Thats2

7 hours ago, Jas10 said:

Sociedad have some top players and we’ve been linked in the past…

Zubimendi

He'd be a perfect fit for us. Calm and skillful on the ball, smart, good reading of the game, rarely makes a mistake. Of all of the summer options at DM, I think he's the best fit.

Alas, it looks like he's Arsenal's top target right now.

Has anyone watched Hugo Guillamon of Valencia? He was highly-rated at one point (on the Spain squad at the last WC) can play DM or CB and is still only 24. Has 100 games under his belt at Valencia too, so perhaps more ready to step in than others his age. I haven't watched much of him lately but I would bet on Unai to get the best out of him. I'm hoping we find the next Palhinha rather than pay up for the current one (or someone similar). I think it fits better with Kamara's eventual return.

15 hours ago, LxYoungAVFC said:

Away at Lille it became clear to me, that neither SJM or Dougie have the experience to control games in a high stakes european match with a hostile atmosphere.

Sample size is far too small to say this with any certainty. McGinn has played in higher stakes game for country, and Luiz has played in a few big ones as well. I'll back them to come good.

He’s one of that rare breed of athlete who absolutely relishes the role of the villain. He feeds off hate.

4 hours ago, Kiwivillan said:

If Olsen had done what Marshall did vs Mostar there would've been 2 pages in his thread about what a liability he is

Right he's young and has a bright future, but we don't have the luxury of using him as Emi's #2. All of his growing pains will be magnified by the title race.

3 minutes ago, DJBOB said:

Nothing that Unai probably couldn't coach but I don't think we're going to churn out the money we need for David when we have some other areas that need to be addressed first.

Fair and to be honest, I'm not advocating for an approach for David specifically as much as I am a player like David - a talented player in poor form. Honestly I don't know enough about David one way or the other to back his signing, so perhaps I erred in calling him "talented." But there are loads of good players out there in bad form for one reason or another, I think that might be the best way to find a bargain.

10 hours ago, Leeroy said:

I always liked Jonathan David but after a great season last season he’s been mediocre so far this season

David might be a bit too high profile for a January move, but I think we should be looking at this type of player. Someone with a good reputation who's lost his form. Maybe we can find a January bargain. Given what Unai has done for the players he inherited, I have full faith he can bring out the best in a talented but out-of-form player. 

1 minute ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

I think we'd cope better without Watkins rather than Luiz for any extended period of time. 

If this is the criteria, I think losing Martinez would hurt worse than anyone else. Of course there are no like replacements out there willing to come on as Emi's backup, but there must be an upgrade from Olsen.

29 minutes ago, nick76 said:

I’m sorry but if Watkins was out for a duration would you want any of them (ours) to be the regular striker? No.  Would you be happy to play Gakpo? Without doubt.  For me anything else is being disingenuous.

What kind of striker will agree to come and be Ollie's backup? If we're determined to sort it in January, I think the answer is old heads and youngsters. One of which we already have (Duran) and one of which we sold last January (Ings).

We could really use a backup striker as cover for Ollie, but who would come? I read an article recently saying we had the same problem as Spurs with Kane - there's an in form striker blocking the way to the starting 11. The author surmised we would have to settle for youth (which we have with Duran) or an old head like Ings. I think he might be right. I see the suggestion of Solanke slated on here, but I really think we would do quite well to bring in that caliber of player to serve as Ollie's understudy.

To be honest if I was ranking them when fully fit, I'd have Carlos as our 4th best CB overall.

And for the most part he had the world's best striker in his pocket today.

Bodes well for us, I'd say.

3 hours ago, alreadyexists said:

In the highlights I just saw I thought he was really good, hit the post too before Buendia tapped it in!

There was another play, I wish I could find a video. Lovely bit of skill to get in on goal, had the Newcastle defenders twisted in knots, but got a little too cute in the end and gave them time to recover. Eye-opening composure to create that chance, especially from a 17 year old. Has a touch of class to him.

First I've seen him, very impressed. Occasion wasn't too big for him.

17 minutes ago, lexicon said:

Unai Emery is the best thing that ever happened to him. He was coasting by under Smith and Gerrard to quite an extent, as he was extremely likable and generally put a shift in, but under a harsher taskmaster who isn't looking to be friends with players, but rather their teacher, his rise has been incredible. McGinn's committed himself 100% to becoming a proper professional and it's paying dividends. Massive credit to him.

Are there players at other clubs for whom this might be true as well? Potential bargain signings struggling due to situation? I know we have the money to spend but Moreno's proved Unai has an eye for talent no matter the fee. Barnes might qualify I suppose.

17 hours ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

Amazing. People can't admit he is poor. Played his part in being poor. Yes you are correct. 

We will never do anything in this league if that's the standard we require from a playmaker with very little defensive duties. If he doesn't finish and score more, doesn't create more directly, then he must add other dimensions to his game, like physicality and tackling and become a boxtobox player. Right now he's a deep laying playmaker spreading passes pretending to be a CAM, when we already got Luiz and are playing a 451. It directly affects how potent we are in attack. We can't afford both Luiz and Jack excelling in the same stuff. We need more going forward from Jack and that's how it is. 

You have decided all that based upon a 3-game sample size? 

1 hour ago, Eastie said:

Smith said himself only 2 days  ago that we were still looking to add more - it’s just we were unable to agree deals for whatever reason - purslow is smart and will not pay over the odds we value a player at.

Deadline day is the worst day to be a buyer, look at all the mad prices. Once yesterday passed without activity I had a suspicion our business might be done. I held out some hope that since Brentford bought as if they expected to lose Benrahma they might capitulate to our offer, but they held firm. Fair play to them.

Hmmm... I’ve got Smalling to Manure for 92M. Not exactly sure how that would work.

Is it a French striker, or a striker who plays in France?

3 minutes ago, lexicon said:

Diagne could easily work in our system as a backup striker - looks strong, gets others involved etc. Doubt he'd be prolific but if he fits in then why not? 

We’ve wondered multiple times throughout this thread who we could sign as a young, squad striker behind Wesley so this sort of signing wouldn’t surprise me at all, really. All this big time striker talk has skewed our perspective on it, I think.

Looks like Chelsea made a bid for Diagne in January.

2 hours ago, Enda said:

It’s not stupid to say we should hold back 10 million in reserve in case Wesley completely flops or Targett breaks his leg. It’s a legitimate argument, even if you and I may strongly disagree with it.

Yer even proving my point.

 

I strongly suspect we will have 10 million available (at least) in January, no matter what we spend now.

16 minutes ago, Genie said:

Why is it negative?

I just said my view is that its risky and I'd have personally taken a less risky approach. It's just an opinion. 

 

As the manager has had just shy of a year to watch those players play and train and he’s still decided to get rid, I think the far, far riskier approach would have been to hold onto them. I also trust in his judgment more so than anyone on an internet message board.

7 hours ago, omariqy said:

Well now this is close to being done the foreign keeper was...well let's just say he's not as useless as his name suggests. 

Juan Nosaves?

Gareth Wrongfoot?

Howler Jones?

32 minutes ago, KentVillan said:

The problem is we talk about moments of "genius" in football all the time, but often they aren't. They're just brilliant execution of something that anyone could have thought of.

It was no surprise when Shearer turned out to be a crap manager, because his whole game was roughing up defenders, winning headers, and banging the ball very hard into the top corner. Brilliant, brutal simplicity, and made him one of the best players of his generation... but he wasn't exactly delivering a tactical masterclass every time he stepped on the pitch.

Henry was made out to be a genius because he drifted out to the left wing and sidefooted the ball into the net (wow, 4D chess), but his main attributes were blistering pace, amazing ball control, and superb finishing under pressure.

It's usually the slower, physically unremarkable midfielders and defenders, who don't have unbelievable ball skills, who turn out to be good managers. They have to think more about movement and positioning, and how to get the better of more talented players. There's a lovely quote from Klopp where he says he "had a first division brain, and fourth division feet".

On that basis, you'd give Lampard half a chance. He was definitely an overachiever.

The good thing about our setup is we have that mix of a clever football brain (DS) and world class playing career (JT), so the players can learn from both of them.

I agree that Lampard was the right kind of brilliant player to make it as a manager, more willfully excellent than a born talent. Terry too, I think, and they both played a ‘thinking man’s’ position more conducive to management. I expect there are far more midfielders and defenders in the coaching ranks than strikers and wingers, no matter the level. 

That Klopp quote sums it up quite nicely for me. I think there’s this sort of belief that says the better your players are, the better your manager needs to have been to gain the respect of those players. Not only is that nonsense to me, I think it’s counter-productive. Hopefully Dean can join Klopp in helping to overturn that narrative.

2 hours ago, A'Villan said:

Let's not forget Chelsea have a lot of talent at their disposal. Lampard's reinvention of Chelsea doesn't have to be replacing personnel.

People who are suggesting he will flop and take Chelsea outside of European placing, what makes you think this?

He is one of the greats, nearly won the Ballon d'Or and has so many accolades to his name. He has a phenomenal understanding of the game.

How do we know he won't be similar to what Cruyff, Rijkaard and Guardiola were to Barcelona?

Edit: Perhaps a discussion for the Premier League Thread

I’ve always found this a quite interesting facet of football management. Here in the States, there’s a belief that the best players don’t usually make for the best managers. The thinking goes that the game comes too easily for them and to impart that greatness to lesser players is difficult (‘just do what I did’). Across the most popular leagues, there have been very few great players who made great managers. Larry Bird maybe. Mike Ditka. Forrest Gregg. It’s far more likely to find managers who never reached anywhere near the highest levels as players and if they did, they usually did so as backups or ‘role players’. Bill Belichick, Steve Kerr, Greg Popovich, Sean McVay all fall into this category. So does Dean Smith.