Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
Aberdeen Football Club / Re: Dundee V Aberdeen
« Last post by jinkyjoe on Today at 02:22:05 PM »
I think that not having had much game time is more of a worry. He's had the entire pre-season like anyone else. The reason he's not had much game time is that he's seen as being either not good enough, or we didn't require him for a particular game. I could understand us not needing him in the Burnley games, and perhaps even the hun game and I suppose we were trying out a front 2 to, logically, his detriment at the weekend so maybe there's some strength in that argument. My first impressions were that he was a lightweight fanny who didn't track back enough to make him worthwhile - a shite Ryan Christie. As for Gleeson, I'm not even sure what he's supposed to do? He can't perform the sitting role that Ball/Hoban did effectively against Burnley and in the "bigger" games. He doesn't have the passing range and coverage of Ferguson to provide even part of the McLean role. He doesn't have the engine and drive of Shinnie. He doesn't seem to be a number 10. He seems to have a serious case of chrisclarkitis or, at best, robmilsomsyndrome. Again, he got a decent (if slightly hampered with injury) pre-season, so I don't know what we're waiting for. He needs to get his finger out his hoop, because it's the basics of "running about" that he's not doing.

Really?
12
Aberdeen Football Club / Re: Dundee V Aberdeen
« Last post by RicoS321 on Today at 02:14:38 PM »
According to our official website Gleeson has played 33 minutes against Burnley, 52 minutes v Huns and 74 minutes v Dundee. He has just come into a new league with new team mates and had an injury issue in pre season. 

Can't we give the man a chance or are we just writing players off after 159 minutes now?

Did you not read the part where I said: "I know, I know, I'm just using him as an example"?

I'm the only person that's put forward my negative opinion on Gleeson, and on every single occasion I've caveated the comment with something along the lines of "obviously it's very early days".

Nobody has written Gleeson off on this forum.

Can people read through comments first before putting up arguments against things that have not happened?
13
Aberdeen Football Club / Re: Dundee V Aberdeen
« Last post by Ramperbamper on Today at 02:14:00 PM »
I was talking about our youth players in general. They're nae good enough was my point. Whether you have an agenda against McInnes or not you can't argue that he knows more about our squad than the fans do and that he's more qualified than us to make the call on whether players are ready to be first team starters or not.

McInnes suggested at a recent Q&A that Wright wasn't doing enough in training to justify first team game time, which tends to back up what you're saying.
14
Aberdeen Football Club / Re: Dundee V Aberdeen
« Last post by jinkyjoe on Today at 01:59:59 PM »
According to our official website Gleeson has played 33 minutes against Burnley, 52 minutes v Huns and 74 minutes v Dundee. He has just come into a new league with new team mates and had an injury issue in pre season. 

Can't we give the man a chance or are we just writing players off after 159 minutes now?


15
Aberdeen Football Club / Re: Dundee V Aberdeen
« Last post by RicoS321 on Today at 01:29:12 PM »
Our youth players are not good enough? McKenna proved otherwise. We would never have known until Motherwell thrashed us 3-0 and his hand was forced to make changes. And he was hardly a kid when he made his debut less than a year ago. He was already a man.

How can you say that Wright isn't good enough? He's been totally mismanaged. Same with Frank Ross. Anderson has only had 2 x subs appearances and you don't think he's good enough either? That's insane.

You are happy to trust McInnes and anyone who dares to criticise him "has an agenda"? That's nuts too.

I watched Whiplash last night with my youngest, a film that had been recommended to her. It was excellent and there were two major themes that are transferable to football. The extreme methods of the "coach" were brilliantly articulated in a speech at the end, the EXACT philosophy that SAF always employed in his managerial career. The other truth highlighted in the film was the value of practise and work ethic. To become the best, you have to want it and work at it.

Most lose, a few win. In the SPL, one team will win and 11 lose. In golf each week, 1 will win and 155 will lose. It's a tough business, winning and I've always said that it's DESIRE that separates the best from the rest, the desire to work harder, the desire to work smarter. McInnes is not a winner and neither are his footballers. But you can't include teenagers who never got managed properly, who never got a reasonable chance. They are the only hope AFC had.

I think the point is that we don't know as we don't see the young players' attitudes in training. It's useless using Alex Ferguson or some other acclaimed fictional/non-fictional coach as an example. Managers are no different to players, and very capable ones are not remotely within our budget. We should be looking at other managers in our division and the promotion of youth within their ranks and the success of that as a barometer of McInnes' performance. We have absolutely no how he chooses to talk to the youngsters, and it could very well be the case that they are not responding to the challenge set because of their own unwillingness to put in the extra effort. Certainly McKenna hold McInnes in high regard and has benefitted from his coaching to the extent he signed a new deal.

Hamilton would probably be the best example. That is somewhere where the entire club is setup as a mechanism through which to promote from within. That's their philosophy and their cost base. We could do that, but we'd sacrifice second place obviously. Are there any clubs with a derivative of that model that are producing more than 1-2 players for every batch of youngsters? I noticed Cochrane playing for Hearts colts v County last night for example, a player that they thought would be amazing since Levein gave him his first start. Are there any players at any team in the SPL that have had similar success stories like McKenna recently? Are any of the top 6 playing their youngsters every week (more than two let's say)?

My criticism of McInnes is that there are minutes where he could have played a youngster and he hasn't. That's usually because we've had a squad that required that other (shite) senior players were given priority to keep the entire squad happy or to keep their hand in whilst not playing every week so they're ready when needed. I think that the club needs to enforce that strategy though if that's what our target is. Make sure that there are no fillers. For example, I thought that Dean Campbell looks like a better player so far than Gleeson (I know, I know, I'm just using him as an example). If it turns out that Gleeson isn't going to make it here after a decent run of opportunities, will he continue to be given minutes at Campbell's expense? I think he would, and I think that is where McInnes falls down (May at Anderson's expense will be another). The wasted minutes on Maynard were a huge frustration when he should have been ditched (I'd have re-sold him before the window closed cause he was so obviously fucking shite). We're wasting time on a player that we know wouldn't improve. The approach on Frank Ross, to me, was the correct one. He wasn't ready and 6 months of playing at a decent level makes him more ready. The only thing I'd add is that the same should have been afforded to Wright; 22 minutes from January was scandalous. However, he may have been being a dick or something that we're not party to; that's the difficulty of judging. 

I think the club needs a strategy and a set of targets. Something that they can hold McInnes to account for. His strategy is to make sure nothing gets in the way of a 1-0 victory, so no risks will be taken, because he'll lose his job if results don't go. The club needs to force the issue if it sees youth development as a function of our club.
16
Aberdeen Football Club / Re: Dundee V Aberdeen
« Last post by rocket_scientist on Today at 12:07:22 PM »
I was talking about our youth players in general. They're nae good enough was my point. Whether you have an agenda against McInnes or not you can't argue that he knows more about our squad than the fans do and that he's more qualified than us to make the call on whether players are ready to be first team starters or not.

Our youth players are not good enough? McKenna proved otherwise. We would never have known until Motherwell thrashed us 3-0 and his hand was forced to make changes. And he was hardly a kid when he made his debut less than a year ago. He was already a man.

How can you say that Wright isn't good enough? He's been totally mismanaged. Same with Frank Ross. Anderson has only had 2 x subs appearances and you don't think he's good enough either? That's insane.

You are happy to trust McInnes and anyone who dares to criticise him "has an agenda"? That's nuts too.

I watched Whiplash last night with my youngest, a film that had been recommended to her. It was excellent and there were two major themes that are transferable to football. The extreme methods of the "coach" were brilliantly articulated in a speech at the end, the EXACT philosophy that SAF always employed in his managerial career. The other truth highlighted in the film was the value of practise and work ethic. To become the best, you have to want it and work at it.

Most lose, a few win. In the SPL, one team will win and 11 lose. In golf each week, 1 will win and 155 will lose. It's a tough business, winning and I've always said that it's DESIRE that separates the best from the rest, the desire to work harder, the desire to work smarter. McInnes is not a winner and neither are his footballers. But you can't include teenagers who never got managed properly, who never got a reasonable chance. They are the only hope AFC had.
17
Aberdeen Football Club / Re: Lewis Ferguson Tribunal
« Last post by CvB on Today at 12:05:31 PM »
to be honest, what's the point of trying to second guess these corrupt bastards anyway?

Suspensions upheld, suspensions rescinded, docking teams 2 points because it fits into a prearranged "decider" schedule (Hearts), not following up the throwing of an elbow...we'll get fucked over, others don't. It's the way it is and we just have to doff our caps, mumble "thank you very much sir" and be on our way.
18
Aberdeen Football Club / Re: Lewis Ferguson Tribunal
« Last post by tlg1903 on Today at 12:03:19 PM »
Performance has didn't diddly squat to do with it. It's down to how much they invested in the player combined with the contract they offered.  It will likely be a couple of hundred k
19
Aberdeen Football Club / Re: Aberdeen V St Mirren
« Last post by Jute on Today at 11:54:12 AM »
08/05/2018 336330 SHALEUM LOGAN (ABERDEEN F.C.) 1 SPFL FIRST TEAM LEAGUE MATCH FROM 22/05/2018
17/05/2018 336330 SHALEUM LOGAN (ABERDEEN F.C.) 2 FIRST TEAM MATCHES IMMEDIATE

That's what the SFA suspension list says so I assume the first ban was Sevco then the "2 first team matches immediate" include the cup?

That’s the way I read it.
20
Aberdeen Football Club / Re: Lewis Ferguson Tribunal
« Last post by Jute on Today at 11:52:14 AM »
I think it is also based on the amount they have offered to retain the player - in writing - at the time of (AFCs) purchase. Plus development costs.

For example, if they have offered him a 4 year deal at £1,500K per week (£300K approx total) we'd be liable for some or all of that. That's what they've valued him at and so we shouldn't be expected to pay significantly higher than that at tribunal with development costs added.

That's certainly my understanding anyway, but I could be wrong.

Think tribunal can also take into account any previous offers made to Accies for Ferguson when setting the compensation.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10