26 into 25 doesn't go: so who's going to miss out?

[(Northern) Irish Canary 48]

I read an article yesterday that we have 26 professionals who would qualify for selection in the 25-man Premier League squad. This excludes those 21 or under, I believe. So, on that basis, who is the unlucky one that Neil will have to leave out? Or, if he signs 1 or 2 more that qualify for the 25-man squad, who will be the unlucky 2 or 3 to miss out?

On the assumption we sign a centre half and striker, I reckon Turner, Lafferty and Ricky will be shifted out on loan.

What are your thoughts?

[Feedthewolf 5,885]

As it stands, I think Lafferty will miss out – his ''wee chat'' doesn''t seem to have strengthened his relationship with AN, and he''d be a desirable loan signing for numerous Championship teams. Should one or two more come in, I agree that Turner would go on loan if another defender arrives. Difficult one with Ricky, but given his wages I can''t image another striker will come in unless we can get him off the wage bill (or at least partially, with a loan deal where the loaner pays a portion of those wages). Hooper would be easier to relocate than Ricky, but personally I hope we keep hold of him.

[Indy_Bones 444]

I''d agree with that, Lafferty will likely be the first name left out, Turner shortly after, then either RvW or Hooper depending on what offers may or may not come in, and of course it will also depend on how many new faces we bring in where we need to make room.

[Yellow Wal 315]

If we have concerns about having 26 (which could well be 28 when AN signs the two more he wants) think of the position at the top clubs who have around 50 contracted players to sort out.

No doubt they will continue to abuse the loan system for their own benefit (not what the system was originally brought in for) and make sure they retain the registrations of many players who ought to be playing for, and registered with, other Premiership clubs.

[smooth 114]

Elliott Bennett should be one looking for a loan.

As I have said before there are a number of senior players who should look for that loan move away otherwise how can people judge when their contract is up at NCFC.

I still think we need a centre half, Ryan Bennett needs a season of playing so we can judge his development. Turner who knows.

It is these three senior players where I cannot see, where on a playing side, they will get game time at NCFC this season.

For me I would look at getting all three on the move and look at bringing in that centre half alongside our new number 9

[Feedthewolf 5,885]

[quote user="smooth"]Elliott Bennett should be one looking for a loan.[/quote]Definitely think we should keep him as a squad player. Consistent and reliable, definitely worthy of a backup slot at right-back, and a good option for the right flank when the full-back needs additional support against excellent opposition wingers. Runs all day, great attitude and decent technical ability. Exactly the kind of player we need in the 25 to cover injuries, suspensions and loss of form.

[Indy_Bones 444]

So having Whitts, Martin, Wisdom and even R.Bennett who can all play/cover RB isn''t enough, you want E.Bennett to be given a squad place for this as well?Don''t get me wrong, I quite like the guy and thought he had potential when we signed him, but the fact that he''s now being seen as a backup RB instead of the attacking winger/no 10 we thought we were getting speaks volumes IMHO, and it''s probably in his best interests to revive his career somewhere else rather than being 4th choice RB here.Wonder if Hughton wants him at Brighton...

[spencer 1970 214]

I''m still trying to find out who was the "26th" player who missed ou...or am I being dim?

[andyc24_uk 79]

Lafferty hopefully, he''s far from good enough and wont really be missed. Turner is a decent shout as others have mentioned; the other possibility is a midfielder as we''re overloaded in that position - probably Andreu would be under threat although AN clearly rates him; Personally I''d let O''Neil go, he''s a pretty average journeyman player who doesnt add anything to the squad that other players don''t already offer.

[mrs miggins 0]

Ryan Bennett at RB sounds like the worst idea ever, however Wisdom at RB isn''t too sharp either tbf judging by his performances there last season in the eyes of West Brom fans.

[Feedthewolf 5,885]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"]So having Whitts, Martin, Wisdom and even

R.Bennett who can all play/cover RB isn''t enough, you want E.Bennett to

be given a squad place for this as well?Don''t get me wrong, I

quite like the guy and thought he had potential when we signed him, but

the fact that he''s now being seen as a backup RB instead of the

attacking winger/no 10 we thought we were getting speaks volumes IMHO,

and it''s probably in his best interests to revive his career somewhere

else rather than being 4th choice RB here.Wonder if Hughton wants him at Brighton...[/quote]I think he can cover both positions well, and I''d much rather see him cover there than Ryan! It''s not easy to find players of reasonable quality and with Prem experience who will be part of a squad where they''re not going to get a huge amount of game time. He''s an extremely popular bloke, both here and at Brighton, and I think if AN wanted to shift him then Hughton would have him in a heartbeat. I read nothing but positive reports about his loan spell there last season. If Redmond were to get injured I think EB might well be in the team, and I actually think he might be a wiser pick in the RM position for games where the full-backs will need all the support they can get, with Redmond as a weapon to bring on later against tiring legs.[quote user="andyc24_uk"]Personally I''d let O''Neil go, he''s a pretty average journeyman player who doesnt add anything to the squad that other players don''t already offer.[/quote]A squad player with many years of Premier League experience is no bad thing to have. Plus, in my opinion he has the best set-piece delivery at the club. Whenever he''s in the team he takes all the corners, and hardly ever fails to beat the first man.