Drop the Prima Donna

[One Team]

11 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Was a strange game really the one in February up there.

We got 2 early goals, ie first 15-20 mins and more chances but a lot less of the ball.

Went to a back 3 post HT iirc and from a Match Graphic too our Chances and Possession steadily seemed to dry up, from about 10-15 mins into 2nd half it was just one-way traffic in their favour.

More of an NP performance.

Agreed mate, reminded me of a Nige performance too. And to the OP and others we looked a lot better without Twine in the team. 

[Mendip City]

When I look at our transfer business- I can’t help thinking the money spent on a luxury player and awkward fit - Twine and two raw, unproven placers in Sinclair and Fally would have been better invested in a quality proven striker. Especially seeing as Wells is still very much part of things. Oh and the pathway would be fractionally less blocked. 

[TDarwall]

3 minutes ago, Mendip City said:

When I look at our transfer business- I can’t help thinking the money spent on a luxury player and awkward fit - Twine and two raw, unproven placers in Sinclair and Fally would have been better invested in a quality proven striker. Especially seeing as Wells is still very much part of things. Oh and the pathway would be fractionally less blocked. 

In theory I agree, but not sure the practice is as simple. For arguments sake, we don't buy Twine & only get 1 of Fally/Sincs.

This gives us circa £6m to spend on 1 higher quality striker.  Does our wage budget support that? Strikers are arguably the most sought after position & someone of that value may bust our pay scale. Right now it's easier for us to accumulate more players at a lower value than fewer better players.

[mozo]

After a poor start to the season I thought we were just starting to see Twine coming into form and now he's out. So frustrating.

Edited Sunday at 11:36 by mozo

[TV Tom]

24 minutes ago, mozo said:

After a poor start to the season I thought we were just starting to see Twine coming into form and now he's out. So frustrating.

Agreed, glad i'm not the only one

[Rob k]

1 minute ago, TV Tom said:

Agreed, glad i'm not the only one

Dont worry, Your not!! 

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 hours ago, One Team said:

Agreed mate, reminded me of a Nige performance too. And to the OP and others we looked a lot better without Twine in the team. 

Meant the game in February that we won up there- haven't seen much of yesterday's one yet save for the EFL Show Highlights so can't comment too much but it sounded like we were better balanced perhaps minus Twine?

[Cole Not Gas]

6 hours ago, One Team said:

Agreed mate, reminded me of a Nige performance too. And to the OP and others we looked a lot better without Twine in the team. 

What was good about a Pearson away performance. I suspect the record show we didnt win many, we conceded a lot of late goals and the coach was 'frustrated'. It is likely Pearson had the massive advantage of a Scott in Midfield and Semenyo up front so without that £35m of talent, our current team seems to be doing pretty well in comparison with the last era. We've won twice at Boro under Liam and i reckon the Twine debate will run and run. Personally i think he has 'assists' and goals in him that reflect what you should expect from the £3-4m we are reported to have paid; this is not a fraction of the value of the players that Pearson had to play with and that we no longer can afford.

[bearded_red]

3 minutes ago, Cole Not Gas said:

What was good about a Pearson away performance. I suspect the record show we didnt win many, we conceded a lot of late goals and the coach was 'frustrated'. It is likely Pearson had the massive advantage of a Scott in Midfield and Semenyo up front so without that £35m of talent, our current team seems to be doing pretty well in comparison with the last era. We've won twice at Boro under Liam and i reckon the Twine debate will run and run. Personally i think he has 'assists' and goals in him that reflect what you should expect from the £3-4m we are reported to have paid; this is not a fraction of the value of the players that Pearson had to play with and that we no longer can afford.

You remain a total, and complete, idiot then.

[headhunter]

5 hours ago, Mendip City said:

When I look at our transfer business- I can’t help thinking the money spent on a luxury player and awkward fit - Twine and two raw, unproven placers in Sinclair and Fally would have been better invested in a quality proven striker. Especially seeing as Wells is still very much part of things. Oh and the pathway would be fractionally less blocked. 

Said this on FBC numerous times but problem is "quality proven striker" would command a wage that busts our structure. Anybody care to explain how we can overcome this? 

We seem to buy (not actual no's.) 8 players at £8k per week rather than 4 @ £16k. 

What's the weekly wage bill for our current strike force of Fally,Armstrong,Cornick,Wells, Bell, Sykes, Mehmeti, Hirakawa? Btw, I didn't classify Twine as a striker!

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

6 minutes ago, headhunter said:

Said this on FBC numerous times but problem is "quality proven striker" would command a wage that busts our structure. Anybody care to explain how we can overcome this? 

We seem to buy (not actual no's.) 8 players at £8k per week rather than 4 @ £16k. 

What's the weekly wage bill for our current strike force of Fally,Armstrong,Cornick,Wells, Bell, Sykes, Mehmeti, Hirakawa? Btw, I didn't classify Twine as a striker!

Well only two of those I class as a striker and that's Fally & Wells.  Armstrong is a work in progress at converting him from a midfielder.  Bell, Sykes, Mehmeti, Hirakawa, Cornick are all midfielders 7/11 types.  In terms of wage structure Twine cost us a bundle and will be on a good bundle.

[Mendip City]

1 minute ago, headhunter said:

Said this on FBC numerous times but problem is "quality proven striker" would command a wage that busts our structure. Anybody care to explain how we can overcome this? 

We seem to buy (not actual no's.) 8 players at £8k per week rather than 4 @ £16k. 

What's the weekly wage bill for our current strike force of Fally,Armstrong,Cornick,Wells, Bell, Sykes, Mehmeti, Hirakawa? Btw, I didn't classify Twine as a striker!

Exactly this. Surely our wage budget is a pool of money to be used over the whole squad. There will always be disparities in pay. I imagine Jay Stansfield earns significantly more than most Birmingham players - but does that mean others down tools? No!   
 

We’ve paid top end for Twine and Armstrong and it seems almost impossible, to me, that we’d turn a profit on either. 
 

As you say, quantity not quality  Plus the pathway is blocked.  The bean counters running City seem to understand the cost of everything and the value of nothing.  

 

[Cole Not Gas]

4 minutes ago, Lorenzos Only Goal said:

Well only two of those I class as a striker and that's Fally & Wells.  Armstrong is a work in progress at converting him from a midfielder.  Bell, Sykes, Mehmeti, Hirakawa, Cornick are all midfielders 7/11 types.  In terms of wage structure Twine cost us a bundle and will be on a good bundle.

Well said, but all clubs in this division seem to have very large squads these days if you count all the players on their books

[Silvio Dante]

21 minutes ago, headhunter said:

Said this on FBC numerous times but problem is "quality proven striker" would command a wage that busts our structure. Anybody care to explain how we can overcome this? 

We seem to buy (not actual no's.) 8 players at £8k per week rather than 4 @ £16k. 

What's the weekly wage bill for our current strike force of Fally,Armstrong,Cornick,Wells, Bell, Sykes, Mehmeti, Hirakawa? Btw, I didn't classify Twine as a striker!

Theres a middle ground between quality proven striker and hopeful punts though, certainly? 
 

It’s also worth noting that we sold in the summer Conway. Ignoring people’s thoughts on him as an individual, one of the things that was said by both Nige and Liam was that he’d been made an excellent contract offer. And as I said at the time, if you value your asset at £5-£6m which is what we mooted, then it stands to reason (as I think you agree) that you have to pay the wages that asset was worth.

So, if we had a £5m striker on books and could offer him an excellent contract (before we’d signed Twine), then it stands to total logical reason that we could, having sold that striker and had we not bought Twine, offered and spent the Twine money/committed Conway wages on a different £5-£6m striker.

Thats not an opinion. It’s just counting.

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

1 hour ago, Cole Not Gas said:

Well said, but all clubs in this division seem to have very large squads these days if you count all the players on their books

I don't mind having a bigger squad, I just wish we had less chuff and more quality.

We've bloated the squad with quantity not quality.  I'd much rather we hadn't signed Twine I was never keen on him after his loan didn't set the earth on fire.  I'd much rather we had gone for someone like Marc Leonard early on who's ended up at Birmingham and forgot about Twine who I think was a distraction.

Maybe picked up a promising youngster like Bobby Pointon at Bradford City instead of Armstrong, massive Nahki fan would be a great understudy and cheap as chips.  Would have potentially given us an extra option upfront. I would have also kept Ephraim in the first team squad.

I'm really disappointed with our recruitment this summer it doesn't seem very well thought through, joined up at all.

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, headhunter said:

Said this on FBC numerous times but problem is "quality proven striker" would command a wage that busts our structure. Anybody care to explain how we can overcome this? 

We seem to buy (not actual no's.) 8 players at £8k per week rather than 4 @ £16k. 

What's the weekly wage bill for our current strike force of Fally,Armstrong,Cornick,Wells, Bell, Sykes, Mehmeti, Hirakawa? Btw, I didn't classify Twine as a striker!

And I don’t think £16-20k for the right player is out of way either.

And depending where you pick them up from, you might get a plenty for your money too.

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

And I don’t think £16-20k for the right player is out of way either.

And depending where you pick them up from, you might get a plenty for your money too.

I was never really strong on signing Twine, he'd move from a punt to an investment player, with only a small amount of headroom for profit.  I'd much preferred we chased Marc Lenard from Brighton.

[Davefevs]

16 minutes ago, Lorenzos Only Goal said:

I was never really strong on signing Twine, he'd move from a punt to an investment player, with only a small amount of headroom for profit.  I'd much preferred we chased Marc Lenard from Brighton.

I’ve not seen enough of Leonard, but I know others like him.

I’d have chased Rudoni…3 players in 1…at £4m, if I’d have got him, I’d have forgone any other signing we did make, take your pick.  I suspect he’d have commanded less of a wage than Twine too.  And his upside…far higher.

But alas, we didn’t.

[RollsRoyce]

18 hours ago, One Team said:

Agreed mate, reminded me of a Nige performance too. And to the OP and others we looked a lot better without Twine in the team. 

We were good on the counter and pressing hard . It was how we were meant to play according to Tnnion . It is how we got great results last season. Elephant in the room. It suits us and is a valid approach to deep blocks and boredom .  The Manning ideal is not the way forward . 

[BobBobBobbin]

On 19/10/2024 at 21:16, Davefevs said:

Chances versus unstructured defences are better (generally) than chances versus structured defences.  If you don’t press with some element of success, you give up one method of scoring.  Don’t get me wrong you can press high with no skill and get picked off.  But why give up that as an option.

Those couple of examples were great.  A lot of the rest of the first half we didn’t really pressure them on the ball, they just moved it around us.

 

 

[Davefevs]

@BobBobBobbin I reckon he knows what he’s talking about.

(ta for sharing)

[BobBobBobbin]

14 hours ago, Davefevs said:

And I don’t think £16-20k for the right player is out of way either.

And depending where you pick them up from, you might get a plenty for your money too.

Case in point being Yu. We'll be paying (until it's made perm) a wage that was agreed in the J2 League!

I don't think there's as big a correlation between big wages and big performers anymore. At a whole squad level, yes. Budget does influence performance, but comparing player to player there is too many variables. Age, nationality, division purchased from etc. 

Key is to get the recruitment right in a way that is cohesive and to a plan. Sometimes I think we're doing that, sometimes I don't. Main issue is the style of play versus the strengths of those recruited imo. We don't play to our recruitment policy and are therefore less efficient. 

 

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

13 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I’ve not seen enough of Leonard, but I know others like him.

I’d have chased Rudoni…3 players in 1…at £4m, if I’d have got him, I’d have forgone any other signing we did make, take your pick.  I suspect he’d have commanded less of a wage than Twine too.  And his upside…far higher.

But alas, we didn’t.

Leonard was peanuts and seems to be alternating between the bench and starting at Brum.  Rudoni has had a great start to the season. 

Our chasing of Twine did smack of we didn't have a plan B for that position.

[robin_unreliant]

18 hours ago, headhunter said:

Said this on FBC numerous times but problem is "quality proven striker" would command a wage that busts our structure. Anybody care to explain how we can overcome this? 

We seem to buy (not actual no's.) 8 players at £8k per week rather than 4 @ £16k. 

Nail on head. I feel this is directly due to SL and is how he has always done business. This, for me, is one of the underlying strategic decisions which has led to our lack of success over the years.

SL is happy to fork out a transfer fee on a young striker that may perhaps lead to  a 5x in said player's value. However he doesn't want to pay big wages as that just can't be recouped. It strikes me that he's been trying to apply his investing head to football and it doesn't translate.

[Rob k]

23 minutes ago, robin_unreliant said:

Nail on head. I feel this is directly due to SL and is how he has always done business. This, for me, is one of the underlying strategic decisions which has led to our lack of success over the years.

SL is happy to fork out a transfer fee on a young striker that may perhaps lead to  a 5x in said player's value. However he doesn't want to pay big wages as that just can't be recouped. It strikes me that he's been trying to apply his investing head to football and it doesn't translate.

The striker position is crazy - Stansfield got 13 goals last season at 21 and was a reported £15m. I’d look at a loan each season i think for that position. 

[Silvio Dante]

33 minutes ago, Rob k said:

The striker position is crazy - Stansfield got 13 goals last season at 21 and was a reported £15m. I’d look at a loan each season i think for that position. 

Stansfield is an outlier for a lot of reasons - most chiefly being Birmingham had a ridiculous amount of money and the fans had real affinity for him. It was a signing the heirarchy wanted to make “come what may” and Fulham took full advantage of that and got a fee significantly in excess of market value for him.

General point holds though. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

10 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Stansfield is an outlier for a lot of reasons - most chiefly being Birmingham had a ridiculous amount of money and the fans had real affinity for him. It was a signing the heirarchy wanted to make “come what may” and Fulham took full advantage of that and got a fee significantly in excess of market value for him.

General point holds though. 

I wonder how they square their last few years with FFP...you see Championship and even some PL clubs basically squeezing pennies, burning the night oil with a calculator so to speak..selling before buying and being quite cautious in doing so.

West Brom under a Business Plan albeit working with the League rather than imposed to mutually avoid the risk of a future breach.

Yes I know the League One rules differ but there's quite a few circles that need squaring- their Hong Kong Segmented results were on face value a long way from their fans boasting about highest non Parachute Income. Income rose go £23-24m by the looks which is decent but..lost approx £49-50m Pre Tax across the prior 2 seasons and maybe as much as £27m last season.

Edited 18 hours ago by Mr Popodopolous