The Squad

[ArcspacE]

This. Why would players who are good enough to play for a top four club's first team, suddenly be happy with bench roles?


They wouldn't.


I'm in the 'A squad of 15-16 quality players rotating, and backup as youth coming through' Side. You have far less to lose.

Plus if you continually demote first team members for new players, the wage bill is going to go through the roof.

Then how does Fergie get it right year after year?

 

[Spursalot]

Then how does Fergie get it right year after year?

Because players are happy to sit on the bench of a club that is winning things.


Comparing us and United in this sense does not make very much sense.



Ferguson's rotation policies are far far far superior to Redknapp's.

 

[ArcspacE]

Because players are happy to sit on the bench of a club that is winning things.

Comparing us and United in this sense does not make very much sense.

Ferguson's rotation policies are far far far superior to Redknapp's.

Not entirely true - they're part of a careful rotation where every position has 2 quality players competing for it. As opposed to 1 + 1 - being 1 good player + 1 mediocre replacement

Plus not every player is trophies driven - especially if it would mean damaging your career / national side selection

 

[Modric THFC]

The problem as I see it is some of our fringe players are now on 50-60k a week. They're earning not much less than Modric and Bale.
The wages of these guy are what stopping us from spending more on top players. Its a question of whether you want good bench or top players.
Considering Redknapp doesn't use these guy we might be better off with youth on the bench and investing in top players.

 

[Little Luka]

Talking about Fletcher however I was one of those players that did not take too kindly to us possibly signing him.

And which player are you? O

 

[Spursalot]

Not entirely true - they're part of a careful rotation where every position has 2 quality players competing for it. As opposed to 1 + 1 - being 1 good player + 1 mediocre replacement

Plus not every player is trophies driven - especially if it would mean damaging your career / national side selection

I wouldn't entirely agree with that, quite a few of their positions have backup players who have a lot of potential, but are not yet quality players.

But this is partly due to the amount of money United have to throw around on players who might be the next 'big thing'...


But they are part of a rotation, which is the way to go. I'm just not sure if Redknapp can adjust his thinking that much..

 

[ArcspacE]

Keepers - De Gea / Lindegaard (sp?) - both are solid

RB - Rafael / Jones

CB - Jones / Smalling / Ferdinand / Vidic

LB - Evra / Fabio

Wingers - Nani / Valencia / Young / Giggs /

CM - Carrick / Scholes / Anderson / Cleverly / Park (their weakest part, imv)

ST - Rooney / Welbeck / Hernandez


Each one of those is a starter and good enough to be one whereas we have starters and some kind of back up - i.e. BAE / Rose

 

[Spursalot]

Keepers - De Gea / Lindegaard (sp?) - both are solid

RB - Rafael / Jones

CB - Jones / Smalling / Ferdinand / Vidic

LB - Evra / Fabio

Wingers - Nani / Valencia / Young / Giggs /

CM - Carrick / Scholes / Anderson / Cleverly / Park (their weakest part, imv)

ST - Rooney / Welbeck / Hernandez


Each one of those is a starter and good enough to be one whereas we have starters and some kind of back up - i.e. BAE / Rose

Yeah, but some of them are Quality, and some of them aren't.


All the players i've bolded are not yet the finished article. They are good young players yes, but they are no where near as good as the others in their positions. They may have the potential to be better then the others, but they have not yet achieved it.

Ignoring GK or RB, as they are all relatively young players who could become world class, but could also not.


I'm not sure quite where Hernandez stands, he did well in his first season but his chances were more limited last time out...



I would love to be able to have that quality of overall squad, but our resources are far more limited, so the decision needs to be made between balancing the squad and the 'backups'.


P.S i've actually lost track of what the point is that either of us is trying to make, if there even is one. I think we both seem to agree that rotating players would be far better then what we do currently...

 

[ArcspacE]

I disagree about the bolded bits but I suppose that's another argument alltogether

The point was - I prefer a roation system which offers 2 starters per position (such as Utd's) as opposed to a 15-man core and some bottom feeders on the side

 

[Spursalot]

I disagree about the bolded bits but I suppose that's another discussion alltogether

The point was - I prefer a roation system which offers 2 starters per position (such as Utd's) as opposed to a 15-man core and some bottom feeders on the side

Fixed. , Maybe some other time though.


Oh, I am not against such a system, but do not think our current financial structure could cope with such a change. It would result in a lowering of ability of the 'best eleven' that we could put out against the bigger teams.

It could be more viable (in my mind) with the new stadium and CL revenues..

Whilst i think the 15-16 man core is far more financially viable for us currently..

 

[metalgear]

i'm actually impressed with the quality of the discussion in this thread.

i'm all for the big picture view, having a very firm and competitive first eleven plus three or four others to effect a "plan B" or "c", another three or four senior players, and the rest in youth.

i also feel that Redknapp only knew what his first eleven could do and was clueless after that. Jol was a much better manager overall, putting his mind across more dimensions across the team and game.

 

[elltrev]

Keepers - De Gea / Lindegaard (sp?) - both are solid

RB - Rafael / Jones

CB - Jones / Smalling / Ferdinand / Vidic

LB - Evra / Fabio

Wingers - Nani / Valencia / Young / Giggs /

CM - Carrick / Scholes / Anderson / Cleverly / Park (their weakest part, imv)

ST - Rooney / Welbeck / Hernandez


Each one of those is a starter and good enough to be one whereas we have starters and some kind of back up - i.e. BAE / Rose

In fairness that's much easier to do when you have the money that United does. And of course the more successful a team is, the more likely the average player is going to be willing to play a smaller part in the team.

Personally, if I was a manager, I would ideally want two first-team players for every position (but they wouldn't have to be of the same quality, just a natural fit in their position and of a decent quality). I think in an ideal world you'd have one player who would be at their peak, and another who was either young and up-and-coming or older and past his peak (e.g. Young and Giggs or Sandro and Parker (could maybe count as either of those!))

I do think squad players are very important. The margins of success at our level are absolutely tiny, to the point that this season one goal could have made the difference between playing in the Champions League or playing in the UEFA Cup. Having players who can cover for injuries without having to change the team's shape, provide competition for other players in their position, offer something different if Plan A isn't working etc can play a big part in the season's outcome IMO.

As for Spurs, in some positions I think we have a good mixture. Central midfield is probably best - Modric and Hudd as ball-players, Parker and Sandro as ball-winners, and Livermore as a versatile local youngster.

 

[Jordinho]

I wouldn't entirely agree with that, quite a few of their positions have backup players who have a lot of potential, but are not yet quality players.

But this is partly due to the amount of money United have to throw around on players who might be the next 'big thing'...


But they are part of a rotation, which is the way to go. I'm just not sure if Redknapp can adjust his thinking that much..

The key is having a bit of versatility. Many of United's first choice players can cover several positions.

 

[Sandman]

I believe we have a fairly good 2nd string. The biggest problem for us though is that most of our attacking play comes from the wide positions and having someone of Adebayors abilities up front. When Bale and Lennon are out or Ade we lose our whole plan A and do not have a plan B apart from poking it around keeping possesion and hoping to make an opening.

It is vital we get some depth in the wide positions, even keeping townsend would have helped i think.

Its also important not to make too many changes at once to rest players, 1 or two here and there every now and then.

 

[Spursalot]

I believe we have a fairly good 2nd string. The biggest problem for us though is that most of our attacking play comes from the wide positions and having someone of Adebayors abilities up front. When Bale and Lennon are out or Ade we lose our whole plan A and do not have a plan B apart from poking it around keeping possesion and hoping to make an opening.

It is vital we get some depth in the wide positions, even keeping townsend would have helped i think.

Its also important not to make too many changes at once to rest players, 1 or two here and there every now and then.

I like this idea, however it would only work if you can guarantee to give him (or whoever you keep as backup) 10-15 games. He is young, he needs to be playing football to improve.


It's sort of a lose-lose situation for Harry, if he keeps the youth and doesn't play them enough, we would state that he should have sent them on loan so they could improve and get 1st team exp.


However if he plays them for a decent number of games (10 minimum), the games we do not win when they play, we are likely to blame Harry for playing said youth players instead of well Bale in this example..

 

[Gutter Boy]

i think Gutter and Naija arent being realistic

for instance what would happen to the fist teamers that went to the bench? would they stay at the club? would they be motivated to play well for a cause? will they effect team morale?

We'll be playing CL football, so they should get plenty of game time in domestic competitions.

And yes, they may only sit around for a year or two as squad players, but then they've served their purpose (and by that time their upgrade may be being upgraded).

What has happened at RB with the gradually upgrading (with overlap) from Stalteri to Chimbonda to Hutton to Corluka to Walker is how it should work.

 

[Spursalot]

We'll be playing CL football, so they should get plenty of game time in domestic competitions.

And yes, they may only sit around for a year or two as squad players, but then they've served their purpose (and by that time their upgrade may be being upgraded).

What has happened at RB with the gradually upgrading (with overlap) from Stalteri to Chimbonda to Hutton to Corluka to Walker is how it should work.

Not the best situation to use, as Corluka was unhappy not playing and went on loan to Germany, leaving us with no Backup for Walker...

 

[Park Lane James]

The other day the idea of Jarvis and Fletcher was pretty much laughed of as not good enough for our team...as in they arent the ones to take them into CL? but why would they be? why instead of being the ones that get us there , why cant they be the squad players that significantly contribute to help the team in general get to the CL?

Some think that if they aren't good enough to get into the first team then they aren't worth purchasing - which isn't strictly true. Many (including myself) have felt that we struggle when our ideal style of play doesn't work, and we fail to adapt to a situation and end up getting a negative result. Perhaps our 'Plan B' is lacking - and that's where the squad members come into play. The likes of Pienaar and Kranjcar have been mis-managed at the club, not seeing anywhere near enough game time.

It's always helpful to have different options in the squad - as there are so many different teams in the league with varying styles of play. Not to mention the importance of a balanced and varied squad when taking on European and domestic cup competition.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Not the best situation to use, as Corluka was unhappy not playing and went on loan to Germany, leaving us with no Backup for Walker...

Well it worked until Redknapp forgot to rest Walker in less competitive matches then ;-)

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Our fringe players like Pavly, Bentley and Bale made the difference for us when we qualified to CL 2 years ago. But since then, Redknapp doesn't seem to like giving a chance to the fringe players unless the first team players are injured.

Redknapp never has - how do you suppose those three got their opportunities?