Mandron gone to Crewe
- Thread starter markinkent
- Start date
I liked Mandron, disappointed to see him leave actually. Although as others have said above Evans is clearly looking to build around Akinde so Mandron will only be backup to him. Due to that and the lure of more game time I don’t blame him for leaving.
He was much more effective second half of the season, with a run of games. First few months when SE was chopping and changing the strikers game by game didn’t help him at all and when he did get a rare chance back then, granted, he failed to impress.
He was much more effective second half of the season, with a run of games. First few months when SE was chopping and changing the strikers game by game didn’t help him at all and when he did get a rare chance back then, granted, he failed to impress.
I am no doubt called the same by some on here.Football is about opinions. On here most have a view I am the odd one out so always the @#$%.There will be some on Facebook who will disagree with the majority therefore your statement is total rubbish delete the "All"and replace it with "Most" and you might be nearer the mark.
Good luck to Mandron; looks like he's seen the writing on the wall from Evans - that SE does not have the time , or patience, to develop players; he prefers to bring in those who he thinks are 'proven' to him already, or loanees who others will do the developing. I think Hanlon who has so much talent and potential will also have to move on to realise it
I must be misunderstanding your post.
Loanees go to clubs to get game time and be developed. We developed the two soton lads because they got game time in men's football rather than U23.
Hanlan got more minutes than his goals return deserved. No wonder RCC left. in terms of goals return he should have played more than Hanlan. However I agree hanlan has potential but not as a goal scorer. I think evans is definitely trying to develop him otherwise he would be gone.
He can't afford to get proven players at gillingham so not sure we can point that at him.
Loanees go to clubs to get game time and be developed. We developed the two soton lads because they got game time in men's football rather than U23.
Hanlan got more minutes than his goals return deserved. No wonder RCC left. in terms of goals return he should have played more than Hanlan. However I agree hanlan has potential but not as a goal scorer. I think evans is definitely trying to develop him otherwise he would be gone.
He can't afford to get proven players at gillingham so not sure we can point that at him.
Despite being on trial with us for what seemed like months, he only signed for us about a week before the season started and only on a one year contract. I did wonder if Evans was actually intending to sign another target but having fell through decided to sign Mandron as he at least had a proper pre-season and had been getting to know his team mates.
Considering Evans also signed a couple of strikers on loan which kept him out of the team and then in the January window took the opportunity to sign Akinde, I'm not convinced Evans will be too disappointed in him moving on beyond having one less player on the books when we don't have enough for a starting eleven.
Considering Evans also signed a couple of strikers on loan which kept him out of the team and then in the January window took the opportunity to sign Akinde, I'm not convinced Evans will be too disappointed in him moving on beyond having one less player on the books when we don't have enough for a starting eleven.
On the contrary, Id say SE has developed Tucker, Ogilvie and Hanlon, the loanees we’ve had especially the 2 young Sotton players.
Can also argue he’s developed Mika Mandron himself. Plenty of posters saying Mandron was better after the New Year with a run in the side.
I’m in the camp that thinks Mika has gone for a better chance of more minutes on the pitch. And good on him if that’s the case. Would also not surprise if they offered more money or a longer term. I think we’ve probably only offered both Mandron and Hanlon a minimal sum especially if SE thinks he can get better players in the next few weeks.
Can also argue he’s developed Mika Mandron himself. Plenty of posters saying Mandron was better after the New Year with a run in the side.
I’m in the camp that thinks Mika has gone for a better chance of more minutes on the pitch. And good on him if that’s the case. Would also not surprise if they offered more money or a longer term. I think we’ve probably only offered both Mandron and Hanlon a minimal sum especially if SE thinks he can get better players in the next few weeks.
