Do we actually need to trim the squad rather than add to it?

[Jim Smith 2,314]

This is on the assumption that we are not going to have a fire sale in the next three weeks but looking at the squad that has gone out to Italy plus those who have not I''m struggling to see how we can keep everyone happy this season if the squad stays as it is.

If RVW is going to get another crack then what does that mean for Hooper now the two new strikers have arrived and vice versa.

With pre-season hinting at some outings for the diamond next season and perhaps the reemergence of Wes would we be better off cashing in on Fer?

There are decent players competing for every spot in the team which is obviously good but also a real challenge for Adams with us as a championship side. Players may be content(ish) to be on the bench in the prem but some of them won''t in this league. Difficult balancing act for Adams this.

[morty 0]

We need both Wes and Fer.Wes will be a handy option from the bench and occasional starter, he will not be starting 45 games.

[mrs miggins 0]

We need another CB. I would like to keep all the players that look as if they might be going (especially Becchio) but thats unrealistic. The only person we can''t get rid of is Hooper. If he goes, there''s a chance we might not go back up

[Icecream Snow 761]

Since we can get loan players outside of the transfer windows in the Championship, and have the Murphys, Loza etc coming through, then 2 players in every position would definitely be excessive.

[Your mother 0]

Don''t think we need to trim the squad, as such. Of course, there''s plenty of trading to be done yet.Sheer numbers, ignore style of play and the gulf in class between us and the following teams and consider this: would you rather be in the position of Chelsea or Arsenal in terms of squad depth? Chelsea with practically like for like replacements in the 25 man squad and seemingly a parallel squad out on loan or at affiliated/feeder clubs. Or Arsenal where a couple of injuries is sufficient to cost them a season long challenge? Surely the Chelsea approach allows for a greater degree of consistency over a long season (incl Champions League).If we want to mitigate the risk that injuries, or indeed out-of-form players, can have on a season I would much rather a Chelsea approach to the Championship, finances permitting.As for loans, I think it much more likely that players will go out on loan and recalled if necessary than loan signings coming in.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="Jim Smith"]....................................but looking at the squad that has gone out to Italy plus those who have not I''m struggling to see how we can keep everyone happy this season if the squad stays as it is................................ Players may be content(ish) to be on the bench in the prem but some of them won''t in this league. Difficult balancing act for Adams this.[/quote]That''s a point I raised a few days backSure, we have an extra 8 games, but it still means that some will have to sit on the bench, or not even be in the squad.Loza, Murphy, Gafaiti, Bennett (E) and Surnam are equivilant to five new signingsI expect Bassong, Becchio and one of RVW/Hooper to go, as well as one of Pilks/E Bennett.Maybe Hoolahan as wellGoalkeepers also pose a problem. Will Rudd want to return to sit on the bench ?I think we''ve a lot more transfer action to see before Sept 1st.

[morty 0]

[URL=http://s869.photobucket.com/user/mortymccarthy/media/Untitled_zps71d0a676.jpg.html][IMG]http://i869.photobucket.com/albums/ab257/mortymccarthy/Untitled_zps71d0a676.jpg[/IMG][/URL]Take the kids out of that, and the likely leavers of Becchio, Bassong and Bunn, and it actually looks a bit short to me.Certainly another central defender is needed.

[Bill 1,788]

two players for virtually every spotshort ?

[morty 0]

[quote user="City1st"]two players for virtually every spotshort ?

[/quote]Do you think, on that premise, that 22 players is enough for a season of 45 games, including two cup competitions?I don''t.

[Bill 1,788]

seems what we had last timeand without numerous youngster coming through

[morty 0]

[quote user="City1st"]seems what we had last timeand without numerous youngster coming through

[/quote]You can''t count on, or rely on the youngsters.Its going to be a lot, lot harder than last time. Last time we had momentum, this time we have to discover it, and fast.I would rather the manager have as many choices as possible, with a squad of at least 30.

[Bill 1,788]

30 !the 22 mentioned only included one keeper, add the two more that we had in the PL and we as good as the maximum allowed for a PL squadif you are excluding the youngsters then an extra 8 players is going to cost around £5m in wages never mind signing on fees transfer fees etcthere is the further concern of what happens if we do not go upI do not believe that we could keep 13 players who are not even on the benchthe suggestion is not so much having variety, but in motivating those you have and that is often done by sticking with the same eleven

[morty 0]

[quote user="City1st"]30 !the 22 mentioned only included one keeper, add the two more that we had in the PL and we as good as the maximum allowed for a PL squadif you are excluding the youngsters then an extra 8 players is going to cost around £5m in wages never mind signing on fees transfer fees etcthere is the further concern of what happens if we do not go upI do not believe that we could keep 13 players who are not even on the benchthe suggestion is not so much having variety, but in motivating those you have and that is often done by sticking with the same eleven

[/quote]You need 11 players plus 7 subs in a matchday squad.I honestly don''t think a squad of 30 (including youngsters) is excessive.We''ll agree to disagree.

[Bill 1,788]

errr, I actually mentioned without youngstersso exclude those, and presume the 22 (one keeper) how many more would you want/expectassume all 22 stay ?

[morty 0]

[quote user="City1st"]errr, I actually mentioned without youngstersso exclude those, and presume the 22 (one keeper) how many more would you want/expectassume all 22 stay ?

[/quote]Look at the situation where we have 5 or 6 players injured, which seems to have a habit of happening to us.The squad I posted above is 30 players.I would assume 4 will leave. Bassong, Becchio, Bunn and 1 another.Take out the kids ( I include the murphys in there, despite a few first team appearances) and that leaves 20 players. We need 18 for a matchday squad.Really it would not take many injuries to make that look very thin indeed.

[Bill 1,788]

we are at cross puropese jerewe have 22 player (one keeper) and no kids includedthose who leave are placed so how many above that 22 would you want/expect ?

[mrs miggins 0]

CB and a LM, although grabban and lafferty have played there on the wing, I think it would be a good idea to also get a solid LM

[Chunky Norwich 0]

I think 25 or 26-man squad with the youth team to back up as required. If Adams is going back to the diamond:GK: Strong. Ruddy, Bunn, Rudd.DL: Strong. Olsson, Garrido Fine. The fact that the number 3 shirt has been left vacant is interesting. Lots of talk about Olsson leaving.DR: Only one. Whitaker. Martin has been used as centre-half by Adams and it''s interesting he''s been shifted from 2 to 5. Benno is being used at RB in friendlies.DC: Looking thin. Turner, Martin, R Bennett look good but Bassong is surely off?DM: Strong. Johnson, Tettey.CM: Strong. Howson, Fer, Pilks, BennoAM: Hoolahoop. Murphies. Loza.ST: Strong. Hooper, Lafferty, Wolfie, Grabban, BecchioObviously some of the CMs may be playing as AMs (Fer or Howson). Players may yet be tempted away - most likely Fer and Ruddy but those funds will be pumped back into the squad.It looks like Adams priority should really be centre halves and right backs. It actually looks like a very good squad...