Jump to content
oneBoro Forum

Smokedsalmon

Members
  • Content Count

    792
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Smokedsalmon

  1. 1 minute ago, Stevoboro said:

    I know it’s obvious but wow we miss a Giles type. Engel really is poor. First thought backwards when space to run into. 

    He's working hard, making all the right runs. But he's also 24, moved to a new country, thrust into a team that was losing every game... and then got crucified and hooked at half time in his last game.

    There's a difference between a *** player and a player who is shitting himself about getting it wrong.

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
  2. 28 minutes ago, ManBearPig said:

    At the start of the season I’d have agreed with you. But now? Carrick is making illogical choices consistently and it’s not working. He has to shoulder most of the blame.  

    Honestly the list is long.

    1- Forss on the wing instead of up front? Carrick.  
    2- Not changing formation? Carrick. 
    3- last nights team selection? Carrick. 
    4- not making subs when the game was there to be won? Carrick. 
    5- slow style of play? Carrick

    6- not using the width and playing narrow on purpose? Carrick 

    7- recruitment has done him a favour by getting in Lewis O’Brien who is probably as best as we could have hoped for for cdm. Where did Carrick play him on Saturday? Oh that’s right, left mid. 

    8- dropping McGree who is well acknowledged to be our best and most creative player? Carrick.

    9- persisting with Crooks as a 10? Carrick. 

    10- these performances stretch all the way back into pre season too btw, this all started before the new players. 

    What I will give you is that the recruitment team have bought in a lot of new players at once which will take time to gel. But anyone thinking that it’s just recruitment which is the problem is blinkered. I want Carrick to succeed and do well, but I just think game by game he either doesn’t want it or doesn’t know how to change it. 

    Not sure about that McGree comment myself.

    There's always a Messiah who we aren't starting, every season, who is the answer to our woes and this year it's McGree.

    Incredibly slow, never plays 1 touch, poor decision making - thought he was *** poor last night and personally think Ramsey made him look stupid with how much better the kid was. Certainly don't see him as this wonderful creative spark.

     

    Much of the rest I agree with though. Persisting with trying to shoehorn Matt Crooks into the Chuba Akpom role is what will do him, in the end.

    • Like 1
  3. 4 minutes ago, TheJew said:

    As above, I have a friend who is heavily involved at MFC and an ex player also heavily involved. This is what they've told me.

    Ask yourself this - why the tweets above?

    The other issue is Akpom and Giles became the heartbeat of the dressing room last season. Chuba became a real leader. Getting rid of these two was like tearing the heart beat out of the dressing room and the subsequent impact is being felt. 

    Still doesn't exonerate the Carrick situation ref team selections though.

    Even if what you've been told is true, we've added 12 new players to the dressing room. That's such a significant overhaul of the squad that the dynamic was going to be totally different no matter who stayed/went.

    Besides, your final point there is the most important one - Akpom/Giles leaving isn't forcing Magic Mike to play his best midfielder at left wing and that big oaf in number 10.

    Comes a point where all the excuses pile up so much that you just need to say "suck it up, you're a well-paid professional in a high-pressure environment, sort it out or move along".

  4. 1 minute ago, TheJew said:

    No. What I'm saying is Akpom WAS staying. Then was told he HAD to leave. Consequently he joined Ajax. The club made this decision.

    Giles was signing. Then the club PULLED the deal. Luton was his the only other offer on the table. The club made this decision.

    They ain't full of ***. I've been through this over and over again and people can believe what they want. The McGree situation is intrinsically linked to the above.

    Can you explain how you know this to be fact?

  5. People can bang on about recruitment all they want but when you've got O'brien starting left wing & Crooks starting CAM that's just willful negligence from Carrick.

    He's got it all wrong all year, from the half-arsed pre-season to the baffling team selections and the inability to properly incorporate the new signings.

    There's no way this squad is this bad. The structure, defensively and offensively, is determined by the coaching staff and it is currently embarrassing.

    • Like 7
  6. 14 minutes ago, TeaCider24 said:

    Or League One. 

    It might just be that the past 5-6 years of cycling between being relegation fodder/promotion candidates has left me kind of "over the whole football thing" but there's a small part of me that can't help but think a League One rebuild save on FM as Boro and some cool new away days might not be the end of the world.

    Obviously, in reality we'd probably go bust and implode, but that's what I like to tell myself.

  7. 1 minute ago, DevKWat said:

    One thing that definitely won’t change is Carrick wanting his holding midfielder/6 to pick up the ball and dictate.

    VDB has looked shaky at times receiving the ball facing forwards never mind with his back to goal, so have to disagree with you on that. 

    4-3-3 certainly seems the way forward as I think Chuba and Giles departure has rendered our 4-2-3-1 extremely ineffective 

    I think he has the qualities to be able to be coached to play there - tall, no slouch, fairly tidy on the ball. He's still only 19 remember.

    • Like 1
  8. 1 minute ago, DevKWat said:

    I think a switch to 4-3-3 would suit Carricks style of wanting high possession and allowing the full backs to get forward and provide chances through crosses 

    I’d like to see a team like this:

     

                            Dieng 

    Dijksteel - VDB - Lenihan - Bangura

        Hackney - O’Brien - McGree

        Forss - Latte Lath - Rogers


    The midfield 3 has high energy and technical quality, yes there’s no traditional ‘6’ but we don’t have one at the club and O’Brien is a lot better defensively than you may think.

    The front 3 provide the greatest goal threat and highest energy levels for pressing high up the pitch. 


    This is my opinion, but I look and that team and think it would be far more threatening than what we are doing currently and seems to check all Carrick managerial “stylistic” boxes 

     

    I agree with the change to 433, but I think I'd go with something more like this.

    image.png.52cee92dc814b733b804f45ba3aceec3.png

    I'd like to see VDB be deployed in that #6 role to sit in front of the defence, screen it, and recycle possession to O'Brien/Hackney.

    McGree's best position is coming in off the left into the #10 role to allow the LB to overlap. I'd like to see the same on the right with Forss tucking in and Jones providing the width.

    It's still high-risk but you have that security of the #6 in VDB playing the Makele-style anchor man role that covers for Jones/Bangura.

  9. 12 minutes ago, Bruce said:

    Actually, I think they can and would. We have missed a lot of chances as most teams in the Championship do but we have been shambolic out of possession. I don't think I would chalk any of our lost games up to bad luck. Some of them, with good luck might have ended as a draw. 

    Of the goals we've conceded, two have been excellent finishes but the rest have been easy including an own goal (which was unfortunate). We have usually given the ball away in the wrong place, missed a tackle, marked really badly, given someone too much space or some combination. Because the chances are easy, you don't need many chances against us to score. In fact, I suspect nearly all the missed chances were by Kevin Nisbet.

    We also give away a lot of nearly chances where opponents would be through on goal if they didn't screw up the final ball. Being the Championship, most teams will get the final ball wrong more often than not.

    For whatever reason, we are utterly clueless at defending without the ball. To be honest, I can't think of a match under Carrick where we defended well for a whole match. That kind of thing is usually a systemic matter. All teams will concede chances but if you are conceding more goals than normal from an average number of chances over a period of time, the problem is you.

    It's weird, because the defensive side of the game is actually the one that's easiest to coach. Allardyce, Pulis, Warnock etc. have literally built their careers around coaching a well-drilled defence that doesn't give away soft goals. The attacking side is, more often than not, a case of getting good players in a good run of form and letting them do their thing (unless you're Pep or Arteta and get a massive hard-on for over-coaching attacking patterns).

    When you look at Karanka and the way we used to defend - even in the Prem for half a season - we were always very, very solid. We didn't give away *** goals. He drilled that defence to the ends of the earth. Now, fair enough, it cost us in the Prem because we were a bit too defensive and didn't have the attacking talent to create a moment of magic, but it just goes to show that it really is down to the manager to coach the defence properly.

    • Like 2
  10. 2 minutes ago, Guffie said:

    Was fuming yesterday when it happened. But giggling now, when McNair let the ball run across him in the first half and passed it straight out near the halfway line. Head was in hands, how he starts I don’t know

    McNair and Howson should have been booted out of the club years ago.

    2 players who have been at the heart of some of the worst Middlesbrough teams I have ever had to watch and yet still getting a game. Symptomatic of how bad the recruitment set up has been the past decade.

  11. The problems with this Carrick team had begun long before Akpom & Giles had left. We looked just as tepid, slow, and unable to defend properly at the end of the last season (and especially in the play-offs, where that second leg performance vs Coventry was an utter disgrace).

    We are a team that is totally shot on confidence. I genuinely believe momentum and mentality have a bigger impact on a football team than tactics and strategy. Everybody is saying our players look ***, but they looked equally *** under Wilder before Carrick came in, and then many of them looked like worldies after. They now look *** again because their heads have gone. So which one is it?

    When you're playing with confidence and freedom you bury those 1 on 1s, your passing is crisp and fluid, you make dangerous forward movements and take risks. That's the difference maker.

    On the defensive side of things, that's on Carrick. We've been *** defensively since he took over and it hasn't improved. His gung-ho "lets just leave the 2 CBs to defend and everybody else can vibe wherever the *** they fancy on the transition" is literally just down to poor coaching. If someone, I don't care who - O'Brien or Van de Berg would be my preference - isn't playing as a holding #6 after the international break then I think Carrick's stubbornness will eventually cost him his job. But that's what we need, defensive stability & midfield control, because that enables your full backs to bomb on and influence the game and gives the team confidence to attack.

    I think the excuse "we've not replaced last years players and all 12 we've signed are ***" is just an overly-emotional reaction to a team that has been struggling for many, many months now.

    • Like 7
  12. Just now, Changing Times said:

    If we're talking solely about the transfer market (which I think we are here?) then buy the best players you can with whatever resources you have at your disposal.  

    Do you think it matters how old they are, contract they'd demand, resale value etc.?

  13. 5 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

    I didn't say every team is doing it, I said you are ignoring those who do it and aren't successful, which you are, and you didn't understand the point I was making because you were focused on the few seasons Brentford have had in the Premier League as if that was guaranteed, when my actual point was that it clearly isn't.  Now we have another name thrown into the mix in Brighton.  What do Brighton have in common with Brentford other than currently doing well in the Premier League?  Nothing at all.  Brighton didn't operate in the same way as Brentford did.  Brighton spent their way to the Premier League just like we did the last time.  In the two seasons before we last went up we had a net transfer spend of +£30m, Brighton's was +£20m, Brentford's was -£50m.  Nothing at all alike but you've brought them into the conversation simply because they are an historically unsuccessful club who happen to be doing well right now. 

    All of this was based on the idea that it's possible for us to make progress whilst finishing lower than we did last season, and I don't think it is.  If we finish midtable, or even lower as we are now, I don't believe that the fanbase in general would see that as progress, and I don't believe that the club would see it as progress either.  The reason that people mention Brentford is solely because it ended up being successful or we'd be talking about another team, like Brighton for example, and saying that the way to get promoted must be to spend your way there.  In fact, last summer wasn't there also lots of people saying we should copy Forest's way of doing things by loaning lots of players in?  Now however, lots of loans aren't a good idea because you have to replace those players at the end of the season.  In reality, the reason they aren't viewed as a good idea is just because we didn't get promoted.  If we'd got promoted with them then everybody would be talking about what a great idea it is to loan players.  Do you see what I mean?

    So, in your eyes, what is the ideal path forward for a club of our size/financial power? I'm happy to accept there are plenty of ways to find success, what do you think would be best?

  14. 4 minutes ago, Rob said:

    I think we doing our own thing rather than their thing

    they are similarities, but think its more of trying to instil the way we want to play through the whole club, buying players to fit that, hiring coaches to play that way, and buying players to use the club as a stepping stone with us making profit on them is also a big part to fund that.

    but think that is CT's point to, they are plenty of other clubs trying to do similar things and they are still here with us.

    its defs a long term way of doing things and relies on everything falling into place for that one season to get you up to the next division.

    the downside being that each time you don't make it then them stand out players of the previous season may want to leave/be sold to fund the next attempt

    But I still don't understand what the alternative is? 

    Our 3/4 year cycle of spend loads of cash, pray it goes well, and then have to cut costs because it didn't?

    Wait for a foreign investor?

    I just don't know why anyone would actively disagree with the club's current strategy. We literally didn't have one for years.

    • Like 2
  15. 9 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

     

    It wasn't a bizarre point, you just haven't understood it, hence you've missed part of the relevant point out.  

    'If Brentford were still a Championship club then nobody would be suggesting we copy them.  It's only because they became a winning team that people want that.  Last summer it was Norwich we were copying but then they did nothing last season and suddenly nobody is talking about emulating them.'

    When some of you talk about these 'models' you act like these clubs are the only ones doing it, and therefore copying them will lead to the same end result for us.  Lots of clubs by cheaper unproven players, it's been happening for years, most of them are not in the Premier League however so none of you want to copy them.  Norwich were the in vogue team to mention until now but this changed because they were crap last season, and suddenly the idea of copying them is less appealing.  Now it's Brentford, but if Brentford were to suddenly find themselves relegated you'd be talking about emulating another club because what you actually want to emulate isn't their way of doing things, it's simply the success of being promoted.  Doing things that way isn't a guarantee of success but some of you appear to believe that it is - we're doing things this way because Brentford did it this way and they got promoted, as if that's all there is to it.  You're simply picking out the most successful example of it that's all, while ignoring the unsuccessful clubs.

    I understood perfectly well, thank you.

    Following Brentford's model is not a guarantee for success. Nobody has claimed that. But it's demonstrably the best way for a team without a wealthy investor to improve their position. Brentford/Brighton have come out of League 1/2 stature to surpass previously established Premier League teams by doing it differently. Not every team has an established transfer strategy, at all, and to claim everybody is doing it this way is simply incorrect. Ask fans of clubs like Everton.

    What's your alternative idea? What else is a club with no wealthy investor meant to do to try and improve in a world where players are regularly going for 100m+?

    • Like 2
  16. 6 hours ago, Changing Times said:

    If Brentford were still a Championship club then nobody would be suggesting we copy them.  It's only because they became a winning team that people want that.

    I'm not sure you quite realise how bizarre a point this is to make.

    "You guys only want us to be like them because they're, er, consistently in the Prem making loads of money and signing good players all the time."

    Err.... yeah?

    • Like 5
  17. Just now, diggerlad07 said:

    I said in not writing him off and it's too early to judge, I am just questioning why we have gone for another left back after what I was told about Bangura deal

    Because Coulson is *** and every good team needs 2 players for every position. I don't think there needs to be a conspiracy behind it.

    • Haha 1
  18. Imagine moving to a brand new country on your own at the age of 24 - to perform in one of the most high-pressure environments imaginable - at a completely different level than you've ever experienced before - with a team that is generally already playing poorly - and being written off after *checks notes* 3 games.

    Some people on here seriously do think football is some kind of real-life FIFA, don't they? You don't just plug his 85 crossing stat from one team into another, slap him on the *** and say off you go mate go be a worldie.

    As if the data analysts have tracked this guy for (almost certainly) months, gone through all the process of signing him, and then checked his first 3 games and said "yeah *** that man let's get another in". Dearie me.

     

     

    • Like 6
  19. It's really funny that people think a professional football club's recruitment department are sat in their offices saying "what names can we leak out so that people think we've tried to do our jobs".

    Football's a great hobby but I think people really do become way too invested with the behind the scenes stuff. Fans should stick to judging the facts and what they can see on the pitch, not speculating over ridiculous conspiracy theories being peddled by very, very vague claims of being ITK.

     

    • Like 11
  20. 6 minutes ago, BoroSmoggie said:

    Ngl completely baffled by the Greenwood signing. Never really rated him and can’t see him improving us. He’s unproven, young and a loan deal when we already have about 8 attacking midfielders. Screams a bit last minute desperation if I’m being honest. 

    I think if we're going to use the loan market it needs to be players who immediately come in and improve the first XI. Agreed this deal just seems to make no sense.

    Who is he competing with? McGree/Silvera/Jones/Forss/Rogers/Crooks already have the 3 positions behind the striker between them, and then there's Gilbert sat on the bench not getting a sniff.

    Bizarre one, this.

  21. 5 minutes ago, ManBearPig said:

    Could Matt Crooks do a job as a CDM?

    I don't think so, no.

    He's incredibly slow and lacks agility. This results in him giving away stupid fouls constantly - remember when he was in the midfield 3 under Wilder he was nailed on for getting a dumb booking every game, and would constantly give away set pieces near our box.

    Crooks is best when he attacks the box late in a midfield 3 - any other role he really struggles to do.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...