NML. Still without a club?

[dembethewarrior]

Re: NML. Still without a club?

He was strong, quick and had a decent shot on him, but he wasn't what I'd call intelligent or skillful. Not sure you can put your chips in with NML and moan about lack of skill in our style of play.

Warnock's best football here was with him in the side though whether that was with Hoilett and Zohore or the Premier League days at Brighton or Man United but those moments were far too rare.

Hope he gets back on his feet and then does work to help others.

That was when Warnock played him and hoilett on the right sides. He changed it after a few games (5 wins in a row wasn't it) and they never had the same threat again.

[Henry Hill]

Re: NML. Still without a club?

Too creative for us.

We are in the process of culling any creativity this squad has and filling the gaps with cut price kids. It goes right against that plan.

Give it a rest your boring kent

[2b2bdoo]

Re: NML. Still without a club?

Seems strange he doesn't have any club after an OK stint at Boro. Let's hope he isn't suspended again.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

Re: NML. Still without a club?

That was when Warnock played him and hoilett on the right sides. He changed it after a few games (5 wins in a row wasn't it) and they never had the same threat again.

Mendez-Laing down the left side was a monster. He had a blistering start to that season partly due to that and we rarely saw him in that position again. Baffling.

[blue lewj]

Re: NML. Still without a club?

Give it a rest your boring kent

I'll post what I want. Thanks for the advice though.

Not sure why posting something fairly obvious gets people so worked up. Tell me what flair players Mick had in the team Saturday? He doesn't seem to like them. Dembe doesn't think he'd be a flair player but I think he is. I know if NML was in our team he would be the only one likely to do a stepover, at least until Mick introduced fines for doing them.

It isn't my intention when I post to wind people up but if it does then it is a little bonus.

[Hilts]

Re: NML. Still without a club?

Flair players like NML , Gavin Whyte with Arter and Wintle in the middle.

Lewj should be next manager.🤣

[blue lewj]

Re: NML. Still without a club?

Flair players like NML , Gavin Whyte with Arter and Wintle in the middle.

Lewj should be next manager.🤣

Any worse than what we've got there now?

Did you watch the game Saturday?

We had two shots on target all game. One per half, at home against the footballing giant that is Bournemouth. Yeah, the current crop are outstanding.

[blue lewj]

Re: NML. Still without a club?

Add those two shots on target to the one shot on target we had in 90 plus minutes at Coventry.

Yeah stick with what we've got I say. We're putting teams to the sword without breaking a sweat. 👍

[delmbox]

Re: NML. Still without a club?

Add those two shots on target to the one shot on target we had in 90 plus minutes at Coventry.

Yeah stick with what we've got I say. We're putting teams to the sword without breaking a sweat. ��

Out of interest what do you think should happen next in an ideal world?

[blue lewj]

Re: NML. Still without a club?

Out of interest what do you think should happen next in an ideal world?

In an ideal world we get a director of football in.
The money Tan would pay this individual would be more than saved by the football savvy he would bring to the football operations. Large wages and long contracts for average players would be a thing of the past.

I would bring in a manager whose style fits in with the way the academy play and at least try to play some modern football where we try to keep it a bit
attack and drop the underdog attitude. We are as big as teams like Bournemouth. I could take Warnock bigging up teams in the Premier League (just) but not the Bournemouths of this world.
If our aim is to just tread water for a few years then why not get a more forward thinking manager now. Or do we just ask the new fella to change it up overnight with Mick's squad and act as though the situation has crept up on us, like we have a tendency to do.

I would use academy players when they are ready. I cannot agree under any circumstances that our academy is producing players of the required quality overnight in such numbers having produced nothing for seasons. One or two maybe but not to that level.

I would look into why we are signing players to supplement the midfield and then making excuses and loaning them out.

Of course the above would be somebody who is not a yes man to Tan (The DOF) and somebody that may well tell him he hasn't been doing things the right way, which isn't something that happens here.

So, in short I'd bring in a director of football, I'd bring in a younger manager that has some clue what a modern football team plays like that is more aligned with what we're asking the academy to do and I would not force players into the team if they are not good enough yet, that only ends one way.
Finally I'd look at why, at a time when we have next to no money, we seem to think we have the luxury to sign players and loan them out. If we were rolling in it then yes take a chance. We need that money spent on somebody featuring in the first team now.

[Rjk]

Re: NML. Still without a club?

In an ideal world we get a director of football in.
The money Tan would pay this individual would be more than saved by the football savvy he would bring to the football operations. Large wages and long contracts for average players would be a thing of the past.

I would bring in a manager whose style fits in with the way the academy play and at least try to play some modern football where we try to keep it a bit
attack and drop the underdog attitude. We are as big as teams like Bournemouth. I could take Warnock bigging up teams in the Premier League (just) but not the Bournemouths of this world.
If our aim is to just tread water for a few years then why not get a more forward thinking manager now. Or do we just ask the new fella to change it up overnight with Mick's squad and act as though the situation has crept up on us, like we have a tendency to do.

I would use academy players when they are ready. I cannot agree under any circumstances that our academy is producing players of the required quality overnight in such numbers having produced nothing for seasons. One or two maybe but not to that level.

I would look into why we are signing players to supplement the midfield and then making excuses and loaning them out.

Of course the above would be somebody who is not a yes man to Tan (The DOF) and somebody that may well tell him he hasn't been doing things the right way, which isn't something that happens here.

So, in short I'd bring in a director of football, I'd bring in a younger manager that has some clue what a modern football team plays like that is more aligned with what we're asking the academy to do and I would not force players into the team if they are not good enough yet, that only ends one way.
Finally I'd look at why, at a time when we have next to no money, we seem to think we have the luxury to sign players and loan them out. If we were rolling in it then yes take a chance. We need that money spent on somebody featuring in the first team now.

I'd like to see us bring in a director of football too, but many of the things you'd want a DoF to be doing we seem to have already started - i.e. bringing youth through, targeting players who have the potential to gain in value etc. So I think the right kind of voices must be getting heard from somewhere. That's ultimately what matters - not whether or not there's someone with a specific job title.

Of course I'd like a more progressive playing style. That isn't going to happen under mick, but that's where we are. If mick keeps us away from trouble while we clear out the high earners and develop some of the young players then that leaves us in a good position to bring in a more modern manager net time around perhaps. Not ideal, but it is what it is.

Finally I think the Wintle deal is one of the smartest things we've done in some time.
We've picked up a highly rated player on a free, he will gain championship experience while someone else pays his wages then come back to us as a more valuable player at the time we are losing vaulks, pack and ralls due to their contracts expiring.
that suggests an element of forward planning that has been missing from this club for a long time.

If we kept him here it would either mean he gets less game time, or we have to pay one of the existing midfield their inflated wages to sit on the bench.
He might be a better player than our existing players already - but with or without him we won't be going up this season, so we are better off planning for a couple of seasons ahead.

[Hilts]

Re: NML. Still without a club?

Lewj wanted us to sign Harry Arter. Now Wintle is suddenly the next Pirlo and our youngsters are not up to it.

Well im backing our youngsters to succeed. Few old heads out in the summer and the rebuild continues.

[blue lewj]

Re: NML. Still without a club?

I'd like to see us bring in a director of football too, but many of the things you'd want a DoF to be doing we seem to have already started - i.e. bringing youth through, targeting players who have the potential to gain in value etc. So I think the right kind of voices must be getting heard from somewhere. That's ultimately what matters - not whether or not there's someone with a specific job title.

Of course I'd like a more progressive playing style. That isn't going to happen under mick, but that's where we are. If mick keeps us away from trouble while we clear out the high earners and develop some of the young players then that leaves us in a good position to bring in a more modern manager net time around perhaps. Not ideal, but it is what it is.

Finally I think the Wintle deal is one of the smartest things we've done in some time.
We've picked up a highly rated player on a free, he will gain championship experience while someone else pays his wages then come back to us as a more valuable player at the time we are losing vaulks, pack and ralls due to their contracts expiring.
that suggests an element of forward planning that has been missing from this club for a long time.

If we kept him here it would either mean he gets less game time, or we have to pay one of the existing midfield their inflated wages to sit on the bench.
He might be a better player than our existing players already - but with or without him we won't be going up this season, so we are better off planning for a couple of seasons ahead.

I would say we need a director of football because I don't think the people we have there at the moment know what is required or have the knowledge to deliver it. We shall see in time but just throwing kids in is not evidence of a great academy.

You've said yourself you would like a more progressive style and that won't happen under Mick. Surely it makes sense then that continuing with Mick and giving him money to carry this on is just wasted time and money?

We will have to disagree on the Wintle deal too. Signing a player and loaning him to a club where he is playing better than our current midfield is good business? I'm not sure I understand what a good and clever bit of business is if actively strengthening a Championship rival and continuing with our toothless midfield is an example of it.
People also talk of the inflated wages like they are something a previous owner and board gave out. These wages were discussed and signed off by the same people we will be letting spend money going forward. If people can't see any issue with that then I can't really paint it any more clearly.

[blue lewj]

Re: NML. Still without a club?

We can moan about Malky shafting the owner and board with some of his signings, we can moan Trollope, Neil Harris and the like were rubbish and that Warnock built an expensive squad and legged it but there are only so many constant factors here. The owner and board who oversaw almost all of what these people did and picked them (with the exception of Malky) are the only constant.

These people oversee the appointment of managers and signings but then point the finger elsewhere when things go wrong.

You can bet your bottom dollar that if this throw in the kids experiment doesn't work then it will be Mick's fault and he will pay the price while nothing above him changes.

Would I trust the current lot to put an academy in place and know what finances and expertise it would take to produce a conveyor belt of future stars? No. I wouldn't trust them to put the cones out straight before training if I'm honest.

[Rjk]

Re: NML. Still without a club?

I would say we need a director of football because I don't think the people we have there at the moment know what is required or have the knowledge to deliver it. We shall see in time but just throwing kids in is not evidence of a great academy.

You've said yourself you would like a more progressive style and that won't happen under Mick. Surely it makes sense then that continuing with Mick and giving him money to carry this on is just wasted time and money?

We will have to disagree on the Wintle deal too. Signing a player and loaning him to a club where he is playing better than our current midfield is good business? I'm not sure I understand what a good and clever bit of business is if actively strengthening a Championship rival and continuing with our toothless midfield is an example of it.
People also talk of the inflated wages like they are something a previous owner and board gave out. These wages were discussed and signed off by the same people we will be letting spend money going forward. If people can't see any issue with that then I can't really paint it any more clearly.

I think everyone is aware we've made mistakes, but we do seem to be doing things differently for the time being at least.
A director of football might improve things, or if we appoint the wrong one could be a disaster. Christ there were even people on here hoping that Warnock would be "moved upstairs" not too long ago.
There are many different kinds of footballing directors, with completely different remits - what's important is someone is looking out for the longer term interests of the club in footbll terms, rather than the manager who will understandably always be short term thinking due to the precarious nature of their job.
MM being seemingly overruled on Marley Watkins would seem to suggest an element of that is already happening.