Is our squad average? Yes.

How many of our players are top 5 in each of these positions

Right back
Centre Back
Left Back
Centre Midfield
Attacking Midfield
Right Wing
Left Wing
Striker

Bruno, Mazraoui, a fit Shaw, Rashford and maybe Dalot and Onana. So two of those are in the same position, one is barely fit and Rashford gets in purely because of a lack of top quality LWs in the PL right now.

Our rivals will have a top 5 player in most of these positions.
 
It's better than average.

We just got a deserved draw with Cheslea and only about 4 players turned up really.
 
It is average to United standards. Together these players are 6-8 PL position players. They could punch above their weight due to a great manager but that's not how it should be. Club needs to consistently add quality so that gradually in 3 years the squad can challenge for PL title.
 
romufc said:
Either way, you cant want to call for a managers head if you feel the squad is that bad.
Click to expand...
Why not? Unless we assume that ten Hag had nothing to do with the recruitment and we keep gaslighting ourselves that overpaying for his former/Dutch player was 100% on the management and never influenced by ten Hag (I'd love if we moved from that nonsense, but many still believe this), I think it's absolutely fine to call for the managers head and think that the squad he build is not worth the money we spent. Ten Hag was not only poor in motivating players, tactics and in game management, but he was also bad in team building.

Still, our squad is not "average" if by average we understand the Premier League standard. On paper we are certainly better than where ten Hag left us, we should've been higher than 8th last year and there's absolutely no reason this squad should be 13th this year. Is it a squad worth the money we spent to assemble it? Definitely no. Is it good enough on paper to challenge for top4? Also probably no. Does it mean we should be playing hopeless football like we did for the last months? Obviously no, a good manager can make a team that's stronger than the sum of its parts.

Position by position I'd say:

GK: Top 4-6 in the league quality
DF: Top 4 in the league quality, possibly even higher
MF: Currently top 6-8 in the league quality, many players with potential to make it top 4
FW: Easily our weakest position, Hojlund & Zirkzee is a forward duo *currently* below the average level of Premier League, bottom half quality at the moment
 
ifightdragons said:
Did you watch the game yesterday? If anything, we worked our socks off.

Seems like we more than anything lack technical quality on the ball. Our passing is not good.
Click to expand...
There is a difference in working hard and working hard at intensity. They look like they are running and working but when you compare the to top teams or even the likes of Brighton you will notice the difference between high intensity football and just doing the basics. There us no speed. No intensity to the press. No co-ordination. No tracking back. Or not none. Its just poor.
 
Onana is playing more like the keeper he was at Inter this season, quite happy with that.

Defence looks reasonably good given the numbers and quality of players overall, hampered by no available left back.

Midfield is average, even the better and more experienced players have been pretty inconsistent or have significant flaws that have been exposed to easily.

The attack is below average. It probably should have been Rashford, Sancho, Antony and Greenwood as the main attackers, two are not at the club and two have been really poor, one to the extent he barely plays now. Garnacho looks a talented player, think he'll come good on his promise eventually. Not convinced by Hojlund and Amad, not sure they'll reach a good enough level, and Zirkzee looks like he does not have the quality for the level he's playing at whatsoever.

Ultimately you need to score goals to win games, and we're sorely lacking in quality across our front line despite the number of players we have.
 
I think it's hard to say what level a number of these players are at. There's been no clear plan or system for the bulk of the time most of them have been here. A new manager with a clear system coming in, and some of them may look like completely different players.

That said, if Amorim is going to play a specific way, there'll be players who won't fit the system and some just won't be good enough. Clearly, he'll want a number of additions.

There's more in the current squad than ETH got out of it, but it's definitely not got the quality of Arsenal, Liverpool, City, or Chelsea, and probably ranks behind Villa and Spurs as well so as a collective, I'd say you'd call it an average squad.
 
ifightdragons said:
That is a wild take.

His first touch was actually really bad. Watch it back, and you'll see how he fails to control that ball, as it slips beyond him. He then has to chase the ball to the back post. Then he gets lucky that Sanchez dives into him.

A good first touch in that situation would have set him up for an early shot.
Click to expand...

Agreed - poor first touch, and the keeper gifts him the penalty when he just needed to drag his hands away.

Hojlund has potential, but he needs to develop. Spends more time battling with the defender than looking for the space, although you do wonder what exactly he's been asked to do in the past.
 
Plant0x84 said:
This has been said about the past 3/4 managers. They can’t all have been bad. At some point we have to accept they just aren’t that good.
Click to expand...
Well, my counter to that would be two-fold...

1. I believe our previous managers HAVE probably been sub-par, as coaches, post-SAF.

I did a "where they manage, IF they manage" thread recently about our permanent managers after Sir Alex and only one of them is currently employed and that's Jose...who's doing a mediocre job in Turkey. OGS might have been a decent "manager', but was he really a coach? LvG was on the brink of retirement from club football. Would you class David Moyes as an elite coach? I think it's perfectly possible that all of them were just fairly mediocre (or outright bad) at coaching modern systems.

2. The question is "is our squad average?"...well don't forget, this squad deservedly won the FA Cup, beating Liverpool and outplaying City in the final. It also won the EFL Cup and finished 3rd in EtHs first season. I'd argue this current version is stronger than the squad that finished 3rd on paper. Under Jose, we won the Europa League and finished 2nd to the oil cheats. Under OGS, we finished 2nd to the oil cheats. So is it "world class", probably not...but "average"....not for me.

Also...a lesser argument because it becomes very subjective and can get downright counterproductive when comparing individuals across clubs...but did you see much in Chelsea's individuals yesterday that convinced you they are much better than ours? Aston Villa finished 4th last season and recently beat Bayern Munich...do you not think they'd take 6 or 7 of our players in a heartbeat?

It comes down to coaching for me, always has, always will. It's amazing what a team can achieve when they're motivated, pulling together in the same direction and all understand their role in the team and their instructions on the pitch.
 
TheRedDevil'sAdvocate said:
Players like Saka and Palmer don't seem to have much of an issue showcasing their talent, despite their respective clubs putting a lot of hope on their shoulders at a young age.
Click to expand...
Saka is 23, palmer is 22, so we are talking about comparing Garnacho (we can't really compare Hojlund with wide attackers) with players we should expect are slightly more advanced anyway.

Garnacho turned twenty this summer. Last season at 19 years old he got 10G, 5A in a pretty poor attacking team.
Palmer at 20, barely played for City. 1 goal, 1 assist in 20+ sub appearances and bit part games.
Saka at 20, had a great season with Arsenal 12G, 7A across 40+ games.

As for Hojlund, he is very young for a CF, the top scorers this season are Haaland (24), Mbeumo (25), Wood (32), Palmer (22), Salah (32), Jackson (23)

So even someone like Jackson, who plays the same role and is young(ish) he is still 2 season behind. Last season they were pretty even in terms of output despite Hojlund being 2 years younger.

Jackson: 44 games, 17 goals, 6 assists
Hojlund: 42 games, 16 goals, 2 assists


The question we should be asking ourselves is not about how we compare right now, but how do we think in a couple of seasons the likes of Mainoo, Garnacho, hojlund, Amad etc. will be viewed. ETH had the unenviable task this season of being a bit of a placeholder and I suspect Amorim might end up being seen a little like this as well, because the hard part of what the coach has to do is keep the team competitive enough that they keep their job whilst essentially relying on youngsters + much of our fanbase really have not adjusted to the reality of what that means.
 
Mainoonited said:
Our squad is not only average in terms of ability (overall), but also unbalanced.

GK - Onana is bang average, the second choice is not even that.
RB - We're actually strong in this position, Dalot and Mazraoui provide great options.
CB - Again we are strong in this position. Yoro, De Ligt, Martinez and Maguire are excellent options.
LB - Doesn't exist. We're playing centre backs and right backs. Who knows what is wrong with Malacia, Shaw is done.
CDM - We have 1 guy who plays that role and he's getting on. Casemiro is still very talented as a footballer but can't play as the holding player as much anymore because he can't cover the ground. We're desperately short here.
CM - Eriksen is talented, but can play half a match before gassing out. Mainoo might be world class one day, but is an inconsistent teenager. Ugarte? Not seen enough of him yet. Seems like a McT replacement for now.
AM - Bruno is talented, hard working and erratic. His leading quality is being more creative than the rest of the dross around him. Mount was a mistake.
Wingers - Antony is rubbish, Amad is a good squad player, Garnacho has something special, but like Mainoo is still young and inconsistent. Rashford is good for half a season every 2 seasons.
Strikers - Hojlund and Zirkzee are both, young new, and hardly setting the world alight.

If we get top 6 or above, we're over achieving. Don't look at the names, wages and transfer fees - look at the actual output and ability.

To improve this squad we desperately need (first choice players);

1 striker
1 leftback
1 central midfielder
1 defensive midfielder
1 goal scoring winger
Click to expand...

Been one of the standout GK's this season.
 
RedRover said:
Agreed - poor first touch, and the keeper gifts him the penalty when he just needed to drag his hands away.

Hojlund has potential, but he needs to develop. Spends more time battling with the defender than looking for the space, although you do wonder what exactly he's been asked to do in the past.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. It's weird how more people didn't see that. Goes to show how blind we can be when watching our own players, and especially players that we like.
 
Average about sums it up, but they are underperforming, and I see this squad as top 6 material if properly coached, with 4th being an impressive stretch goal.

I will say however that the squad is only a solid striker (15-20 goals a season) and decent wide player or two away from potentially being very good. Despite the doom and gloom there is a decent spine of young players in there. Just need to work with a well defined and drilled system. Hopefully Amorim brings that (along with Gyokeres in the summer, and somehow Berrada et al convince Davies to join us too {insert deprecated deluded wenger emoji here}.
 
It gets better the further back you go. I think we have three very good centre backs (if Yoro turns out well) and two good full backs. Not much depth after that. Ugarte Mainoo Bruno is potentially a very good midfield if it's given some shape, but it's hard to see it as world class. And again the next best options are all weak. And up front we have nothing at all. Just two talented kids still learning their trade, an inconsistent Rashford and an Ent that lumbered in from the Two Towers.
 
It depends on what you consider to be average.

Mathematically speaking, I guess an 'average' EPL squad finishes somewhere between 9th and 11th in the table, right?

In that sense our players are definitely above average, as we're underperforming terribly and really should be competing for 5th or 6th with this squad.
 
A lot of it is pretty average. But you don't need to anything special to finish 4th. Last season Villa got 4th and Newcastle the year before. Neither had a squad of brilliant players.
 
I think we genuinely have some good players but we need to find a style of play and team that gets the most out of them.

I feel like we should be trying to build around the likes of Onana, Mazraroui, De Ligt, Martinez, Yoro, Mainoo, Hojlund, Ugarte, Amad and Garnacho. These are the players who are either new and needs a chance, have shown us something recently to build upon or are young and could be good for us in the future.

Everyone else is potentially dispensable for me. I like Dalot but I think his level is limited. Bruno has been inconsistent for ages. Rashford doesn't apply himself enough. Casemiro is aging. Mount can't stay fit. Antony isn't good enough. Maybe a bit harsh on Zirkzee as he is also new but I'm not seeing enough from him to see him as being anything other than dispensable.
 
The squad has massively underperformed for the past 18 months or so. How much of our bad attack is due to our forward options or due to tactical choices and poor coaching. We should be clearly scoring more goals than we currently are but it's not a brilliant forward line. Feel like we need senior players to come in and take over allowing our youth to drop down onto the bench and not have as much pressure on them.
 
romufc said:
Its funny right. Blame the manager, want him sacked.. gets sacked then the same people will say the players are not good enough.

It cant be both, if the manager was so bad, means he didnt coach well or the players were so bad he couldnt get them to play,.

Either way, you cant want to call for a managers head if you feel the squad is that bad.

Personally, I think our squad is more than good enough to get top 4.
Click to expand...
It 100% can be both and in Ten Hag's is precisely why he got fired. He built this squad either directly through signings or indirectly by refusing to get rid of them. So yeah the squad is not good enough because Erik Ten Hag built it.
 
Lentwood said:
I believe our previous managers HAVE probably been sub-par, as coaches, post-SAF.

I did a "where they manage, IF they manage" thread recently about our permanent managers after Sir Alex and only one of them is currently employed and that's Jose...who's doing a mediocre job in Turkey. OGS might have been a decent "manager', but was he really a coach? LvG was on the brink of retirement from club football. Would you class David Moyes as an elite coach? I think it's perfectly possible that all of them were just fairly mediocre (or outright bad) at coaching modern systems.
Click to expand...
Sir Alex didn’t do the coaching though. He left it to McClaren, Phelan, Meulensteen and Quieroz etc…. So really the question of coaching is are LVG/Jose/Ole etc better than those coaches?
There again, did Moyes, LVG, Jose, Ole and ETH do training themselves or did they delegate to their assistants and coaching staff? Should we really be questioning Giggs, P Neville, Rui Faria, Carrick and McKenna etc? The later two have been debated to death and largely proved everyone wrong when they’ve stepped away from United and gone out on their own.
Let’s be fair here, Moyes was a relative success at Everton before and I would argue a roaring success at WH since (he won a European competition - look where they are now they have a ‘better’ head coach in Lopetegui) I think you can argue he is a good coach. In different circumstances he could have been a good coach for United, had he not made a handful of fatal mistakes.
LVG being near retirement is neither here or there really. He held a very impressive CV, had a wealth of experience and knowledge, and he is one of the games most decorated coaches. He knew what he was doing, but still came up short.
I also don’t think coaching was Jose’s downfall. His issue has always been man management, rubbing people up the wrong way and demotivating players. He likes to foster a siege mentality which is a somewhat antiquated approach, and when Faria left and he was unchecked he seemed to have that siege mentality himself against those around him at the club. He isolated key players and filled the dressing room with a toxic negativity.
I could go on about Ole and Erik too, but I’m wary of tl;dr-ing this post. It’s a long assed way of explaining I think that coaching hasn’t been the problem per se, and that a player must be receptive to that coaching for it to be successful. If our players don’t or can’t carry out their instructions as coached it really doesn’t matter who the coach is.
 
Yes, it’s a mid table squad. There are around 9 teams with a better squad than us. And if we change that number, I think it’s more teams than 9 rather than less
 
Red Star One said:
Why not? Unless we assume that ten Hag had nothing to do with the recruitment and we keep gaslighting ourselves that overpaying for his former/Dutch player was 100% on the management and never influenced by ten Hag (I'd love if we moved from that nonsense, but many still believe this), I think it's absolutely fine to call for the managers head and think that the squad he build is not worth the money we spent. Ten Hag was not only poor in motivating players, tactics and in game management, but he was also bad in team building.

Still, our squad is not "average" if by average we understand the Premier League standard. On paper we are certainly better than where ten Hag left us, we should've been higher than 8th last year and there's absolutely no reason this squad should be 13th this year. Is it a squad worth the money we spent to assemble it? Definitely no. Is it good enough on paper to challenge for top4? Also probably no. Does it mean we should be playing hopeless football like we did for the last months? Obviously no, a good manager can make a team that's stronger than the sum of its parts.

Position by position I'd say:

GK: Top 4-6 in the league quality
DF: Top 4 in the league quality, possibly even higher
MF: Currently top 6-8 in the league quality, many players with potential to make it top 4
FW: Easily our weakest position, Hojlund & Zirkzee is a forward duo *currently* below the average level of Premier League, bottom half quality at the moment
Click to expand...

Oh that is nonsense about our forwards being bottom half quality. What bottom half team players have ever got 20+ PL goals? Or even 10.
 
Dannn411 said:
It 100% can be both and in Ten Hag's is precisely why he got fired. He built this squad either directly through signings or indirectly by refusing to get rid of them. So yeah the squad is not good enough because Erik Ten Hag built it.
Click to expand...

Squad is not good enough for what?

There is a big difference from the squad is not good enough to challenge for the title to get top 4.
 
romufc said:
Its funny right. Blame the manager, want him sacked.. gets sacked then the same people will say the players are not good enough.

It cant be both, if the manager was so bad, means he didnt coach well or the players were so bad he couldnt get them to play,.

Either way, you cant want to call for a managers head if you feel the squad is that bad.

Personally, I think our squad is more than good enough to get top 4.
Click to expand...

People always struggle to wrap their heads around those two conflicting ideas.

There's no situation where all players play well and the manager gets fired. His performance raises and lowers player output so you can't judge based off just a failing managerial period. We've seen plenty of bad teams turn good under a new manager.

Under Ten Hags 's coaching, tactics whatever these players were undoubtedly bad. Could they be top 4 under different circumstances? Absolutely
 
I just hope Amorim can create a system that masks a lot of their inadequacies. You see players all the time that leave a certain system and look half the player, in fact it’s usually us buying them.
 
romufc said:
Oh that is nonsense about our forwards being bottom half quality. What bottom half team players have ever got 20+ PL goals? Or even 10.
Click to expand...

Literally just from last season:

Solanke scored 19 goals for Bournemouth (12th)
Chris Wood scored 14 goals for Forest (17th)
Matheus Cunha and Hee-chan Hwang scored 12 each for Wolves (14th)
Carlton Morris scored 11 and Elijah Adebayo scored 10 for Luton (18th)

Fernandes and Hojlund were our top scorers with 10 each.

This season, we are pretty much the worst team at converting chances. We have I think the second fewest number of goals, have missed the most "big" chances, and are underperforming our xG by the most of any team. It's about as "bottom half" as you get.
 
Smores said:
People always struggle to wrap their heads around those two conflicting ideas.

There's no situation where all players play well and the manager gets fired. His performance raises and lowers player output so you can't judge based off just a failing managerial period. We've seen plenty of bad teams turn good under a new manager.

Under Ten Hags 's coaching, tactics whatever these players were undoubtedly bad. Could they be top 4 under different circumstances? Absolutely
Click to expand...

Exactly. The issue is, the players may be bad or not good enough to compete for the league but its silly to say they cant get top 4.

I mean its clear they can, his first season we got top 4 probably with a worse squad. We have signed quality players, the manager cannot get anything out of them, which was his issue.

Coaching is such a big thing, people dont realise. Look at Spurs, they have Werner, Johnson, Solanke, Son as their forwards... they score loads of goals.
 
tomaldinho1 said:
Saka is 23, palmer is 22, so we are talking about comparing Garnacho (we can't really compare Hojlund with wide attackers) with players we should expect are slightly more advanced anyway.

Garnacho turned twenty this summer. Last season at 19 years old he got 10G, 5A in a pretty poor attacking team.
Palmer at 20, barely played for City. 1 goal, 1 assist in 20+ sub appearances and bit part games.
Saka at 20, had a great season with Arsenal 12G, 7A across 40+ games.

As for Hojlund, he is very young for a CF, the top scorers this season are Haaland (24), Mbeumo (25), Wood (32), Palmer (22), Salah (32), Jackson (23)

So even someone like Jackson, who plays the same role and is young(ish) he is still 2 season behind. Last season they were pretty even in terms of output despite Hojlund being 2 years younger.

Jackson: 44 games, 17 goals, 6 assists
Hojlund: 42 games, 16 goals, 2 assists


The question we should be asking ourselves is not about how we compare right now, but how do we think in a couple of seasons the likes of Mainoo, Garnacho, hojlund, Amad etc. will be viewed. ETH had the unenviable task this season of being a bit of a placeholder and I suspect Amorim might end up being seen a little like this as well, because the hard part of what the coach has to do is keep the team competitive enough that they keep their job whilst essentially relying on youngsters + much of our fanbase really have not adjusted to the reality of what that means.
Click to expand...

Saka is growing as a player, while Arsenal are growing as a team. He is helping them as much as they're helping him. Palmer can have an impact as a #10, on the right and, occasionally, in a deeper midfield role. These are aspects that, IMHO, should be taken into account when judging potential. Football isn't played on a sheet of paper, you need to look beyond the raw numbers. Questions we should also be asking is whether this player or that can show his skills and talent within certain parameters or not. How do they respond in more demanding roles? How do they cope when the spaces aren't there? Or how naturally developing partnerships comes to them? And so on. One can say, for instance, that Rashford is a 30 goals per season attacking player. Is he though? According to evidence, he can be when everything is being channelled through him, when he's allowed to do his favourite movement (cutting inside from the left) and when the whole team is hitting it long to play him into space. The numbers are there, but, for me, this is not a 30 goals per season forward for a title aspiring team. Garnacho can also finish this season with great numbers, with the whole team feeding his greediness. Surely, this isn't the way to build a "balanced" side. Also, betting your future on so many youngsters coming good with these fees and this wage bill, is most certainly the proof of an "average" squad.
 
Surely it's better than Forest who are 4th. Or better than the likes of Brighton who seem to beat us every season
 
Alex99 said:
Literally just from last season:

Solanke scored 19 goals for Bournemouth (12th)
Chris Wood scored 14 goals for Forest (17th)
Matheus Cunha and Hee-chan Hwang scored 12 each for Wolves (14th)
Carlton Morris scored 11 and Elijah Adebayo scored 10 for Luton (18th)

Fernandes and Hojlund were our top scorers with 10 each.
Click to expand...

Okay so you have taken one season, our worst season.

The season before... Rashford had 17 PL goals.
 
2 man midfield said:
I just hope Amorim can create a system that masks a lot of their inadequacies. You see players all the time that leave a certain system and look half the player, in fact it’s usually us buying them.
Click to expand...
:lol: true. Mhki, Sancho, van de Beek, Kagawa spring to mind
 
Average squads can win the league though. If they are coached well and, crucially, put together according to a plan. MUFC has not recruited according to a playing style. Even the purchase of Ugarte was contrary to ETH's preferred style and in retrospect was a clear indicator that he was already for the chop.
 
romufc said:
Okay so you have taken one season, our worst season.

The season before... Rashford had 17 PL goals.
Click to expand...

I was responding to the "what bottom half players score more than 10 goals?" bit of your post. Also, our stats this season are not just bottom half, but outright bottom.

Plenty of bottom half teams have players capable of hitting double figures. We don't have any players (yet) capable of hitting 20+ like most of the other top sides, or enough players capable of hitting 10-15 to cover for the lack of individual "talisman".

Patrick Bamford once hit 17 goals for Leeds. Maybe we should sign him?
 
Alex99 said:
I was responding to the "what bottom half players score more than 10 goals?" bit of your post. Also, our stats this season are not just bottom half, but outright bottom.

Plenty of bottom half teams have players capable of hitting double figures. We don't have any players (yet) capable of hitting 20+ like most of the other top sides, or enough players capable of hitting 10-15 to cover for the lack of individual "talisman".

Patrick Bamford once hit 17 goals for Leeds. Maybe we should sign him?
Click to expand...

Or maybe we should keep buying players that score goals elsewhere and expect them to magically score goals?

Or do the sensible thing and look at why we are not scoring? We are not creating enough chances maybe?

Lets wait until end of the season before you say our players are lower league standard. The manager was the problem, these players are good enough to get top 4. We can agree to disagree on that but I do feel in a better coached system, we score more goals.
 
TheRedDevil'sAdvocate said:
Saka is growing as a player, while Arsenal are growing as a team. He is helping them as much as they're helping him. Palmer can have an impact as a #10, on the right and, occasionally, in a deeper midfield role. These are aspects that, IMHO, should be taken into account when judging potential. Football isn't played on a sheet of paper, you need to look beyond the raw numbers. Questions we should also be asking is whether this player or that can show his skills and talent within certain parameters or not. How do they respond in more demanding roles? How do they cope when the spaces aren't there? Or how naturally developing partnerships comes to them? And so on. One can say, for instance, that Rashford is a 30 goals per season attacking player. Is he though? According to evidence, he can be when everything is being channelled through him, when he's allowed to do his favourite movement (cutting inside from the left) and when the whole team is hitting it long to play him into space. The numbers are there, but, for me, this is not a 30 goals per season forward for a title aspiring team. Garnacho can also finish this season with great numbers, with the whole team feeding his greediness. Surely, this isn't the way to build a "balanced" side. Also, betting your future on so many youngsters coming good with these fees and this wage bill, is most certainly the proof of an "average" squad.
Click to expand...
I'm not really sure what the point is from this in relation to what I said?
 
romufc said:
Or maybe we should keep buying players that score goals elsewhere and expect them to magically score goals?

Or do the sensible thing and look at why we are not scoring? We are not creating enough chances maybe?

Lets wait until end of the season before you say our players are lower league standard. The manager was the problem, these players are good enough to get top 4. We can agree to disagree on that but I do feel in a better coached system, we score more goals.
Click to expand...

You know I wasn't seriously suggesting we bought Bamford, right? Also, what do you mean by "keep buying players that score goals elsewhere"? None of our current striking options have ever been prolific.

Again, no team has missed more big chances than us, and no team is underperforming xG by as much. We are not suffering from a lack of chances. We are suffering from an inability to convert them. We'd have literally double the number of goals we've currently scored if we were matching our xG.

I was also literally just pointing out that bottom half teams have players capable of scoring 10+ goals, which you seemed to think was an impossible feat.
 
I remember the best football we played in last 5/6 years was "30 mins against Palace" in Ragnick's first match and then players gave up!
Managers can have ideas but if we dont have the players to follow that or don't have the drive then things can fall apart quickly.
SAF didnt have the Galactico's or the best continental style but we had definitive work culture and players were ready to give everything.

Over 1.2 Billions net spend in last 10 years and still looking for 5/6 first team players to improve things is our biggest downfall. Hope we make right choices in next transfer market and get rid of any players with no right mentality and not suitable to the system.
 
Alex99 said:
You know I wasn't seriously suggesting we bought Bamford, right? Also, what do you mean by "keep buying players that score goals elsewhere"? None of our current striking options have ever been prolific.

Again, no team has missed more big chances than us, and no team is underperforming xG by as much. We are not suffering from a lack of chances. We are suffering from an inability to convert them. We'd have literally double the number of goals we've currently scored if we were matching our xG.

I was also literally just pointing out that bottom half teams have players capable of scoring 10+ goals, which you seemed to think was an impossible feat.
Click to expand...

We will continue to disagree.

You feel the players are the problem and I think the system is the bigger problem.

We can have xG wars all we like, Bruno was actually very prolific, a few season ago, along with Rashford. So you feel they have forgotten to finish.

We dont create enough chances for our players on a consistent basis. I think with a better coached system, we score alot more goals, I know you disagree with this but that is my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.