What's more important the Squad or the first 11?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bruce Wayne;2195895[B said:
]I'd say the difference between the sides challenging for honours is that they can have both a strong first team and a strong squad[/B]. Often there's not a huge amount of difference between their reserves and their starters. Of course, you have some players like your RVPs and Toure's that are very hard to replace, but otherwise most have got 20 odd really good players to choose from.

Anyway, back to the question of Felli. Spurs and Bale are perhaps the nearest comparison. Bale won them a lot of points last season, so even though they're bringing in a lot of talent with that £80 million, will they be able to win games as Bale did? They've certainly strengthened a few areas of their squad with that windfall, but whether any can replicate his standout performances is another matter.

When the best teams by squad players they're purely doing it to offset any lost points from fatigue. We're trying to offset lost points by match winners. Tough ask.

I think the choice is a very clear one for us. One or the other. We can't afford both.
 
Surely if you improve the first 11 then you are improving the squad as well? If you replace a first team player with a better one, then that previous player drops to the bench and becomes a squad player that we already know is capable of doing a good job in the starting 11. So I would say we should be simply looking for the best players we can afford full stop.
 
Surely if you improve the first 11 then you are improving the squad as well? If you replace a first team player with a better one, then that previous player drops to the bench and becomes a squad player that we already know is capable of doing a good job in the starting 11. So I would say we should be simply looking for the best players we can afford full stop.

Yeah, that's what I'd like to see.

I don't mean this as a dig at the manager either because I'm made up he's here. Moyes did this squad thing as well the last few windows with players like Naismith, Oviedo, Stones and the like.
 
Surely if you improve the first 11 then you are improving the squad as well? If you replace a first team player with a better one, then that previous player drops to the bench and becomes a squad player that we already know is capable of doing a good job in the starting 11. So I would say we should be simply looking for the best players we can afford full stop.


Exactly right, but the only way we can generate significant funds is by selling our best player. That's where our situation differs to that of other teams. In our instance, the replaced player won't be dropping to the bench - he'll be playing for United. So the funds HAVE to bring in a starter AND a squad player.
 

Its a hard one to choose as you need both. Take last season for instance, we had a decent first 11 that could go toe to toe with most teams if not all. The problems we started facing was tiredness...Baines certainly could of done with a few rests as could most of the others. Playing most games takes the players edge away therefore that first 11 is technically getting weaker as the season progresses. We need decent back ups in certain games to help keep the team fresh. I felt Moyes basically flogged them to death and was willing to let players who had dropped form because of tiredness continue regardless. So to answer the OP question I would just about favour squad over first 11. I think.............
 
The bit in bold is a little OTT for me. I get the impression you're thinking we should carry a Spurs/RS style squad size, without the budget to go with it.

As a rule I've got no problem with us recycling players. When done right it's the only decent strategy for a club like ours to be towards the top of the table.

Our transfer dealing so far has been about quantity more than quality. I hope we go for the latter if Fellaini goes.

I'm not asking for eight or nine more players. There's a difference between upgrades and additions - we need upgrades for Osman and Hibbert as they won't be here for much longer. That's not ADDITIONAL players, that's two in and two out. However we do, IMHO, need three additions: RM, DM and CM. Those additions won't be replacing anyone, because there is no depth at these positions.

I would contend that we don't recycle players very efficiently overall, and we have bailed ourselves out with a couple of big sales in recent years.

Our transfers to date have NOT been about quantity - we saw Hitz, Mucha and Neville leave, and we saw Robles, Alcaraz, and Kone come in. That's a net increase in the size of the squad of.... zero. Deulofeu is a loan only, so in the medium term does not affect our depth.

Arguably the quality has improved in GK, CB and ST, but our depth in midfield has worsened. Who currently covers for Gibson? Fellaini. Who then is covering CM for Fellaini? Osman. We are bloody lucky Barkley has been up to the task of starting at 10 so far, but who comes on for Felli or Osman if they get injured playing the likes of Spurs or Arsenal? Junior? Lundstram? We need to increase our squad size, AND we need to raise the quality in some positions. We need money.
 
I'm not asking for eight or nine more players. There's a difference between upgrades and additions - we need upgrades for Osman and Hibbert as they won't be here for much longer. That's not ADDITIONAL players, that's two in and two out. However we do, IMHO, need three additions: RM, DM and CM. Those additions won't be replacing anyone, because there is no depth at these positions.

I would contend that we don't recycle players very efficiently overall, and we have bailed ourselves out with a couple of big sales in recent years.

Our transfers to date have NOT been about quantity - we saw Hitz, Mucha and Neville leave, and we saw Robles, Alcaraz, and Kone come in. That's a net increase in the size of the squad of.... zero. Deulofeu is a loan only, so in the medium term does not affect our depth.

Arguably the quality has improved in GK, CB and ST, but our depth in midfield has worsened. Who currently covers for Gibson? Fellaini. Who then is covering CM for Fellaini? Osman. We are bloody lucky Barkley has been up to the task of starting at 10 so far, but who comes on for Felli or Osman if they get injured playing the likes of Spurs or Arsenal? Junior? Lundstram? We need to increase our squad size, AND we need to raise the quality in some positions. We need money.

I don't think we've improved the quality in any of the positions you mention. GK is still Tim Howard. CB's will still be Big Syl and The Jag and Jelavic is starting as things stand. Debatable whether Kone is better than what we already have?

Hitz and Mucha played less than a handful for us in beards. Neville was a body who was used and needed to be replaced/upgraded whatever you prefer. But of the signings we've made none are starters so far. It's clearly a quantity thing.

The big sales aren't bail outs. They're identifying young quality players who are available and developing them to their potential. Spending 5m on a Mirallas is completely different to spending 5m on Kone. If the players you identify have enough potential then selling them on for a big fee isn't luck, it's judgement.
 

I don't think we've improved the quality in any of the positions you mention. GK is still Tim Howard. CB's will still be Big Syl and The Jag and Jelavic is starting as things stand. Debatable whether Kone is better than what we already have?
Nor do I. I was simply observing that losing three players and gaining three players does not increase the size of the squad.

Hitz and Mucha played less than a handful for us in beards. Neville was a body who was used and needed to be replaced/upgraded whatever you prefer. But of the signings we've made none are starters so far. It's clearly a quantity thing.
To be fair, you don't expect your backup keeper to play very much. When he did appear, Mucha performed well - Man City ring any bells? As for Hitz and Nev, they were there. If someone got injured or suspended, they were an option. They aren't there now, so that's a reduction in depth UNLESS Barkley gets used in CM as cover. That's a drop in quantity.

[The big sales aren't bail outs. They're identifying young quality players who are available and developing them to their potential. Spending 5m on a Mirallas is completely different to spending 5m on Kone. If the players you identify have enough potential then selling them on for a big fee isn't luck, it's judgement.
Never said it was luck. By bail out, I was referring to the fact that thos ebig sales bailed us out in a financial sense, IE saved our bacon. We have had ongoing squad needs for over a decade because we tend to sell players for a loss when they have failed, or for a loss because they have reached the twilight of their careers. Once in a while, we sell a younger player for big money, which makes our financial situation a bit better for a while.

Don't understand the Mirallas / Kone reference in this context. They were purchases, not sales. I must have missed your point?
 
I think with fellaini you have more strength,power,height and defensive ability but does martinez want to play that way,he seems to want passes of the ball more to play out of trouble,that is when mcCarthy comes in as he seems to be a better passer hence the martinez way.McCarthy is not a all round better player but martinez wants to play the passing game more of which our squad have been bought and set-up to play more defensively.With martinez he wants more crispier passing so sadly McCarthy will be here as a alternative way of playing.Thats why wigan were relegated as they were not put together to defend they were to play nice football.This squad we have now got quoted as playing like barcelona in patches last season so they do have it in them.This is my opinion.With the sale of fellaini we will ave to get at least McCarthy plus 1 cm and a winger/forward in,so we may not be a weaker 1st 11 or weaker squad.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top