Holmesy

So between last season and this season, you think we’ve gone forwards? Are you ok?

Fair points. I still think there’s better value to be had elsewhere, and no one can convince me otherwise. The Isak situation combined the the DoF debacle definitely fucked us but I do think they were amplified by only having our eye on a small pool of players, which seems to be Eddie’s M.O. We ended up in a reactive state and at the hands of teams who knew we were desperate for signings.

I don’t think there’s anyone in our fanbase, wider football or the media that thinks we had a good transfer window. Arguing otherwise is strange to say the least. We spent £100m on two supposed first-team ready players to bolster the numbers and improve us. Neither have done that. I admire your positive stance on the matter and I obviously hope both develop, but the way top level football is these days, most players have done their developing by 22/23. Eddie might be able to coach more out of them, but if they’re not first team ready now, it begs the question, why spend £100m on them when we could have signed equivalent, younger players that need development from elsewhere for probably half that? Back to the original point. Maybe we expected them to be better than they are but again, that bolsters the argument for better and wider scouting. Hopefully we’ve learned our lesson and it doesn’t happen again.

So, do you think the answer is to sign players from the next rung down, at inflated PL prices? Or do you think we should be doing something different? Because that's the crux of the whole argument.

Bournemouth have one of the smallest turnovers in the PL yet manage to sign some truly excellent players. It's inevitable that some of their first team and squad will be average. They generally sign well, spend well, sell well and punch above their weight. The risk of their model is lower than the risk of ours. If Rayan turns out not to be good enough, they've spent £28m and can probably recoup most of that. If he does well, they'll probably triple their money. Do you think we'll ever see £55m for Elanga if we decide to sell him? Or £43m for Ramsey? And do we seriously think either of them will help us consistently break into the league's top 4?

Give the way both clubs are run, I imagine they would probably have anticipated the increasing number of games and put actions in place to ensure the squads could handle it. They are both very well run clubs, something I don't think many of us would say about our lot over the past couple of years. Would I rather be Brighton or us is a moronic question. But tbh, I would rather be us but be run more like Brighton (and no, not signing the players they do but have their scouting intelligence, structure and succession planning models).

Bournemouth have just signed 19 year old Rayan from Vasco and he looks class - exactly the type of player we should be scouting and signing IMO. They signed him with the money they got for Semenyo, who is currently tearing shit up at Man City. Unfortunately, Kerkez is exactly the type of player i'd expect us to be linked with these days (pre-Liverpool). They also signed Justin Kluivert, Evanilson, Dean Huijsen, Ilya Zabarnyi and i'm sure there are others - their scouts are quietly unearthing talented youngsters and players who are making an impact at PL level while playing good football.

That's really just shaping the situation to fit your argument. No one is suggesting we try to sign the same players Brighton would sign. We have bigger budgets and loftier ambitions, and you could argue the only really they're not unearthing as many gems is because many clubs have already followed their model. What people, including me, are suggesting is that we apply a similar approach to finding and unearthing gems that can develop under us, using data and a wider scouting network, rather than signing expensive PL-experienced players ie, more Brunos and Tonalis, fewer Elangas and Ramseys.

Thanks bud, i aim to please.

Preach

And we've achieved what exactly, apart from going backwards? Bournemouth and Brentford are above us in the league and play better football than us, having spent a hell of a lot less. Brighton haven't the best season but no one can deny their scouting and acquisition model has been a success.

You've seen what Bournemouth, Brentford and Brighton have done by scouting outside of the PL, right? We can't shop at the top table - the cartel clubs just hoover up the best PL players. We need to stop signing the next tier down because they're PL-experienced, and start taking chances on players from other leagues/countries. There's a reason we had a free run at players like Elanga and Ramsey - none of the cartel clubs wanted them. Why?

Still monitoring - takes a while

🥱

Agreed. I actually think we have better defenders now than we did then as well.

That seems more like the Bruce/Pardew school of football - stick the players on the pitch and hope for the best. Eddie definitely isn’t that - there are tactics, just no discernible identity. City are a possession based team, as are all of Pep’s previous. Villa and Arsenal are possession-based as well but Arsenal obviously utilise their set piece prowess heavily as well. Forest were a counter-attacking team but they’ve lost that identity now. Chelsea, ManUre, Spurs, not really sure. Us, not really sure. Burnley try to park the bus, Leeds are direct and aggressive. We used to have an identity - shit-housing, heavy pressing, winning the ball back high, over-powering physicality and great interplay between full back and wingers high up the pitch. I have no idea what our identity is now. Not a clue what we’re trying to do, hence the question.

Was Forest’s style more boot it up field and chase it than run with it? I didn’t watch much of them but that would certainly seem more of a style that would suit him asking him to pass the thing or take a fullback on

So do you think he’s adapted what he wanted us to do because he’s realised the players aren’t good enough to execute it? It seems very un-Eddie-like. He’s traditionally had his philosophies and doesn’t seem to bend from them.

It was still there, it’s been there all season. I just chose to post it now. There are plenty of other threads you can post in pal - I notice you didn’t answer the question though.

I refer back to the original post about being girlie and defensive. I know it’s inevitable on here but it really was a serious question.

What is it? What are we actually trying to do? I’m hoping someone who knows more about the game can actually tell me what we are trying to be because I can’t fathom it at all. Even if we are in a transition season, we should be transitioning into something. What though?! We’re not a possession team, we’re not a counter-attacking team, we don’t play the ‘intensity is our identity’ style any more, we don’t park the bus. What are we trying to be? And don’t get all girlie and defensive, it’s a legitimate question.

I get that but I think it was just the improved performance where you finally think ‘ok, maybe there’s something there’ and the he just reverts to being shit.

For £55m you’ve got to expect more than fine. He ran forward a lot, created nothing, contributed nothing, gave the ball away in dangerous positions and looked like a fast championship player in a PL game. If he’d have cost £12m we could say he’s been fine but we’ve bought a lemon.

I just don’t think there’s anything we can do with this lad, sadly - he’s all athlete and zero footballer. No finesse, no technique, no composure and no sign that he can develop really. It’s a shame because he’s shown more in recent games but he didn’t set himself a very high bar. I’d love to see him succeed but he’s just not very good.

Early signs of what’s to come from the officials. Strap in fellas.