Based on This Season ONLY: Clarke or McDermott?

[Snowball136]

SIMPLE STAT
Clarke With top-scorers Blackman and Sa 21 League matches. 27 points
McDermott. Without both 20 League matches. 24 points

corrected for you

[No Fixed Abode]

SIMPLE STAT
Clarke With top-scorers Blackman and Sa 21 League matches. 27 points
McDermott. Without both 20 League matches. 24 points

corrected for you

McDermott has a squad that's had more time to gel. Swings and roundabouts.

[genome]

I'm not sure it works like that though. If a squad that's been put together isn't the right mix of personalities, they will never gel into a good team. It's not Football Manager.

[No Fixed Abode]

I'm not sure it works like that though. If a squad that's been put together isn't the right mix of personalities, they will never gel into a good team. It's not Football Manager.

So you're saying BM is a man that can't find the right blend of players out of a squad of around 30 players? Backs up my point.

[genome]

Who's fault is that? Clarke built the squad, not Brian. And Clarke couldn't find the answer either, save for a run of a few games that coincided with one player's freak run of form.

Considering Brian's past record I think he knows a thing or two about team building and should be only be judged once he has had a chance to do that, and not be lumbered with a bunch of mercenaries brought in by the last manager, who don't work together when the chips are down.

[No Fixed Abode]

30 players with a mix of experience and youth all with differing personalties and you can't find a core of players that gel? What a coach BM must be. They certainly gelled well at the start of the season didn't they? Seems the squad has become fragmented since BM introduced the Russian roulette style of football.

[genome]

It is absolutely understandable. Not all of those "30 players" are ready or even good enough for first team football.

Looking at our first team squad, it's more like 23 players. Of those, two are long-term injured... so that's 21. Of those, 10 were brought in by Clarke and you could argue only 1 or 2 have performed anywhere near good enough and 6 are loans that will be going back to their parent clubs.

Good luck Brian trying to knit that squad together. He needs time to ship out Clarke's mistakes and bring his own in.

[No Fixed Abode]

If they're given squad numbers they certainly should be in contention for a first team call up. As you said, those 'mercenaries' are no good - then why not give youth a chance?

[Maneki Neko]

we aren't safe yet

[No Fixed Abode]

we aren't safe yet

Mathematically, but I very much doubt you'll go down with the points you have. Genome said those mercenaries are no good so why not give youth a chance? But then those mercenaries are good enough to include in Genome's 21 man squad when it suits.

[genome]

If they're given squad numbers they certainly should be in contention for a first team call up.

Agreed.

In fact I'm surprised Chelsea didn't play Mitchell Beeney, Ola Aina, Kasey Palmer, Fankaty Dabo, Bradley Collins and Charlie Colkett during their poor run of form.

As you said, those 'mercenaries' are no good - then why not give youth a chance?

3 days ago: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36014783

[Ian Royal]

Genome, please stop giving the idiot oxygen

[genome]

But it's fun

[No Fixed Abode]

If they're given squad numbers they certainly should be in contention for a first team call up.

Agreed.

In fact I'm surprised Chelsea didn't play Mitchell Beeney, Ola Aina, Kasey Palmer, Fankaty Dabo, Bradley Collins and Charlie Colkett during their poor run of form.

As you said, those 'mercenaries' are no good - then why not give youth a chance?

3 days ago: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36014783

But I never said our players weren't good enough did I?

You're one massive contradiction.

[genome]

Why weren't they called up then? You said if players were given squad numbers they certainly should be in contention for a first team call up.

IRONY ALERT

[Maneki Neko]

we aren't safe yet

Mathematically, but I very much doubt you'll go down with the points you have. Genome said those mercenaries are no good so why not give youth a chance? But then those mercenaries are good enough to include in Genome's 21 man squad when it suits.

we already know how good they are, because the club sees them very day. and if we think they are able to step up ( for the majority who arnt out on loan it will be too early for them, and possibly damage their progress.

and when you say playing ALL the loanees..for the last few he only played 1(until kermorgant was injured and he recalled Vydra)

im happy with that

[floyd__streete]

why not give youth a chance?

we already know how good they are, because the club sees them very day. and if we think they are able to step up ( for the majority who arnt out on loan it will be too early for them, and possibly damage their progress.

I'm with Kes here I am afraid, Brendy. I somehow suspect that BMc has either been pressured into playing these loan 'stars' by the shady people who own our club or just as likely there is some clause in the agreements we signed (under a previous manager) which states we must play the loan players when they are fit and available to play.

[No Fixed Abode]

Yep. People are moaning about these mercenaries/loan players at the club and they're only here as a stepping stone in their career but on the other hand don't want to give the academy players a chance.

[genome]

I and most Reading fans would love for them to have a chance, as long as McDermott thinks they are good enough and ready, there's no point in playing them otherwise. Brian's not going to just throw them in for the sake of it, it could be bad for them.

[No Fixed Abode]

I and most Reading fans would love for them to have a chance, as long as McDermott thinks they are good enough and ready, there's no point in playing them otherwise. Brian's not going to just throw them in for the sake of it, it could be bad for them.

But many of the 1st team haven't been good enough.