"you don't buy them for August" is the dumbest stance in the world. August is just as important as December, February, September and ever other fn month.
I remember that game, wasn't Osman to blame for a lousy back pass? Wasn't it boxing day?The Sunderland game were he got sent was an absolute catastrophe. Just let them score, don't get sent off. We battered them even with 10 men but they hung on. Brain dead decision making
They do but it's better to have really good players for 35 games than mediocre ones for 38.It's almost like points in the beginning of the season count as much as ones at the end ?
Or, you know, get good players in early?They do but it's better to have really good players for 35 games than mediocre ones for 38.
Before you start saying people are dumb do you want to check you understand the argument. Every game is obviously worth 3 points. That isn't in dispute. The argument is whether we should sign inferior players just so they are available for an 3 extra games this season or whether we should sign better players who are available for just 3 less games than inferior players over the four year period of their contract? Would you sooner have Dibling available for every game for the next four years minus the 3 in August this year, or Fellows for every game in that period? Am I the dumb one?"you don't buy them for August" is the dumbest stance in the world. August is just as important as December, February, September and ever other fn month.
Correct. Absolutely no need to play it but also terrible from Howard.I remember that game, wasn't Osman to blame for a lousy back pass? Wasn't it boxing day?
Do you think we didn't do that on purpose? There are three variables involved in transfers, value, quality and timing. You can't have all three. If you want quality early in the window you need to pay way over the odds. If you want want value and early in the window then you won't get quality. I think we're choosing the right option.Or, you know, get good players in early?
Those teams were played in incredible heat and it was preseason so lots of subs were made. We usually only make 2 or 3 subs a game. More players is nice but not essential.On the squad.
Reading the arguments I see both sides but fundamentally the squad is short, bench is nowhere near what we need the US tournament shows that specifically comparing to the other 3 teams. This means we still need more players than the 1st choice primary targets. It'll be busy up till 1st September I reckon.
Our starting XI at Chelsea at the end of April:-
View attachment 320452
Even ignoring that fact that Tarkowski was unavailable which is why the back four was what it was here and Lindstrom & Mangala were already out long term - you can literally now add Dewsbury-Hall and/or Alcaraz to this side with Barry, Aznou & Armstrong available on the bench at worst.
Given then that all we really 'lost' in return was Young, Harrison, Doucoure & DCL - are you seriously telling me that we arent better off now?![]()
he was indeed, weak AFI remember that game, wasn't Osman to blame for a lousy back pass? Wasn't it boxing day?
…..And is still only preseason.Those teams were played in incredible heat and it was preseason so lots of subs were made. We usually only make 2 or 3 subs a game. More players is nice but not essential.