Pauno out

[URZZZZ]

OK, take out Bristow, CBC and Clarke from Ian’s squad. That leaves 23, so five of them won’t even make the bench with everyone fit. To me, that’s a big squad.

Yeah, with an 18 man squad you’re one injury away from having an academy player on the bench. But that’s hardly the end of the world when you have six other subs.

I disagree. The Championship is well known for its intensity and with that come injuries. We will do well to have no more than 5 or 6 out on average throughout the season. So that 23 man squad is reduced to 17/18 to select from each week and you want your bench to have various positional options.

The squad is about right albeit a bit too heavy with cdm’s.

Would say 2 players for each position is about right with 1/2 spares depending on personnel and formation

Quite heavy at CB too with five first team players there whereas fullbacks look fairly sparse, although Paunovic seems to use CB’s at FB quite a lot

[Zip]

OK, take out Bristow, CBC and Clarke from Ian’s squad. That leaves 23, so five of them won’t even make the bench with everyone fit. To me, that’s a big squad.

Yeah, with an 18 man squad you’re one injury away from having an academy player on the bench. But that’s hardly the end of the world when you have six other subs.

I disagree. The Championship is well known for its intensity and with that come injuries. We will do well to have no more than 5 or 6 out on average throughout the season. So that 23 man squad is reduced to 17/18 to select from each week and you want your bench to have various positional options.

The squad is about right albeit a bit too heavy with cdm’s.

Would say 2 players for each position is about right with 1/2 spares depending on personnel and formation

Quite heavy at CB too with five first team players there whereas fullbacks look fairly sparse, although Paunovic seems to use CB’s at FB quite a lot

Yes so a squad of 23 is about right.

[Nameless]

I disagree. The Championship is well known for its intensity and with that come injuries. We will do well to have no more than 5 or 6 out on average throughout the season. So that 23 man squad is reduced to 17/18 to select from each week and you want your bench to have various positional options.

The squad is about right albeit a bit too heavy with cdm’s.

Would say 2 players for each position is about right with 1/2 spares depending on personnel and formation

Quite heavy at CB too with five first team players there whereas fullbacks look fairly sparse, although Paunovic seems to use CB’s at FB quite a lot

Yes so a squad of 23 is about right.

Can’t really agree that we are over loaded with centre backs
We used a midfielder and a full back tofill those positions on Saturday !

[Snowflake Royal]

Would say 2 players for each position is about right with 1/2 spares depending on personnel and formation

Quite heavy at CB too with five first team players there whereas fullbacks look fairly sparse, although Paunovic seems to use CB’s at FB quite a lot

Yes so a squad of 23 is about right.

Can’t really agree that we are over loaded with centre backs
We used a midfielder and a full back tofill those positions on Saturday !

By that logic we could have 23 CBs and if 22 of them were injured we wouldn't be overloaded.

[Nameless]

Yes so a squad of 23 is about right.

Can’t really agree that we are over loaded with centre backs
We used a midfielder and a full back tofill those positions on Saturday !

By that logic we could have 23 CBs and if 22 of them were injured we wouldn't be overloaded.

By that logic we only need a squad of 11...

Although the point was more that 5 isn’t overloaded, 5 is a sensible number. 23 would be overloaded.

[SCIAG]

Would say we usually operate with 3 or 4 - McShane/Ferdinand/Hector/Cooper became McShane/Moore/Ilori became Miazga/Moore/Morrison. Last season we had five so I guess Dann is “replacing” Gibson, but he’s a much more senior player and Gibson often seemed superfluous.

OK let’s look at our two most recent successful seasons.

When Stam got us to the playoffs we had 14 players make 30+ appearances and another 6 made 10. So a squad of 20 and then a bunch of fringe players we probably didn’t need.

Last season, 13 players played 30+ times and another 6 played 10-29 times. So a squad of 19. Most significant players who didn’t make it to 10 were Tetek and Southwood.

I’m not going to waste time looking at McGhee, Pardew, Coppell or McDermott teams because we can probably just agree that squad sizes were smaller.

Based on that, I think a reasonable squad size is probably 18 or 19 outfield players, plus goalkeepers. We have more senior players than we would usually expect to play 10 games - not sure how easy it will be to keep TDB, Hoilett and Halilovic happy when we’re closer to full strength.

[Nameless]

Would say we usually operate with 3 or 4 - McShane/Ferdinand/Hector/Cooper became McShane/Moore/Ilori became Miazga/Moore/Morrison. Last season we had five so I guess Dann is “replacing” Gibson, but he’s a much more senior player and Gibson often seemed superfluous.

OK let’s look at our two most recent successful seasons.

When Stam got us to the playoffs we had 14 players make 30+ appearances and another 6 made 10. So a squad of 20 and then a bunch of fringe players we probably didn’t need.

Last season, 13 players played 30+ times and another 6 played 10-29 times. So a squad of 19. Most significant players who didn’t make it to 10 were Tetek and Southwood.

I’m not going to waste time looking at McGhee, Pardew, Coppell or McDermott teams because we can probably just agree that squad sizes were smaller.

Based on that, I think a reasonable squad size is probably 18 or 19 outfield players, plus goalkeepers. We have more senior players than we would usually expect to play 10 games - not sure how easy it will be to keep TDB, Hoilett and Halilovic happy when we’re closer to full strength.

With 10 players injured medium to long term a squad of 18 would have been devastating, especially if the make up ofnthe squad differed from the injured list.
Obviously you can’t go on adding cover for possible injury for ever but this season a squad any smaller than our current one would have left us in dire straits,

[Snowflake Royal]

You can't build a squad around maybe having 10 players injured at once.

[Nameless]

You can't build a squad around maybe having 10 players injured at once.

I know, I said that.
Doesn’t alter that comment I made though.

[SCIAG]

Would say we usually operate with 3 or 4 - McShane/Ferdinand/Hector/Cooper became McShane/Moore/Ilori became Miazga/Moore/Morrison. Last season we had five so I guess Dann is “replacing” Gibson, but he’s a much more senior player and Gibson often seemed superfluous.

OK let’s look at our two most recent successful seasons.

When Stam got us to the playoffs we had 14 players make 30+ appearances and another 6 made 10. So a squad of 20 and then a bunch of fringe players we probably didn’t need.

Last season, 13 players played 30+ times and another 6 played 10-29 times. So a squad of 19. Most significant players who didn’t make it to 10 were Tetek and Southwood.

I’m not going to waste time looking at McGhee, Pardew, Coppell or McDermott teams because we can probably just agree that squad sizes were smaller.

Based on that, I think a reasonable squad size is probably 18 or 19 outfield players, plus goalkeepers. We have more senior players than we would usually expect to play 10 games - not sure how easy it will be to keep TDB, Hoilett and Halilovic happy when we’re closer to full strength.

With 10 players injured medium to long term a squad of 18 would have been devastating, especially if the make up ofnthe squad differed from the injured list.
Obviously you can’t go on adding cover for possible injury for ever but this season a squad any smaller than our current one would have left us in dire straits,

While that’s true, it doesn’t change that our current squad is big!

We probably wouldn’t have signed Hoilett if Meite had been fit, so I suppose there’s an element of reacting to injury, but having enough first teamers to cover ten injuries is a luxury, particularly when footballers are so expensive to maintain. Playing a few Academy players wouldn’t be the end of the world.

We also wouldn’t have as many injuries if we hadn’t signed Dann.

[Nameless]

Would say we usually operate with 3 or 4 - McShane/Ferdinand/Hector/Cooper became McShane/Moore/Ilori became Miazga/Moore/Morrison. Last season we had five so I guess Dann is “replacing” Gibson, but he’s a much more senior player and Gibson often seemed superfluous.

OK let’s look at our two most recent successful seasons.

When Stam got us to the playoffs we had 14 players make 30+ appearances and another 6 made 10. So a squad of 20 and then a bunch of fringe players we probably didn’t need.

Last season, 13 players played 30+ times and another 6 played 10-29 times. So a squad of 19. Most significant players who didn’t make it to 10 were Tetek and Southwood.

I’m not going to waste time looking at McGhee, Pardew, Coppell or McDermott teams because we can probably just agree that squad sizes were smaller.

Based on that, I think a reasonable squad size is probably 18 or 19 outfield players, plus goalkeepers. We have more senior players than we would usually expect to play 10 games - not sure how easy it will be to keep TDB, Hoilett and Halilovic happy when we’re closer to full strength.

With 10 players injured medium to long term a squad of 18 would have been devastating, especially if the make up ofnthe squad differed from the injured list.
Obviously you can’t go on adding cover for possible injury for ever but this season a squad any smaller than our current one would have left us in dire straits,

While that’s true, it doesn’t change that our current squad is big!

We probably wouldn’t have signed Hoilett if Meite had been fit, so I suppose there’s an element of reacting to injury, but having enough first teamers to cover ten injuries is a luxury, particularly when footballers are so expensive to maintain. Playing a few Academy players wouldn’t be the end of the world.

We also wouldn’t have as many injuries if we hadn’t signed Dann.

We have been playing a few Academy players !
Seems the consensus is a squad of 22 is about right, which if you allow a couple of signings forced by injury means at 25 we really don’t have an excessively large squad. We’re debating over maybe 1 player, and perhaps that player is Drinkwater who perhaps we don’t need, but was an opportunity signing that just adds a huge amount to the squad. If when we signed him we had loaned Tetek out we’d probably be at the ideal level.

[Millsy]

With Reading, you have to build a squad around maybe having 10 players injured at once.

Corrected for you.

[SouthDownsRoyal]

Pauno out

[Millsy]

Pauno out

1 goal down.

Take off Puscas, stay with 1 up front the rest of the game.

Just typical Pauno shit subs, zero confidence in the guy ever doing anything clever mid game to salvage anything.

[NathStPaul]

Idiotic comments.

[windermereROYAL]

So every time we win it`s in and when we lose it`s out, schoolkids on this board .

[Stranded]

Pauno out

1 goal down.

Take off Puscas, stay with 1 up front the rest of the game.

Just typical Pauno shit subs, zero confidence in the guy ever doing anything clever mid game to salvage anything.

He swapped out to the line up that had been effective last 2 games. Few mins later was clear Halilovic was done, but options limited. Bringing on Clarke was all he could really do then.

First sub made sense, second was all that was available in the situation. Bringing Dann on took Tetek out of the firing line as his confidence suffered following the goal and never really recovered.

Subs aren't often VPs string point but all made sense tonight based on available personnel and match situation.

[Sanguine]

So every time we win it`s in and when we lose it`s out, schoolkids on this board .

Even better than that. We lose because of Pauno, and win in spite of him, apparently.

[SouthDownsRoyal]

So every time we win it`s in and when we lose it`s out, schoolkids on this board .

Seems that way

Win = Pauno in
Lose = Pauno out

Bit daft really but hey

[Brogue]

I’ve not changed my mind once since I started the thread. Pauno out. The 3 wins prior we’re circumstantial and merely papered over the cracks. I fully anticipate losing to Cardiff next up and we will be back to square one again.