Leaderboard

So if Engel wasn’t as bad as made out to be because of Carrick then don’t the rest of the signings get that leeway aswell? This expectation of perfection in everything helps the club in no way, it’s not possible and no other club achieves it. We put a team together that simply should be higher than it is right now, the reason we aren’t is because we’ve blew 2 or 3 goal leads or conceded goals due to stupidity and incompetence. I can think of 10 easy points we should have extra simply just by not literally throwing games away, that would have us firmly in the play offs and mean we ARE moving in the right direction squad wise.

Just to change the topic from Scott. Surprised Armstrong has struggled at WBA, 2 goals so far... I'd love us to have a go to get him in the summer. He's been mentioned loads before so guess he's in our wishlist

At the end of the day it’s not really as abnormal as people make out on here to have a regular ‘rebuild’. I’ve done it before on the transfer thread but here are some stats from well lauded teams when it comes to transfers Brentford 16/17- 12 incomings/11 outgoings 17/18 - 7 incomings/12 out goings 18/19 - 6 incomings/9 out going’s 19/20 - 14 incomings/12 out goings Brighton 15/16 17 incomings/10 out goings 16/17 - 10 incomings/11 out goings I did them from the time we got promoted until they went up, I didn’t realise Brighton went up so fast after we did. I also tried to only include first teamers, it’s hard to decipher on there sometimes what actually is a signing or just a player returning from loan etc. Either way you can see 6-12 signings in a summer for them was pretty normal, so what we need to do in summer vs what these teams who we are apparently trying to ‘emulate’ did (which resulted in eventual promotion/success), is more or less the same thing. Also in the lists of their incomings are plenty of ‘misses’ that apparently no other team but us seem to suffer in the transfer market. Almost as if the whole area is basically a lottery and you can only do so much before it’s up to the player/manager/gods whether it will work or not. Anyway my point is that while yes it’s a big job, it’s not really out of the ordinary when you actually look at what other teams are doing so maybe the whole panic about it is a bit over the top? Thanks to the previous ground work we should also have plenty of cash available to do it aswell.

I'd say improving the viability of the club via improved recruitment will have been close to the top of his target personally.

to play devils advocate, if it was partially or all down to carricks training methods, then that might be the reason why in his first half season you didn't see it so much as injuries from training methods likely are not instant injuries, its going to be the training catching up with people after its been going on for long term and the constant stress accumulates on the players, which might explain why injuries started to appear more in his 2nd season as the training accumulated, maybe I'm wrong but by the end of the season when around the play offs we did had a few players who were injured too, akpom was someone carrying injuries, which I don't think he fully recovered from before he moved to ajax, sure there might been others than just ramsay, and around the time the playoffs were guaranteed the team did feel like it was running a bit on empty (although that could just be down to coventry and the others we played countering our playing style, or maybe a bit of both) was the 2nd season also the year that all the stoppage time rules changed that added quite a decent bump to the length of injury time and time the ball was in play? I think this added to fitness stress levels too

Every single team has a ton of misses, literally go through Brentford’s signings on their build towards promotion, most of them are failures/bang average buys. Youre complaining about Left backs but you thought Engel was great but Carrick was making him look bad with his system. So which one is it? Scott’s fault for signing a bad player or Carricks fault for making him look bad?

And have we actually done that? Also, how does that as a main target for the Head of Football mesh with a promotion target for the Head Coach? Or is the Head Coach expected to make us more viable as well.

I would like to think so, but I just worry that the clown might try to make things so awkward that they will impose extra sanctions against the club and as always, it is the fans that suffer most. Don't know if we have any Reading fans on the board, but I can imagine what they have gone through since we classed them as direct rivals not that long ago.

thats good, i never knew you could be disqualified after buying a club

The topic is about Scott not one player be it Engel or anyone else. I'm not even sure why you have gone off on that tangent. Anyway, are you happy with our squad right now? Are you saying Iheanacho is down to Carrick or Silvera or Hamilton just as three examples. We are going to require a huge rebuild once again in the summer. That isn't continuity, it isn't progress, the squad isn't fit for purpose, surely as DOF or HOF Scott has to carry the responsibility for that? They both must share the blame for many failings on what they are doing. They have both had some big pluses but also some very big negatives.

As does lack of substitutions!

Agree with that, and said as much on the Kieron Scott thread that's floating around.

Similarities definitely but no cigar 🙂 You appear to have missed the bit in bold......

https://www.footballinsider247.com/exclusive-tim-steidten-in-pole-position-to-join-crystal-palace/ If Football Insider are reliable with Palace, it sounds like we're fine, they're looking elsewhere.

The injuries all seemed to start hitting in quick succession at the end of Carrick's first season. McGree out in the 41st game. Fry fully out in the 41st game. Ramsey out in the 41st game. Forss out in the 43rd game. Howson and Giles out in the 45th game. Akpom injured in the 2nd play-off leg. Since then, we've basically had a regular conveyor belt of injuries, starting in pre-season, so it might have been a delay from whatever happens in Carrick's training taking effect. Or it genuinely is all just bad luck and players being injury prone.

Yes but I’m assuming that’s already been tried. What’s baffling is in Carricks first season here we rarely had any injuries at all. Ramsey aside I can’t really think of any major injuries that season other than ‘niggles’. From that angle maybe it’s something he does in pre season? I also find it crazy that we’ve had 2 (almost 3) career ending injuries in as many seasons (smith, Lenihan, almost Clarke apparently). Have we maybe stopped doing something in the treatment process, for example I wonder how popular stem cell treatment is in football to treat muscular/tendon problems. I’d guess it’s popular as it seems to be effective, are we using medical science along those lines (if it’s actually allowed in football)? Or are we a bit ‘behind the times’?

Brilliant exclusive 👏 @Nobby Barnes He was only appointed on Tuesday and you’re all over it already 🤔

Just because we have a lower points total doesn't necessarily correlate to changing the manager - if we had a guy who was open, clear and demonstrated flexibility with his tactics - to a point - but wanted to create an identity within our playing style - i'd be 'all in' for Carrick. Carrick doesn't offer any of these reassurances though that we're heading a the right direction ; he shuts down when Tees as him a tougher question than his normal easy ones, doesn't appear to be learning anything about the value of subs before the 70 min. I only wanted to see a manager who is 'real' with the supporters - but carrick is so manufactured in the way he speaks to the media - and ultimately that is delivered to supporters - I am left with zero confidence in the guy. I think he comes across as arrogant when evading questions and being short with Mark at Tees BUT with nothing to be arrogant about.