verlaine1979

Both teams dire so far.

A game of blunder and counter-blunder so far.

I was among those agreeing that he at least *looks* better this season, but his stats for the league are still no goals and no assists in 8 games. What's more, for all that, he's probably still our most dangerous player behind Ings, which is terrifying for someone with no decisive contributions in twelve hours of football.

I'm pretty sure we also had a massive goal drought that season over xmas and new year too.

I don't even think it was a myth. I think it was a very successful wind-up playing on the vanity of some of our fanbase.

But, but - he saw the value in taking our unique 'family club' brand global! Who will do it now??

Eh? Puel, MP and Hughes have all deviated from the 4-2-3-1 template the club were meant to play across all age groups. After starting out with 45 minutes of five at the back, haven't we been playing an old-fashioned flat 4-4-2 in most of our games this season? The problem with the club isn't that we're sticking too closely to a philosophy or identity, it's that we've let go of ours completely in both tactics and recruitment, and are now floundering in a sea of received wisdom about what-you-need-to-do-to-stay-up.

Exactly - FFP is a complete red herring for Saints. Since the takeover, we've spent about two million less on transfers than we've made on sales. Beyond that we've also shipped out several of our highest earners and replaced them with players from the Swiss, Scottish and other less remunerative leagues. TV and sponsorship revenue has increased over the past couple of seasons, player trading is more or less cost-neutral and wages have probably gone down recently relative to the average rise across the league. All adds up to the fact that we could be investing more in the playing squad, but have chosen not to. Moreover, FFP actually allows clubs to make losses of up to £105m over three seasons as long as the owner is prepared to inject cash to make good the loss (though the allowable losses are smaller if you play in European competitions governed by UEFA). Hence why all the bleating about Bournemouth is probably futile - I doubt they're coming anywhere near touching the FFP caps for either profit & sustainability or short term wage control.

We just don't have the composure or the class to play against Chelsea's press. They've won more tackles in our defensive third than we have.

The game isn't so much being played in our half as in our penalty box at the moment.

Redmond showing his searing pace there.

I've only used Transfermarkt's figured, but if you look at transfer activity since the takeover was completed, we haven't spent any more on fees than we've brought in from sales. Maybe it's just early days, and maybe the VVD fee was so huge it distorts the picture, but at the same time, that's exactly the strategy I'd expect someone who bought the club with borrowed money to adopt.

Looks more and more a Hughes player every game. Bought as a simple answer to an overly-simplistic question, and subsequently really not cut out for playing against an attack with any level of pace or willingness to keep the ball on the ground. Seems like a reasonably cultured passer of the ball (then again, so did Hoedt), but just agonisingly slow.

Absolutely this. On balance of chances created, Wolves were as far ahead as they eventually were on chances scored. We had a couple of decent spells of possession, but it was mostly huff and puff, while Wolves seemed to be able to march through the middle of the pitch more or less at will for most of the game. People keep calling back to the Palace game as a good performance, but it really wasn't. We got a couple of goals against the run of play, but once again, aside from a world-class save from McCarthy just before the second, that game winds up another mediocre draw. The team's got no identity, almost no quality, and a manager who consistently makes the wrong decisions with both lineups and substitutions. Dire.

Neither team showing a lot of quality, but Wolves getting into better positions before f-ing up than we are, and they've had by far the better half chances.

4-2-3-1 has the same number of attacking players on the field as 4-4-2?

Something something Koeman, something something.

Call me an optimist, but I'd rather watch a team that contained at least one or two players with the ability to create or take a chance. As it is, we're not just mediocre, we're incredibly dull. Still, listening to the fan base on here, this is pretty close to the team most people seem to want: a bunch of strapping cart horses they can (for the most part) identify with.

We'd probably be better off with Boufal and Carillo in that team.

It's a mark of the gulf in class between the sides that I think their back line is quicker than our front line.

Yup - neat and tidy, but not really seen anything to suggest he has the passing range or creativity we might have expected, which is disappointing as he's got zero pace. Hoj's goal yesterday a good case in point. Moi picks it up on the right, starts to run diagonally towards the area, gets about 30 yards out and then just floats a waist-high nothing ball towards the penalty spot that any one of about three defenders could've cleared. The fact that it then broke for Hoj to finally keep one down was very fortunate for us indeed.

Agreed - the fact that quite a few deemed the first half an excellent performance shows just how far our standards have fallen. We played with reasonable energy before the break, created one or two half-chances, but if Hoj hadn't finally hit one on target from outside the box after three years of trying, we'd have had nothing to show for it. Again. As for Brighton, they were poor, but got in once or twice down the flanks during the first half, so you could see the potential for them to regroup and come out better in the second half. Our first team is mediocre in almost every position, our bench is weak, and our manager rarely seems to pick the right subs to see out or change a game.

Careful, someone will be on here in a minute to tell you that Matt Oakley was the foundation upon which MLT built his genius.

Davis becoming our go-to creative midfielder after the departure of those higher calibre players (I'd also add Lallana to the list) has been one of the key factors in our decline.

Yup - opening goal was a combination of hit and hope attacking play coupled with awful defending, capped off by a lovely opportunistic finish. If the move had gone as intended we wouldn't have gotten anywhere near the goal in all likelihood.