Remi Matthews

[Football Dinosaur]

A goalkeeper who is constantly peppered will concede goals. They need a good defence in front of them.

I did say it may also be a team thing but a team who defend and hit on the break (like the mags have done since the managerial genius relegated them) would also offer more protection. One thing is certain no one can say its a positive for a keeper to be on course for conceeding 100 goals in a full season (minus Bury!).

 

[Youngymmxviiii]

Was amazed when he turned back up with Celtic like thought he was finished. Having said that lee camp could win clean sheet golden glove at Celtic. It’s like killstreaking ya nanna on COD

 

[Vore]

That completely ignores that he faced 175 shots on target to Jon McLaughlin's 95 and he saved 113 to JM's 70.

Where 1 = perfect
RM = 1.316
JM = 1.357

Not huge difference but suggests Remi had slight edge re: 19/20 shot stopping.

 

[JamesTu]

I'm sure Dyche would have appreciated this advice with Nick Pope.

Pope had actually played 130 games before his 26th birthday (which was more than Matthews). Not the best example to make.

Any keeper should look decent for us in the system Parky plays as they are so well protected.
Matthews will play ahead of Burge as he has a big boot which Parky loves.

 

[Perryqhill]

This is the sort of thinking that excuses strikers who don't score "but he's a great team player and recycles the ball" its bollocks really. Football is a simple game, attackers create and score goals and defenders keep ball out of the net. If we sign a keeper who can't keep clean sheets we'll not get promoted its as simple as that.

Another bullshit reply without replying to the actual context, well done.

A goalkeeper who is constantly peppered will concede goals. They need a good defence in front of them.

It's not hard like is it? I mean Matthews might be absolute dogshit, but in that side at Bolton he never had much of a chance and he's well thought of. Dismissing him on goals against alone is f***ing madness and I've gave several instances and other stats but its just being dismissed, the key one being the amount of shots on target he faced.

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

I'm sure Dyche would have appreciated this advice with Nick Pope.

"Check your facts"

Again.

 

[Perryqhill]

I did say it may also be a team thing but a team who defend and hit on the break (like the mags have done since the managerial genius relegated them) would also offer more protection. One thing is certain no one can say its a positive for a keeper to be on course for conceeding 100 goals in a full season (minus Bury!).

No one is. You're the one dismissing everything bar goals conceded though.

Pope had actually played 130 games before his 26th birthday (which was more than Matthews). Not the best example to make.

Any keeper should look decent for us in the system Parky plays as they are so well protected.
Matthews will play ahead of Burge as he has a big boot which Parky loves.

Matthews is currently on 127 according to Wiki and Soccerbase and has played 6 games since his birthday in Feb, so you're talking 121 to - nthe 130 you say Pope played, not a lot of difference really. Career appearance wise they're very similar.

The only real positive thing I noticed from Burge in his games was his extremely long kick, so if that were the case Burge would have already played more games for Parkinson, but he took him back out because clearly JM had more ability. That suggests it will again go on ability.

 

[Football Dinosaur]

Another bullshit reply without replying to the actual context, well done.


It's not hard like is it? I mean Matthews might be absolute dogshit, but in that side at Bolton he never had much of a chance and he's well thought of. Dismissing him on goals against alone is f***ing madness and I've gave several instances and other stats but its just being dismissed, the key one being the amount of shots on target he faced.

Hope he proves me wrong. You haven't been able to yet

No one is. You're the one dismissing everything bar goals conceded though.


Matthews is currently on 127 according to Wiki and Soccerbase and has played 6 games since his birthday in Feb, so you're talking 121 to - nthe 130 you say Pope played, not a lot of difference really. Career appearance wise they're very similar.

The only real positive thing I noticed from Burge in his games was his extremely long kick, so if that were the case Burge would have already played more games for Parkinson, but he took him back out because clearly JM had more ability. That suggests it will again go on ability.

No i'm not he may be great with his feet for example, I'm sutre Steele, Ruiter and Camp had redeming features (cant think of any at present like) but the main job of any keeper is to keep clean sheets and last season he was woeful at that (apart mainly against us). As i've said earlier only positive I can think of is at least he's not Ben Alnwick, however some elements on this board would defend any new signing - See Danny Graham threads. We accept shite that's what we'll get.

 

[JamesTu]

No one is. You're the one dismissing everything bar goals conceded though.


Matthews is currently on 127 according to Wiki and Soccerbase and has played 6 games since his birthday in Feb, so you're talking 121 to - nthe 130 you say Pope played, not a lot of difference really. Career appearance wise they're very similar.

The only real positive thing I noticed from Burge in his games was his extremely long kick, so if that were the case Burge would have already played more games for Parkinson, but he took him back out because clearly JM had more ability. That suggests it will again go on ability.

I am not using the number of games as a stick to beat Matthews with, I just wanted to correct a statement someone through out there, indicating that Pope was somehow a late developer, when in fact he was the opposite.

Possibly, but I think Parkinson is the type of manager who likes to have trust in players and he clearly trusted McLaughlin from his previous time working with each other. I would be shocked if Burge starts the season as first choice.

 

[Perryqhill]

Hope he proves me wrong. You haven't been able to yet

I'm not going to really am I when all you're taking notice of is goals against and you're ignoring all arguments and even the save percentage against Jon McLaughlin's above and the fact, the absolute fact he faced 175 shots on target compared to 95 with McLaughlin - does that not even make you think?

No one in the division faced as many shots as Matthews. the nearest was the MK Dons keeper Nicholls who faced 158 - that's still 17 short of what Matthews faced in two more games, I mean jesus does than not make you think?? The only one to get anywhere near to Matthews with saves was Nicholl at MK Dons with 116 saves, three more than Matthews - no one else made over 100 saves, only two got into the 90's.

Those are facts

 

[Football Dinosaur]

I'm not going to really am I when all you're taking notice of is goals against and you're ignoring all arguments and even the save percentage against Jon McLaughlin's above and the fact, the absolute fact he faced 175 shots on target compared to 70 with McLaughlin - does that not even make you think?

No one in the division faced as many shots as Matthews. the nearest was the MK Dons keeper Nicholls who faced 158 - that's still 17 short of what Matthews faced in two more games, I mean jesus does than not make you think?? The only one to get anywhere near to Matthews with saves was Nicholl at MK Dons with 116 saves, three more than Matthews - no one else made over 100 saves, only two got into the 90's.

Those are facts

If your facing more shots you should be saving more if you've anything about you as a professional. The fact the MK Dons keeper was close in terms of shots saved may point to fact even he could have been a better option. We've already got Burge who is imo an average l1 keeper. We should have gone for a loan keeper from Weolves or Chelsea. Saved on wages and bunged them a loan fee spread over 12 months which woul effectively been wages under another name. Our business so far this summer is poor and how people can't see this is beyond me. Hope i'm wrong but not looking great.

 

[Scorer]

Oddly I reckon he’ll be okay in a Ward or Chamberlain sort of style. Nowt flash but better than expected and dependable.

 

[Summerbee]

Pope had actually played 130 games before his 26th birthday (which was more than Matthews). Not the best example to make.

Any keeper should look decent for us in the system Parky plays as they are so well protected.
Matthews will play ahead of Burge as he has a big boot which Parky loves.

Yes, it was more than Matthews' 127. Obviously Pope gained a huge amount of additional experience in those 3 extra games.

Stop splitting hairs.

 

[JamesTu]

Yes, it was more than Matthews' 127. Obviously Pope gained a huge amount of additional experience in those 3 extra games.

Stop splitting hairs.

It’s not that he had more than Matthews, it’s that you implied that Pope had less than 100 games before 26- which was miles off being true.

I actually think you have recruited well in Matthews but you don’t need to make things up to justify decisions.

 

[Perryqhill]

If your facing more shots you should be saving more if you've anything about you as a professional. The fact the MK Dons keeper was close in terms of shots saved may point to fact even he could have been a better option. We've already got Burge who is imo an average l1 keeper. We should have gone for a loan keeper from Weolves or Chelsea. Saved on wages and bunged them a loan fee spread over 12 months which woul effectively been wages under another name. Our business so far this summer is poor and how people can't see this is beyond me. Hope i'm wrong but not looking great.

But he was saving more, it's already been pointed out further back in the thread about his saves to shots ratio. The MK dons keeper might have been a better option, he might cost money though or he might not be - who knows? Isn't that the point though, like you cannot tell simply by statistics - it's rank stupidity doing it on stats alone.

not sure how you're going to save on wages signing a keeper on loan given they are likely to be on a damn site more in the first place and I can't imagine Matthews is costing us much on wages either. If Chelsea or Wolves have capable looking young keepers there will be clubs salivating all over them - you aren't going to dictate the terms. Even if the loaning club i.e. Wolves or Chelsea want the players to go out for experience and subsidise most of his wages any deal you do will mean you might not pay wages at all - if you play him. If you don't play him you're likely to be paying his full wage as that type of deal is almost common place now and you're still likely to be giving them a loan fee. If those players are really decent then you're paying a loan fee and wages.

 

[Scootsie]

If your facing more shots you should be saving more if you've anything about you as a professional. The fact the MK Dons keeper was close in terms of shots saved may point to fact even he could have been a better option. We've already got Burge who is imo an average l1 keeper. We should have gone for a loan keeper from Weolves or Chelsea. Saved on wages and bunged them a loan fee spread over 12 months which woul effectively been wages under another name. Our business so far this summer is poor and how people can't see this is beyond me. Hope i'm wrong but not looking great.

That’s not strictly true though is it? Anyone facing more shots will concede more goals, it doesn’t make you a bad keeper, it’s just the way it is.

This lad is well thought of at previous clubs and will be fine for us, as will Burge.

 

[Football Dinosaur]

But he was saving more, it's already been pointed out further back in the thread about his saves to shots ratio. The MK dons keeper might have been a better option, he might cost money though or he might not be - who knows? Isn't that the point though, like you cannot tell simply by statistics - it's rank stupidity doing it on stats alone.

not sure how you're going to save on wages signing a keeper on loan given they are likely to be on a damn site more in the first place and I can't imagine Matthews is costing us much on wages either. If Chelsea or Wolves have capable looking young keepers there will be clubs salivating all over them - you aren't going to dictate the terms. Even if the loaning club i.e. Wolves or Chelsea want the players to go out for experience and subsidise most of his wages any deal you do will mean you might not pay wages at all - if you play him. If you don't play him you're likely to be paying his full wage as that type of deal is almost common place now and you're still likely to be giving them a loan fee. If those players are really decent then you're paying a loan fee and wages.

Swindon have the Chelsea lad on trial. If we can't compete with a newly promoted L1 club we may as well fold the club. Its about keeping costs under control. Matthews may not be much but if a loan is cheaper we can use that money further up the field. If it's the chelsea lad he's under 21 too i believe so frees up an overage aquad place too. The overall stategy this season seems to be unchanged from other SD seasons. Sign players who've been promoted from this league before and hope for the best. Its a shite starategy and its lazy. It won't work imo and we'll be back having the same argument in a years time.

That’s not strictly true though is it? Anyone facing more shots will concede more goals, it doesn’t make you a bad keeper, it’s just the way it is.

This lad is well thought of at previous clubs and will be fine for us, as will Burge.

Depends what a is definded as a shot. Some are 30 year screamers decinded for top corner. Others are daisy cutters anyone could throw their hats on. Matthews is a poor signing, lazy and within strategy of last 2 seasons which haven't worked. I hope I'm wrong but can't see how at this point. As stated earlier I can see maybe only 2 positives, he;s not Ben Alnwick and its only a years contract. How many of our competitors would have wanted him?

 

[The Cabbage]

I'm sure Dyche would have appreciated this advice with Nick Pope.

Pope who has played 140 senior games by his 26th birthday? That one?

Yes, it was more than Matthews' 127. Obviously Pope gained a huge amount of additional experience in those 3 extra games.

Stop splitting hairs.

Three games are hugely important. Just think of the seismic impact that Phil Parkinson was able to have on John Egan’s career in three games. Absolutely made the lad

 

[Summerbee]

Pope who has played 140 senior games by his 26th birthday? That one?

A lot of which were in non-league. Do you want to try engaging with the original point that a goalkeeper who have played a limited number of games by the age of 27 must be rubbish? Because there's very little between Pope and Matthews in numbers alone.

Oh and the goalkeeper who starred in his FA Cup Final win this year only has 101 appearances and is two years older than Remi. Although you will deliberately miss the point and spend hours scowering the records to find he actually played 102 games.

 

[Football Dinosaur]

A lot of which were in non-league. Do you want to try engaging with the original point that a goalkeeper who have played a limited number of games by the age of 27 must be rubbish? Because there's very little between Pope and Matthews in numbers alone.

Oh and the goalkeeper who starred in his FA Cup Final win this year only has 101 appearances and is two years older than Remi. Although you will deliberately miss the point and spend hours scowering the records to find he actually played 102 games.

So your advocating signing players who've been on professional contracts for best part of 10-12 years but hearly played?