Happy with what we've got?

Post a reply

Smilies
:goodpost: :lol: :rofl: :goal: :scarf: :keepie: :clap: :bow: :engflag: :-P :) :-D :nod: ;-) :-/ :( :'( :Z :@ :| :oops: :yellow: :red: :O :whistle: (*) (8) (D)

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Happy with what we've got?

Re: Happy with what we've got?

by cambgull » 02 Feb 2011, 11:13

Yesterday, I was feeling quite hopeful about the situation and thought we had got a good player in Stanley and a decent replacement in Robinson. By the sounds of it, Robinson will be a very good player and could make all the difference but I really think Buckle needs to get a couple decent squad players. We've somehow gone from having 3 guaranteed subs coming on to having no real replacements at all.

I'd be happy with a decent top half finish, with the squad we currently have and the financial situation, we are nowhere near ready to gain promotion, we'll be annihilated in L1. I'm just worried that we are now starting to lose ground on the teams challenging for the play offs, let alone the ones in the play offs. We're now only 2 points off where we finished last season, if we finish 17th or lower, I'd be pretty gutted as it means we have gone absolutely nowhere considering the start of the season.

It's about time Bucks bucked his ideas up so we can holt this gradual slide down the table. Whether this means going back to basics or getting the board to allow him a bit of wage budget for loanees til the end of the season. All it shows though is that we have, maybe, 12 players he actually wants to use. That's pathetic and I think we'd really struggle to find another team with such a small squad. Even my local team, St Neots Town (with the beast, Stefan Moore up front! Ex Villa youth I believe) have a larger squad of players used regularly and they're 5 tiers lower than Torquay!

Re: Happy with what we've got?

by taunton_gull » 02 Feb 2011, 10:37

I see what you're saying Fletch but last night we looked worryingly short on ideas and had absolutely no options on the bench to change things around. If when things are going badly in future our only answer is to bring on the likes of Halpin and Lathrope I really fear for the second half of our season. In my opinion we definitely need another striker and possibly cover at the back. We also looked incredibly lightweight in midfield. I understand we aren't going to have like for like replacements in terms of numbers but as it stands I fear for the quality in the squad beyond our strongest XI.

Re: Happy with what we've got?

by Dave » 02 Feb 2011, 09:44

For quailty over quantity is the key for a club our size and with our budget,in the evnt of mulitple injuries or suspensions there is the loan or emgerency loan market.

I agree with royalgull,for me a specialist right back is a must,not knocking Robbo who has be fairly solid in that position,however both he and Mansell are not right backs,last nights game highlighted something for me,the drastic drop in form of Ellis.

We have a centre back pairing of Ellis-Branston that picks itself at the moment because there is no one else,the addition of a right back would mean Robertson is availible to return to the centre,and the cetre backs can be rotated if one needs a rest,or time out to re-focus which could be the case for Ellis,it would also leave Mansell in midfield which is what he does best.

Re: Happy with what we've got?

by Fletch » 01 Feb 2011, 17:25

taunton_gull wrote:My only gripe is that we have swapped like for like, we have released several players who are yet to be replaced. You'd have thought Bucks will have other options otherwise he wouldn't have let Hemmings go - I hope we see some loan additions in the near future.
The released players were released for a reason:-
Carlisle was on a short term contract to prove his fitness (but didnt by the look of it).
Ditto Senda.
Gritts was also short term to see if he still had the attributes.
Hemmings seemed to be a bit of a one trick pony (bit like Carayol a couple of years ago) and pace is no real use without end product.

I think all (apart from Hemmings possibly) were viewed as extra to the core squad requirements and as such, wouldnt need to be replaced.

Re: Happy with what we've got?

by royalgull » 01 Feb 2011, 17:09

From what I gather he left by his own accord, was trying to get a move elsewhere. MAybe family reasons I'm not sure.

We need a first choice right back, that's the point i'm really trying to make.

Re: Happy with what we've got?

by Plymouth Gull » 01 Feb 2011, 16:53

Dean Holden? Really? He seems to fail everywhere he goes these days. His best was Peterborough; now he seems way past it.

Probably want a fair whack too.

Re: Happy with what we've got?

by royalgull » 01 Feb 2011, 16:46

We need at least one more winger, another striker and in my opinion a first choice right back.

i saw Dean Holden left Shrewsbury yesterday so is free to sign for anyone, someone like that would be ideal.

Re: Happy with what we've got?

by Southampton Gull » 01 Feb 2011, 16:35

shaunicus wrote:Think we need another central defender (as cover) and a forward. We're covered in all other positions.

I'd agree about a forward and two of those were mentioned as targets to me yesterday.

We have Rowe-Turner and Robbo as cover at the back so not too worried about that.

Re: Happy with what we've got?

by shaunicus » 01 Feb 2011, 16:28

Think we need another central defender (as cover) and a forward. We're covered in all other positions.

Re: Happy with what we've got?

by taunton_gull » 01 Feb 2011, 16:25

Happy with both Stanley and Robinson, I think they are both capable players and in terms of quality were about the best we could hope for as Wroe and Benners replacements. Wroe's body language has been terrible during the last few games and alongside a dodgy formation it contributed to our downfall at the weekend. With Stanley sounding similar to Mansell I pray Bucks can find a formation suitable for both home and away. Without doubt O'Kane is our most skillful player but at times I felt we have tried to fit him in on the wing or behind EB and it hasn't always suited us - as we saw on Saturday. I like to sound of the 4-2-3-1 but ultimately Bucks is going to have to find something that means we can be attacking at home and compact away, I look forward to seeing how he does.

My only gripe is that we have swapped like for like, we have released several players who are yet to be replaced. You'd have thought Bucks will have other options otherwise he wouldn't have let Hemmings go - I hope we see some loan additions in the near future.

Re: Happy with what we've got?

by Fletch » 01 Feb 2011, 11:41

Reasonably happy. Benners is a big pair of boots to fill (obviously not literally), Robinson may go some way towards that but sounds more of an attacking winger that can also play up front, than an out and out striker. Time for Billy to show us what he's made of with a run in the team I think.

Stanley in for Wroe is a no-brainer for me. Better engine and stiffens up the midfield no end.

Hemmings probably wasnt going to feature much (which is part of the loan agreement usually) so may as well be back at Wolves closer to his nipper.

Slightly weaker in numbers but slightly stronger overall I reckon...

Re: Happy with what we've got?

by Fonda » 01 Feb 2011, 10:39

regiment0609 wrote:i have to agree with you guys.

firstly, i've got to be honest, and say i'm not buckle's biggest fan. i think there are things he does well, but there are definitely big holes there too. my main gripe is his ability to change a game from the touchline. too often things have not been going well after an hour, and subs are not made until 80th minute onwards, and/or changes often don't seem to be the right ones. i think this will only continue (or get worse) now, as the squad is looking a bit short. having said all that, we all know there isn't buckets of money available, and attracting players down to our little club isn't easy. but considering we really are running on a bare minimum squad, why release Hemmings from his loan early ?

i am optimistic about the arrival of Stanley and Robinson, both are good players, and will certainly add something to the squad, but i'm always concerned at how determined loan players are, particularly as these two new guys potentially will affect their parent clubs with their performances for us, as we're all in the same division (especially Stanley - one month loan -what's the point of that ??). at least hemmings, oastler etc, have come in to gain experience, and prove that they are capable of playing for their own clubs at a higher level - they've got nothing to lose as such. i'm sure the new guys will want to do well, but i'd be happier with permanent signings.

in addition, i suppose we should be grateful that only Benyon and Wroe went, both inevitable really, but hanging onto Ellis, O'Kane etc, at least until the summer, will help us in the short term.

tonight is a big test for everyone, and four home games in the next five, games we should realistically be more than capable of winning, could shape the remainder of the season.
Excellent post. Agree with pretty much all of that.

Re: Happy with what we've got?

by cosmic74 » 01 Feb 2011, 10:18

Stayed up late last night, and went to bed fairly satysfied with the state of the squad. Woke up this morning, still feeling the same. I don't think we are any worse off than 24 hours ago. Stanley, on paper appears to be as good, if not better than Wroe. Robinson, is proven and decent at this level. OK, not as many goals as Benyon, but probably slightly more versatile than Benyon.

Of course, I may feel completely different after watching the game tonight, but changing acouple of players, can make a whole lot of difference to the way we play. Hopefully for the better!!

I think, the best way to sum up the last 24hrs, is that, "we are slightly more versatile than 24hrs ago"

Andy :)

Re: Happy with what we've got?

by Plymouth Gull » 01 Feb 2011, 09:41

Agree with everything you've said there, regiment. Great post, and welcome to the forum! :)

Re: Happy with what we've got?

by Regiment » 01 Feb 2011, 09:39

i have to agree with you guys.

firstly, i've got to be honest, and say i'm not buckle's biggest fan. i think there are things he does well, but there are definitely big holes there too. my main gripe is his ability to change a game from the touchline. too often things have not been going well after an hour, and subs are not made until 80th minute onwards, and/or changes often don't seem to be the right ones. i think this will only continue (or get worse) now, as the squad is looking a bit short. having said all that, we all know there isn't buckets of money available, and attracting players down to our little club isn't easy. but considering we really are running on a bare minimum squad, why release Hemmings from his loan early ?

i am optimistic about the arrival of Stanley and Robinson, both are good players, and will certainly add something to the squad, but i'm always concerned at how determined loan players are, particularly as these two new guys potentially will affect their parent clubs with their performances for us, as we're all in the same division (especially Stanley - one month loan -what's the point of that ??). at least hemmings, oastler etc, have come in to gain experience, and prove that they are capable of playing for their own clubs at a higher level - they've got nothing to lose as such. i'm sure the new guys will want to do well, but i'd be happier with permanent signings.

in addition, i suppose we should be grateful that only Benyon and Wroe went, both inevitable really, but hanging onto Ellis, O'Kane etc, at least until the summer, will help us in the short term.

tonight is a big test for everyone, and four home games in the next five, games we should realistically be more than capable of winning, could shape the remainder of the season.

Top