“Planning since the last window closed”

[cook]

Yet we extended Cirkins deal less than six months ago.

Just find the idea of signing another defender as mental when we’re crying out for strength in other areas and money is tight.

I've never heard of the lad but we had to sign a fullback. Hume is the only fit one we've got you'd imagine for the majority of remaining games.

Means he's straight in, Hume to the RB, and Seelt moves in with O'Nien to cover Ballard's suspension.

But yes, desperate for an experienced CM and CF. So we look to be signing another winger

 

[Provider]

Who says?

 

[TZMouk]

So, going back to my original post. We've got the Stewart and Lihadji money and we've bought a LB from Leeds that doesn't get a game and a young winger who went on a free and played 6 times in Belgium this season. Whilst sending a young winger we already had out on loan, who's actually contributed this season, when given the chance.

Where are the additions who are going into the first 11 to push us on? We'll barely have enough space in the match day squad for all of last summers kids and these sitting in the bench.

Fingers crossed something gets done in the next few days.

"went on a free" is certainly an interesting way to describe turning down an offer from Spurs to go to Standard Liege.

Why are you bothered about whether he gets a game for Leeds? That has no bearing on whether he'll be any good here. Clarke didn't get a game for Spurs, means nowt. Roberts barely got a look in at Troyes. Diallo at Rangers etc

Who knows, someone will step up. I'm genuinely not too bothered about the history of our signings if they're good enough they're good enough.

 

[pwsafc]

So why sign some one on a permanent deal?

Cirkin has a contract until June 2026
Alese has a contract until 2025 with a year option.

Surely it makes sense to loan a left back and then reassess in the summer?

Well Alese is a CB who can cover at round back, Huggins has played more at RB than LB. Cirkin is a very good player, he seems to pick up a lot of injuries. So now we have 2 natural LBs and plenty of other players who can fill in at LB

 

[Safc98]

Fact is if your honest tier 2 player at best that needs to be developed and if the player was so good Spurs would have offered him a lot more money. We need a striker with Experience…..

They offered him a 4-5yr deal man

 

[Frankel]

Well Alese is a CB who can cover at round back, Huggins has played more at RB than LB. Cirkin is a very good player, he seems to pick up a lot of injuries. So now we have 2 natural LBs and plenty of other players who can fill in at LB

Alese has played nearly if not all games at left back or left wing back for us.

We’ve got four centre halfs already.

 

[Karlsson]

Na, some on here will tell you that when we sell the likes of Clarke and Co in the summer, we'll go and buy better players high up the food chain. Just like we did with the big money we got for Stewart and Lihadji in the summer.

Nail on head.

 

[DrewC]

They offered him a 4-5yr deal man

Length of contract does mean anything if it’s a low offer on wages just wanted to use him to sell on as an Asset

 

[Safc98]

Length of contract does mean anything if it’s a low offer on wages just wanted to use him to sell on as an Asset

What was he offered

 

[Comeback_Kenwyne]

The data has obviously shown that they’ll be able to flip him for a profit easier than they’ll be able to flip a striker.

It’s all about the bottom line.

That makes no sense, because the value of strikers is always more inflated and accelerates quicker.

I think on the striker, the reality is that it’s hard to find value.

Look at the likes of Simms, Cannon, even our very own Ross Stewart - the big money moves generally haven’t come off. Piroe for Leeds is the exception.

My concern is that we genuinely at a deep tactical level - I.e Speakman and Dodds - think we can play without one. That the lack of a striker isn’t just because we can’t find one, but because we don’t want one.

Though speaking frankly, I’ll be raging a lot more if we don’t sign a DM. That really is a joke imo.

Your constantly moaning about not having a striker but are fine with us not having a left back it’s succession planning that people say we don’t do West Ham are after Ballard he’s not going to turn that down so why not bed someone in to be ready

He’s not a CB.

 

[Safc98]

The data has obviously shown that they’ll be able to flip him for a profit easier than they’ll be able to flip a striker.

It’s all about the bottom line.

So why haven’t we turned many profits

 

[chunksafc]

That makes no sense, because the value of strikers is always more inflated and accelerates quicker.

I think on the striker, the reality is that it’s hard to find value.

Look at the likes of Simms, Cannon, even our very own Ross Stewart - the big money moves generally haven’t come off. Piroe for Leeds is the exception.

My concern is that we genuinely at a deep tactical level - I.e Speakman and Dodds - think we can play without one. That the lack of a striker isn’t just because we can’t find one, but because we don’t want one.

Though speaking frankly, I’ll be raging a lot more if we don’t sign a DM. That really is a joke imo.

He’s not a CB.

Just a question. Should our director of football be thinking at a "deep tactical level"?

Isn't that the coaches job?

 

[suddick mac]

Think the planning is done on a subutteo table. Doesn't matter if you play players out of position as they are all the same anyway.

 

[Arfa Sleep]

Just a question. Should our director of football be thinking at a "deep tactical level"?

Isn't that the coaches job?

I guess he probably should to have an understanding of exactly what is needed.

 

[chunksafc]

I guess he probably should to have an understanding of exactly what is needed.

I assumed the style of play was set by KLD and it was KS job to make sure that it is implemented across the whole club, but tactics, formations and that would be the head coaches remit.

Or is it as strict as KLD and KS want us to play 4231 with fast attacking wingers or 433 with a fluid front 3 and the coaches have to make it work?

 

[Comeback_Kenwyne]

Just a question. Should our director of football be thinking at a "deep tactical level"?

Isn't that the coaches job?

Absolutely not.

I am concerned about that part of my post on a number of levels. He’s way too controlling.

I don’t want to hear people say “Director of Football models are normal now” as if that’s the end of the debate. That’s true enough, but the correct question is whether our DoF model is a normal DoF model. Feels like it’s quite extreme.

 

[chunksafc]

Absolutely not.

I am concerned about that part of my post on a number of levels. He’s way too controlling.

I don’t want to hear people say “Director of Football models are normal now” as if that’s the end of the debate. That’s true enough, but the correct question is whether our DoF model is a normal DoF model. Feels like it’s quite extreme.

That's why I asked the question, our DOF seems very involved in day to day things that I would expect the coaches to deal with

 

[Houghtoner]

That makes no sense, because the value of strikers is always more inflated and accelerates quicker.

I think on the striker, the reality is that it’s hard to find value.

Look at the likes of Simms, Cannon, even our very own Ross Stewart - the big money moves generally haven’t come off. Piroe for Leeds is the exception.

My concern is that we genuinely at a deep tactical level - I.e Speakman and Dodds - think we can play without one. That the lack of a striker isn’t just because we can’t find one, but because we don’t want one.

Though speaking frankly, I’ll be raging a lot more if we don’t sign a DM. That really is a joke imo.

Not a chance we can get promoted without a proper forward.

 

[Arfa Sleep]

I assumed the style of play was set by KLD and it was KS job to make sure that it is implemented across the whole club, but tactics, formations and that would be the head coaches remit.

Or is it as strict as KLD and KS want us to play 4231 with fast attacking wingers or 433 with a fluid front 3 and the coaches have to make it work?

I thought that was the whole point to be honest, this is how we want the club to play so if a coach leaves it doesn't impact too much - everything ticks over and we don't suddenly have players who are ideal for 4-3-3 but the new guy plays 4-4-2 for example. Probably not a great set of formations to use as an example but you get the idea.

 

[chunksafc]

I thought that was the whole point to be honest, this is how we want the club to play so if a coach leaves it doesn't impact too much - everything ticks over and we don't suddenly have players who are ideal for 4-3-3 but the new guy plays 4-4-2 for example. Probably not a great set of formations to use as an example but you get the idea.

I get the idea, but can it and should it be that rigid? There's been a fair few posts saying we look good playing 433, same as we did look good playing 352 against Leeds.

If the owner and DOF are insisting it's 4321, then we are always going to have round pegs in square holes if we fancy a change in tactics