Transfer News and Gossip Transfer Rumours Thread 2023-24 (Part 2 - Back in Business. Oh no we’re not)

[Rattus Norvegicus]

This starts to be a problem. He is good enough when played out of position (wide & up top) that people forget that actually he is a CM…I would love to see him show what he can do in his actual position. And there really is no excuse other than an abundance of caution- after all we play 3 in midfield. He got 8 in 18 playing in CM in NLS- bizarrely we look at records like that from midfielders in the NLS/NLN and we want to sign them- yet we already have same and play him somewhere else…

Jack Wood is a natural central midfielder you say. I didn't know that. That's handy given that we (the Club) need an attack minded midfielder - my opinion that is.

I would have stuck Woody in the middle on Saturday (luckily I'm not in charge of these decisions). At times Kensdale & Crowther had no midfielder directly in front of them forcing the "crab like" movement that is mentioned on here at times.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

The statement from a statement signing is nearly always “we’ve more money than sense”.

From Dan Mooney to Neil Harris to Michael Kightly to Michael Ricketts to Mike Marsh to Gary Poole, or the re-signings of Freddy Eastwood and Lee Barnard I’m struggling to think of a marquee signing that was going to make the rest of the division sit up and take note, that actually worked.

As a player, I saw some of the most sublime passing I’ve ever seen from a Southend player from Ronnie Whelan (a superb through ball against Derby at the Hall in particular). Not sure if he was described as a statement signing though.

He made a massive statement when he signed as manager though: ‘don’t anyone ever hire me as a manager, ever again’.

 

[Blues4LifeDan]

The statement from a statement signing is nearly always “we’ve more money than sense”.

From Dan Mooney to Neil Harris to Michael Kightly to Michael Ricketts to Mike Marsh to Gary Poole, or the re-signings of Freddy Eastwood and Lee Barnard I’m struggling to think of a marquee signing that was going to make the rest of the division sit up and take note, that actually worked.

You missed Rob Kiernan

 

[Richard Hearn]

You missed Rob Kiernan

No one misses Rob Kiernan.

 

[loz]

This starts to be a problem. He is good enough when played out of position (wide & up top) that people forget that actually he is a CM…I would love to see him show what he can do in his actual position. And there really is no excuse other than an abundance of caution- after all we play 3 in midfield. He got 8 in 18 playing in CM in NLS- bizarrely we look at records like that from midfielders in the NLS/NLN and we want to sign them- yet we already have same and play him somewhere else…

Is he a natural CM though? This is Wood himself speaking on the OS in September about playing up-front: "I’ve always been more of a winger, so it’s something I’ve got to adapt to."

he's usually described as an attacking midfielder from his Kings Langley days but that could easily mean wide in a 433 or a 4231; he definitely looked at home on the right at the weekend.

 

[M_Simps]

Is he a natural CM though? This is Wood himself speaking on the OS in September about playing up-front: "I’ve always been more of a winger, so it’s something I’ve got to adapt to."

he's usually described as an attacking midfielder from his Kings Langley days but that could easily mean wide in a 433 or a 4231; he definitely looked at home on the right at the weekend.

Maybe this is what our attack needs. Someone who's nominally a ten, and drops into the position when defending, but going forward can pop up wherever, either through the middle or out wide.

When Wes was in form earlier in the season, he was pretty good at going either way around Bridge and it helped us be less predictable in our attacks. He seems to have forgotten how to do that recently. If it comes more naturally to Wood, then why not give him a shot?

 

[kentblues]

Is he a natural CM though? This is Wood himself speaking on the OS in September about playing up-front: "I’ve always been more of a winger, so it’s something I’ve got to adapt to."

he's usually described as an attacking midfielder from his Kings Langley days but that could easily mean wide in a 433 or a 4231; he definitely looked at home on the right at the weekend.

I kind of hope he isn’t a winger as we don’t play wingers and I certainly wouldn’t want him to suffer the same fate as Dan Mooney. I remember another really talented player that went on to play in the Championship- Jack Payne. For a long period he was our most talented player yet we played 442 and couldn’t, it seemed, accommodate a number 10…so he ended up not playing as often as he should have done for some while. To our disadvantage.
Of course, with 3 in CM there is far less excuse for not accommodating a number 10. But the evidence thus far is it this doesn’t fit with how we want to set up.
My real concern is I think he is one of the biggest, if not the biggest talent, we have. Certainly John Still believed he was a huge talent.
However, if we are not to revisit the Jack Payne scenario where do we actually play him?
As I say a winger in a side that doesn’t play wingers is worrying to say the least. Hence, back to the 10 position we could arguably accommodate.
Other wise he is likely to come to the conclusion he needs to move elsewhere to get meaningful game time/starts- and ultimately someone else benefit from the huge potential uncovered by John Still.
One thing is for sure he won’t develop his potential sat on the bench?

Yes 433, 343, 4231 and other formations could accommodate him better- but how many times have we changed from 352 for at least a year now? At all?

 

[Blues4LifeDan]

No one misses Rob Kiernan.

Phil Brown does... Wow!

 

[loz]

I kind of hope he isn’t a winger as we don’t play wingers and I certainly wouldn’t want him to suffer the same fate as Dan Mooney. I remember another really talented player that went on to play in the Championship- Jack Payne. For a long period he was our most talented player yet we played 442 and couldn’t, it seemed, accommodate a number 10…so he ended up not playing as often as he should have done for some while. To our disadvantage.
Of course, with 3 in CM there is far less excuse for not accommodating a number 10. But the evidence thus far is it this doesn’t fit with how we want to set up.
My real concern is I think he is one of the biggest, if not the biggest talent, we have. Certainly John Still believed he was a huge talent.
However, if we are not to revisit the Jack Payne scenario where do we actually play him?
As I say a winger in a side that doesn’t play wingers is worrying to say the least. Hence, back to the 10 position we could arguably accommodate.
Other wise he is likely to come to the conclusion he needs to move elsewhere to get meaningful game time/starts- and ultimately someone else benefit from the huge potential uncovered by John Still.
One thing is for sure he won’t develop his potential sat on the bench?

Yes 433, 343, 4231 and other formations could accommodate him better- but how many times have we changed from 352 for at least a year now? At all?

Yeah I agree with all that, I do think some of our pre embargo recruitment was done with an eye to playing 343 (Powell, Mooney, arguably Wood) and when it became clear we'd dropped that it's caused a bit of square peg syndrome. Hoping we can find a way to accommodate Wood long term.

 

[flangejackrabbit]

Hoping we can find a way to accommodate Wood

Speak for yourself!

 

[bluethroughandthrough]

I kind of hope he isn’t a winger as we don’t play wingers and I certainly wouldn’t want him to suffer the same fate as Dan Mooney. I remember another really talented player that went on to play in the Championship- Jack Payne. For a long period he was our most talented player yet we played 442 and couldn’t, it seemed, accommodate a number 10…so he ended up not playing as often as he should have done for some while. To our disadvantage.
Of course, with 3 in CM there is far less excuse for not accommodating a number 10. But the evidence thus far is it this doesn’t fit with how we want to set up.
My real concern is I think he is one of the biggest, if not the biggest talent, we have. Certainly John Still believed he was a huge talent.
However, if we are not to revisit the Jack Payne scenario where do we actually play him?
As I say a winger in a side that doesn’t play wingers is worrying to say the least. Hence, back to the 10 position we could arguably accommodate.
Other wise he is likely to come to the conclusion he needs to move elsewhere to get meaningful game time/starts- and ultimately someone else benefit from the huge potential uncovered by John Still.
One thing is for sure he won’t develop his potential sat on the bench?

Yes 433, 343, 4231 and other formations could accommodate him better- but how many times have we changed from 352 for at least a year now? At all?

Yes agree with this and well said.

There was some analysis done on the game at the weekend that identified how we shifted I'm game from 352 to 424 as we attacked.

I'd love to wood played at rwb like a right side bridge permanently. Others argue that we would be too exposed - I'd argue that we are already defensively tight and our issue is scoring goals ( and creating good opportunities not just shots ) so taking a little more risk loosens the defensive side but opens up the attacking side. The benefits were clear to see albeit we were playing 10

 

[BoyWonder2]

Tell you what. Our recruitment was poor again yesterday.

Waldron & Crowther were both excellent, Morton a bit more subdued, but still got another assist. Dackers gets his first and played well.

John Still out!

Last time I’ll do this, but once again what dreadful recruitment from Kev & the amigos.

Dackers and Crowther both excellent last night. Crowther looks a proper defender.

John Still out!

 

[BoyWonder2]

1 win in 5 …. Don’t get to excited

3 wins in a row, 2 of them coming from behind…

 

[Mark Corrigan]

3 wins in a row, 2 of them coming from behind…

Still not sure on Crowther though, looking a very poor recruit.

 

[SUFCGoals]

Last time I’ll do this, but once again what dreadful recruitment from Kev & the amigos.

Dackers and Crowther both excellent last night. Crowther looks a proper defender.

John Still out!

I think you've won here. These sarcastic comments are starting to become extremely annoying.

 

[Thundersley Blue]

Yes agree with this and well said.

There was some analysis done on the game at the weekend that identified how we shifted I'm game from 352 to 424 as we attacked.

I'd love to wood played at rwb like a right side bridge permanently. Others argue that we would be too exposed - I'd argue that we are already defensively tight and our issue is scoring goals ( and creating good opportunities not just shots ) so taking a little more risk loosens the defensive side but opens up the attacking side. The benefits were clear to see albeit we were playing 10

Just an interesting stat about goals. Only Chesterfield, Aldershot and Bromley had scored more goals at home than us. With the 2 we scored last night we are level with Aldershot on 35. Not too shabby really.

 

[SU BLUE]

I think that if we added Dackers to our squad in the summer we will have a team more than capable of promotion

 

[dusterman]

I think that if we added Dackers to our squad in the summer we will have a team more than capable of promotion

Yeah I don’t get the knockers tbh. I think he’s young and loses confidence but with our coaching staff he’ll really thrive with constant support IMO.

 

[kentblues]

Is he a natural CM though? This is Wood himself speaking on the OS in September about playing up-front: "I’ve always been more of a winger, so it’s something I’ve got to adapt to."

he's usually described as an attacking midfielder from his Kings Langley days but that could easily mean wide in a 433 or a 4231; he definitely looked at home on the right at the weekend.

Well we don’t play wingers….
Last night it seemed to me he replaced Wes and basically replicated what Wes was doing on the left on the right. Maybe that the current plan.

 

[ShrimperStats]

Well we don’t play wingers….
Last night it seemed to me he replaced Wes and basically replicated what Wes was doing on the left on the right. Maybe that the current plan.

I like the idea of using Jack Wood off the bench if we need to change system slightly, depending on the match.

Similar to Mooney, he doesn’t really fit into our system optimally, but as he’s younger, he could be more of an impact player. Whereas Mooney couldn’t play this role, because he was a more established NL player and wanted to be playing more regularly.