Current Squad: June 2021 | Page 4 | Vital Football

Current Squad: June 2021

The squad is looking good to me. Obviously there will be some changes yet but nice to have a good amount of continuity from one season to the next, something we haven't had in quite a while.
 
22 on the books plus Draper about to sign a deal?
The young keeper to be loaned out?
9 defenders but Melbourne, Roughan and Cann won't play, they'll be out on loan or will be gone (Melbourne) plus Walsh is injury prone and Jackson can be.
The 5 central midfielders will be here, good balance there.
The wingers good chance none of them will play a part?
The strikers, the two youngsters will be loaned out.
Bit unbalanced
 
Davidimp said:
22 on the books plus Draper about to sign a deal?
The young keeper to be loaned out?
9 defenders but Melbourne, Roughan and Cann won't play, they'll be out on loan or will be gone (Melbourne) plus Walsh is injury prone and Jackson can be.
The 5 central midfielders will be here, good balance there.
The wingers good chance none of them will play a part?
The strikers, the two youngsters will be loaned out.
Bit unbalanced
Click to expand...
At the moment it is very poor, carrying 3 sicknotes also in Bridcutt, Jackson and Walsh.
 
Just shows how fragile any squad will be without adequate cover and depth.Although chimpimp would disagree.
 
oldgaurd said:
Just shows how fragile any squad will be without adequate cover and depth.Although chimpimp would disagree.
Click to expand...

I agree. 21 isn't nearly enough, especially when we know several of those players will manage fewer than 30 games on previous form.
 
CH is a worry for me, not sure if it was just last season and being unlucky but Jackson and Walsh seem to constantly be carrying knocks and bad niggles. I know MK fans said Walsh was a bit of a sick note but if he is only playing half of the games or less we are then down to two fit CHs, it would then be Poole, Roughan or one of the scholars stepping in.
 
oldgaurd said:
Just shows how fragile any squad will be without adequate cover and depth.Although chimpimp would disagree.
Click to expand...
No such thing as adequate cover, unless you have very deep pockets and a crystal ball.
Even then you cannot "replace" your best players, as the definition implies.

Expect we will end up with a similar sized squad to last year, not two or three more. So spending our money on the maximum quality we can afford.

Your "adequate" cover = more, mine equals no more than last season.
 
It just might be that Max Melbourne will stay as cover for the centre halves. He is, in my opinion and based on only games in that position in the Pizza cup, better in the middle than at left back. Don't think he will let us down and has been featuring quite heavily in pre-season, though that might be simply because of injuries to others
 
League starts by our senior players last season:

Grant 35
McGrandles 35
Hopper 33
Jones 28
Jackson 27
Bridcutt 22
Walsh 18

That's the spine of the team. Jackson and Walsh didn't even make 46 starts between them. We can only hope they all stay fitter this time - at least the schedule will be less compacted.
 
Scotimp said:
League starts by our senior players last season:

Grant 35
McGrandles 35
Hopper 33
Jones 28
Jackson 27
Bridcutt 22
Walsh 18

That's the spine of the team. Jackson and Walsh didn't even make 46 starts between them. We can only hope they all stay fitter this time - at least the schedule will be less compacted.
Click to expand...
That almost certainly didn't help, we played more than most and seemed to be playing Saturday and Tuesday almost the entire season.
 
Our "usable" squad always seems to be a lot less than our actual squad. which begs the question why are we signing them in the first place. OK this gap will never be nil,but to me,the unusable portion seems too high on a regular basis.
 
57harry said:
Our "usable" squad always seems to be a lot less than our actual squad. which begs the question why are we signing them in the first place. OK this gap will never be nil,but to me,the unusable portion seems too high on a regular basis.
Click to expand...
Not every player we sign will make it to the standard that MAPP wants. With all the scouting and diligence in the world, some players are duds.

Look at some of the players that crashed and burned at Man City in the past - Bony, Mangala, Bravo. The further down the pyramid you go, the more the risk is that they don't fit, for whatever reason.
 
I think it would be reasonable to be a little unsettled by the balance of the squad and the injuries at this time. However I'm quite sanguine about the whole situation for several reasons:

There are several weeks to go and a lot can change. More broadly speaking, my expectations are not that the club has to automatically better the 'on the pitch' outcomes year on year to be progressing. Sometimes other factors such as the make up of the league, the change in the salary cap and the timing of selling players, or the stage of development that our players are at, can have an impact within that department.

That doesn't mean the club is standing still or even regressing overall. We've seen further investment, a significant pitch overhaul, plans to press ahead with the Stacey West re-development and ongoing tweaks at the training ground, to name but a few.

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if we have a season where we finish mid table and in my opinion that should not be deemed failure at all. Time to trot out all the cliches about two steps forward, one step back and managing expectations. However the reality is that we have become an established, professionally well run league 1 club, that has a clear identity and direction, built upon solid foundations and ever increasing infrastructure.
 
57harry said:
Our "usable" squad always seems to be a lot less than our actual squad. which begs the question why are we signing them in the first place. OK this gap will never be nil,but to me,the unusable portion seems too high on a regular basis.
Click to expand...

Isn't that the case at pretty much all teams? There's only going to be so many players getting game time and you're going to need some backup just in case. I think the standard of those players has been improving along with the team as a whole but I don't see how you can avoid it.
 
I suppose the trade-off is, if we're taking Joe Walsh as an example, would you rather have a better than L1 defender for 30 games a season or a lesser, average L1 defender for 50 games? Likewise Bridcutt in midfield. And likewise Jackson to a point.

If Walsh was a 45/50 game a season man, he'd be a Championship defender IMO.

The unfortunate thing is that we can't get a decent number of games out of those three and they're through the spine of the team and occupy a similar area of the pitch so perhaps it's more noticeable when they're not there than, say, losing a CB, winger and striker at the same time.

The Hopper and Grant injuries were ones you could pick up any time during the season, McGrandles was probably having to play too much when he picked up his injury and Jones was never the same after Covid.
 
Chimpimp said:
No such thing as adequate cover, unless you have very deep pockets and a crystal ball.
Even then you cannot "replace" your best players, as the definition implies.

Expect we will end up with a similar sized squad to last year, not two or three more. So spending our money on the maximum quality we can afford.

Your "adequate" cover = more, mine equals no more than last season.
Click to expand...
Easy
 
monkeyg said:
Isn't that the case at pretty much all teams? There's only going to be so many players getting game time and you're going to need some backup just in case. I think the standard of those players has been improving along with the team as a whole but I don't see how you can avoid it.
Click to expand...
Of course thats true-but they should be of a standard that you can realistically use them.
 
57harry said:
Of course thats true-but they should be of a standard that you can realistically use them.
Click to expand...
Easier said than done on a sensible budget.

MA has previously referred to valuing versatile players, TJ and Tayo were prime examples of that last season, both could perform at least 2 different roles and were core starter/squad players.

Then you get to the fringes of the squad, and whether it's 18 or 38 there will always be fringes, you need cheap players capable of performing essential roles in the lesser cup competitions and as finishing subs, but if starters in league games would indicate we are down to bare bones.

That currently is the like of Melbourne (told he can go) Longdon (the artist formerly known as, with an extended contract so clearly potential seen) and Archibald (sick note) can provide that versatility to an appropriate standard and stay fit.

If we can recruit better for appropriate cost then great, if not, then so long as Archibald's fitness issues are resolved, they'll do a job. These sorts of players are almost an insurance policy, think Angol in the L2 title season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.