Thomas Vermaelen

[Lane]

So if you have a 9/10 and two 8/10, you can't sign a third 8/10 as your fourth centre back. Ideally you should have two 9's, an 8 and maybe a 7.

Who decided this was the way it should be? Who decreed that your third or fourth centre back aren't allowed to be as good as any of your others?

The crazy thing is, this has been raised in another centre back thread by another poster, so it's not just one person with this strange idea. Am I alone in thinking this arbitrary way of building a squad and deciding who you sign based on whether or not they're a bit worse than players in the same position in your team is a bit weird?

Nobody decided that, it's just the way it is. Barcelona doesn't have 4 equally good CBs, neither does Munich or Real and so on. Real have the exactly the mix i am talking about. Two main ones in Pepe and Ramos, then a good cover just a bit worse in Varane, maybe temporarily a bit worse as he is young still. And then god knows who as a cover.

 

[The Neviller]

Nobody decided that, it's just the way it is. Barcelona doesn't have 4 equally good CBs, neither does Munich or Real and so on. Real have the exactly the mix i am talking about. Two main ones in Pepe and Ramos, then a good cover just a bit worse in Varane, maybe temporarily a bit worse as he is young still. And then god knows who as a cover.

It's just the way it is. Managers actively seek out players not good enough for their team, rejecting better available players, because you can't have more than 2 players as good as each other in any given position. Right.

So, this summer we should either sign a top player to play with Evans, or a player not as good as Smalling or Jones, because having another good defender is bad, and having a worse defender is better balance. feck logic.

 

[Lane]

It's just the way it is. Managers actively seek out players not good enough for their team, rejecting better available players, because you can't have more than 2 players as good as each other in any given position. Right.

No they settle at main paring and just don't by 5 CBs or 4 equally skilled ones for that matter. If they do have too many players on the same level, they sell ones that are too good to be a cover but are not perceived by managers as a main, first team players.

 

[The Neviller]

No they settle at main paring and just don't by 5 CBs or 4 equally skilled ones for that matter. If they do have too many players on the same level, they sell ones that are too good to be a cover but are not perceived by managers as a main, first team players.

And then do what? Buy a lesser quality one?

This is definitely Football Manager talk.

I'd be interested in other people's take on this, because I find how you're discussing building a squad utterly absurd.

 

[The Man Himself]

Nobody decided that, it's just the way it is. Barcelona doesn't have 4 equally good CBs, neither does Munich or Real and so on. Real have the exactly the mix i am talking about. Two main ones in Pepe and Ramos, then a good cover just a bit worse in Varane, maybe temporarily a bit worse as he is young still. And then god knows who as a cover.

Barcelona and Munich's playing style is different. Still, Barcelona have suffered for not having proper CBs and playing Mascherano there. As far as Real, they are always looking to add in attack even if they don't have proper defenders and then buy more attackers if it doesn't work. Not our style. 4 good CBs for top clubs is not a luxury, particularly if you are looking at playing 55 or so games in a season in total and one of them is a cover at other positions. This season, we might do with 3CBs but if a top talent like Hummels become available, club has to go for him.

 

[Lane]

And then do what? Buy a lesser quality one?

This is definitely Football Manager talk.

I'd be interested in other people's take on this, because I find how you're discussing building a squad utterly absurd.

No, that actually a real life. Your position is more of FM-stretch. You try to buy as many good players as you can while not considering balance of the squad.

Just forget about all this theorizing you are doing and look at real examples. The top clubs like Real, Munich, Barca, Roma(as Juve plays with back three), Aletico, Chelsea. How many skilled CBs do they have.

PS. You can buy an experienced player that is ready to be a cover in a top club for decent money or you buy an emerging player looking for a chance. It all depends on the exact players you have. If you have two CBs 29-31 years old it makes sense to buy a talented younger player.

 

[Lane]

Barcelona and Munich's playing style is different. Still, Barcelona have suffered for not having proper CBs and playing Mascherano there. As far as Real, they are always looking to add in attack even if they don't have proper defenders and then buy more attackers if it doesn't work. Not our style. 4 good CBs for top clubs is not a luxury, particularly if you are looking at playing 55 or so games in a season in total and one of them is a cover at other positions. This season, we might do with 3CBs but if a top talent like Hummels become available, club has to go for him.

Just name one top club, that will have 4 CBs that are all equipped to play in first team, similarly good etc.
No club is having a 4 good CBs, that just does not happen. Even if there are four good CBs on the books, it just means that manager does not believe in one or even two of them and is looking to offload.

 

[The Neviller]

No, that actually a real life. Your position is more of FM-stretch. You try to buy as many good players as you can while not considering balance of the squad.

Just forget about all this theorizing you are doing and look at real examples. The top clubs like Real, Munich, Barca, Roma(as Juve plays with back three), Aletico, Chelsea. How many skilled CBs do they have.

PS. You can buy an experienced player that is ready to be a cover in a top club for decent money or you buy an emerging player looking for a chance. It all depends on the exact players you have. If you have two CBs 29-31 years old it makes sense to buy a talented younger player.

I don't play football manager, so that wouldn't be likely.

You don't decide against buying players because they're too good, and actively look for worse players, so that they aren't as good as your current players. That makes zero sense. Absolutely none at all.

 

[The Man Himself]

Just name one top club, that will have 4 CBs that are all equipped to play in first team, similarly good etc.
No club is having a 4 good CBs, that just does not happen. Even if there are four good CBs on the books, it just means that manager does not believe in one or even two of them and is looking to offload.

We are going bit around circles and I see you and some other weird username guy arguing with Nev on this topic endlessly and now I am doing same. Lets just discuss it in hypothetical scenarios and probably I will try to get what you mean. OK?

1) If Hummels is interested and wants to sign for United, what you do with current 3? (Name exact one who should be sold if that's what you want).
2) Repeat of 1 for Martins Indi
3) Repeat of 1 for Vermaelen

 

[Lane]

I don't play football manager, so that wouldn't be likely.

You don't decide against buying players because they're too good, and actively look for worse players, so that they aren't as good as your current players. That makes zero sense. Absolutely none at all.

As i've said earlier, you need to stop all these pointless theorizing about buying players and look at real life examples.
Just look how many CBs and the level of these player, the composition of the squad so to speak top teams have. Munich, Real, Atletico, Barca, Dortmund, Roma, Chelsea none of them have 4 CBs fighting for a spot.

 

[The Neviller]

We are going bit around circles and I see you and some other weird username guy arguing with Nev on this topic endlessly and now I am doing same. Lets just discuss it in hypothetical scenarios and probably I will try to get what you mean. OK?

1) If Hummels is interested and wants to sign for United, what you do with current 3? (Name exact one who should be sold if that's what you want).
2) Repeat of 1 for Martins Indi
3) Repeat of 1 for Vermaelen

I genuinely think they're the same guy. I've never heard anyone talk about football squads in this way before.

 

[The Neviller]

As i've said earlier, you need to stop all these pointless theorizing about buying players and look at real life examples.
Just look how many CBs and the level of these player, the composition of the squad so to speak top teams have. Munich, Real, Atletico, Barca, Dortmund, Roma, Chelsea none of them have 4 CBs fighting for a spot.

You're saying that's by design though, and what managers actually think and do deliberately. "We need a centre back, this guy is available at a fee we can afford, but he's as good as our other centre backs so we shouldn't sign him. Find me someone worse, Mr Scout". Nonsense.

For what it's worth, Mourinho has always said his ideal is 22 players, 1 for every position and 1 of equal quality as back-up for every position. Look up the quote yourself.

 

[The Man Himself]

I genuinely think they're the same guy. I've never heard anyone talk about football squads in this way before.

I genuinely haven't understood his point completely that's why put those hypothetical scenarios. Only argument I see against having 4 good CBs is someone being discontent with game minutes if first pair stays injury free. For us, it almost never happens. I agree that in our current scenario if a good CB is available, we go for him, LvG chooses first pair based on training and performance etc and other 2 fill in as and when needed. No need to sell any of the current 3 to buy a top CB.

 

[The Neviller]

I genuinely haven't understood his point completely that's why put those hypothetical scenarios. Only argument I see against having 4 good CBs is someone being discontent with game minutes if first pair stays injury free. For us, it almost never happens. I agree that in our current scenario if a good CB is available, we go for him, LvG chooses first pair based on training and performance etc and other 2 fill in as and when needed. No need to sell any of the current 3 to buy a top CB.

The idea that you turn down the opportunity to sign players of equal quality to Jones and Smalling, and actively look for players worse than them is madness. He actually said the 3rd centre back should be worse than the other 2, and the 4th worse again.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who doesn't get this way of thinking.

 

[Devil may care]

Injury prone and error prone, our 3 CB's are not that good that we can afford to bring in someone this dodgy.

 

[The Neviller]

Injury prone and error prone, our 3 CB's are not that good that we can afford to bring in someone this dodgy.

Should we sign someone better, the same, or worse than the 3 we have? That's the question.

 

[Lane]

You're saying that's by design though, and what managers actually think and do deliberately. "We need a centre back, this guy is available at a fee we can afford, but he's as good as our other centre backs so we shouldn't sign him. Find me someone worse, Mr Scout". Nonsense.

For what it's worth, Mourinho has always said his ideal is 22 players, 1 for every position and 1 of equal quality as back-up for every position. Look up the quote yourself.

Just name me top club that has four equally skilled CBs. And explain to me how come neither of mentioned do?
As i've said Real, Munich, Barca, Roma, Aletico, Chelsea.

You can't defend your argument, can't even name a single club with a four top CBs yet you think some ridiculous stuff about me being here with two logins, which is sort of idiotic, and also stuff about FM manager which as you claim you don't play.
You need to stop being twaddling about buying players and just look how actually football team are built. How many CBs Munich have, how many CBs Real have and so on.

 

[Devil may care]

Should we sign someone better, the same, or worse than the 3 we have? That's the question.

Sarcasm duly noted, someone capable of competing to start as opposed to a Buttner type signing.

 

[The Neviller]

Just name me top club that has four equally skilled CBs. And explain to me how come neither of mentioned do?
As i've said Real, Munich, Barca, Roma, Aletico, Chelsea.

You can't defend your argument, can't even name a single club with a four top CBs yet you think some ridiculous stuff about me being here with two logins, which is sort of idiotic, and also stuff about FM manager which as you claim you don't play.
You need to stop being twaddling about buying players and just look how actually football team are built. How many CBs Munich have, how many CBs Real have and so on.

I know they don't build squads by actively turning down players because they're too good, and going out of their way to sign worse players.

Here's an example. We have Evans, Smalling and Jones. We feel we need a fourth centre back. Nobody better than those three are available. Two centre backs are available, one of a similar ability to Smalling and Jones (Evans is our best centre back) and one of lesser ability. Both are available at a fee we can afford, are willing to come and fight for their place in the team, and won't impact on the funds available to sign other players.

Should we
A. Sign neither?
B. Sign the better one? (Of similar ability to Smalling and Jones, but not as good as Evans)
C. Sign the worse one? (Of lesser ability than Smalling and Jones)

 

[The Neviller]

Sarcasm duly noted, someone capable of competing to start as opposed to a Buttner type signing.

The sarcasm wasn't aimed at you mate.

 

[Lane]

We are going bit around circles and I see you and some other weird username guy arguing with Nev on this topic endlessly and now I am doing same. Lets just discuss it in hypothetical scenarios and probably I will try to get what you mean. OK?

1) If Hummels is interested and wants to sign for United, what you do with current 3? (Name exact one who should be sold if that's what you want).
2) Repeat of 1 for Martins Indi
3) Repeat of 1 for Vermaelen

As i've said already, you(or manager to be precise) need to determine a main CB pairing. If it's Hummels, Smalling whatever. Then you need one player for frequent rotation, maybe a bit worse, maybe on par. And then you need a cover. That's how any top club is built. If LVG wants Evans-Hummels as a main CBs and he prefers Jones to Smalling as a 3-rd choice then Smalling has to go.

Now if you are asking me, who personally i want, i don't have a firm position. I like our three guys and so i am open to the prospect buying experienced cover and let Evans, Jones, Smalling fight for 2 CB spots. Then if LVG want Hummels and is ready to sell one of our players i am fine with this too. I don't think we will get Hummels though.
1) Sell at least one and get a player suitable for cover. This year i would sell Jones. But if Evans does not cure his injury proneness next season i think he needs to go really.
2) Depends on if Indi is regarded as our first team player. If yes, see 1. But i don't think Indi is any better than our current CBs and he is not exactly the cover material either.
3) Nothing, cause i think Vermaelen would be a fine cover. He is not really suited for much more now.

 

[Lane]

I know they don't build squads by actively turning down players because they're too good, and going out of their way to sign worse players.

Here's an example. We have Evans, Smalling and Jones. We feel we need a fourth centre back. Nobody better than those three are available. Two centre backs are available, one of a similar ability to Smalling and Jones (Evans is our best centre back) and one of lesser ability. Both are available at a fee we can afford, are willing to come and fight for their place in the team, and won't impact on the funds available to sign other players.

Should we
A. Sign neither?
B. Sign the better one? (Of similar ability to Smalling and Jones, but not as good as Evans)
C. Sign the worse one? (Of lesser ability than Smalling and Jones)

Just name teams. Or you can't even name a single top team with 4 good CBs? That plays with back four. And also explain how come Real, Munich and other have only three good CBs and doing fine. Much better in fact.

 

[The Neviller]

Just name teams. Or you can't even name a single top team with 4 good CBs? That plays with back four. And also explain how come Real, Munich and other have only three good CBs and doing fine. Much better in fact.

Answer the question. A, B or C? It's a simple scenario, and since you already hold your opinion, shouldn't be a difficult answer.

 

[Lane]

It's a simple fecking A, B or C answer. I've given you a simple scenario.

You need to calm down, that was not answer to your post.
And i will answer yours as soon as you will name me top teams that use 4 CBs and the reasons why other top teams(Munich, Real, Dortmund and so on) only use three.

 

[The Man Himself]

As i've said already, you(or manager to be precise) need to determine a main CB pairing. If it's Hummels, Smalling whatever. Then you need one player for frequent rotation, maybe a bit worse, maybe on par. And then you need a cover. That's how any top club is built. If LVG wants Evans-Hummels as a main CBs and he prefers Jones to Smalling as a 3-rd choice then Smalling has to go.

Now if you are asking me, who personally i want, i don't have a firm position. I like our three guys and so i am open to the prospect buying experienced cover and let Evans, Jones, Smalling fight for 2 CB spots. Then if LVG want Hummels and is ready to sell one of our players i am fine with this too. I don't think we will get Hummels though.
1) Sell at least one and get a player suitable for cover. This year i would sell Jones. But if Evans does not cure his injury proneness next season i think he needs to go really.
2) Depends on if Indi is regarded as our first team player. If yes, see 1. But i don't think Indi is any better than our current CBs and he is not exactly the cover material either.
3) Nothing, cause i think Vermaelen would be a fine cover. He is not really suited for much more now.

Your point of deliberately having worse players than first choice is baffling. Why? If wages are not an issue, players are ready to fight it out, what is the problem?

Also sell Jones???? ffs

 

[The Neviller]

Your point of deliberately having worse players than first choice is baffling. Why? If wages are not an issue, players are ready to fight it out, what is the problem?

Also sell Jones???? ffs

I really don't get it. You can't have players on the bench as good as the ones in the team, so sell them and buy worse players?

Seriously, where does this idea come from, and how do two totally different guys come up with the same silly idea over two centre back transfer threads on the same night?

 

[Lane]

Your point of deliberately having worse players than first choice is baffling. Why? If wages are not an issue, players are ready to fight it out, what is the problem?

Also sell Jones???? ffs

It's a dubious interpretation. You don't need to have "deliberately worse players". You need to have balance. Does any of the top teams i named have four good CBs? Why? You are sticking with some theoretical recruitment strategy and forget how teams are actually built. How come top team just don't have 4 good CBs. surely Real, Barca, Munich and so on can afford it. They can even afford 5 as a special cover. So why are they not buying more CBs?

 

[The Neviller]

Answer my question. You're deliberately avoiding it because you know your point is daft.

A, B or C?

 

[Lane]

Answer my question. You're deliberately avoiding it because you know your point is daft.

A, B or C?

No i am avoiding it, so you will answer my questions first. And before all this silly A,B,C theory look at the real life situations. At Real, Munich and so on. None of them have 4 equally good CBs and all of them are built in the exact the way i described.

 

[Eboue]

This is a classic standoff. Riveting stuff.

 

[The Neviller]

No i am avoiding it, so you will answer my questions first. And before all this silly A,B,C theory look at the real life situations. At Real, Munich and so on. None of them have 4 equally good CBs and all of them are built in the exact the way i described.

They're built by selling players and buying worse ones to ensure some arbitrary idea of balance?

You've said if Hummels were available we should sell Jones and then buy someone not as good as Jones to be a backup player and ensure we have "balance".

When has any side ever done that?

 

[Lane]

This is a classic standoff. Riveting stuff.

I think it's kind of pathetic that Neviller can't come up with a single example of a top team that actually has 4 good CBs. And can't even bother to explain why all the top teams seems to have only three good CB and one worse for cover.

 

[The Neviller]

This is a classic standoff. Riveting stuff.

I'm at a loss here eboue. If Hummels were to come to Arsenal, which of your centre backs would you sell, and which worse one would you sign, for balance?

 

[Eboue]

I think it's kind of pathetic that Neviller can't come up with a single example of a top team that actually has 4 good CBs. And can't even bother to explain why all the top teams seems to have only three good CB and one worse for cover.

I'm at a loss here eboue. If Hummels were to come to Arsenal, which of your centre backs would you sell, and which worse one would you sign, for balance?

I haven't been reading either of your posts. I just want to know who will crack first and answer the other's questions. Can betEd give me some odds? @EdWeatherall

 

[The Neviller]

I think it's kind of pathetic that Neviller can't come up with a single example of a top team that actually has 4 good CBs. And can't even bother to explain why all the top teams seems to have only three good CB and one worse for cover.

I think it's kind of pathetic that you can't choose which of the first three letters of the alphabet you prefer, or tell me one single occasion where any club has ever sold a player and signed a worse one to replace him with for "balance".

You're an idiot.

 

[The Neviller]

Chelsea had 4 centre backs last season, by the way. Terry, Cahill, Luiz and Ivanovic, who isn't a right back and only ever played there because their right back was shite, and because the good right back they then bought was playing left back because their left back was injured.

 

[The Neviller]

We had 5. We didn't sell 1 to buy a worse 1 for balance. At any stage. Ever.

Because nobody ever has.

 

[The Neviller]

1. Sign Hummels
2. Sell Jones
3. Sign Titus Bramble
4. Balance!

 

[Lane]

They're built by selling players and buying worse ones to ensure some arbitrary idea of balance?

You've said if Hummels were available we should sell Jones and then buy someone not as good as Jones to be a backup player and ensure we have "balance".

When has any side ever done that?

Everyone did that. We did it with Pique for example. He was surplus to requirements so we sold him. Because we had Rio-Vidic as a main paring. The simple truth you are so blindly cant see is that every top team has a solid two CBs, one just as good or a bit worse for rotation. And one for deep cover. Or two main CBs and two cover players.
Real is built that way: Pepe-Ramos - main, Varane - 3-d choice. Nacho is a deep cover.
Munich: Dante-Boateng. Martinez for rotation and Buyten as a cover.
Roma: Castan-Benatia, Burdisso and Toloi are cover, played less than 10 games between them.
Dortmund: Sokratis-Hummels-Subotic are main three due to injuries and Friedrich is a cover.
Chelsea: Terry-Cahil, Luiz for rotation. Ivanovic played only four games in a CB role.
Atletico: Godin-Miranda, Alderweireld is a cover.
Barcelona: Pique-Mascherano, Puyol was not fit, so Bartra was a cover.

That's how a team is built. Three skilled CBs is more than enough, some teams even do well with two. When you have four CBs of the same level and you keep rotating them, it never works in your favor. And defense needs stability.

 

[The Neviller]

We sold Pique because his hometown club came in for him and he wanted to go home. We wanted to keep him, Ferguson has said on numerous occasions that he didn't want to sell him but we couldn't stand in his way when he wanted to go home. We didn't sign a better centre back then sell him and sign a worse one to replace him, for balance. That's what you're suggesting, and nobody has ever done that.

You've mentioned a few clubs there with 4 centre backs, and then excluded them with "he was injured" or "he only played centre back 4 times". It doesn't matter if he was injured or if he only played the position 4 times. He's there in the squad. Chelsea had 4 last season, we had 5. Man City had 4 and 2 others who can play there. Arsenal had 4, Liverpool had 5 and another 2 who can play there. Maybe there's a trend here with English clubs and the demands of the Premier League.

And not one of those clubs, that you've mentioned or I've mentioned, have signed a top centre back and then sold one they had to replace him with someone not as good to balance the squad. Not one.