Dons vs Huns - New season!

[DantheDon]

I don't think Gleeson was a terrible player he had a couple of good games but it did seem he lacked the engine (perhaps just because he was never properly fit). I think failed to live up to the expectations a lot of fans especially as its speculated he was bought in on a decent wage. The general consensus seems to be that we should be doing better in transfers, McInnes has really struggled to re-build the squad over the last few seasons. 

[Sonoftherock]

12 hours ago, KennyFuckinPowers said:

Please elaborate, both of you. Gleeson played sporadically and started a handful of games, when he played, he was absolutely fine, he wasn't fit enough to play 90 minutes due to injuries, we're in the same position with Bryson right now. Fail to see why your " Jesus " retorts are merited, at least back it fucking up with some sort of contrary opinion. 

Gleeson was with us for 2 seasons and showed absolutely nothing in his 20-odd performances, or whatever it was.  In midfield the game mostly passed him by and he was miles off the pace.  He looked extremely pedestrian.  He wasn't good enough to impact our first team and as a result he was sat on the bench for most of his time with us.  Yes he had injury problems - but when he was on the pitch he was extremely underwhelming.

I don't know how much Gleeson was on, but he is an Irish international, who'd just come off 4 seasons in the championship.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that we will have been paying him top dollar to relocate to Scotland.

My feeling is that a youth player could have provided everything, and possibly more than Gleeson brought to the table, for a vastly reduced price.

You can make all the excuses you want - however my argument, based on the above, is that Gleeson was a poor signing and a massive waste of money.

If you think Gleeson was fine, (not withstanding the wages we were paying for him), then we have very different opinions on our hopes and aspirations for Aberdeen Football Club.  On that basis, there is not much point in continuing this debate.

Have a go with Tansey, Forrester, Bryson, etc... Interested to hear your excuses for the non-return on our significant investment for these players.  You can make excuses for anything... but the truth is there is an emerging trend.  We have wasted hundred of thousands of pounds in wages and in some cases transfer fees on injured, or mental ill/past their best players.  There are a few other culprits... but the aforementioned are certainly the worst examples.  After that we move into Stevie May territory.  Again, big wages and a big transfer fee.  Some will argue he ran about a lot and worked hard.  He absolutely did that - the boy ran himself into the ground for Aberdeen and bloody good on him!  However, did he represent value for money?  Could we have saved 400k (or whatever it was) and payed another player 1/10th of his wages, to provide a similar level level service?  I think we could have.

There seems to be no accountability for the amount of money we've just thrown away under McInnes... this both angers and worries me.

Hopefully this will change under Cormack.

[RicoS321]

A cracking summation! The annoying thing about Gleeson is that I (and others, I'm not some genius) picked it up within his first pre-season game. He was a Rob Milsom type, distinctly average and always playing within themselves. In fairness, you generally have to attend a game where they're playing to notice the full extent of it, because you miss a lot on the TV. Players like Ryan Jack can seem like they're not doing a lot at times, but when you're there you seem them tucking in to replace missing fullbacks and stretching the game. Gleeson played like one of those "modern" players you see playing fives where they've learned their entire game from watching someone on the TV. Running full pelt at a centre back to "take the ball off them", so that they look like they're the main man, rather than just taking a couple of steps back and receiving the ball easily because you've made the space. Gleeson was ponderous, put his defenders under pressure by standing too close to them, didn't cover his fullbacks and had shite movement (he had one okay game at Pittodrie against someone, can't remember who). He was way out of his depth. If I had scouted him, I'd have spotted it straight away too, and almost anyone who's watched fitba regularly and played at any level (even fives) would have seen it had they been looking solely at him (which was what scouts are supposed to do!). I wouldn't blame McInnes, necessarily, for Gleeson that is where the club has to have a far better network of scouts and McInnes should be tasked with requesting a position and final sign off. That would reduce the nonsense that we keep getting where we're overloaded in parts of the pitch because Deek really liked McGeouch or whoever. McInnes is utterly to blame for Tansey, Storey, Main, Morris, May etc. who were playing in our league and blatantly didn't have the attributes to play for a McInnes team. Tansey's movement was shite for ICT, Storey was a fucking car crash of a fitba'r, and Main not much better.

[KennyFuckinPowers]

Glad you both replied. 

 

Solely on Gleeson, sonoftherock, you are correct in saying he was an International, he had a pretty respectable CV, the only reason we got him was because of his Injury problems, a quick search on Google will show you what every one of his Managers said about him, previous to joining us. I wanted it to work, same as all of us, I thought on paper it was a very good addition, it never worked out, but my point was, he never did anything wrong, made himself available for the ball, took the game ( And Olly Lee ) by the scruff of the neck against Hearts when he came on, we were being absolutely bossed, Livingston away, the game Wilson set up young Campbell, he made a big difference, and the other times he played, he did his job, kept it ticking along and was a pretty good passer of the Ball, I believe had we got him fully fit, he'd have been a key Player for us. Our aspirations are the very same, I assure you. The rest of the Players you have mentioned ( Bryson aside, for the moment ) you have hit the nail on the head, McInnes' transfer dealings have been largely pish and he doesn't get called out enough for it. Especially Forrester, Tansey & May.

 

I am not saying Gleeson was a success, I'm saying he never did anything wrong when he played, and when he played, he was never 100% Match Fit. 

 

Rico, Gleeson was brought in to replace Jack, similar players that come deep for the ball and keep it moving. He's never been a box to box midfielder, I absolutely understand why McInnes signed him, but sadly it wasn't to be.

 

I see the very same trend happening with Bryson now though, hasn't been fully fit since he arrived, has a pretty decent CV, is someone who could be a very important Player for us, but it's looking more and more unlikely. Again though, was pretty happy when we signed him and understand why McInnes brought him in.

[rocket_scientist]

For all the supposed science and professionalism that McInnes has supposedly brought to the club, perhaps he should have focused on the basics and recruited footballers who weren't fucked. Medicals were being used in the Turnbull and Bonthrone eras. I'm sure they've come a long way in the half a century since.

[tup1]

Playing in the English Championship for most of your career is bound to be hard going. It's a league full of cloggers and hatchet men.

So Bryson can be cut a bit of slack for the fitness issues. But he doesn't look good enough to play for us is the real problem.

McInnes used to be ruthless with players who were obviously not good enough, he must be going soft to keep Bryson in the team.

 

[RicoS321]

31 minutes ago, tup1 said:

Playing in the English Championship for most of your career is bound to be hard going. It's a league full of cloggers and hatchet men.

So Bryson can be cut a bit of slack for the fitness issues. But he doesn't look good enough to play for us is the real problem.

McInnes used to be ruthless with players who were obviously not good enough, he must be going soft to keep Bryson in the team.

 

I'm guessing that will change this weekend. I thought we'd see something from Bryson, he's a proven player. I'd be putting him in the McNamara and Naismith category of very good professional fitba'r who's just lost it after a fairly minor injury/run of injuries. I wouldn't even say he was a poor signing like a lot of the others, as he had no real injury history, keeps himself trim and is a professional. I expected him to be like Robson in terms of impact (different style of player). I'd like to see him get a couple of more appearances against some of the pisher sides just to be certain, but it doesn't look good for him. One thing I'd add, is that there is no way he should be playing high up the park like that. Needs to be along side Ferguson or just not playing.

[Ten Caat]

4 hours ago, rocket_scientist said:

For all the supposed science and professionalism that McInnes has supposedly brought to the club, perhaps he should have focused on the basics and recruited footballers who weren't fucked. Medicals were being used in the Turnbull and Bonthrone eras. I'm sure they've come a long way in the half a century since.

Players like Hoban and Devlin (and Scott Wright) would have been forced to retire in the 70s having suffered the injuries they have. Signing Devlin whilst only halfway through his rehab from his second cruciate repair was reckless to say the least. Bryson had no real history of injuries up to his last few months at Derby and I guess there was no reason to believe he wouldn't recover from it...nevertheless at 32 (and closer to 33) and likely to be at the top end of our wage structure....it was a gamble that has backfired spectacularly. I hope I'm wrong but I think he's done even at our level and we are stuck with a player till next summer who will contribute next to nothing and just be a drain on our finances (and possibly on our medical/physio staff's time too)

I get that our budget means we have to take the odd gamble  but Mcinnes isn't getting many of them right.

[tup1]

2 hours ago, RicoS321 said:

I'm guessing that will change this weekend. I thought we'd see something from Bryson, he's a proven player. I'd be putting him in the McNamara and Naismith category of very good professional fitba'r who's just lost it after a fairly minor injury/run of injuries. I wouldn't even say he was a poor signing like a lot of the others, as he had no real injury history, keeps himself trim and is a professional. I expected him to be like Robson in terms of impact (different style of player). I'd like to see him get a couple of more appearances against some of the pisher sides just to be certain, but it doesn't look good for him. One thing I'd add, is that there is no way he should be playing high up the park like that. Needs to be along side Ferguson or just not playing.

As I said earlier, I'd prefer to see a youngster replace Bryson with immediate effect.

On the basis that, whoever it is, he can't really be any worse and will in all likelihood be a great deal better.

McInnes is far too conservative, playing it safe every game. This team needs a good boot up the arse.

 

 

[RicoS321]

57 minutes ago, tup1 said:

As I said earlier, I'd prefer to see a youngster replace Bryson with immediate effect.

On the basis that, whoever it is, he can't really be any worse and will in all likelihood be a great deal better.

McInnes is far too conservative, playing it safe every game. This team needs a good boot up the arse.

 

 

Aye, if it were me, I'd have Campbell alongside Ferguson with mcginn in front and take it to st Johnstone full pelt. Especially as they're dicking about with a 3-4-3 at the moment. I wouldn't write Bryson off, but I also wouldn't give a fuck if he never played for us again. The conservative part, for me, is not choosing Bryson over Campbell, it's choosing three midfielders who's strengths lie in sitting deep or going box to box and shoe horning one further forward. Bryson wasn't suited to that role, but Campbell would be pish there as well and Ferguson can play there but it doesn't make the best of his abilities. If Wright hadn't turned out to be pish, it was tailor made for him. Maybe hedges? Fuck knows. We've got a plethora of players that don't quite fit.

[tup1]

Hedges actually looked ok when he came on, apart from his daft haircut.

At least he has a bit of pace about him.

[BigAl]

21 minutes ago, RicoS321 said:

We've got a plethora of players that don't quite fit.

And a manager that is a champion at fitting square pegs into round holes  

[TheDeeDon]

2 hours ago, BigAl said:

And a manager that is a champion at fitting square pegs into round holes  

Probably the best summing up of DM I have seen

[TheDeeDon]

2 hours ago, tup1 said:

Hedges actually looked ok when he came on, apart from his daft haircut.

At least he has a bit of pace about him.

I think Hedges is a decent player, seems to have a good footballing brain, but I don't see him as a winger and also think he is another player not suited to the DM style as he doesn't track back enough. Half expected to see him back down south by now.

 

 

[hercule poirot]

It's always easy with hindsight.

Did everyone think Gleeson was a good signing when he came up to Aberdeen? And what about Bryson? Wilson?

Yes to all of the above.

As succinctly put a few posts above, our Manager isn't very good with his pegs and holes 

[Madbadteacher]

Two things

1. McInnes has signed significantly more “bad” than “good”

2. Tactically we have regressed from a team that could score seven goals in one game to a team that can’t score one goal in seven games!

 

Recruitment?

Training?

Tactics?

Bad luck?

[tup1]

45 minutes ago, hercule poirot said:

It's always easy with hindsight.

Did everyone think Gleeson was a good signing when he came up to Aberdeen? And what about Bryson? Wilson?

Yes to all of the above.

As succinctly put a few posts above, our Manager isn't very good with his pegs and holes 

They are all English lower league dross is the problem.

The best two signings we made in recent times were Ferguson and Kennedy, both signed from other teams in the same league.

[hercule poirot]

 ^ Wilson was ex Man Utd, Bryson was a very highly thought of player at Derby, Both of these teams would be slightly above Aberdeen in the dross pecking order.

I thought Greg Stewart was a good signing first time around and after having watched Stevie May rip us apart at Ibrox, he got the nod of approval from most also.

All of the above failures due to team selection rather than their individual ability.

Ferguson,:yes. Kennedy: jury's out. 

 

I know my stuff min as I analyse football from the stand. Watching football on TV and forming an opinion on the back of professional analysts comments doesn't quite cut the mustard.