Cast your mind back to our last team that outperformed. The main reason it was so good was that Rose, Walker, Dele, Dier and Kane were signed for less than £20m between them and turned into top four players. We are never going to improve by signing the second best established players that our competitors have rejected. We have much more chance by gambling on youth.
What about the rest of that team though? Such as Lloris, Vertonghen, Alderweireld, Dembele, Wanyama, Eriksen and Son? If they’re second best established players rejected by competitors then I’ll take 20!
Signing castoffs can work, but only if the reason the player is a castoff is because they were being replaced by a genuinely exceptional talent Gianfranco Zola at Chelsea is the obvious example: obviously quality, but Parma signed Hernan Crespo and Enrico Chiesa making him surplus to requirements, and Chelsea were only too keen to offer him the playing time he wouldn't have got otherwise Also has to be said the Bottlers have a track record of signing castoffs: Dennis Bergkamp was surplus to requirements at Inter, Thierry Henry was surplus to requirements at Juventus, Mesut Ozil was the player Los Ladrones could most afford to lose to offset Gareth Bale's pricetag, while Los Ladrones basically forgot they even had Martin Odegaard until they needed to balance the books during Lockdown Worth remembering that Atletico had allowed Alderweireld to go out on loan to Southampton in the first place, so on that basis he could be described as a reject
Point taken but with the fee that Southampton are asking i doubt we will get the lad for less that £50 million on the basis of Grays fee , can we afford to take that chance on a teenager who's scored 2 goals in 17 games
Lloris was the only players in that list who was really a high quality established player though. Eriksen and Son were 21 and 22 and closer to gambles on youth. The other four were definitely more like journeyman who came good for us. Except for Wanyama who wasn't really a success due to injuries, the others all seemed like underwhelming signings at the time. But of course such players will sometimes be huge successes but I still think youth is the best bet for our situation.
I think you need to mix it up. Going all in on one type has too many risks. All in on youth for instance has the risk that the law of averages suggest a certain percentage won’t amount to what we hope they will. Going all in on more established players can then can get you situations of Richarlison, though you could argue Richarlison was never truly established. Jol, Redknapp and Pochettino’s teams all had a good blend. I actually think right now we have a decent blend, I’ve long said I don’t think our squad calibre is anywhere near as bad as it’s showing, it’s just been very poorly coached and managed. But to move forward and improve, whilst it’s great to see promising young players arrive, you still need one or two for the now to ensure that you’re not waiting anything from 1-3+ years for a particular player to only potentially come good, because if they don’t, it’s a few years wasted with nothing to show for it and you’ve likely taken one or two steps backward in the process.
I think that it's really crucial to have a really strong spine. The youthful Ferguson team, including Beckham, Scholes, etc., had Keane, Pallister, Stam, Schmeichel, Sheringham, etc. We've nothing to compare to that. In the right set up, it's Vicario, Romero, Bentancur, Maddison, Bissouma and Sonny. I'm going to be very kind and call them intermittently good leaders... ...we need some consistently good pros, with top level (preferably PL experience) to lead the youngsters. We ain't got them. That is, and will continue to hurt us.
The main issue is our leadership group...well, isn't Sonny does appear to be a good leader behind the scenes, but that isn't translating on the pitch Cuti is the sort of "Kick you up the backside" player we need, but he's been injured half the season Maddison has the on field leadership qualities of Liz Truss Another way of looking at it is how our most vocal players on the pitch - Cuti and Vicario, who has been stepping up in that regard this season - are all in our half of the pitch, but what we clearly need is a dominant voice in midfield considering how meek our midfield often is
I think we’ve got the experience and even a decent enough spine, we just don’t utilise it well enough. We do lack a proper captain but so do a lot of teams when looking across the board so we’re far from unique there. But when there’s no sense to our selections and play, I don’t think experience will make any difference. Players are shoehorned into positions in a formation that doesn’t suit them. You can’t then lead on the pitch when you yourself are struggling to fit into things. 433 hasn’t worked consistently enough for over a year now, we’ve got 10s playing in 8, 8 playing in 6, players who specialise running the line being told to come inside and players who specialise cutting inside told to run the wing. I can’t remember the last time seeing such naive management. There’s been **** football (and some) but rarely have I felt “you’re ****ing brain dead, pal” as much as I have done this season.
The interesting thing is Maddison mentioned that we've been working on overlapping FBs in training Errm...so what hasn't that been on the docket for the last eighteen months? Especially when you consider the plan is to overload the flanks, having Udogie run the line and Son cut inside would do that and work much better for both of them
Sacha Tovalieri reckons Romero had a chat with Simeone and is keen on joining Atleti. We supposedly value him at £67m. I definitely don’t wanna lose Romero but has to be said he’s tailor-made for Simeone-ball at Atleti. He’d probably become one of the top three CBs in Europe after a year or so with him there.
Who are you referring to when you you speak of 'the experience'? On the spine, decent enough for what exactly?
Vicario, Romero, Bentancur, Maddison, Solanke. Straight line down the middle of the team. All Internationals, all 25+ and all good enough to play for teams in the top six, with perhaps Solanke the only debatable one.
But when three out of the five that you mention are out injured long term[Romero, Vicario, Solanke], and the other two are in and out for short term injuries and 'reasons', what happens to the spine? Are they still good enough when you replace them with kids and gaffer tape?
Forster, Danso, Bissouma and Kulu would cover 4 of the 5 - albeit Kulu would generally be starting at RW in the primary XI - I would add Richarlison as the 5th but he’s **** and often injured. Problem is though when you play a naively OTT intensive system that wrecks players regularly, along with rushing players back from injury, that alternative spine then needs its own alternative… as we’ve more or less seen by having to utilise Gray and Bergvall regularly.
This may be true, but it lacks a little context, in my opinion. Eriksen and Son were young, but they'd both played a lot of football at a good level. They'd already played over 150 club matches and nearly 50 internationals.
More than anything else, having Porro and Udogie stay wide also means opponents can't just pack the centre and then start playing Blackjack for the next 89:55 because having them running the line from deep would force opponents to have to come out of a fixed position to try and deal with them That might (in theory, anyway...) allow our midfield to have a degree of influence, too
