No Excuses

[Woodwardfan]

Am I missing something here?

theres no doubt the board backed Clough and some of that money has of course been a waste. Adkins has been backed but I'd guess to a lesser extent cash wise. But how is writing a monthly cheque for a Clough signing, good or bad, "backing" Adkins?

Has anybody said that Sean?

 

[zablade]

Pound for Pound Clough had the best backing that any manager here had since Robson and the only player he brought in that has been a reasonable success is Done, the rest have been a big disappointment, and I include Brayford In that as he wasn't that impressive before being injured in the run in last season.

This is probably a reason why Clough hasn't been seriously linked with any job since leaving.

 

[Kevincarterversion2.0]

If we play like that we have to get the full backs charging up and down the wings, ideal for Brayford but Freeman is a good player too ( offensively anyway).

Basham at the back, Coutts and Hammond in the holding positions. What Coutts lacks in pace and mobility I reckon he can make up for in experience, particularly with Hammond alongside him.

In a short while:

Keeper.

Brayford, Edgar/ Collins, Basham, Harris/ Wallace

Coutts, Hammond

Done Baxter Adams

Sharp

That is the team I'd be picking.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Has anybody said that Sean?

Not sure, some vagueness which is why I asked if I was missing something.

Costs do have to be met so it doesn't need spelling out but the conversation was about Adkins being backed. As I said, he has. Costs applicable to Clough signings may well be a millstone - in some cases- around his neck.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Not sure, some vagueness which is why I asked if I was missing something.

Costs do have to be met so it doesn't need spelling out but the conversation was about Adkins being backed. As I said, he has. Costs applicable to Clough signings may well be a millstone - in some cases- around his neck.

That's the bit Pete can't get his head around.

 

[Jan Age]

We are still short of X1 CB and let's not forget that.

However I do agree that the board are in some ways stumped by the large squad that Clough was allowed to gather but they have only themselves to blame.

I am sure Adkins has tried to move them on but it shows how poor some of them are as we haven't been able to get rid of that many.

Of the signings that Adkins has made:

Sharp - is here to score goals and so far he has.
Sammon - has looked good when played in the right position
Woolford - is just a body to be honest but is games record suggest he will always be fit and available
Edgar - has looked great and terrible in the same measure (personally I don't think the long hauls do him any good)
Hammond - on the face of it a quality signing

80% of those have been or do look good signings.

2 things I am laying at Adkins door is;
No CB signing
Making JMc captain

He should still get our full support though.

 

[blade too long]

its up to the backroom staff to thin out the numbers , push them out on loans or frees to save the wages
realistically if we get rid of even 4 bench warmers come January will have worked hard to achieve that

theres around 8 I dont see a place for but as I suggest getting rid of half would be moving in the right direction , anymore and its happy days
Anybody who wouldnt take some Italian money for diego now, thought not

 

[Woodwardfan]

We are still short of X1 CB and let's not forget that.

However I do agree that the board are in some ways stumped by the large squad that Clough was allowed to gather but they have only themselves to blame.

I am sure Adkins has tried to move them on but it shows how poor some of them are as we haven't been able to get rid of that many.

Of the signings that Adkins has made:

Sharp - is here to score goals and so far he has.
Sammon - has looked good when played in the right position
Woolford - is just a body to be honest but is games record suggest he will always be fit and available
Edgar - has looked great and terrible in the same measure (personally I don't think the long hauls do him any good)
Hammond - on the face of it a quality signing

80% of those have been or do look good signings.

2 things I am laying at Adkins door is;
No CB signing
Making JMc captain

He should still get our full support though.

Actually I think we need a keeper before a central defender. In the past 8 games the defence has only conceded 9 goals and that's with a rookie (a good rookie) at left back and a right back who is more suited to wing back at this stage of his career ( he's only young).

With Hammond we have dealt with the main priority and him being there will protect the defence more. Keeper next.

In central defence we have, in order of quality: Basham, Collins, Edgar, Kennedy, McGahey (all of a sudden), Brayford, Alcock. It would be profligate to spend more money when we have all those.

 

[PeteBlade]

That's the bit Pete can't get his head around.

That's exactly the point I MYSELF have made, you patronising oaf.

Stick to changing the terms of bets to suit your own ends.

 

[blade too long]

It would be profligate to spend more money when we have all those.

does that mean anti Yorkshire ?

 

[Woodwardfan]

That's exactly the point I MYSELF have made, you patronising oaf.

Stick to changing the terms of bets to suit your own ends.

I didn't think it would need explaining but here goes:

Clough: was backed. Sound multiple players. Decent fees, large wages.

Adkins: not yet backed as only able to sign two players permanently. It's partly Clough's fault he's not been able to be backed because of all the players he inherited.
Inheriting these players doesn't count as being backed.

 

[PeteBlade]

Do you struggle with basic comprehension?

Clough was backed.
Adkins has been partially backed but not to the extent of Clough due to the large and expensive squad he inherited?

How has that possibly confused even you?

 

[Woodwardfan]

Do you struggle with basic comprehension?

Clough was backed.
Adkins has been partially backed but not to the extent of Clough due to the large and expensive squad he inherited?

How has that possibly confused even you?

Now you are making more sense, Pete.

 

[PeteBlade]

Now you are making more sense, Pete.

It was obvious to most before the unnecessary explanation.

But hey, it means you managed to attempt to be patronising and condescending again, a favourite pass time of yours, even if it keeps backfiring on you.

 

[Woodwardfan]

It was obvious to most before the unnecessary explanation.

But hey, it means you managed to attempt to be patronising and condescending again, a favourite pass time of yours, even if it keeps backfiring on you.

Hey Pete, I've put you on "ignore", we are not on the same wavelength!!

Have fun elsewhere.

BTW, you are my first ever.

 

[PeteBlade]

Hey Pete, I've put you on "ignore", we are not on the same wavelength!!

Have fun elsewhere.

Hey Woodward, I'm not sure anyone can possibly be on your rather odd wavelength.

I'm sure I'll survive somehow.

 

[Sothall_Blade]

Pound for Pound Clough had the best backing that any manager here had since Robson and the only player he brought in that has been a reasonable success is Done, the rest have been a big disappointment, and I include Brayford In that as he wasn't that impressive before being injured in the run in last season.

This is probably a reason why Clough hasn't been seriously linked with any job since leaving.

Adams? A big disappointment?
Basham, K.Wallace and Mcgahey written off as bad signings?
No credit given to Harris and Brayford for their performances in Clough's first season?

He made a mixture of successful and not so successful signings (like all managers do). Why exaggerate?

 

[Sean Thornton]

That's the bit Pete can't get his head around.

Err, are you sure about that ? The vague comment didn't relate to Pete.

And before you claim we are ganging up on you again, Pete and I have disagreed on more on this forum than we have agreed on.

 

[PeteBlade]

Err, are you sure about that ? The vague comment didn't relate to Pete.

And before you claim we are ganging up on you again, Pete and I have disagreed on more on this forum than we have agreed on.

No we haven't.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Err, are you sure about that ? The vague comment didn't relate to Pete.

And before you claim we are ganging up on you again, Pete and I have disagreed on more on this forum than we have agreed on.

So what Sean?

 

[Sean Thornton]

So what Sean?

This forum thingy, all the years you've been on them and as well as having no sense of humour, you are unable to grasp the reality that people will disagree with you. So you retreat to condescension each and every time. You aren't always correct. Remember "transition". There's a perfect example.

It's you that needs to take advice, instead of giving it.

 

[Woodwardfan]

This forum thingy, all the years you've been on it and as well as having no sense of humour, you are unable to grasp the reality that people will disagree with you.

So what, again? We are all different, we all have a view. Sometimes we agree, sometimes we don't. That's a forum.

BTW, I've not noticed that you are a barrel of laughs or that you ever concede a point of view, but in other circumstances I would never have said that. Not even interested frankly. It's only because you frequent my replies so much that I recognise your pseudonym. I only know about 8 in total.

No point me saying the reason I am on here is to learn from others after you say that, but believe me I learn so much from this forum and that's why I'm on here, no other reason than I am away in Whitby and miss the daily football banter, that's the real reason.

So Sean, back off, it does you no good nor me frankly.

 

[SandyMcBlade]

I'm still trying to work out who these bad signings Clough made are ?
Looking back over his term as manager he's had his failures for one reason or another but then who doesn't.
He took a gambled on some but then three of those were playing on Tuesday night and held their own and but for injuries there could have been more.
If I have any complaints about Clough it's more about the players he didn't sign than the ones he did......

 

[Sean Thornton]

So what, again? We are all different, we all have a view. Sometimes we agree, sometimes we don't. That's a forum.

BTW, I've not noticed that you are a barrel of laughs or that you ever concede a point of view, but in other circumstances I would never have said that. Not even interested frankly. It's only because you frequent my replies so much that I recognise your pseudonym. I only know about 8 in total.

No point me saying the reason I am on here is to learn from others after you say that, but believe me I learn so much from this forum and that's why I'm on here, no other reason than I am away in Whitby and miss the daily football banter, that's the real reason.

So Sean, back off, it does you no good nor me frankly.

As difficult as it is for you to accept that you aren't the voice of the fanbase, just the voice of yourself. "So what" just indicates your inability to debate, save for questioning people's motives, when you've backed yourself into a corner. No one follows you around, posts are read and sometimes disagreed with. As for never conceding any point of view, if you deal in facts much of the time, it's not usually necessary. Whereas you take the same tack simply because you believe everything you post is how it actually is.
It's very reminiscent of Lenners, repeating a point but being unable to explain it when challenged.

As for "back off" please don't be such a drama queen.

 

[Jan Age]

Actually I think we need a keeper before a central defender. In the past 8 games the defence has only conceded 9 goals and that's with a rookie (a good rookie) at left back and a right back who is more suited to wing back at this stage of his career ( he's only young).

With Hammond we have dealt with the main priority and him being there will protect the defence more. Keeper next.

In central defence we have, in order of quality: Basham, Collins, Edgar, Kennedy, McGahey (all of a sudden), Brayford, Alcock. It would be profligate to spend more money when we have all those.

I always go down the route of; there's 10 players before the GK who could have kept the ball out. But thinking of Howard's inability with long range shots I think you are right.

GK is the next priority but I still think we need a CB despite options listed.

Can we have both please?

 

[Woodwardfan]

As difficult as it is for you to accept that you aren't the voice of the fanbase, just the voice of yourself. "So what" just indicates your inability to debate, save for questioning people's motives, when you've backed yourself into a corner. No one follows you around, posts are read and sometimes disagreed with. As for never conceding any point of view, if you deal in facts much of the time, it's not usually necessary. Whereas you take the same tack simply because you believe everything you post is how it actually is.
It's very reminiscent of Lenners, repeating a point but being unable to explain it when challenged.

As for "back off" please don't be such a drama queen.

"So what" simply questioned the relevance.

"Back off" was with regard to the personal stuff, not debate.

You've been trotting out all this stuff for years so I don't see you stopping now. I'll try to avoid any interaction with you and that will be better for both of us. I'll not put you on "ignore" because I learn things from you from time to time!

 

[crucialkneeligaman]

Good OP and quality thread.

The next phase has to be more departures on loan. Adkins has assessed the squad and will have an idea of his first choice team and formation now that he has his "main man" on board.

The team has goals in it and the defence has got a good defensive record these last 8 games (9 goals). The presence of Hammond should improve that more as should the return of Edgar.

Well done Phipps and the Board. The manager is not seeking excuses, he expects promotion and has always said that if we are still in touch in January we can take it from there. Brayford back, settled side, all players used to playing together and off we go.

Not sure about Edgar, Harrison seems a better bet at the moment for me.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Not sure about Edgar, Harrison seems a better bet at the moment for me.

McGahey has had a very good week and what a bonus it would be if he kept his place - for ever and a day - he's still a very young lad.

I think he still has a problem with the long through ball and the high bouncing ball under challenge.

 

[crucialkneeligaman]

McGahey has had a very good week and what a bonus it would be if he kept his place - for ever and a day - he's still a very young lad.

I think he still has a problem with the long through ball and the high bouncing ball under challenge.

Agree Woody, it would be nice if young Harry can cement his place but like you say he is still learning. On current form, I prefer him out of the two of them.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

I'm still trying to work out who these bad signings Clough made are ?
Looking back over his term as manager he's had his failures for one reason or another but then who doesn't.
He took a gambled on some but then three of those were playing on Tuesday night and held their own and but for injuries there could have been more.
If I have any complaints about Clough it's more about the players he didn't sign than the ones he did......

The Clough Years - A Revisionist Perspective

It'll be intersting to see how he's judged after some time has passed.

One thought:

Nigel I signs them, Nigel II turns them into good players, thereby making Nigel I look like a shrewd judge of footballing potential.

UTMB