Schu me the way to Amarillo - Summer 2025 Transfer Thread

[sonicthewhite]

Autos is the goal next season. SS knew that coming in.

If the Autos is actually the goal then that's going to need some serious work and investment this summer.

[TonyDomingos]

Autos is the goal next season. SS knew that coming in.

If the Autos is actually the goal then that's going to need some serious work and investment this summer.

Quite a bold target given the last couple of years. But, what a season it would be!

[Spartan2]

Has to be promotion for me, I'm sick of hearing excuses. Parky did it in one season, Oxford managed to go up and stay up, Oxford! Good managers can do it. We've set our standards too low, it's a shit league, full of awful players (most of them play for us) TBH I don't even see promotion as that big of an achievement. Getting us to the playoffs in the championship, that would be an achievement.

[BWFC_Insane]

Autos is the goal next season. SS knew that coming in.

It’s fine to say it. But saying it doesn’t do anything - that ambition has to be backed up with action. And that action would need significant investment into the playing squad.

[BWFC_Insane]

Going to be a long summer. I have pretty low expectations tbh. Doesn’t appear like we have much to spend - it’s clear to anyone that we need a substantial amount adding to the squad to be really competitive and have limited spaces to fill with little prospect of creating new ones.

New sporting director, new recruitment bod who haven’t even started yet and these things take time to get going and working well.


I think the thing is that we mustn’t rush in and saddle the club with the wrong players. If it takes another season as depressing a thought as that is - that is better than signing absolute dross like we did last summer and then being stuck with it. Cos that means we can write off more and more seasons.

The rose-tinter is back.

And making a "season's a write off" case, coz you didn't like the last dude, but this is your sorta guy!

Minimum. Playoffs. For me.

Not at all. The reality is that we have been left with a poor squad, assembled expensively. If I was sitting here thinking this squad was good enough but had been mismanaged it would be different.

But I don’t and haven’t felt that even when Evatt went. I don’t care what the judgement on Schumacher is regardless - but next season I don’t right now have great vibes for. Maybe that’s just the way it ended and summer inertia. But there is an awful lot to do. A few changes won’t cut it.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Small tidy-up: PNE signed Stoke releasee Jordan Thompson. Oh well.

SHEFF WED
Released: Stuart Armstrong, Ben Hamer, Ryo Hatsuse, Michael Ihiekwe, Marvin Johnson, Pol Valentin, Mallik Wilks
Loanees returned: James Beadle, Ibrahim Cissoko, Shea Charles.

HULL
"Long-serving left-back Brandon Fleming, midfielder Callum Jones and wingers Nordin Amrabat and Doğukan Sinik will leave the club upon the expiration of their contracts on 30 June." Fleming is the fella Keith Hill loaned just as Covid descended; 25 now.

POMPEY
Released: Cohen Bramall, Tom Lowery, Alexander Milošević, Anthony Scully, Kusini Yengi.
Loans returned: Adil Aouchiche, Rob Atkinson, Kaide Gordon, Isaac Hayden, Freddie Potts and Mark O’Mahony.

[Mar]

Small tidy-up: PNE signed Stoke releasee Jordan Thompson. Oh well.

SHEFF WED
Released: Stuart Armstrong, Ben Hamer, Ryo Hatsuse, Michael Ihiekwe, Marvin Johnson, Pol Valentin, Mallik Wilks
Loanees returned: James Beadle, Ibrahim Cissoko, Shea Charles.

HULL
"Long-serving left-back Brandon Fleming, midfielder Callum Jones and wingers Nordin Amrabat and Doğukan Sinik will leave the club upon the expiration of their contracts on 30 June." Fleming is the fella Keith Hill loaned just as Covid descended; 25 now.

POMPEY
Released: Cohen Bramall, Tom Lowery, Alexander Milošević, Anthony Scully, Kusini Yengi.
Loans returned: Adil Aouchiche, Rob Atkinson, Kaide Gordon, Isaac Hayden, Freddie Potts and Mark O’Mahony.

Yengi's a funny one. Had he not acted like Billy big bollocks against us you'd argue we'd be after a striker that fits his billing.

As it stands though, that's probably his best performance in a Pompey shirt and rather than giving us a case for bring interested ala Tom Eaves, he's just dropped off.

Still, might be worth a trial. Even if it adds to the irk around the ground. Gotta be better than Shitete.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I would hope we’re aiming above “better than Etete”, or the trials alone will take an eternity to narrow down the field…

On this week’s podcast (which seems to get longer the less there is to discuss) Ilesy says he thinks we won’t be in for Niall Ennis because we need a target man. I see the reasoning (although personally I think the more likely reason is Stoke gouging the market) but I’d say we don’t just need one type - we also need pace - and Schuey used both types in rotation at Plymouth.

[Prufrock]

Iles also seems convinced it's a 343 next year which I'm... not.

[BWFC_Insane]

Iles also seems convinced it's a 343 next year which I'm... not.

343/433 hybrid would be fine where we can play either system. I think it’s less about systems and much more about character and organisation. Don’t care that much if it’s 3 at the back or four if we can’t keep it out of our net.

I guess if the Roughan talk is true and we are in for him it doesn’t scream a back four.

[Prufrock]

All fair, and I agree I'd expect to see both at points, but there were a couple of teams towards the end where even the XI picked would have suited a 343 more and we will played the 4. I'd be surprised if 433 wasn't Plan A.

[Worthy4England]

Iles also seems convinced it's a 343 next year which I'm... not.

343/433 hybrid would be fine where we can play either system. I think it’s less about systems and much more about character and organisation. Don’t care that much if it’s 3 at the back or four if we can’t keep it out of our net.

I guess if the Roughan talk is true and we are in for him it doesn’t scream a back four.

I agree it should be less about systems - but you probably need one in mind as you do your recruitment - and the problem with 343/433 is to be the best at one or the other, you likely need different squad depth in different places - or you end up with our last few years of could be left CB, maybe at a pinch LB or perhaps on a sunny day LWB...(which is sort of what we heard about Iredale and a few others). I think you can probably do that with a couple of players, but by the time you're talking half the starting XI could be a, b or c, I'm starting to think perhaps they're not the best at any of them.

[BWFC_Insane]

Iles also seems convinced it's a 343 next year which I'm... not.

343/433 hybrid would be fine where we can play either system. I think it’s less about systems and much more about character and organisation. Don’t care that much if it’s 3 at the back or four if we can’t keep it out of our net.

I guess if the Roughan talk is true and we are in for him it doesn’t scream a back four.

I agree it should be less about systems - but you probably need one in mind as you do your recruitment - and the problem with 343/433 is to be the best at one or the other, you likely need different squad depth in different places - or you end up with our last few years of could be left CB, maybe at a pinch LB or perhaps on a sunny day LWB...(which is sort of what we heard about Iredale and a few others). I think you can probably do that with a couple of players, but by the time you're talking half the starting XI could be a, b or c, I'm starting to think perhaps they're not the best at any of them.

Yeah this is my worry too. I think we’ve got Toal who to me is a back four centre half. He looks at sea wide centre half in a back three and I think struggles to be dominant enough on his own in the middle of a back three.

Then we have Johnston who is a left sided back three centre half.

Forrester who apart from injury prone is probably a back three middle organiser type.

Then Forino who maybe is a back four centre half more than anything else.

Generalising a bit but does feel like a lot of players who don’t fit in the same team. We’ve never really developed any partnerships.

As you say we don’t have natural left backs either - at least not in the standard sense.

All that’s before we look at the forwards who were recruited last summer for a 343 but never once looked comfortable playing it. So yeah…I’d like players in a system they feel like they could play. Some of that for me needs partnerships building rather than chopping and changing.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Annoyingly busy today but a couple of things to share

Ilesy does indeed seem convinced we're still back-three next season but here's a Schumacher quote from just before the Posh game:

We'll look at potentially changing the recruitment side of things, i.e. based on a shape. This team has been recruited to play a back five, to play with three centre-backs, over the last few years. So, I want to recruit to play a system that I'd prefer, playing with wide players, which hasn't really been easy to do so far. We would look to try and get some speed on the sides if we can, forward-thinking players, a number nine that runs in behind, and a physical presence, if possible.

Now, that never explicitly says "back four" (and indeed I think we will still seek some in-game flexibility), but it does explicitly say he doesn't want to hire players who can only play back-three. I suspect that's more about wanting high width than specifically hating wingbacks, which as noticed he largely played in Argyle's title win - but note that he changed them to back four in the higher division and also played a back four at Stoke. From what I can gather he sometimes had one full-back who'd "stay home" more than the other - a tactic that helped Mourinho win several titles - but it looks like he did have at least one full-back bombing on. Which could be JDC or Conway...

Background reading: here's a Plymouth forum post from last summer comparing Schuey's back four with Rooney's. Props to the guy who confidently predicts Rooney will outshine Schuey.
https://pasoti.co.uk/threads/schumacher ... -3.128973/

[BWFC_Insane]

^^You could read that as him saying ‘yeah back five not my thing’ and he wants wingers to be able to play a 433 or whatever.

You could also maybe read it as ‘we’ve got the players for a back five but I’d like to add more width’….which would be a 343 I guess…which is ironically what Evatt tried to do last summer…

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

^^You could read that as him saying ‘yeah back five not my thing’ and he wants wingers to be able to play a 433 or whatever.

You could also maybe read it as ‘we’ve got the players for a back five but I’d like to add more width’….which would be a 343 I guess…which is ironically what Evatt tried to do last summer…

I hear you on the openness to interpretation, but I disagree that the 3-box-3 gives you high width. In that formation your two 'forward midfield' players – or I guess Evatt wanted Collins & McAtee - are more central, like 10s; it's a square box with them in front of your two central midfielders. Although they can roam, they aren't wide men. Think more Bellingham/Foden/Palmer than Grealish/Gordon/Saka.

All formations are only starting points, like, but box midfield ain't high width - unless you specifically ask your two 10s to peel wide in possession - which leaves you open to transitions. As we found out, but then we've been open to transition on just about every formation we've played since 2017....

[Prufrock]

I think the other reading is a 343 but with wingers rather than "10s". More Conte with Willian and Hazard either side of Costa. I'd be a lot happier with that than the narrow version (which I'm still convinced Evatt was steered towards by England playing it despite at no point ever looking comfortable). It asks a lot of the central two though. Chelsea had Kante. We do...not.

On the ball, your differences from a 433, especially if your midfield triangle has one sitting, are fine margins. On the ball a 433 where say Morley drops deep between the centre halves to get the ball and the full backs push on basically is a 343.

I'd prefer us to be 433 with the option of a 343.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I think the other reading is a 343 but with wingers rather than "10s". More Conte with Willian and Hazard either side of Costa. I'd be a lot happier with that than the narrow version (which I'm still convinced Evatt was steered towards by England playing it despite at no point ever looking comfortable). It asks a lot of the central two though. Chelsea had Kante. We do...not.

On the ball, your differences from a 433, especially if your midfield triangle has one sitting, are fine margins. On the ball a 433 where say Morley drops deep between the centre halves to get the ball and the full backs push on basically is a 343.

I'd prefer us to be 433 with the option of a 343.

Yep, I endorse all this, but I would ask where that sort of "wide" (rather than "box") 343/433 leaves a lot of our players. It has zero '10s' and we have a million. I'm not sure Randall works anywhere but as the 10 in a 4231. I'm not sure McAtee is anything but a 'second striker' (and I'm not entirely sure he works there, either). Collins could work on the left of a front three but I'm not sure he offers the width we crave. The 'bag of bits' strikes again...

Put another way, to pass a Monday - if we were to play a wide front three, who'd be in the XI? Feel free to add 'new signing here' - but as a balance for that, list the players who don't fit that system...

[Worthy4England]

Given the wide ranging tea-leaf reading views, I'm not going to read it, just take a punt. 4 at the back.

[Worthy4England]

Iles also seems convinced it's a 343 next year which I'm... not.

343/433 hybrid would be fine where we can play either system. I think it’s less about systems and much more about character and organisation. Don’t care that much if it’s 3 at the back or four if we can’t keep it out of our net.

I guess if the Roughan talk is true and we are in for him it doesn’t scream a back four.

I agree it should be less about systems - but you probably need one in mind as you do your recruitment - and the problem with 343/433 is to be the best at one or the other, you likely need different squad depth in different places - or you end up with our last few years of could be left CB, maybe at a pinch LB or perhaps on a sunny day LWB...(which is sort of what we heard about Iredale and a few others). I think you can probably do that with a couple of players, but by the time you're talking half the starting XI could be a, b or c, I'm starting to think perhaps they're not the best at any of them.

Yeah this is my worry too. I think we’ve got Toal who to me is a back four centre half. He looks at sea wide centre half in a back three and I think struggles to be dominant enough on his own in the middle of a back three.

Then we have Johnston who is a left sided back three centre half.

Forrester who apart from injury prone is probably a back three middle organiser type.

Then Forino who maybe is a back four centre half more than anything else.

Generalising a bit but does feel like a lot of players who don’t fit in the same team. We’ve never really developed any partnerships.

As you say we don’t have natural left backs either - at least not in the standard sense.

All that’s before we look at the forwards who were recruited last summer for a 343 but never once looked comfortable playing it. So yeah…I’d like players in a system they feel like they could play. Some of that for me needs partnerships building rather than chopping and changing.

Agree mate.