[Brookie]

Search & Destroy said:

1712037941[/url]' post='1815594']
Quigley was given a new contract


Let that sink in

Quigley might do better in a higher league where there is hopefully not as much blatant shirt pulling etc.

Although he has improved he still doesn’t drag defenders around like Grigg does

[Search & Destroy]

Brookie, on 02 April 2024 - 06:45 AM, said:

Quigley might do better in a higher league where there is hopefully not as much blatant shirt pulling etc.

Although he has improved he still doesn’t drag defenders around like Grigg does

Quigley needs to cut it out then

[Phil V 72]

Search & Destroy, on 02 April 2024 - 06:05 AM, said:

Quigley was given a new contract


Let that sink in

Yeah, Cook clearly hasn’t got a clue what he’s doing 🙄

[Search & Destroy]

Phil V 72, on 02 April 2024 - 06:54 AM, said:

Yeah, Cook clearly hasn’t got a clue what he’s doing 🙄

Clearly thinks Quigley could be a force a L2

[jack bauer]

Search & Destroy, on 02 April 2024 - 07:14 AM, said:

Clearly thinks Quigley could be a force a L2

he'll have his part to play, however with an extended matchday bench next year i would expect another striker in and quigley may find himself as 3rd choice striker.

[Search & Destroy]

jack bauer, on 02 April 2024 - 07:23 AM, said:

he'll have his part to play, however with an extended matchday bench next year i would expect another striker in and quigley may find himself as 3rd choice striker.

3rd choice on big wages when we play with one striker though?

[Exharboroughspireite]

Loan market will come into play next year especially for extended subs

[DerbySpireite59]

jonnythespireite, on 01 April 2024 - 09:09 PM, said:

Letting in goals isn’t necessarily just down to defenders and a goalkeeper you know. Most of our concessions have started way further forward by losing the ball in poor areas with full backs committed forward under instructions.

I'd agree with marginally (51%) rather than "mostly"(80%).
That's still a significant factor. Cookie knows our Achilles heel, and will address it. However, we saw at Barnet how good we can defend, as a team, with a "must not lose" approach rather than a "win or bust" approach.
By way of example, we lost at York because of bad errors by DJ and Mando. The defenders were just fine imho. You could even argue that the forwards, Berry and Qujgley should have put us 3/4 up at half-time.Game over.

[DerbySpireite59]

Search & Destroy, on 02 April 2024 - 08:06 AM, said:

3rd choice on big wages when we play with one striker though?

So what do you actually propose?
Go with 2 centre forwards (Will, and a new signing) or with 3, but the quality of the 3rd reflecting his far smaller wages? That could be retaining Harley.
Bear in mind Will will be 33 in July and has suffered his first ever hamstring strain.

[DerbySpireite59]

Exharboroughspireite, on 02 April 2024 - 08:28 AM, said:

Loan market will come into play next year especially for extended subs

I dont think Cookie has a history of having more than 2 loanees at any one time.You might be right though.

[azul]

Exharboroughspireite, on 02 April 2024 - 08:28 AM, said:

Loan market will come into play next year especially for extended subs

Why do you think that? Will it be any different to this year? I expect a couple of half or full season loans will be the maximum. Only 22 outfield players allowed (plus goalies and youth) which isn’t much different size wise to this year. Also remember there is a transfer window in the EFL so no plugging gaps that may appear.

[danblue]

Search & Destroy, on 02 April 2024 - 08:06 AM, said:

3rd choice on big wages when we play with one striker though?

By being allowed more subs, in theory if we are chasing a game, it allows more diverse tactics to be employed.
So we could chuck more strikers on and go two or even three up top - using recognised strikers

[azul]

danblue, on 02 April 2024 - 09:48 AM, said:

By being allowed more subs, in theory if we are chasing a game, it allows more diverse tactics to be employed.
So we could chuck more strikers on and go two or even three up top - using recognised strikers

More to the point, will Quigley be an expensive 3rd striker option by L2 standards? Not so sure.

[dim view]

Search & Destroy, on 02 April 2024 - 06:05 AM, said:

Quigley was given a new contract


Let that sink in

ok then.
Taking Joe as an example.....
The cost of offering a new contract has to be measured against the benefit of keeping the squad together to produce record breaking results and harmony. For a player that will be in demand next year because of his stats this year, the cost is marginal. He still gets paid for this season. He still gets his promotion bonus. CFC still get a large proportion of next year's salary.

Can you name a single CFC player contracted for next year who will not be sought after by NL (or higher) clubs?

[SocraticCFC]

azul, on 02 April 2024 - 09:53 AM, said:

More to the point, will Quigley be an expensive 3rd striker option by L2 standards? Not so sure.

I see opposition strikers who have 12-18 goals and feel many have a different 'offer' from Joe. What we don't want is another 2011/12 scenario when we went up a league without properly re-aligning the squad. We came straight back down big style. I'm sure Mr Cook and the powers that be are aware of this and will have plans afoot to sign necessary replacements in areas deemed by them, and no doubt, the supporters concurrently to be an issue. It looks like we have a J and H team atm. One that can beat or go toe to toe with L2, L1 and Chmp oppisition yet lose emphatically to lower national league outfits. More a state of mind than anything else.
Finally, to be brutally frank, I can't see anyone in that team yesterday who is out of contract being given a new one.

This post has been edited by SocraticCFC: 02 April 2024 - 10:34 AM

[azul]

dim view, on 02 April 2024 - 10:28 AM, said:

ok then.
Taking Joe as an example.....
The cost of offering a new contract has to be measured against the benefit of keeping the squad together to produce record breaking results and harmony. For a player that will be in demand next year because of his stats this year, the cost is marginal. He still gets paid for this season. He still gets his promotion bonus. CFC still get a large proportion of next year's salary.

Can you name a single CFC player contracted for next year who will not be sought after by NL (or higher) clubs?

I’m sure most if not all will be sought but whether they would be willing to go to the clubs seeking them or whether that club can afford their contract are crucial factors.

This post has been edited by azul: 02 April 2024 - 10:41 AM

[dim view]

azul, on 02 April 2024 - 10:41 AM, said:

I’m sure most if not all will be sought but whether they would be willing to go to the clubs seeking them or whether that club can afford their contract are crucial factors.

Of course. There might even be an incentive offered to our player. Don't you think Cook and Ash will have had those discussions when airing their thoughts on contract extensions? The cost has to be soberly weighed against the benefit of keeping the squad happy this year. If that works out at say, £100k overall calculable at the end of next season, then it will have been well worth it.

This post has been edited by dim view: 02 April 2024 - 10:52 AM

[Misnomer]

spireitenag, on 01 April 2024 - 05:13 PM, said:

Tyrer - another season would be great.
Boot - retained.
King - released.
Sheckleford - retained
Palmer - released.
Williams - retained as squad player.
Grimes - retained.
Freckleton I'm sure there's better out there.
Clements - released.
Horton - released.
Maguire - retained as squad player. Likely to be released anyway.
Mandeville - retained.
Oldaker - released.
Jacobs - retained.
Colclough - retained.
Hobson - retained as squad player.
Dobra - retained.
Berry - retained.
Curtis - released.
Quigley - released.
Banks - retained as squad player.
Naylor - retained.
Jones - retained.
Cook - released.
Grigg - retained.

I realise a number of these are not out of contract.
However if they could be moved on the squad next season would benefit.

Just my opinion and no doubt I'll be slated for it.

Agree with all of that, apart from Shecks. Too many bad touches, poor distribution and poor decision making. That said, King is worse. Maybe PC will keep Shecks as a squad player, but I don't think he has the consistency to be a league 2 player.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Search & Destroy, on 02 April 2024 - 06:05 AM, said:

Quigley was given a new contract


Let that sink in

It was your allegedly noncey hero who paid a sizeable six figure sum to originally sign JQ.

Let that sink in.

On the other hand PC made him a last twenty man. A role he performed successfully given the vital goals he's grabbed. Unfortunately Grigg's injury means he's now starting, a role I'm certain we'd have signed someone else to fulfill was the title not already bagged.

So another offer let's see if you once again dodge: I'll bet a ton, with the proceeds going to an asylum seeker charity, that JQ is back to the bench next season.....yeah?

[Rogerwillis]

danblue, on 02 April 2024 - 09:48 AM, said:

By being allowed more subs, in theory if we are chasing a game, it allows more diverse tactics to be employed.
So we could chuck more strikers on and go two or even three up top - using recognised strikers

1 only be one more sub for us and the other will be a keeper