Agree, Skarz was in no way an attacking full back.Do u consider skarz an attacking over lapping full back ? I’d say he was more in the vein of what ruffels gives, very strong defensively, good in the air and positionally who gets forward when needed?
You also mention the best teams retain the ball, on the whole both long and ruffels ball retention and distribution are excellent. Especially when u consider both are actually still learning the role.
Do u consider skarz an attacking over lapping full back ? I’d say he was more in the vein of what ruffels gives, very strong defensively, good in the air and positionally who gets forward when needed?.
Obviously all positions are key, but I believe if the right personnel are selected in these roles then they can enhance the team further. I’d say most successful teams tend to have key players in these positions.
Its clear budgets are being reduced thats a strong statement prove it. That's just how you see it if you said i think budgets are being reduced yes but clear no.I think some need to get real, it's clear from the accademy update that budgets are being reduced so I don't think we'll be replacing perfectly good players like Josh and Sam when there are going to be players like Curtis who will need to be replaced.
Its clear budgets are being reduced thats a strong statement prove it. That's just how you see it if you said i think budgets are being reduced yes but clear no.
Yet some people are still thinking Erick is riding in on his magical horse."It is no secret that there have been some internal financial challenges this season across the club and every department, Academy included, is going to have to adapt to this new landscape for next season."
Yet some people are still thinking Erick is riding in on his magical horse.
Also we’ve been paying Hall and Carruthers all seasonTbf, we could make decent savings on the budget just by not replacing Shearer, Obika and then chuck in Pekalski's wages and wouldn't notice any difference to the 1st team squad.
Also we’ve been paying Hall and Carruthers all season
Absolutely. I would imagine that those three players alone are worth a combined 5k a week. Maybe even more if Pekalski was given a particularly awful contract from our perspective, which I’d imagine is pretty likely.Tbf, we could make decent savings on the budget just by not replacing Shearer, Obika and then chuck in Pekalski's wages and wouldn't notice any difference to the 1st team squad.
Absolutely. I would imagine that those three players alone are worth a combined 5k a week. Maybe even more if Pekalski was given a particularly awful contract from our perspective, which I’d imagine is pretty likely.
We could have a squad of 20 first team players with an average wage of 3k a week and it would still be around the 3m a year mark, which would be a substantial saving on this year’s budget.
There’s definitely scope to have a competitive squad with a reasonable outlay. Just means the summer window will need to see an improvement in terms of judgement.
Pay as you play deals always include a basic salary. If a player wants 2k a week but the club only offers a PAYP deal, this will often mean something along the lines of a 1k basic with the other 1k only being paid if they’re fit enough to be included in the 18 man squad. There are also usually break clauses in there that specify if a player fails to be fit for the squad X times over a period of Y that the club can terminate the deal. This is usually used in the case of appearance based contracts that are over a period of more than one season. I’d be very surprised if Mackie’s two year deal with us hasn’t got this sort of arrangement, for example.Perhaps this 'new financial landscape' will see us releasing Hall. Even on a deal where he got paid when he played, surely the poor chap must be given some sort of living wage to keep the wolf from the door over the year?