Greenlizard0 Weekend Football Thread ** spoilers ** [17th - 22nd November 2017]

adam cool dude

adam cool dude

adam cool dude

Caporegime
Joined
22 Oct 2002
Posts
26,939
Location
Boston, Lincolnshire
Spurs/Chelsea might be close but Liverpool and Arsenal are no where near. Wait till the season really kicks on and injuries start kicking in, cup games etc. Like has been mentioned Pogba, Bailly, Rojo and Zlatan have all been injured. I will be honest I do not follow other teams as closely as I used to but I am pretty sure Liverpool would be crippled with 4 big players out injured. You fielded a much stronger team than we did when we played last yet still couldn't win. We also managed to grind out a win against spurs. Chelsea was bad but both were playing horrid.
 

Robbo

Robbo

Robbo

Man of Honour
Joined
2 Jan 2009
Posts
60,266
I know it's not just about the first eleven. Our squad is short of quality when it comes to ability and speed (at the same time). Mkhitaryan is considered one of the best players in the world and he just doesn't affect games much, same for Mata. I think we'll fall short of Man City in the end, but Pogba being fit is massively critical. The fact we are that reliant on 1 person is a squad issue.
 

Robbo

Robbo

Robbo

Man of Honour
Joined
2 Jan 2009
Posts
60,266
Moses said:
*Mata and Mkhitaryan used to be considered two of the best players in the World, at most.
Click to expand...

I'm not disagreeing with your main point, I don't think our squad is amazing, just that our strongest 11 is among the best (I think most would agree it's pretty good). Is it as good as it should be considering the money spent? No.

Andybtsn said:
To be fair this board is about 60% Man U supporters, 30% Liverpool and 10% the rest of us, not surprising really..
Click to expand...

We can't even comfortably win a game without an inquest into why we're actually really bad and it was a massive fluke. :p
 

Shamikebab

Shamikebab

Shamikebab

Caporegime
Joined
9 Mar 2006
Posts
56,284
Location
Surrey
Andybtsn said:
To be fair this board is about 60% Man U supporters, 30% Liverpool and 10% the rest of us, not surprising really..
Click to expand...

This was more a general statement rather than specific to this board. I'm not convinced those numbers are correct though either. It used to be like that but it hasn't been that drastic for a few years.
 

BaZ87

BaZ87

BaZ87

Don
Joined
9 Jun 2004
Posts
46,292
I wouldn't say Utd's first 11 is much better if any better at all than Chelsea's, ours, Spurs or even Arsenal's. Utd's squad is far stronger though. They mentioned on commentary today, Utd had Darmian, Jones, Bailly, Blind, Carrick, Mkhitaryan (over £100m worth of players) not even in their 17 man squad today (which cost over £450m).
 

drunkenmaster

drunkenmaster

drunkenmaster

Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
33,188
Moses said:
*Mata and Mkhitaryan used to be considered two of the best players in the World, at most.
Click to expand...

Honestly Micky has spent 5 years in top leagues, for Dortmund 2 of his 3 years were crap, his last year there was great and he's done nothing since then. Best players in the world, closer to one season wonder in reality. He had ability but he wasn't ever anything close to one of the best players in the world.

Mata is considerably better than Micky and he's had probably 3 seasons on the level of Micky's one top season, I'd say two for Valencia and one for Chelsea. Being a good freekick and corner taker has always elevated him above where his general play really is on average and I wouldn't have considered him amongst the best players in the world for the past 5 or more seasons.
 

drunkenmaster

drunkenmaster

drunkenmaster

Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
33,188
BaZ87 said:
I wouldn't say Utd's first 11 is much better if any better at all than Chelsea's, ours, Spurs or even Arsenal's. Utd's squad is far stronger though. They mentioned on commentary today, Utd had Darmian, Jones, Bailly, Blind, Carrick, Mkhitaryan (over £100m worth of players) not even in their 17 man squad today (which cost over £450m).
Click to expand...

Cost doesn't really mean anything, you can over or under pay for any type of quality. Micky isn't very good, as above one season wonder that for no apparent reason everyone treats like he played the same every season of his career. Jones is meh, Carrick had been holding Utd back for a decade. The biggest change to Utd is when Carrick, Fellaini and Herrera don't play, the midfield is monumentally improved going forwards and defensively. Baily is decent, Blind under rated probably, Darmian... weird. He seemed good enough when he signed for UTd but everyone seems to consistently overlook him for Valencia who sucks.

I think Utd don't have much depth at full back, hence well, Young and Valencia playing more than any of their actual fullbacks. Options upfront are good, depth in midfield is poor, as in the numbers are there but the quality isn't at all. I don't think Utd have a particularly good squad in all, certainly not for how much they've spent in the past 4 seasons.
 

BaZ87

BaZ87

BaZ87

Don
Joined
9 Jun 2004
Posts
46,292
drunkenmaster said:
Cost doesn't really mean anything, you can over or under pay for any type of quality. Micky isn't very good, as above one season wonder that for no apparent reason everyone treats like he played the same every season of his career. Jones is meh, Carrick had been holding Utd back for a decade. The biggest change to Utd is when Carrick, Fellaini and Herrera don't play, the midfield is monumentally improved going forwards and defensively. Baily is decent, Blind under rated probably, Darmian... weird. He seemed good enough when he signed for UTd but everyone seems to consistently overlook him for Valencia who sucks.

I think Utd don't have much depth at full back, hence well, Young and Valencia playing more than any of their actual fullbacks. Options upfront are good, depth in midfield is poor, as in the numbers are there but the quality isn't at all. I don't think Utd have a particularly good squad in all, certainly not for how much they've spent in the past 4 seasons.
Click to expand...
Of course you can over or under spend on players but when you have a squad costing £500m+, it's fair to say it will be a lot deeper in quality than a squad costing not much more than half that. And that's certainly the case here. Whether you particularly rate those players or not, they're all senior players and full internationals that weren't in Utd's 17 today - could any of the other sides mentioned name a 17 as strong as Utd's today and still have at least 6 senior players not involved?
 

drunkenmaster

drunkenmaster

drunkenmaster

Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
33,188
Arsenal had Holding, Debuchy, Chambers, Cazorla, Elneny, Giroud, Walcott who weren't in the squad today, we had a bench with Mertesacker, Wilshere, Ospina, Iwobi, Welbeck, Coquelin and then Maitland-Niles. That is full of full internationals and senior players, has Arsenal got better squad depth because of that?

Carrick was a full international, undeservedly for most of the time he was involved, he's been useless for a decade, that isn't depth, Utd are a significantly worse side when he has to play. Full international is meaningless, because international itself doesn't mean squat, look at Italy going out thanks to a brain dead manager. Numerous undeserving players get called up, numerous players continue getting called up long after they are past their best and international football is at a quality far below club football. Senior player also means nothing much at all, senior = over 21, nothing more or less. Neither are measures of quality. Utd started at least two players who wouldn't currently get into other top 6 sides starting lineups, I'd argue it's closer to 3 or 4 players, Valencia and Lindelof as he's currently playing, no chance. then looking at the bench, most other top sides would have sold Fellaini, Rojo is all over the place, good sometimes, terrible others, Lingard is incredibly average, Herrera is just a bucket of hate and bad fouling, Shaw is being practically excluded by Mourinho yet that is his 'strong bench'. I'd say Arsenal's bench was stronger and City's bench.... lol.

City had only Danilo, Gundogan, Aguero, the other Silva, Toure and bravo on the bench along with a much stronger starting line up overall.

I don't believe a squad with incredible depth that has spent 500mil+ ends up playing Valencia as a fullback, Young as a fullback, is desperate to hang on to Fellaini, names a player Mourinho appears to despise on the bench and plays like utter utter crap if one midfielder is injured.

Maybe I'm missing something but Liverpool's bench was Milner, Sturridge, Ox, Can, Gomez, Solanke and Karius, that is 4 players with a lot of international experience and 2 more who were called up recently. Then players not in the squad, Clyne, Matip, Lallana, Markovic, Ings and Flanagan who isn't exactly great but is still senior and making up the numbers.
 
Last edited:

BaZ87

BaZ87

BaZ87

Don
Joined
9 Jun 2004
Posts
46,292
DM, I can't believe we're debating this. To be clear, I didn't mention City in my post - they have squad equally as deep as Utd's. You can believe Valencia and Young are **** if you wish to but they're being picked ahead of international level players in Darmian, Blind and Shaw. Any of the 6 players that weren't in Utd's 17 yesterday could have started and nobody would have been shocked nor would there have been a massive drop off in quality. You cannot say the same for any of the other sides I mentioned - Liverpool were playing a 19 year old midfielder at RB because our only right back has been injured all season and will be out for at least another 3 months.

Utd's first 11 is no better than Liverpool's, Arsenal's, Spurs' or Chelsea's but they have (obviously with the exception of 1 or 2 players) like for like replacements throughout their side. With the other sides it's the opposite - they have a few like for like replacements but the rest are noticeable downgrades/kids.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom