changing, players will be more settled and confident in the knowledge they will have a run of 10 games rather than 2 or 3 before they are dropped Injured. A prime example last season was Leicester with the infamous Tinker man in charge hardly rotated the team.
fixed it for you
The guy knows the league. So why not give him a chance before digging him out?
I think it is because he is the appointment of the regime. Slade has to achieve promotion as a minimum for fans to accept him in a kind of neutral fashion. I have always quite liked him as a bloke, but now he is at my club he has to deliver with no excuses.
This quote has now proven what certain fans of our club are like. We are not going to give him a chance as "t is because he is the appointment of the regime." Pathetic
Has anyone said we are not giving him a chance? No. Instead we are quite reasonably commenting on his quote about the size of a squad and, again, quite reasonably commenting on whether such a slim-line squad could carry some of the players we are speculating might still be with the club next season. All of that is perfectly acceptable. So if you could just stop slagging people off as being pathetic for no reason whatsoever it would be appreciated. Thank you.
BTW, if you beat a dog with a stick often enough....guess how it behaves when you wave another stick in front of it?
Look through the thread and i think you will see there is more than one person, and that is some quote about a dog.
Yes, we have had no team strategy before so 22 would never be enough. It is one of the owner's big mistakes- taking this control from the manager and just telling him to get on with what he is given! But if approached properly, 22 -25 could easily be enough.
I don't agree two seasons is a fair crack of the whip in the circumstances we are in. I expect 50 points by January 31st 2017 followed by promotion as a minimum. More or less the same chance I give the other head coaches. I don't care if the manager is from Micronesia, it is results that count. I do wish to beat this regime, and I have been trying a variety of tacks.
Wait for the Cults mantra "we aim to be competitive " ----- Religsted sides " compete " as pointed out by myself and many others at this stage last season.
I agree with Slade .. more than 22 the manager is spoilt for choice, perhaps has too many players to think about and with about 22 he can fit a smallish squad into a consistent mould of play .. Players not in the frame for a game get moody, and can spread discontent with moaning .. Mourinho was/is always of the opinion that twenty two would do and he won lots at Chelsea with a smallish but versatile and talented squad
I don't agree two seasons is a fair crack of the whip in the circumstances we are in. I expect 50 points by January 31st 2017 followed by promotion as a minimum. More or less the same chance I give the other head coaches. I don't care if the manager is from Micronesia, it is results that count. I do wish to beat this regime, and I have been trying a variety of tacks.
So you think that bad grammar will finally flip Roland ?
Really starting to make cringe how every tiny thing Slade has said is being scrutinised so close. I like thqt he was quite confident in his in interview and cock sure about his ability.
Let's just give him a go and see what he does I've got a feeling he will silence a lot of gobshites
Who the hell are you to refer to genuinely concnerned fans as 'Gobshites'? Slade seems like he's not the only one who is cocksure of himself.
Genuinely concerned?
Bunch of moaning minnies more like!
Tell me how you can moan about a squad that no one has a clue as to what it will finally look like?
I don't agree two seasons is a fair crack of the whip in the circumstances we are in. I expect 50 points by January 31st 2017 followed by promotion as a minimum. More or less the same chance I give the other head coaches. I don't care if the manager is from Micronesia, it is results that count. I do wish to beat this regime, and I have been trying a variety of tacks.
You will give him till January ??? Really ???
And you give him two seasons. We differ. However I don't consider your position to be pathetic or you to be a gobshite. We differ, I expect this trumpeted at the press conference 'brave new world' to mean a season like the last time we won promotion.
Really starting to make cringe how every tiny thing Slade has said is being scrutinised so close. I like thqt he was quite confident in his in interview and cock sure about his ability.
Let's just give him a go and see what he does I've got a feeling he will silence a lot of gobshites
Who the hell are you to refer to genuinely concnerned fans as 'Gobshites'? Slade seems like he's not the only one who is cocksure of himself.
Genuinely concerned?
Bunch of moaning minnies more like!
Tell me how you can moan about a squad that no one has a clue as to what it will finally look like?
I don't think that is the point.
The point is that people are genuinely concerned that Slade, who has been at the club for 5 minutes is already echoing the thoughts and sounds from KM and RD. Anyone who thinks that a squad of 22 in League one, (which will undoubtedly include several kids), can achieve a play-off place is mistaken. Dont get me wrong, I dont think anyone is saying we need a squad of 40, but 22 is too small.
'Moaning minnies' is at least slightly more humorous than calling other members 'Gobshites'.
I don't see problem with what he has said, It's often squads that use the least amount of players who tend to do well in the lower leagues. He also is a manager who instills a team bond in any squad he gathers so it wouldn't be good to have a massive squad with unhappy players not playing. I done a little research and it would appear he used 32 players last season at Cardiff and 8 of those players played either 1 or 2 games, and of course as we know they had a good season, the season before he used 42 players in which they were deemed to have had a poor season so maybe he realises for his method of managing it's better to utilize a smaller squad. Obviously there will be some that will not bother reading and will dismiss any half glass fall suggestions but I'm quite glad to be a half glass full person and will back Slade rather than dismiss him as a puppet and question every little thing he says.
When Jose came over to England for the first time he said he only needed roughly 22 players, 2 for each position. Then you have some players that can play in a variety of positions to add cover. If you assemble a decent squad why would you need more than that?
This chart shows the number of players used by each League 1club last season .. the figures surprised me .. BUT .. this season there will be few if any loans available for managers and that will make a huge difference, quality not quantity will be the order of the day, managers can't get away with lazy signings, every squad member will need to contribute Look at Walsall, not quite good enough for promotion, but the club used very few players .. there is a definite correlation between using few players and success/final table position, albeit all over 22 .. look at Burton Albion !!
When Jose came over to England for the first time he said he only needed roughly 22 players, 2 for each position. Then you have some players that can play in a variety of positions to add cover. If you assemble a decent squad why would you need more than that?
He would say that - because that's what KM and RD wanted. It is therefore no surprise that Slade is now saying the same thing. Perhaps becuase it's still what KM and RD want!
I don't see problem with what he has said, It's often squads that use the least amount of players who tend to do well in the lower leagues. He also is a manager who instills a team bond in any squad he gathers so it wouldn't be good to have a massive squad with unhappy players not playing. I done a little research and it would appear he used 32 players last season at Cardiff and 8 of those players played either 1 or 2 games, and of course as we know they had a good season, the season before he used 42 players in which they were deemed to have had a poor season so maybe he realises for his method of managing it's better to utilize a smaller squad. Obviously there will be some that will not bother reading and will dismiss any half glass fall suggestions but I'm quite glad to be a half glass full person and will back Slade rather than dismiss him as a puppet and question every little thing he says.
Agree but you can't start a season with the attitude "we'll do well if we don't use many players".
Teams that are doing well tend to have to use less players, as the starters tend to be doing the job asked of them.
To be fair, he said 'you've got to have' between 22 and 25. I read it as though he's saying that's the absolute least you can get away with, ie, you'd ideally want more.
This chart shows the number of players used by each League 1club last season .. the figures surprised me .. BUT .. this season there will be few if any loans available for managers and that will make a huge difference, quality not quantity will be the order of the day, managers can't get away with lazy signings, every squad member will need to contribute Look at Walsall, not quite good enough for promotion, but the club used very few players .. there is a definite correlation between using few players and success/final table position, albeit all over 22 .. look at Burton Albion !!
So with a squad of 22, even if every player made an appearance we would still have played the least amount of players in the previous League One season? Perhaps those that believe a squad of 22 is more than enough should ask why every other team in League One last season fielded more than that.
Again, I dont disagree with many on here. I think a manager that is able to field roughly the same starting 11 week afte week tends to do better. But realistically, in order to do that, you still need more than 22 in a squad. Not forgetting that every season, we seem to suffer the same 'injury crisis' which lasts for weeks and weeks with no update on player progress etc. Therefore those that are saying we need a bigger squad than 22 are perhaps justified in claiming that?
Therefore those that are saying we need a bigger squad than 22 are perhaps justified in claiming that?
I agree with @hawksmoor .. i.e. the headline post is wrong/deliberately misleading ?, Slade intimated between 22 and 25 .. look at last season, Burton (first) (Or was it second ?), Walsall (3rd)(Or was it fourth ) ((:>) used the least players .. I will write again .. NO LOANS AVAILABLE = MORE CAREFUL SIGNINGS .. SEE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SUCCESS LAST SEASON AND FEWEST PLAYERS USED .. If we end next season having used 35 to 40 players, which will not happen as the loan system is virtually finished, I'll guarantee that we'll be in the bottom 1/2 of the table .. 22 players with back up from the youth system should suffice ..
Looking at that spreadsheet it seems that the more successful sides used less players, you also have to remember how many of those teams signed players on loan towards the end of the season. I would say 22-25 is actually a very good number to START the season with as does Russell Slade.
Looking at that spreadsheet it seems that the more successful sides used less players, you also have to remember how many of those teams signed players on loan towards the end of the season. I would say 22-25 is actually a very good number to START the season with as does Russell Slade.
apart from mine .. the most sensible post yet ((:>)
Blimey, he said something off the cuff about squad size and we all lose our minds? We can continue to demand a regime change without picking on Slade, who deserves a shot before we pick on him too. He's managed in this league, none of us have. If he gets a squad of 24 players and is happy, I'd trust his judgement on that.
Comments
The "noise" around the building of the squad then was about building from within. The challenge to such an approach is if the players "from within" are not yet ready individually or collectively to step up.
I do not think I have ever commented on Colins' contribution to this board but he does seem, at the moment, to be in overdrive in defence of "the realm".
The suggestion or "regime mantra" the squad needs to allow space for the youngsters to progress is only valid if those youngsters are ready to progress.
The assertion 3 or 4 will be regular first teamers suggest within a match day squad of 17 outfield players nearly 25% will be inexperienced and learning their trade in one of the most physically competitive divisions on the planet.
As we have seen there is a huge difference between the physicality of the U21 development league and senior football. For a young professional to be asked to step up to deliver consistently for a 46 game league season is a big ask.
It is physically and mentally exhausting. It is why even exceptional talents like Gomez and Lookman needed/ need to be managed otherwise you get burn out, loss of confidence and they start to go backwards. You risk doing significantly more harm than good
To base your squad building around having 3 or 4 of such players and then expect to be in the mix for even a play off place is foolhardy.
Colin could you please add some clarity by suggesting exactly who these 3 or 4 might be and why in performance terms they will offer more to the success of the team than their senior counterparts.
There is no magic number here. Every squad is different in terms of the balance of skills, ability physical and mental attributes, leadership and team skills.
However as with any business "project" the key is in the preparation so from the outset you build in the margins for eventualities and leave yourself the budget to cope with the unexpected or the unknown. If things do not work to plan you have the "wiggle room" to adjust, reinforce and move forward.
Even at the lowest level of the pyramid I never worked with a squad of less than 25 players.
You always need to carry/ have access to 3 goalkeepers familiar with the rest of the squad notably the back 4.
That leaves 22 outfield players.
At any given point in the season you are going to have;
- 10% on long term injuries.
- 10% on short term injuries.
- 10% with family, personal or domestic issues
- 10% with a complete loss of form
- 10% with a short term loss of form
Adding in 25% looking to take their first steps in the senior game and you are asking for trouble
All of that before you even address the ability for players to work with each other.
Every one of these risks you ignore at your peril. I welcome the use of the most senior U21 players stepping up to cover the margins and yes you always hope 1 or 2 will suddenly become stand out performers but base your campaign on a series of unproven youngsters or for that matter unproven overseas players all new to the division and you risk it falling apart.
In the past 30 months we have seen nothing remotely approaching the building of a professional football squad - it has been a lottery based on a great deal of wishful thinking and a series of "punts".
One of the best signings Powell ever made was Andy Hughes. He barely kicked a ball in anger but he provided the experience, the professionalism to provide precisely the level of cover for the squad to get the job done.
Remember the object of the exercise is supposed to be about getting the job done, to be competitive, to be successful. It is about giving the manager/ head coach the tools to do the job. The modern game is about game management and using the squad to provide you with the options to go win games.
Based on injuries and loss of form alone with only 22 outfield players in the squad as a coach you are then left with the 16/17 you want for the match day squad.
That is the cost of doing business to succeed.
That is what being competitive actually means.
All of that is perfectly acceptable. So if you could just stop slagging people off as being pathetic for no reason whatsoever it would be appreciated. Thank you.
BTW, if you beat a dog with a stick often enough....guess how it behaves when you wave another stick in front of it?
Let's just give him a go and see what he does I've got a feeling he will silence a lot of gobshites
Mourinho was/is always of the opinion that twenty two would do and he won lots at Chelsea with a smallish but versatile and talented squad
;0)
Bunch of moaning minnies more like!
Tell me how you can moan about a squad that no one has a clue as to what it will finally look like?
We differ, I expect this trumpeted at the press conference 'brave new world' to mean a season like the last time we won promotion.
The point is that people are genuinely concerned that Slade, who has been at the club for 5 minutes is already echoing the thoughts and sounds from KM and RD. Anyone who thinks that a squad of 22 in League one, (which will undoubtedly include several kids), can achieve a play-off place is mistaken. Dont get me wrong, I dont think anyone is saying we need a squad of 40, but 22 is too small.
'Moaning minnies' is at least slightly more humorous than calling other members 'Gobshites'.
Solly, RCC
Teixeira, Bauer
Sarr, Lennon
Fox, THD
Cousins, Jackson
Diarra, Kashi
JBG, Ceballos
Marriott, Lookman
Vetokele, Watt
KAG, Tucudean
Dmitrovic, Ba, Bergdich, Johnson
A couple of youngsters too like Umerah and Konsa, so basically anyone on that list that's gets sold needs to be replaced.
Look at Walsall, not quite good enough for promotion, but the club used very few players .. there is a definite correlation between using few players and success/final table position, albeit all over 22 .. look at Burton Albion !!
http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/league-one/eingesetztespieler/wettbewerb/GB3
Teams that are doing well tend to have to use less players, as the starters tend to be doing the job asked of them.
Again, I dont disagree with many on here. I think a manager that is able to field roughly the same starting 11 week afte week tends to do better. But realistically, in order to do that, you still need more than 22 in a squad. Not forgetting that every season, we seem to suffer the same 'injury crisis' which lasts for weeks and weeks with no update on player progress etc. Therefore those that are saying we need a bigger squad than 22 are perhaps justified in claiming that?
I agree with @hawksmoor .. i.e. the headline post is wrong/deliberately misleading ?, Slade intimated between 22 and 25 .. look at last season, Burton (first) (Or was it second ?), Walsall (3rd)(Or was it fourth ) ((:>) used the least players .. I will write again .. NO LOANS AVAILABLE = MORE CAREFUL SIGNINGS .. SEE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SUCCESS LAST SEASON AND FEWEST PLAYERS USED ..
If we end next season having used 35 to 40 players, which will not happen as the loan system is virtually finished, I'll guarantee that we'll be in the bottom 1/2 of the table .. 22 players with back up from the youth system should suffice ..
Sounds like another lie to me Daisy