SaintBobby

I'm sure if we can crack this key, existential question we can replace Koeman with a "crowd sourcing" manager from this forum.

That would basically be the opposite of "parking the bus", right? 4 goals ain't "parking the bus".

Just heard from a reasonably reliable source that VVD is fine. However, he then said he may not be risked on "tiredness" grounds. Wldnt that apply to Yoshida even more? So, only reasonably reliable.... (Caulker didn't travel, so maybe he goes into the back 4?)

He ain't going nowhere. Until 2017. Come back to me if that proves to be wrong.

I've read it. I've reread it. You're still mad. You're assuming whether over 11 or 12 games that Saints should have had 5 more points. But over that run of games, we're bound to have off days and make errors. You can't just wish these away for Saints, but keep them factored in for Man City (who clearly shouldn't have lost at home to West Ham) or Arsenal. If Southampton played to our absolute best in all 38 games and eradicated all and any errors from every match, we'd probably win the league. But errors and (occasional) sub-standard performances are part and parcel of the sport.

Utterly, utterly mad. In what sort of world would you expect Saints to be level with Arsenal and Man City after 12 games? Sure, you can find matches where we were below par (e.g. surrendering a 2-0 lead to Leicester in the 2nd half at home), but then you can say the same for Man City and Arsenal. You can't treat Man City's failure to beat Aston Villa today as some sort of natural act of God but our failure to hold a lead against Man Utd at home as a weak display on our part.

If you expect 8-9, why not "take" 9?

Ten points would be a good return. That's a tricky batch of six fixtures. Although we are pretty good, this next batch includes two teams who are going to finish above us (Man City and Arsenal), one who will likely finish above us (Spurs), two teams who are around our level, maybe just a tad below (Palace and Stoke) and only one match where we are clearly and unambiguously the better side (Villa) Football being what it is, we will probably lose to Villa and beat the other 5 clubs!

In a probably futile attempt to get this thread back on topic, I want to argue that we arguably now have a stronger squad than last season. Not much in it between Forster and Stekelenburg. Maybe Forster is a bit better, but there isn't a huge amount in it. I'd prefer to have van Dijk than Alderweireld. I also think Yoshida looks better this season than last. Hard to make a definitive judgement on Caulker, but he gives us better depth. Soares isn't as good as Clyne, of course, but looks like he's now settling in. Bertrand has got better and better over the last year. Targett may never be a first choice, first team Saints player, but he is surely better as cover at left back than he was a year ago. In midfield, it was always going to be difficult to replace Schneiderlin. I'd prefer to have Morgan than either one of Clasie and Romeu, but we now have BOTH Clasie and Romeu. Sure, the rules of association football sadly don't allow us to play two new players in place of one departing player, but again the depth is much better. We can cope much better this year with an injury or a suspension to a defensive midfielder. Last season when either Victor or Morgan were out, I feared we were much weaker (especially after Cork's departure). Now, if we can't field Wanyama or Clasie, I think we are only slightly weaker. Steve Davis seems to be a better player than last year (is this just form/confidence or has he found his role?) The front three of Tadic, Mane and Pelle are clicking together brilliantly. This time last year, some fans were saying Mane was a League One player. It now seems close to unanimous that he's a £30m player. Tadic started last season brilliantly but then faded. He now seems way more consistent. Pelle remains very consistent. Although it's been stop-start, we hopefully still have Rodriguez to come back and play a role. Hell, even Gaston Ramirez seems to have re-emerged as a half useful squad player. I might still be persuaded that our best XI from last season is a little better than our best XI from this season. But you can't play your best XI in every game. In fact, it's quite rare to be able to field your best XI in any single match, there's usually an injury, a niggle or a suspension for at least one of them. Over 38 games, you need to look at your best 17 or 18, not your best 11. On that score, I think we are better this year and so have every chance of beating the 60 points we got last year. And on a rudimentary points per game basis, we are on target to get 63 points this season.

I much prefer comparing the matches like-with like (so, example: we're 3 points down v Everton at home, 3 points up v Sunderland away, same as last season v Man Utd). The problem with all the "best" or "worst" start to the season sort of analysis is they just stretch this to cover an indefinable number of matches. If we win the first three games of a season and draw the next three, that would be our best ever "start" to the season. If we lose the first two games 3-0, that would be our worst ever "start" to the season.

Law 12 of the game covers that. You don't have to make contact for it to be a direct free kick/penalty. Sadly, it's rarely or sensibly enforced.

I was quite a fan of Fabrice Fernandes too. But I think we need to accept that he ain't coming back.

At least Mane wasn't in the team tonight. He's League One at best. Basically Ali Dia Mk2.

2-1 to west ham

Well, there's usually a positive relationship.Anders wasn't bad for us, but somehow very, very good for Sweden.Delgado just couldn't adapt to England. That was a weird one.Otherwise, being good for Saints and being good for your country are pretty well correlated. The only other one that springs to mind is Neil McCann - wasn't he quite good for Scotland but utterly rubbish for us?

You okay, hun?

For the LOLs

Fair question - when did we last beat the Champions away? Ever?

Can someone please, please, please dig up that thread with people saying Mane was a League One player. That was a peach.

People get so hung up on the transfer fee and forget the wages. My rough guess is that Long is paid about 30% of what Lallana gets paid and so this needs to be factored in to whether they are each "worth it" or not. Very rough guess on what each would be sellable for? Long £8m, Lallana £12m. That's a massive capital depreciation on both players, but on an epic scale for Lallana. Not as bad as Osvaldo though, admittedly.

I keep thinking we really need a No.10...that position just behind Pelle doesn't seem to have anyone who's a natural fit (apart from Ramirez...but let's not reopen that can of worms).

That's not wholly unfair. But making a net profit of, what, £30m on the transfer market while doing so is pretty impressive. Whether that can be repeated ad infinitum...well, let's less certain.

Agree with this. I think we were probably right this year to sell two players for a total of £40m and then buy 8 players for about £5m each (ok, that's an oversimplification, but broadly right) But next year, if we sell Wanyama and Mane for £40m, we really don't need 8 new £5m players - we need one or two superstars. I'm also a bit worried that the academy production line seems to have dried up a little. Harry Reid hasn't burst into the first team. And the others seems to be way off to the fringes. Ok, there's no way you can produce a Bale, Walcott or Shaw every single year. But for the first time in a long while, when I'm asked by fans of other clubs "So, who are the next 2 or 3 Saints academy players to keep an eye on?", I'm struggling for an answer.

These tables are meaningless if based just on transfer activity. A measure of what you're spending should be something like (not saying it's perfect, but it's closer to perfect): 1. Transfer fee paid divided by years of contract (so VvD counts as £2.3m a year for 5 years on cost side) 2. Player wage bill. If you sign your entire squad on free transfers, but pay them all £150,000 a week, you aren't the cheapest squad in the league 3. Transfer fees received divided by years that were left on the player's contract (so, I think that's £12m this year for Clyne, £12m this year and next year for Morgan)

Sure...if he'd done brilliantly at Liverpool, he probably wouldn't have left. For whatever reason, it didn't work out for him. He hardly played. As a back-up centre forward for Saints, he would have been relatively cheap and we could know with some confidence that he'd settle well at the club. Some players seem to click with some clubs and not others. Eg. Wilfred Zaha seems to be a one club man. Jason Puncheon seems to be very, very good as long as he isn't in a Saints shirt.