What is a paper thin squad? How many players should we consider to having a "cardboard thick " squad. As far as I can see we have a group of 22 first team players backed up by several talented young eager players who never let the team down.Sometimes because of unforeseen circumstances players have to drop in to strange positions at the drop of a hat.This happened last night and I thought Fryers and Ben Williams in particular got to grips with what was asked of him.Theres not many clubs who can afford or want a 30/40 man squad.Our squad is ticking along nicely and I think we should be proud of them.
I think we should have more than 2 strikers and a bollock was dropped in January with regards to that.
As it was in letting two experienced midfielders leave to be replaced by one up and coming player who had never been tested at this level before.
Paper thin doesn't always mean not having 22 or 18 players. It can sometimes mean being forced to start those who havent featured in 3 month and playing reserves
Isgrove wouldn't have started another game if he was here or not he can't even get in pompeys squad. Agree with moncur but he is similar to bahre.
That's easy to say and we would all accept in an ideal world that would be the choice. But in reality who would we have realistically been able to sign, both from the point of view of finance and attracting a player to be backup, that would have been better options to what we have? I ask in context of Moore not being injured (otherwise I'm sure we would have signed somebody to replace him) and our options being Brown, Adaboyajo and Thiam.
I didn't want Potts to leave neither did stendel neither did 90% of our fans. It was disappointing the conway interview with tykes tv touched on selling players where he said if a player wants to leave we won't stop them. I assume with Potts his agent told him about Preston he wanted to go, i cant blame him he got some awful stick the previous season and they made a big enough offer.
I have no idea as I don't have access to the spreadsheet, we clearly had the funds to sign someone as we bought Miller - only problem is he can't play. I just don't believe that it wasn't possible to bring a first choice striker in better than we have got.
OK, so you would have dropped Moore or Woudrow. Just need to point out Sunderland paid £4m for Will Grieg. There will only be under 24s on the spreadsheet and like Miller will be ones for the future.
No I wouldn't have dropped them I'd have had tried to get decent cover for an injury which we simply don't have especially considering we spent a big chunk of the first half of the season playing with only one fit striker & at times it showed. Every so often we need to sign a player for the here & now, I'd have thought promotion was more of a priority than taking a punt on one for the future who can't play this season.
You then need to consider the question... Who would come without assurances of first team football and how much would they cost. Not realistic imo.
I have no idea, I really struggle to believe that there would have been nobody at all interested in joining a top six 3rd tier side as 1st change striker who would have been within our budget & better than the reserves that we already have. I can't name names as I don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of players. Think it's probs best we agree to disagree on this.
Absolutely spot on ...load bearing pillar... We could have easily brought in a loan or 2 just for cover, happens all the time. How many players come with assurances they will play every week? utter nonsense (oh yea Ryan kent). Funny enough pompy brought in 6, that's right....6 and Omar bogle ain't a defo starter every week.
This .....in spades. No one is seriously griping at a lack of cover in the squad as a whole, but the problem ‘up top’ has been there since August! You might have hoped that with us going for promotion, a little push to get appropriate cover in, wouldn’t have been too much for the Coach to ask for. Instead we did the opposite! Crackers behaviour.