Jump to content
cambridgeshire canary

So Ashley Barnes, Jack Stacey.. Shane Duffy?

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

Found out about this via email and thought we were signing Stacey Trouble, which would be a great name for a footballer.

 

Screenshot 2023-05-31 at 15.20.50.png

Sounds more like a wrestler 🤣

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I may have found the DM that could lead us forwards. 

He's the strongest, he's the quickest, he's the best...

 

Danger-mouse-fair-use.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Barnes as as signing, subject to the way in which we set up around him in terms of attacking midfield both centrally and wide whether he plays as a #9 or a #10.

I will confess to never having really noticed Jack Stacey play, which I suppose could be a good thing !  On paper seems a solid enough acquisition in a position that we need to bolster, but I can't really comment much beyond that.

Duffy is a slightly odd one in the sense that his career seems to have dropped of a cliff.

He looked good (in a limited sense) for a long time at Brighton and on paper is much of what many on here have been calling for in that he is very much the traditional stopper type - good in the air, body on the line etc etc.  But he wasn't wanted by Potter at Brighton because of his limitations on the ball, bombed at Celtic largely for the same reasons and slightly more worryingly didn't get a game at Fulham ahead of the like of the absolutely glacial Tim Ream (who to be fair was surprisingly effective last season.)

He seems to be to be very much in the Hanley mould which is sort of fine, but does suggest that we aren't going to be playing out from the back much next season (which many will be delighted with) and / or don't expect to be dominating possession in matches.  He also lacks Hanley's pace which would be an issue if paired with Gibson which seems to be the plan given Webber's touting of Omo.

That said, I can't think of many free transfer central defenders available with his experience floating around, and hopefully he will be a bit more vocal in terms of organising the defensive shape.  But I worry that this may exacerbate some existing problems.  If Omo does go, we are either going to be playing with a really deep line or need to be looking at investing in a centre back with a bit of pace (and ideally some ability on the ball) to play alongside Duffy or Gibson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Capt. Pants said:

Solid enough signings.

If we land Duffy you'd maybe question how this is focusing on youth, but that doesn't bother me at all.

We need an experienced DM as well.

You can't have pure youth, you need leaders for them to learn from. That was abundantly clear for the last ten games of last season.

Hanley is out for the majority of next season, Duffy absolutely makes sense to be the experience replacement there. We saw how much better Omo was alongside an experienced head.

What folks seem to be missing here though, is that these aren't just rubbish freebies, they all have something to offer. Have experienced premier league football and build our squad whilst burning up little of what cash we do have.

That perhaps saves it for players we want to land that are not free.

I don't think we'll have finished at the back either. In theory RB is sorted ready for Max's departure.

CB is Gibson, Hanley(injured until at least Jan), Omo(heavily tipped to leave) and Tomkinson.

LB is Giannoulis and McCallum, both entering the last year of their deals with Dimi heavily linked to a move away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Barham Blitz said:

I like Barnes as as signing, subject to the way in which we set up around him in terms of attacking midfield both centrally and wide whether he plays as a #9 or a #10.

I will confess to never having really noticed Jack Stacey play, which I suppose could be a good thing !  On paper seems a solid enough acquisition in a position that we need to bolster, but I can't really comment much beyond that.

Duffy is a slightly odd one in the sense that his career seems to have dropped of a cliff.

He looked good (in a limited sense) for a long time at Brighton and on paper is much of what many on here have been calling for in that he is very much the traditional stopper type - good in the air, body on the line etc etc.  But he wasn't wanted by Potter at Brighton because of his limitations on the ball, bombed at Celtic largely for the same reasons and slightly more worryingly didn't get a game at Fulham ahead of the like of the absolutely glacial Tim Ream (who to be fair was surprisingly effective last season.)

He seems to be to be very much in the Hanley mould which is sort of fine, but does suggest that we aren't going to be playing out from the back much next season (which many will be delighted with) and / or don't expect to be dominating possession in matches.  He also lacks Hanley's pace which would be an issue if paired with Gibson which seems to be the plan given Webber's touting of Omo.

That said, I can't think of many free transfer central defenders available with his experience floating around, and hopefully he will be a bit more vocal in terms of organising the defensive shape.  But I worry that this may exacerbate some existing problems.  If Omo does go, we are either going to be playing with a really deep line or need to be looking at investing in a centre back with a bit of pace (and ideally some ability on the ball) to play alongside Duffy or Gibson.

Here's the thing though, if our front three are a combination of Barnes, Sargent and Idah, is ability on the ball really so important for a centre-half when suddenly a launched clearance can become a plan B?

Doesn't work with Pukki at all unless it's into the channels and beyond their defence. Aimed at a feisty and powerful sh-ithouse like Barnes though....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Here's the thing though, if our front three are a combination of Barnes, Sargent and Idah, is ability on the ball really so important for a centre-half when suddenly a launched clearance can become a plan B?

Doesn't work with Pukki at all unless it's into the channels and beyond their defence. Aimed at a feisty and powerful sh-ithouse like Barnes though....

It take your point - t wasn't necessarily a criticism per se - more of an observation of the sort of player he is and of the implication that this may have on the style of play, particularly in combination with the other options.

Although as a plan B fine - I'm not delighted at the prospect of it being plan A !! 

But if we have any pretensions towards attempting to play through midfield, as we have demonstrated at times this season having a centre back who isn't reasonably comfortable on the ball - particularly with our current CM options - does leave us open to a more easily targeted press resulting in more self-inflicted problems.  And from a defensive standpoint, a lack of pace at CB in general means we have to play relatively deep which then creates big holes in midfield anyway in both transitions.  A lot will depend on the tactical shape next season.

A general musing rather than a complaint or criticism of the signing ...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just going to repeat what I just said.

Almost guaranteed this is not the end of the shake up in the defensive department.

Hanley may as well be not counted for next season. He'll be back in Jan at the earliest which means up to speed to play regularly would probably be a few weeks after that. That is if all goes to plan and he recovers quickly, which I hope he does because I don't like to see any players out like that. Still, he has to be counted as out for the purposes of planning.

That leaves Gibson and Omo. Gibson has been very hit and miss the last couple of seasons and needs a steady hand alongside him to help get him back to his best I think. He also isn't the fastest. Omo is heavily linked to moves away, and if we do get an offer of £15-20m for him I can't see it being turned down, as frankly, I don't see him being worth that much right now, that's not to say he might not be worth that in a couple of seasons, but equally, he might not. Put simply, I think he is still young and raw and I don't see our team being so dependent upon him that he must be kept at all costs.

So realistically, we could be looking at just Gibson at this point. Unless they feel Tomkinson is ready, despite mixed reviews of his time at Stevenage. In either case, if Omo is gone and they do include Tomkinson, we'd still need two more CB's. If Omo stays AND Tomkinson is kept, we still need an experienced fourth and it doesn't really matter about lack of pace as the two younger lads have that. Mackay NEVER had pace, but both in our teams and with Watford's he was always coupled with faster players who were more able on the ball. His strength was in "stopping", set pieces, positioning and organising. Hanley is better as he isn't that bad on the ball and has more pace - or had, realistically coming back from this injury he may have less pace.

Also, these players are all the freebies - don't be dumb and fall into the idea that these represent plan A's or B's etc. Though Stacey is clearly good enough to be a regular starter. I also see people are continuing to vastly underrate Barnes. He is most certainly not a traditional No.10, but then I wouldn't say Stiepermann was either, and I can see Barnes playing that role. He's played slightly off the likes of Woods to good success in the past. It could well be that they want to try and recreate that sort of link up with Sargent.

As we saw with Stiepermann, it was the use of pockets of space, being a bit of a nuisance and winning little flicks and holding up the ball that really helped him be a bit of a foil for Pukki. He wasn't pacey as such, but played that roll perfectly. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

Just seen pink un report that Stacey’s time at Bournemouth was littered with injuries…so there’s that.  Again. 

Always question rather than just accept... not exactly like journo's using a bit of license to sensationalise isn't a real thing or anything.
image.png.396b19756aa73f4aeecc109c49d4dd6b.png

Not sure missing 15 games out of 4 seasons from 3 injuries is "littered". 

More here but not all at Bournemouth... either way, does not look like "littered" to me. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

Just seen pink un report that Stacey’s time at Bournemouth was littered with injuries…so there’s that.  Again. 

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/jack-stacey/verletzungen/spieler/249356

Not sure I'd call 3 injuries littered. Of course it's possible transfermarkt has missed some, i think they're fairly good though.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Barham Blitz said:

It take your point - t wasn't necessarily a criticism per se - more of an observation of the sort of player he is and of the implication that this may have on the style of play, particularly in combination with the other options.

Although as a plan B fine - I'm not delighted at the prospect of it being plan A !! 

But if we have any pretensions towards attempting to play through midfield, as we have demonstrated at times this season having a centre back who isn't reasonably comfortable on the ball - particularly with our current CM options - does leave us open to a more easily targeted press resulting in more self-inflicted problems.  And from a defensive standpoint, a lack of pace at CB in general means we have to play relatively deep which then creates big holes in midfield anyway in both transitions.  A lot will depend on the tactical shape next season.

A general musing rather than a complaint or criticism of the signing ...

 

Too early to be 2nd guessing at this point. As stated, just considering the way he has been used before, if we revert back to 4-2-3-1 I would expect to see him taking the Stiepermann role just behind Sargent. It's what he did with great effect for Woods. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Indy said:

So we’re replacing out going players with experienced free players. It’s going back to old days, but we need experienced players to develop the younger players. As long as we don’t fill the team with these players at the detriment of our younger players. If the play they need to perform in my book.

 

Sadly Aarons is the last of the old silver to be sold of Godfrey ,lewis ,Maddison ,Cantwell ,Emi 

That is what our Success has been built on signing young players ,

i would like to see Webber signing some younger players after these 3 have come in we need it as a club as much as the older pros 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, chicken said:

Too early to be 2nd guessing at this point. As stated, just considering the way he has been used before, if we revert back to 4-2-3-1 I would expect to see him taking the Stiepermann role just behind Sargent. It's what he did with great effect for Woods. 

I would agree entirely that Barnes would be best suited to that role.  Not sure that I said anything to the contrary though ?  I was just responding to TGS's comment ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Robert N. LiM said:

Well sure, but we do keep not signing one, so seems reasonable enough to keep going on about it.

Well , if that's what floats your boat. Pointing out the blatantly   obvious.  In other news, , water is still wet .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

Just seen pink un report that Stacey’s time at Bournemouth was littered with injuries…so there’s that.  Again. 

If he wasn't littered with injuries we would be a million miles away from us

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only time will tell but picking up three experienced players for nothing and partly replacing Aaron’s and our centre half issue seems sensible to me. The first challenge has to be to make us harder to beat and more competitive as we were wide open and there for the taking at the end of last season.

notwithstanding the above we do appear to be rapidly moving away from a technical passing game and you do look around the squad and wonder how we will really hurt teams especially if Sara or Sargent get sold. In this division historically if you score a lot of goals then you have a chance but I’m struggling to see that in the team, however there is clearly a very long way to go in the transfer window. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The transfer window hasnt even opened officially. I'm pleased weve got three seasoned professionals in quickly, and free, which is great business.

Dont thinks for one minute this is the benchmark for the entire window though

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On paper all good signings, pretty happy with all three if Duffy happens. I feel the odd one out as I think Duffy is potentially the best of the three.

That said I find it really hard to not just be excited about new signings and the hope and promise they offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont share any of the optimism on this thread.

Might be glass half empty but we have signed 

Target man  - A bloke who hasnt scored more than 12 goals in a season in 10 years

Centre back - a guy who has averaged 12 league games a year for last 4 years - so super hungry for first team football||

Right back -  a player who's history is littered with injuries and only played for Bournemouth in the Prem when they were terrible and who hasnt had a sniff since they turned the corner .  The new Byram/Haydn/Matt Jarvis

Get used to it.  Mr 90 per cent has plssed all the money away on the likes of Tzolis / Placheta etc and we now in the bargain basement of fading has beens desperately trying not to spend any money on transfer fees for a last failing attempt to pay the wages of players who wont have the hunger to be here.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, City Stand Ultra said:

Dont share any of the optimism on this thread.

Might be glass half empty but we have signed 

Target man  - A bloke who hasnt scored more than 12 goals in a season in 10 years

Centre back - a guy who has averaged 12 league games a year for last 4 years - so super hungry for first team football||

Right back -  a player who's history is littered with injuries and only played for Bournemouth in the Prem when they were terrible and who hasnt had a sniff since they turned the corner .  The new Byram/Haydn/Matt Jarvis

Get used to it.  Mr 90 per cent has plssed all the money away on the likes of Tzolis / Placheta etc and we now in the bargain basement of fading has beens desperately trying not to spend any money on transfer fees for a last failing attempt to pay the wages of players who wont have the hunger to be here.

On paper and if they come off, if, they seem like useful additions at this moment in time to me, by addressing certain frailties in the current squad and also tending to immediate injury concerns, whilst forming an experienced base for the so-called re-build.

The two over thirties** are, of course, sticking plaster to this effect and I would hope that we have two or three newbies to get excited about, rather than just being satisfied by. There seems to be good money coming in from various sources.

Webber has a lot to make up for and there are question marks over Wagner. However, it's what it is at the moment and there are no concrete signs of changes being in the pipeline.

We might do well, but it seems like a long shot as things stand.

As for the rapidity and manner of our decline, you couldn't make it up.

** Duffy not on-board yet, of course.

Edited by BroadstairsR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

As for the rapidity and manner of our decline, you couldn't make it up.

But it appears you can make up Stacy’s injury record. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...