Failure to sign striker cost us


We finished sixth, due to the recruitment as a whole and the coaching staff. Massive over achieving on expectations but still the bellend brigade have to spout negativity, some of our ‘support’ are an embarrassment.
 
Yeah we can say that with hindsight but they must have thought we had enough to get the job done and we weren't too far off.
 
My point is we chose not to gamble and are still stuck in the Championship.
I accept we could have spent £5 million and still not gone up but we didnt even try and that is disappointing
We tried buying a striker in January to get us out of league one that cost us 3m. That didn't work either.
 
We finished sixth, due to the recruitment as a whole and the coaching staff. Massive over achieving on expectations but still the bellend brigade have to spout negativity, some of our ‘support’ are an embarrassment.

Here here

Like spoilt bairns always wanting more.
 
No one's whinging, I consider myself a happy clapper to a large degree but do think that the manager, players and fans were let down in the January window, even Mowbray publicly requested a striker, do you not think the players would want a striker and at the very least an out ball and presence up top to help them get out and hold the ball up.

The point that we scored plenty of goals and therefore didn't need a striker is way, way off the mark imo....the recent loss of centre backs was the final straw and just compounded the situation.

Everyone thinks differently though and no-one is spitting their dummy either way....just voicing an opinion.

That's fine, and the world is full of differing opinions, maybe I was responding more to the poster than the content but I don't think having a striker would have solved our problems.

We failed to win because we failed to defend set plays.

Having a striker would have made fuck all difference to that.

And given our past history of last minute desperation signings and paying over the odds for absolute shite who do nothing but drain enthusiasm and passion from the fanbase, I trust the recruitment team. If they couldn't get the right player in, then I'd rather not sign someone just because we "need" a striker. I think they made the right choice in holding off
 
My point is we chose not to gamble and are still stuck in the Championship.
I accept we could have spent £5 million and still not gone up but we didnt even try and that is disappointing
My point is that gambling and not going up , we would be in a far far worse position now.
We wouldn't be able to get players this summer due to gambling and paying over the odds in January on a 'quality physical striker' as you said.
It's pretty hard to get the strikers you want in January.
But if you'd have preferred us to gamble, spend loads on a striker who was way down our list as our top options couidnt / wouldnt come in January, meaning that we were now financially fucked to get our top options this summer, then there's nothing I can do to convince you that this short termism is stupid and the reason why we were millions in debt getting relegated to league 1.
 
We tried buying a striker in January to get us out of league one that cost us 3m. That didn't work either.

So that failure is going to.dictate our transfer policy from now on.
Leaving aside that most of the players the new recruitment team have signed have been impressive, indicating that when we do recruit in the main we have recruited well.
 
We did better than anyone expected. We actually performed better without a striker. It's been a strange season and there's no one reason why we have done so well and no one reason that we haven't gone up. If Ballard and Batth were fit we would probably be going to Wembley. In the end it was injuries to defenders that cost us.
This 👆
 
So that failure is going to.dictate our transfer policy from now on.
Leaving aside that most of the players the new recruitment team have signed have been impressive, indicating that when we do recruit in the main we have recruited well.
Hence we didn’t get striker in Jan because no one suitable available. Lack of central defenders cost us, nothing more, nothing less.
 
We've scored in pretty much every game, except about a handful. Missing our centre halfs has cost us more and we've quite a few. Missing a physical presence in midfield has probably been worse for us as well. People need to move on from the striker thing now. It wasn't ideal at all, but we coped.
 
My point is that gambling and not going up , we would be in a far far worse position now.
We wouldn't be able to get players this summer due to gambling and paying over the odds in January on a 'quality physical striker' as you said.
It's pretty hard to get the strikers you want in January.
But if you'd have preferred us to gamble, spend loads on a striker who was way down our list as our top options couidnt / wouldnt come in January, meaning that we were now financially fucked to get our top options this summer, then there's nothing I can do to convince you that this short termism is stupid and the reason why we were millions in debt getting relegated to league 1.

Lets get this straight. Our owners are billionaires, richer than some premier league owners. We have been getting gates which far exceed most clubs in our division.
We have invested modest amounts so far but paying 5 million for a striker will fuck us up financially and stop us buying players in the summer.
Really?
 
It’s literally impossible to know if the club actually tried to sign these strikers in January also so you too are talking bollocks.

i never said it was a fact, i said it was my opinion that they did try to sign several strikers and for various reasons they never came off. thats what i think happened, just going off the most likely set of circumstances.

another proposition is that the club didn't even try to sign one, and thought that a fit stewart would be enough with simms coming back. also not an outrageous position to take

the scenario that some drama queens on here would like us to be believe is that the club thought knew simms wasn't coming back and thought having just stewart was enough as they didn't want to spend any money, even when he got injured with 3 days of the window left. i don't believe that would have been the case, but you like you say we'll never actually know for a fact what went on

i'm not passing anything off as fact, just an opinion on the likelihood and complexities of what went on

you are passing off your opinion that we would have scored more goals since januaray with 'a striker' as fact, which is literally impossible to say. thats without even going into the discussion of 'which striker' .

with haaland or messi - aye
with connor whickam or chris martin - no
 
Lets get this straight. Our owners are billionaires, richer than some premier league owners. We have been getting gates which far exceed most clubs in our division.
We have invested modest amounts so far but paying 5 million for a striker will fuck us up financially and stop us buying players in the summer.
Really?
We played this same Luton side in October. We had no striker, but we did have a back 5 of Patterson, O'nien, Wright, Batth, Cirkin. Our No. 9 that match was Amad and we drew 1-1.

So we did not need a striker to avoid defeat last night we needed a genuine CB or two.
 
Lets get this straight. Our owners are billionaires, richer than some premier league owners. We have been getting gates which far exceed most clubs in our division.
We have invested modest amounts so far but paying 5 million for a striker will fuck us up financially and stop us buying players in the summer.
Really?

that entirely depends on which £5million striker you are talking about. name him, and then people can say
 

Back
Top