Short Termism.

[HoodedClaw]

You've missed the point altogether. The squad was awful before he arrived, yes, everyone knows that. But he's added to that by making poor signing after poor signing. The majority of the fan base were saying "four to five signings in key positions and we'll be there or thereabouts for the automatics" before the season started, where you one of those? I suspect you were. Had he have got it right and signed those key players in the key positions, this squad would have been a lot further up the table and it'd have a lot better chance at promotion than it has now. As it is he hasn't and that recruitment shouldn't be allowed to be amplified with a lot more signings and a lot more at risk in the summer.

So you suggest we do what?

 

[Barney]

I don't recall saying so, but I imagine that's what I thought, yes.

But you're missing my point. Not only is everyone after those four or five players, but how are you meant to acquire such players when a lot of funds are tied up in a huge, average squad?

We needed better options at the back and in midfield, so we got Hammond and Edgar. Hammond was awful at first, but he got much better as match fitness came on. Edgar overall for me has been decent, with the exception of a few iffy games (injury perhaps played part there). Woolford has improved since he first came but he's slow and can't beat a man, hence him being only a half-decent option. Sammon had a couple of decent games early on but overall is a very frustrating player and not genuinely good enough. Sharp is Sharp.

A partner for Edgar and a decent left winger with pace would do as a minimum, but any less than that and we have zero chance of going up. Other areas could certainly be improved, but as I say, with the size of this squad and seemingly nobody interested in buying, we're going to struggle.

It's alright saying we should have signed this player and that player, but quality players ain't cheap and our budget was spunked elsewhere.

It's clear you're going to continually miss my point so it's not worth a tit for tat over.

I've explain my point in my post before this one.

 

[Esablade]

It's clear you're going to continually miss my point so it's not worth a tit for tat over.

I've explain my point in my post before this one.

Why so evasive?

There's still a question still waiting for you back in post 8

Who has he actually bought though Barney ...who has he actually paid a transfer fee for?

It's just Billy isn't it...and I'm not even sure whether we didn't just pay off his wages like Leeds did when they signed him from Southampton.

Adkins is feeding off scrap's..

 

[Barney]

So you suggest we do what?

Get in a manager that has proven he isn't liable to the recruitment Adkins has carried out and thus prone to amplifying in the summer.

 

[Barney]

Why so evasive?

There's still a question still waiting for you back in post 8

And I answered it.

 

[HoodedClaw]

Get in a manager that has proven he isn't liable to the recruitment Adkins has carried out and is thus prone to amplifying in the summer.

But we got in a proven manager to replace Clough, who do you suggest would come and be an improvement on Adkins?

 

[Esablade]

And I answered it.

Barney

With all due respect you didn't answer the question of 'how many players Adkins has actually bought'

You said that question doesn't matter.

However, it would appear to matter a lot to our chances of promotion.

 

[Barney]

But we got in a proven manager to replace Clough, who do you suggest would come and be an improvement on Adkins?

You'd have to have a look at managers and the recruitment they've carried out recently and weight it against their ambitions and targets as a football club. I suspect there'd be many out there and lots in the division we're in that have proven they aren't liable to carry out the sort of recruitment Adkins has. Which isn't exactly hard.

 

[TJB.]

We had a quality left winger. What happened to him?

He left to go to the division above because he wanted to further his career and be considered for his national side, ergo, he didn't want to play for Sheffield United anymore.

Should we have forced him to stay and denied him that chance?

 

[HoodedClaw]

You'd have to have a look at managers and the recruitment they've carried out recently and weight it against their ambitions and targets as a football club. I suspect there'd be many out there and lots in the division we're in that have proven they aren't liable to carry out the sort of recruitment Adkins has. Which isn't exactly hard.

Come on surely you must have a suggestion/opinion or two on who would be an improvement?

I'm struggling to think of anyone in this division that has recruited well but only been incumbent for 8 months.

 

[TJB.]

It's clear you're going to continually miss my point so it's not worth a tit for tat over.

I've explain my point in my post before this one.

I haven't missed your point in the slightest. You're saying NA has signed poorly, I'm saying he's signed what he can and that we can't afford to sign what we desperately need at this point in time. I've even gone through the list of his signings and broken down who has been good/bad and when.

I've addressed your point again, now address mine. How do you think we are meant to sign the quality players we need without firstly reducing our huge squad, to which the funds to acquire said players are currently tied?

 

[botoble]

He brought in Woolford on a three year deal or something stupid. Permanents or not, the recruitment hasn't been good enough and that can't be afforded to happen on as large a scale as the rebuild in the summer. Keeping Adkins as opposed to getting in someone capable of what Adkins has proved he isn't makes the chances of that happening much higher and thus setting us back another three to four years.

I don't pipe up much, I enjoy reading the banter and seeing others opinions.... however can you explain how in 1 year at a club that is trying to reduce its wage bill and recover from heavily backing previous managers warrants this kind of comment "Keeping Adkins as opposed to getting in someone capable of what Adkins has proved he isn't". Correct me if I'm wrong but the one thing this manager is proven in, is doing the one thing every Sheffield United fan wants and that is taking teams out of this division!

I would love for you to be a chairman of a football team so we could let logic and reason tear apart everything you seem to believe and say on here.

However I speculate this day will never come and we can just look at Leeds United and pretend you would be similar to Massimo Cellino ruining football with money fueled personal opinionated ridiculousness.

 

[Barney]

I've addressed your point again, now address mine. How do you think we are meant to sign the quality players we need without firstly reducing our huge squad, to which the funds to acquire said players are currently tied?

We signed Sharp for 500k for gods sake. All of his other signings won't be on cheap wages either. That's hardly all the money being tied up in the squad is it? He was given the money for the five signings he brought in, the funds were there. He failed in his recruitment and brought in players that aren't up to the job.

 

[Grecian2000]

He left to go to the division above because he wanted to further his career and be considered for his national side, ergo, he didn't want to play for Sheffield United anymore.

Should we have forced him to stay and denied him that chance?

If we wanted to keep him then YES.
He signed a three year contract a few months earlier. Should we wish to enforce it we are quite within out rights to do so.
Some clubs choose to do this, we always choose not to.

 

[Barney]

Come on surely you must have a suggestion/opinion or two on who would be an improvement?

I'm struggling to think of anyone in this division that has recruited well but only been incumbent for 8 months.

Why do they have to have been incumbent for 8 months? Evidence of good recent recruitment is all that's required. From the top of my head, Justin Edinburgh and David Flitcroft stick out as having shown good recruitment. Like I say though, you'd have to look at and study the recruitment of managers to be able to have a reliable gauge as to whether or not they'd be suitable candidates.

 

[HoodedClaw]

Why do they have to have been incumbent for 8 months? Evidence of good recent recruitment is all that's required. From the top of my head, Justin Edinburgh and David Flitcroft stick out as having shown good recruitment. Like I say though, you'd have to look at and study the recruitment of managers to be able to have a reliable gage as to whether or not they'd be suitable candidates.

How far back do you look at the recruitment record, I would hazard a guess that Adkins' has been pretty reasonable over his career or o you feel only the last 12 months is relevant?

I say incumbent for 8 months as thats all Adkins has had with us. Personally I don't think that's long enough to evaluate a squad and implement the neccessary change particularly as I feel that a squad assessment is only really relevant when done in a competitive environment, he wasn't able to start that process until this season started.

You may disagreee and lots on here probably will too, but I personally think that he made the right decision when he wanted to give everyone a chance. It's what I would do if I went to a new company as a Manger, lots of things can change when a new person takes charge a bit like results improving due to new manager syndrome.

I and lots of others knew we were short at the back, he acted pretty quickly once it was highlighted in a competitive environment. I think he's now got an idea of who is capable and up to it from the existing squad and he knows who he's going to get rid of. I also think he knows what is required to take us forward, but I don't expect much to happen from the investment in Lee Turnbull until the summer.

You mention Justin Edinburgh, he had 4 months assessing the Gillingham squad in a competitive environment before the summer transfer window. David Flitcroft had a month in charge assessing Bury's squad, competitively, before the January transfer window and 6 months before the summer one.

I know you don't rate him due to the mistakes you feel he's made, but I'm yet to be convinced that there was or is anyone better for us at the moment. Don't get me wrong, he certainly doesn't walk on water in my book and I have no problems criticising him if I feel its warranted, but I also feel changing the manager will do far more damage to us at the moment.

 

[longinthe toothblade]

Thought this deserved its own thread.

The general consensus seems to be our managers sign 'experienced' players known to them. This is probably because they know their tenure will be short and therefore they are signing the older heads who they trust.

Perhaps the club should consider this and ensure someone is in place with the long term interests of club at its heart?


As seemingly if Mcabe and Prince carry on sacking managers for failing to get promotion we will continue to go round in circles.

Depends what you mean by 'experienced'?

 

[Revolution]

He left to go to the division above because he wanted to further his career and be considered for his national side, ergo, he didn't want to play for Sheffield United anymore.

Should we have forced him to stay and denied him that chance?

Yes