Thanks for that. I'm not quite sure why but the expression 'a camel is a horse designed by a committee' comes to mind looking at the DVP team. We've now got a squad of contracted players and the continuity that should come from that will hopefully enable the better players to kick on, stand out at that level and push for a first team place. That's surely the aim more than just results. Certain things don't quite make sense though and it feels like the whole thing is a compromise to try and keep everyone happy.Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
We've got a first team manager who likes wide players but there don't seem to be any at under-23 level, apart from the permanently injured Jack McKay, yet there's a plethora of centre halves and central midfielders to the point where Paul McKay, a centre-back who we recently gave a long contract to, has to play at right back, even though we released a right back who now starts regularly in the Championship, signed another one and still have Cameron Coxe here. I saw someone mention on here that Coxe was lined up to go to Yeovil and maybe that was the plan until the Tom James (another right back we released) transfer fell through but it's still a bit confusing.
The Academy played a very smooth, well organised 3-5-2 on Saturday and seem to be developing well. Should the under-23s be used as a continuation of the good work being done at that level or solely as preparation for an old school first team manager who, despite all his success, suddenly seems a bit confused about systems and formations and will be 70 in a couple of months? It's a big question and such a difficult one to answer that it's hardly surprising the under 23 set-up looks more like a camel than a horse at present.
Reply With Quote