Hopefully the spreadsheet will now be abandoned

And we can try to bring in few more experienced players.

 

I dont mind the spreadsheet connor winnall watkins roberts pinnock lindsay i could go on and on. No one can tell me olaure and ieska that used half of our budget up were based on stats one had played less games then andy carrol in his last 4 seasons and the other was hardly prolific.

 

I don’t, it is a good way of identifying targets. What’s needed is recruitment to be more flexible and not entirely dependant upon it, like when we signed Solbaur (sp) for example

 

Every single professional club uses statistical data to evaluate potential signings. Every one. Why would we put ourselves at a huge disadvantage by ignoring readily available data?

Statistical analysis identifies experienced players just as easily as young players. Actually, it does it much better as experienced players have, by their very description, played more games and therefore there is more data available on them.

Our decision to only sign young players was a policy decision, nothing to do with a spreadsheet.

 

The spreadsheet didn't discriminate based on age, Conway did.

 

Hopefully it isn't.

And considering its James Cryne's model, if anything, we'll be more reliant on it.

 

I don't think that's true at all. If anything, the only time we've signed anyone over the age of 25 whilst following the data, is whilst Paul Conway was here. We were using the data driven approach under Patrick, and still signing pretty much exclusively players under 25.

We've e drifted away from experience, but age and experience are two very different things.

 

We need the 'unearthed gem' approach to recruitment that we had before the 80% mob arrived. We need sensible recruitment like Luton have done with the experience they have signed. Then, if we do have a rough diamond that we want to flog then we sell them for proper money and reinvest it into the playing squad like Brentford have done.

 

I think thats true, after relegation in 2014 cryne wanted to sign only players under 25 by using stats at the time wilson was not impressed with this idea so he let wilson sign some experience keith treacy, leroy lita and ross turnbull were signed. After that we only occasionally broke the trend signing hammill and a few loans. Under conman we have signed a few over 25 players sol, matty james and more recently oulare.

Funny enough i was on holiday in 2016 and got speaking to ex pompey and coventry player carl baker he told me he was once very close to signing for barnsley as ben mansford was trying to get him in as he knew him through been a football agent. In the end patrick cryne stopped any deal when he implemented the signing of players under 25.

I do like using stats to sign up and coming players but we need to go back to the type of players we used to sign not premier league u23 players.

 

I've no issue using statistics at all. As long as the data is complete and robust to base decisions. And I don't mind where players come from as long as they make sense for what a team needs and for what formation the coach/manager of the time wants to deploy.

I hope we're starting to enter a period where signing a million and 1 of one position that doesn't suit a formation is a thing of the past.

 

I don't mind the spreadsheet but statistics don't tell you everything. What frustrates me is the idea that we can compete in the championship with a team of kids. We need experienced senior players too. Not just for on the field, off the field too.

 

I agree, in the past we would sign top goalscorers from league 2(sam winnall) or top assists (hourhine) or club captains (yiadom) now we sign a 26 year old injury prone player who has hardly kicked a ball for 4 year and a player from burnleys 23s which i know its in a league but its hardly competitive. 90% of club in England will use stats to identify players now. Unfortunately we have gone off the mark in recent windows.

 

Absolutely. It's certainly a myth that we reverted to signing younger players when PMG took over, because we'd been on that path for a few years before. It's one of the reasons they were interested in 'investing' to begin with.

Over the last 3 or so seasons, there's definitely been a shift away from experienced young players though. That's something I'd like us to go back to looking at. There's bound to be a few 23 year old midfield/forwards with 150 career games under their belt, in the mould of a Conor Hourihane, Brad Potts or Sam Winnall.

I don't necessarily mind PL players on loan, as it might allow us to temporarily use players to strengthen the squad, which we wouldn't normally be able to afford. Claudio Gomes for example added something to our side last season, as has the likes of Harvey Barnes and Danny Drinkwater in the past.

 

I'd like a mix. Go for the good young lads by all means via a spreadsheet, but keep an eye open for experience looking to move towards a different phase of their career; coaching badges, management. Forget the obsession with foreign players too. The more of them get packed into the Premier the more native talent is freed up.

 

We certainly had a shift to younger and less experienced players. The age profile seemed to shift from 23-25 to 19-21. But to be honest, we've been all over the place in our recruitment which has shifted from coach to coach and CEO to CEO. No loans, loans. No experience, experience. 23 forwards and appoint a coach who prefers 1 up top. Play 4-4-2 and sign a dozen attacking midfielders for a non existent 10 position. Certainly nothing that felt strategic or planned. Or lasting. Just decisions from the hip. I'm sure more must have gone into it some of the time, but when you look at the variations of formations and tactics, it all just came across as ... well,... crazy.

 

We havent played one up front since hecky was here have we? And it seemed like he wanted to play one up top as when he left he went to play 1 upfront at both leeds and hibs.