The Small-Medium Rebuild 2018'19

[steelboy]

11 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

Just shows how we see things differently. I thought he had a very good game on Saturday ably assisted by Aldred and McHugh.  Not back to his best yet though.  The fact that Carson, in goal, had little to do for much of the game was largely down to Hartley and his colleagues, not our midfield screen, which left them somewhat exposed. 

He went off injured.

[sbcmfc]

38 minutes ago, steelboy said:

He went off injured.

He still had a good game.

Campbell had a good game too and he didn’t play 90 minutes.

[sbcmfc]

I can see how Sammon and Main together might not work and might encourage hoofball, but he’s an option and he’s proven he can do well at our level and higher in the past, albeit without ever being a prolific goalscorer.

I liked the Main and Johnson pairing on Saturday, but I’m sure Sammon can contribute whether that be as an option from the bench or as one of a front 2, possibly with Johnson rather than Main?

[GazzyB]

7 hours ago, weeyin said:

He will be a cheap option because Hearts will be paying a chunk of his wages.

1) You have literally no idea how much we're paying him or whether or not he'll be "a cheap option", and I don't know why you're pretending like you do. He went from The Championship in England to Hearts, he'll be on a fair whack, and fuck knows why we are but we are paying a fair whack of that whack.

2) As already stated, it doesn't matter what we're paying him, it's still too much. The guy is fucking shite and should be nowhere near our bench let alone our starting XI. He is an utter fucking dud. Hearts fans I know were pishing themselves when they heard we've taken him.

[weeyin]

21 minutes ago, GazzyB said:

1) You have literally no idea how much we're paying him or whether or not he'll be "a cheap option", and I don't know why you're pretending like you do. He went from The Championship in England to Hearts, he'll be on a fair whack, and fuck knows why we are but we are paying a fair whack of that whack.

2) As already stated, it doesn't matter what we're paying him, it's still too much. The guy is fucking shite and should be nowhere near our bench let alone our starting XI. He is an utter fucking dud. Hearts fans I know were pishing themselves when they heard we've taken him.

1) Standard practice is that loan deals involve the lending club paying a portion of the salary.  No reason to think we broke with that practice or busted our wage structure for a backup striker.

2) I never claimed he was good or that I wanted him to sign (as my posts at the time will show).  But I'm pretty sure he was signed as a backup to Main, Bowman and Johnson. The only reason he started games in the League Cup was because Johnson wasn't near fitness, Main looked like he forgot he was a footballer and Bowman got crocked. 

3) When did arguments start happening in lists? 

4) Ten reasons George Newell will end up on the treatment table. You won't believe number six!

 

[Wellfan1984]

1 hour ago, GazzyB said:

1) You have literally no idea how much we're paying him or whether or not he'll be "a cheap option", and I don't know why you're pretending like you do. He went from The Championship in England to Hearts, he'll be on a fair whack, and fuck knows why we are but we are paying a fair whack of that whack.

2) As already stated, it doesn't matter what we're paying him, it's still too much. The guy is fucking shite and should be nowhere near our bench let alone our starting XI. He is an utter fucking dud. Hearts fans I know were pishing themselves when they heard we've taken him.

Hearts fans were pishing themselves when we took Sutton off them too...

[GazzyB]

1 hour ago, weeyin said:

1) Standard practice is that loan deals involve the lending club paying a portion of the salary.  No reason to think we broke with that practice or busted our wage structure for a backup striker.

2) I never claimed he was good or that I wanted him to sign (as my posts at the time will show).  But I'm pretty sure he was signed as a backup to Main, Bowman and Johnson. The only reason he started games in the League Cup was because Johnson wasn't near fitness, Main looked like he forgot he was a footballer and Bowman got crocked. 

3) When did arguments start happening in lists? 

4) Ten reasons George Newell will end up on the treatment table. You won't believe number six!

  

You, I and 99% of the members of this forum will have no idea how much we or any other club pay towards a player's wages when they're on loan. You can't just dismiss him as a "cheap backup option" when you have literally no clue what % of his wage we'll be paying. He might well be a backup option, but we've no idea what he's costing, and it's reasonable to assume we're paying a fair wedge when you consider he'll be on a fair wedge at Hearts.

 

You may well be right that he will be signed as a backup to the first 3, but my point is he's not good enough to be a backup, whether he's cheap or (most likely) pretty expensive. Not even close. Which rolls into your 4th point. George Newell's a crock but we could have and should have lined up a better 4th choice as cover than Connor Sammon.

[superward]

Not sure you can assume he's in a high % if you won't let someone else assume he's on a low % of his Hearts wage...you got the first sentence spot on though.

One thing's for sure though...I'm yet to be convinced he's the type of player who will do well off the bench and from what I've seen he's not going to be starting. Hope to be proved wrong though as it is only August after all. 

21 minutes ago, GazzyB said:

You, I and 99% of the members of this forum will have no idea how much we or any other club pay towards a player's wages when they're on loan. You can't just dismiss him as a "cheap backup option" when you have literally no clue what % of his wage we'll be paying. He might well be a backup option, but we've no idea what he's costing, and it's reasonable to assume we're paying a fair wedge when you consider he'll be on a fair wedge at Hearts.

 

You may well be right that he will be signed as a backup to the first 3, but my point is he's not good enough to be a backup, whether he's cheap or (most likely) pretty expensive. Not even close. Which rolls into your 4th point. George Newell's a crock but we could have and should have lined up a better 4th choice as cover than Connor Sammon. reasnoble for you to assume we are paying a fair wedge if you won't allow someone else to assume we are paying a small amount? 

[weeyin]

1 hour ago, GazzyB said:

You, I and 99% of the members of this forum will have no idea how much we or any other club pay towards a player's wages when they're on loan. You can't just dismiss him as a "cheap backup option" when you have literally no clue what % of his wage we'll be paying. He might well be a backup option, but we've no idea what he's costing, and it's reasonable to assume we're paying a fair wedge when you consider he'll be on a fair wedge at Hearts.

 

You may well be right that he will be signed as a backup to the first 3, but my point is he's not good enough to be a backup, whether he's cheap or (most likely) pretty expensive. Not even close. Which rolls into your 4th point. George Newell's a crock but we could have and should have lined up a better 4th choice as cover than Connor Sammon.

Of course what I was saying was a guess - although it is based on a lot of what the club, the manager and the Well Society have communicated over the past few seasons about our relative budgets, our rigid wage structure and how various loan deals have worked.

And like I said, I wasn't a big fan of Sammon being signed - even though his goals were every valuable in the league cup group.

I don't think he's complete shite either, though. Just average. I'd rather we had signed someone that offered something a bit different, rather than more of the big, strong, hard running variety.

Last season Bowman scored 10 in 42 games, Main 9 in 30 (for us and Portsmouth) and Sammon 10 in 37 games. I'd say that is a pretty mediocre return from all 3. We need someone up top who is closer to the 20 goal mark and it seems we are pinning that role on Johnson - that's a big ask.

[Haggischomper]

Sammon doesn't quite have the reek of a panic buy but he was certainly a desperate one. I said at the time we got him that it looks like Plan B is just going to be Plan A all over again. The guy isn't a no-hoper but I just don't see him as a good fit for us. Plus, I've always hated loaning from other SPFL clubs. Same deal with Ciftci.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[MelvinBragg]

6 hours ago, Haggischomper said:

Plus, I've always hated loaning from other SPFL clubs. Same deal with Ciftci.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

I see your Nadir Ciftci and I raise you a Calum Elliot and a Cillian Sheridan...

[Yorkyred]

10 hours ago, weeyin said:

Of course what I was saying was a guess - although it is based on a lot of what the club, the manager and the Well Society have communicated over the past few seasons about our relative budgets, our rigid wage structure and how various loan deals have worked.

And like I said, I wasn't a big fan of Sammon being signed - even though his goals were every valuable in the league cup group.

I don't think he's complete shite either, though. Just average. I'd rather we had signed someone that offered something a bit different, rather than more of the big, strong, hard running variety.

Last season Bowman scored 10 in 42 games, Main 9 in 30 (for us and Portsmouth) and Sammon 10 in 37 games. I'd say that is a pretty mediocre return from all 3. We need someone up top who is closer to the 20 goal mark and it seems we are pinning that role on Johnson - that's a big ask.

I would suggest Johnson is the player we signed that was different and for me has the potential to be a 20 goal a season striker. That gives us him, Main, Bowman, Sammon, and Tanner. To be fair with our budget that’s respectable enough.

[Kmcalpin]

All our strikers are a bit different but only time will tell if they're different enough.  In the end it'll all be about the right combination.  Bowman is an out and out target man.  Johnson is more of a goalscorer in the Louis Moult or maybe even Dougie Arnott style. They're poles apart in terms of style.   Main is somewhere in between.  Sammon - I haven't quite got to grips with yet but he certainly isn't a target man despite his build - give him time.  

[wellwell91]

43 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

All our strikers are a bit different but only time will tell if they're different enough.  In the end it'll all be about the right combination.  Bowman is an out and out target man.  Johnson is more of a goalscorer in the Louis Moult or maybe even Dougie Arnott style. They're poles apart in terms of style.   Main is somewhere in between.  Sammon - I haven't quite got to grips with yet but he certainly isn't a target man despite his build - give him time.  

Both Sammon and Main are terrible in the air for their height with Bowman not far behind but better than Sammon/Main

Neither Sammon nor Main will run the channels whereas Bowman and Johnson will

Anyone who can score 40+ goals in any grade of football has got to be respected as Johnson has done

Sammon needs the ball played into him on the deck and if given chances is more likely to score than Main

It’s all about getting the partnership that works BUT one that does not seem to be working is Sammon and Main

[Gadgey]

1 hour ago, wellwell91 said:

Both Sammon and Main are terrible in the air for their height with Bowman not far behind but better than Sammon/Main

Neither Sammon nor Main will run the channels whereas Bowman and Johnson will

Anyone who can score 40+ goals in any grade of football has got to be respected as Johnson has done

Sammon needs the ball played into him on the deck and if given chances is more likely to score than Main

It’s all about getting the partnership that works BUT one that does not seem to be working is Sammon and Main

I would agree with all of that. Johnson may well turn out to be stellar but like many before him (including Moult),  he will require a period of adjustment.

As others have said, we don’t know the intricacies of the day to day i.e. wages paid, what goes on the training ground and the group dynamics of the squad.

I am prepared to wait and see. Those returning from injury may also require some time to adjust and to form relationships/partnerships. As painful as it may be, we may have to anticipate some torture before the correct blend is found. 

I am personally hopeful of a Bowman/Johnson partnership. Based on nothing (because like I said, in terms of day to day facts, I know nothing), but Bowmans endeavour is endearing and Johnson looks also to be a grafter with an eye for goal.

[Kmcalpin]

1 hour ago, wellwell91 said:

Both Sammon and Main are terrible in the air for their height

I agree about Sammon but Main, although powerfully built, is "only" 5-10 or so, not especially tall for a striker. 

[steelboy]

So do we think we'll add anyone before Friday.

That we still don't have a left wing back is criminal so if we sign anyone it should be for that role.

[Kmcalpin]

Just now, steelboy said:

 

That we still don't have a left wing back is criminal so if we sign anyone it should be for that role.

ATS? I know he's short on fitness but thought he'd be getting some game time.

[Yorkyred]

40 minutes ago, steelboy said:

So do we think we'll add anyone before Friday.

That we still don't have a left wing back is criminal so if we sign anyone it should be for that role.

I don’t see any additions.

[weeyin]

Unless someone else ships out (or suffers a long term injury), I doubt we'll be seeing any new faces.

 

 

[steelboy]

Turnbull and Maguire aren't involved in the reserves today. Are they possibly going on loan?

Also Akeal Rehman is a new name. Possibly ex Wolves?

[Del_Superwell]

3 hours ago, steelboy said:

Turnbull and Maguire aren't involved in the reserves today. Are they possibly going on loan?

Also Akeal Rehman is a new name. Possibly ex Wolves?

Nothing in it with Turnbull and Maguire, they were both training with 1st team today.  Rehman is a new name on me, think Craigan has had him in on trial over the summer.

[daver]

Does seem a bit strange not to give Turnbull and Maguire a run out today instead of training when they didn't play on Sunday and the next game isn't until Saturday. 

[stuwell]

14 hours ago, daver said:

Does seem a bit strange not to give Turnbull and Maguire a run out today instead of training when they didn't play on Sunday and the next game isn't until Saturday. 

Maybe they wanted to give others a run out who may be involved on Saturday ie Bowman?

[steelboy]

You don't need to drop a midfielder and a defender out the squad to play a striker.

Hopefully they are getting loans as they won't get an opportunity here.