I think we all see it but the point is it is for the future, not the right now. Right now he should be focusing on simply establishing himself before being a leader, walk before he can run type of situation.
The way forward for THFC ??
- Thread starter The RDBD
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I think we all see it but the point is it is for the future, not the right now. Right now he should be focusing on simply establishing himself before being a leader, walk before he can run type of situation.
By and large people are leaders they don't become leaders. Ignoring this is a source of many of our problems today and I am not just talking football. This is true in all walks of life.
I don’t think it’s entirely true that injuries gave Skipp his place. He was one of the few standouts at the base of a midfield 3 under Nuno and made a number of starts before his injury problems that season. I agree that in a midfield 2 he is likely only starting because of injuries but if we played a 3 I think he’s the best choice of our current crop to anchor it.
That was before we signed Bentancur and Bissouma though. By signing them perhaps we were expressing concerns about Skipp's trajectory and/or his overall fitness?
Re Sissoko it's worth mentioning that he only really emerged as a "leader" when it became apparent that Aurier and Ndombele basically needed a babysitter and he took on the role of an older brother to them.
We wouldn't need leaders like that if we stopped signing clowns.
We wouldn't need leaders like that if we stopped signing clowns.
Certainly we needed depth and quality. Which is why we signed them. I think we’re not necessarily seeing the best of Skipp because he’s not a great fit for the system. Bentancur and Bissouma can each do a bit of everything and do it pretty well. I think you could play either of them as box to box 8s, basically what they’ve been doing under Conte, and either as a 6 if you wanted, especially Bentancur, though they have more to offer elsewhere. Skippy is more of a specialist. He’s intelligent and aware enough to do a job as an 8 but he’s not as technical as the other two and not as creative in his passing, so it’s not a natural fit.
Well I think I've found the stupidest take imaginable...
You must log in or register to see images
Erm….
Whilst I agree with you sentiment to a degree, and I'm all for signing better players, I think it's more accurate to say that Sissoko became a leader when Dembele's absence became a crippling factor at the beginning of the squads decline. In a squad stripped of a backbone, Sissoko becomes the 'goat'.
I disagree that we wouldn't need leaders like that. We've always needed leaders like that.
Sissoko was like a gaffa tape lesser alternative temporary fix for losing Wanyama and Dembele who were both firm in midfield. Before that it was Scott Parker partnering Modric, before that it was Palacios partnering Huddlestone. When these players came into our squad they always made a positive impact and added rigidity to a, too often, too soft centre. (Redknapp having to field a midfield pivot of Modric and Kranjcar in an inevitable heavy loss comes to mind.)
Look at how Dembele was willing to fight in the battle of the bridge.
Who, apart from, Sissoko, has had any kind of physical stature like that on he pitch to let the opposition know not to f&*( with our players?
Winks? Skipp?
Even Hojbjerg, "the viking", is lightweight and passive in comparison to prime Dembele, and he annoys me sometimes with his seeming passivity in key moments. Anyhow, I digress.
Perhaps it was to in prove squad depth, something we all wanted. Unfortunately it coincided with a spate of injuries.
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...eams-after-making-1-2-billion-in-three-years/
1) Dallas Cowboys $1.17Billion (3 year operational profit)
2) New England Patriots $623Million
3) TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR $414Million
4) New York Nicks $404Million
5) Houston Texans $356Million
10) Man City $329Million
Thank you Beyoncé
1) Dallas Cowboys $1.17Billion (3 year operational profit)
2) New England Patriots $623Million
3) TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR $414Million
4) New York Nicks $404Million
5) Houston Texans $356Million
10) Man City $329Million
Thank you Beyoncé
The obvious issue with this graph is that it suggests The Sheikh Mansour Team aren't investing either
Superb control of the wage bill by Levy
(what is not spent on wages is by definition
available for transfer fees) .
The measure is a ratio R ( = X/Y) .
So to get R= 0.5, I can have 5/10, 50/100. 500/1000 etc.
Or from those who do stattery in their day job :
1. R means nothing without knowing X and Y
2. Publishing R without giving X and Y (or citing
sources that do) is an immediate alarm bell for
potential statistical deceit.
Realistically what these graphs actually show is some clubs are run by people who couldn't be trusted to run a bath, most obviously Everton, Leicester and the Saudis
And that's the problem with the Leicester myth: they were held up for years as a model we should follow, and yet their model was based entirely on selling a player for a massive markup every summer to balance out how their wage bill had got out of control