Naylor has 10 suggestions for the Albion..

[Triggaaar]

AN has hit the nail on the gead unlike your post.

Your disagreeing reassures me

1. All succesful clubs build from a solid defence.

Watford lead the division, and have only let in 3 less goals than us. We can't afford to spend in every area, and our defence isn't in as desperate need as our attack.

2. Nobody is suggesting an international rated left back but a competant one that we have signed permenantly.

I didn't say internationally rated. Naylor said one with similar proven quality to Bridge or Ward and I simply disagree, purely because we have a limited budget. Would I like someone as good as Bridge - of course. Can we afford someone as good as Bridge - definitely not.

5 In order to supply the front men with opportunities we ned a new wide man who can provide crosses and score goals a la Buckley, Pennant or at a higher level Andros Townsend.

Gus wanted a wide pitch and to play with wingers. Hughton hasn't said that's what he wants, and so if improving the squad elsewhere, we may not be able to spend on another winger or two.

9. As pointed out on the radio by Guy Butters we have nobody geeing up the players a la Cullip Oatway Carpenter if they dont do their job and getting at the ref if he isng doing his effectively equally and fairly.

We're more in need of leaders now because we're low on confidence and playing poorly. The team need encouragement and leadership. If we get the players we want elsewhere, then we won't be in such desperate need. The question is, do we by the playing talent we can afford, where we need it, or do we sacrifice a bit of that so that we can spend more on some other leaders. We need the talent more than we need extra leaders.

What Naylor is saying is to spend far more than we can afford. What he's completely missing is the fact that we have a limited budget. All the things he says would be nice, of course they would, but we simply cannot afford it. The most important thing we need is good strikers and someone creative, and spending on every other area that Naylor mentions means we'd not have enough to spend on the strikers we need.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

I wonder how significant it will prove that our season has ended a month earlier than usual? Play-off teams tend to focus their energies on the promotion battle as opposed to getting contracts sorted out.

It's hard to disagree with a lot of what Naylor is saying there, and it pretty much involves wholesale playing changes. I think that extra month might prove handy!

Totally agree. I have mentioned the "not having the distraction of the playoffs and knowing which division we are going to be in next season" factor already.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Wouldn't disagree with anything Mr Naylor has said there.

And I think he should be saying it, even if it is stating the obvious. In fact all the more so, just in case there is any Elephant in the room stuff going on.

 

[LamieRobertson]

Totally agree. I have mentioned the "not having the distraction of the playoffs and knowing which division we are going to be in next season" factor already.

Or having to find a new manager...well at least currently

 

[Stato]

Your disagreeing reassures me

Watford lead the division, and have only let in 3 less goals than us. We can't afford to spend in every area, and our defence isn't in as desperate need as our attack.
I didn't say internationally rated. Naylor said one with similar proven quality to Bridge or Ward and I simply disagree, purely because we have a limited budget. Would I like someone as good as Bridge - of course. Can we afford someone as good as Bridge - definitely not.
Gus wanted a wide pitch and to play with wingers. Hughton hasn't said that's what he wants, and so if improving the squad elsewhere, we may not be able to spend on another winger or two.
We're more in need of leaders now because we're low on confidence and playing poorly. The team need encouragement and leadership. If we get the players we want elsewhere, then we won't be in such desperate need. The question is, do we by the playing talent we can afford, where we need it, or do we sacrifice a bit of that so that we can spend more on some other leaders. We need the talent more than we need extra leaders.

What Naylor is saying is to spend far more than we can afford. What he's completely missing is the fact that we have a limited budget. All the things he says would be nice, of course they would, but we simply cannot afford it. The most important thing we need is good strikers and someone creative, and spending on every other area that Naylor mentions means we'd not have enough to spend on the strikers we need.

This is a far more realistic appraisal than Naylor's. Although we would all agree that the things Naylor has suggested would improve the side, it takes no account of budget limits.

With all the inadequacies that have been highlighted this season, we should be looking to build for long term improvement. Kayal is a very good start, but it is unlikely that we are going to bring in enough successful newcomers to go from the current position to candidates for the top two during the summer. We should be looking for steady improvement next year.

However, all the teams I have seen play us this year also have inadequacies and resolving half of the things that Naylor raises would have made us competitive in the top half of what has been the poorest Championship division for some years.

 

[brighton_tom]

Spot on.

 

[Bladders]

We need players who can kick the ball better than the ones we've got

 

[B.W.]

Agreed with AN's comments, as has been said, most are obvious.

I am also sure that the club will be in agreement. The big issue is not knowing what the issues are so much as actually implementing them.

As an example, every club wants to do business early in the transfer window, but players and agents won't commit as they try and hold out for a better club/deal. The club needs to take heed of AN's comments for sure, but the way the Argus presents it suggests that "oh, just sign them early, sorted" doesn't tell the whole story and that is the real battle.

Offer the market price, they will come.

 

[B.W.]

Your disagreeing reassures me

Watford lead the division, and have only let in 3 less goals than us. We can't afford to spend in every area, and our defence isn't in as desperate need as our attack.
I didn't say internationally rated. Naylor said one with similar proven quality to Bridge or Ward and I simply disagree, purely because we have a limited budget. Would I like someone as good as Bridge - of course. Can we afford someone as good as Bridge - definitely not.
Gus wanted a wide pitch and to play with wingers. Hughton hasn't said that's what he wants, and so if improving the squad elsewhere, we may not be able to spend on another winger or two.
We're more in need of leaders now because we're low on confidence and playing poorly. The team need encouragement and leadership. If we get the players we want elsewhere, then we won't be in such desperate need. The question is, do we by the playing talent we can afford, where we need it, or do we sacrifice a bit of that so that we can spend more on some other leaders. We need the talent more than we need extra leaders.

What Naylor is saying is to spend far more than we can afford. What he's completely missing is the fact that we have a limited budget. All the things he says would be nice, of course they would, but we simply cannot afford it. The most important thing we need is good strikers and someone creative, and spending on every other area that Naylor mentions means we'd not have enough to spend on the strikers we need.

I agree with your priorities for player acquisition, but... it is time to loosen the purse strings and, more importantly, improve recruitment effectiveness; Kayal shows what can be achieved on a relatively tight (but looser) budget.

 

[Prince Monolulu]

Well CH's job really starts now. Next few weeks he has to decide who is for the Spanish Archer, who he wants and to persuade the bods upstairs pretty much regarding the 10 points of common sense stated here.
Good luck Chrissy boy.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Tomlin, Clayton, Vossen. Bamford, Adomah, Callum Wilson, Kermorgant, Kenwyn Jones. These are the sort of players that have joined Boro and Bournemouth that we should have been bringing in. This is the sort of quality you need in this division.

 

[jimbob5]

Your disagreeing reassures me

Watford lead the division, and have only let in 3 less goals than us. We can't afford to spend in every area, and our defence isn't in as desperate need as our attack.
I didn't say internationally rated. Naylor said one with similar proven quality to Bridge or Ward and I simply disagree, purely because we have a limited budget. Would I like someone as good as Bridge - of course. Can we afford someone as good as Bridge - definitely not.
Gus wanted a wide pitch and to play with wingers. Hughton hasn't said that's what he wants, and so if improving the squad elsewhere, we may not be able to spend on another winger or two.
We're more in need of leaders now because we're low on confidence and playing poorly. The team need encouragement and leadership. If we get the players we want elsewhere, then we won't be in such desperate need. The question is, do we by the playing talent we can afford, where we need it, or do we sacrifice a bit of that so that we can spend more on some other leaders. We need the talent more than we need extra leaders.

What Naylor is saying is to spend far more than we can afford. What he's completely missing is the fact that we have a limited budget. All the things he says would be nice, of course they would, but we simply cannot afford it. The most important thing we need is good strikers and someone creative, and spending on every other area that Naylor mentions means we'd not have enough to spend on the strikers we need.

I agree. We have 3 pretty good keepers who will have good and bad days at the office. Why chuck money at something that is not important and might not be any better. Roller coaster indeed!

 

[jimbob5]

The most umportant thing should be to get back the patient passing possession game again. Then slowly aquire the players to play that style again.

Why?

 

[Triggaaar]

I agree with your priorities for player acquisition, but... it is time to loosen the purse strings and, more importantly, improve recruitment effectiveness

Obviously it would be nice to improve recruitment effectiveness, and no doubt TB feels that a lot more than you and I, given that it's his money that's been pissed up the wall. But that's not what Naylor was saying. To buy better was too obvious even for Andy to point out (that's not a dig at you BtW). As for loosening the purse strings, how much do you think TB should be happy to lose next season, and what do we do if not promoted, having broken the FFP rules? Because we definitely can't do what Naylor says without breaking FFP rules.

 

[Grombleton]

I largely agree with the article. I think the only things i don't quite align with is Stockdale, who has been good for us but is prone to mistakes...but he's a solid keeper at this level. With Walton progressing i think we're set in that position for a while.

I'd also like to keep Calde on, as he has the flexibility we need.

I'd also not complain about a long-term loan for a player - no-one complained about Bridge only being a loan when he was doing so well, it's just that Bennett has been inferior to him (though still good and I wouldn't complain if he joined permanently) - i think it's just picking and choosing the loans and not having another Leon Best or another Ledesma who hardly got a look-in.

 

[jimbob5]

I largely agree with the article. I think the only things i don't quite align with is Stockdale, who has been good for us but is prone to mistakes...but he's a solid keeper at this level. With Walton progressing i think we're set in that position for a while.

I'd also like to keep Calde on, as he has the flexibility we need.

I'd also not complain about a long-term loan for a player - no-one complained about Bridge only being a loan when he was doing so well, it's just that Bennett has been inferior to him (though still good and I wouldn't complain if he joined permanently) - i think it's just picking and choosing the loans and not having another Leon Best or another Ledesma who hardly got a look-in.

For sure. Say the Pool had not sold Gerrard but said we could borrow him for a season …….

 

[dadams2k11]

Obviously it would be nice to improve recruitment effectiveness, and no doubt TB feels that a lot more than you and I, given that it's his money that's been pissed up the wall. But that's not what Naylor was saying. To buy better was too obvious even for Andy to point out (that's not a dig at you BtW). As for loosening the purse strings, how much do you think TB should be happy to lose next season, and what do we do if not promoted, having broken the FFP rules? Because we definitely can't do what Naylor says without breaking FFP rules.

what are the rules again? It appears that very little teams are sticking to theses and they are managing to do well.

 

[GT49er]

Tomlin, Clayton, Vossen. Bamford, Adomah, Callum Wilson, Kermorgant, Kenwyn Jones. These are the sort of players that have joined Boro and Bournemouth that we should have been bringing in. This is the sort of quality you need in this division.

And at least two of those - either of which I'd welcome for next season - are loanees.

 

[Danny-Boy]

Baldock is the one that continues to baffle. As he stated he has always played in a 2 pronged strike force so what do we do.....Play him either on his own or out wide on the left.

Sign Baldrick instead..

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

All those promoted from this division last season and those likely this season play 2 up front. Hopefully if TB or PB have any input into the players coming in they can convince CH.

Looking back over the past 3 seasons and this one why can't TB and PB see a clear pattern emerging that to finish in the top 2 or go up via the play offs you need to play 2 strikers up front and in some games go for it and sacrifice a midfielder with 10 minutes to go and bung on a third striker.