TheReebokBear

I'm not saying he's 'like' Davies, I'm saying he has the attributes we rate in Davies. The work rate, drive and running that we always raved about. He also lacks the technical attributes people moan that Davies doesn't have. Doyle is also unlike Davies, but people compare him to Davies due to work rate and willingness. A "guesser"......cute.

I meant amongst Bolton fans. I can say "it seems like almost nobody rates him" if you like, but "nobody" doesn't have to include everyone. It's like saying "I've packed everything".....you haven't literally packed everything there is. Context gives meaning. Let me say it another way. I am yet to hear from any Bolton fan who would see him as a positive signing and have heard many say they hope we don't want him.

It's interesting nobody rates the guy, when he has essentially the same attributes that everyone likes in KD. His work rate is phenomenal and he holds up the ball well. He even has enough of a leap on him for him to flick the ball on. He's not great in terms of touch and passing, but nor is KD. He's not got KD's power, but he's quicker. I'm not a huge fan of his, but he seems like the sort of player who is suited to do a specific 'job'; rather than just a great player. KD has been great for us because he does the job we need him to do; CMS may be a similar sort of player for whomever he signs for.

What about Orient?

Burnley and Cardiff.

I've no idea which one is right, to be honest. He could use a loan in a higher league, which he had with Coventry until he got injured.

Fair enough. I can only say that I've seen him a few times, including going to see him play for Swindon, and that's my view of him. I've seen him smash in a few good goals and he's been on Sky before this season and with Swindon before that, I've just taken the time to watch him. I just don't think he can be written off as not good enough. We've sent him on loan 3 times. Twice he's done extremely well and once he got injured. I'm not sure how much more can be expected of the lad thus far. A Championship loan next season would be a good measure of the kid.

Yeah Rembrandt, I'm a bit confused by that. It's only our site that has that as his birthday (you'd assume we'd know, obviously), others have him a year younger. Plus he's announced as 19 before the game today and was interviewed a few weeks back and the guy said "you're only 19, what are your ambitions?" (or something along those lines) and he didn't correct the guy. I had assumed our dob was a typo.

So hang on, Garrp. Someone watches a player play some games, then has a view on that player, but that is somehow not permissible to you? Do you want to run the rationale for that one by me? How else is someone supposed to make a judgement on a player?

Or there's the two he smashed in the other week, although the keeper made an error on one. Just because you have no idea what you're talking about, doesn't mean other people don't.

And the rest of his time there and at Swindon. Amazing isn't it? You watch a player play, and then you can say things about how they play........it's like some kind of magic.

Ward is 19. I'd be amazed if he was good enough for the Prem at that age. He has a bit of pace, a bit of skill and a bit of power; but offers nothing special in any of those areas. He has a terrific shot on him and can put in a decent ball. He also has good control on his headers and good work rate. He's actually a similar player to Davies when he was at Chesterfield. He's not a world beater, but he's a better player than Jon Walters was at his age; and a few have said they'd have him off Stoke.

It sounds like his wages would mean we'd need to see him as vital to the side for the next few seasons, if we invested in him.

Good point.

We didn't get 34 points though, did we?

No. His movement stopped, he gained weight and he generally couldn't be arsed. He was rubbish.

At the time, he was shit. Many of us said that a change of clubs would help him out; but he was awful at the end with us.

Sounds like a pay-as-you-play deal.

We have a name that starts with the same letter as two of the relegated sides, that must be relevant too somehow. We finished 7 points above the relegated sides and 3 points off 8th: That is a relevant stat. Finishing 3 points above a club who could have gone down means sod-all (except that we're better than Blackburn )

As you are well aware, we're not in a position to just throw money at the squad. Therefore, Coyle isn't going to be able to fix all the issues with the squad at once. We have issues all over the park, but we're likely to go into next season with a similar squad to the one we ended the season with; even though he can change more this time than last summer. We have to prioritise and some positions have bodies already there and we'd need to sell to improve them. Alonso has clearly caused an issue for next season (not to trivialise the death of a young woman, but the effect on the squad is something that needs to be dealt with). I assume that is why Ricky is being offered a new deal, to cover for the absent player, though that may be wrong. Right back has two players there already, Steinsson and Ricketts. We've seen nothing about either moving on, so we may have to continue as normal there; though Onuoha may be a right back for us.....so many ifs and buts. Ultimately, I think the most striking issue about the squad is the complete lack of goals in attack. You can patch parts of a squad, but not the strikers in a 4-4-2. We may not be able to fix everything, but we need to fix that.

I'd probably want him if we could get him. It would depend upon the impact it would have on our other aspirations in the transfer market. I don't know whether we will see other sales, aside from Cahill (a 'keeper seems almost certain to leave) and what effect that might have on our budgets. Received fees can become wages, after all. The question is whether our current (10/11) wage budget is sustainable, or whether we need to cut it to maintain some degree of financial stability. If we can maintain the 10/11 budget without damaging the club, then we can probably afford one major signing - but if we signed a 'big name' in midfield, then the reported Pratley deal starts to look like we've throw away 17k a week plus a signing fee. After all, once Holden is fit, there is only one position to fill in the middle of the park. IF the Cahill deal reported in the Mirror has a basis, then that deal may well sort out the defence in one move AND help our finances out. In which case, all out money can go into finding a couple of talented forwards to give us some real firepower next season. After all, we can only buy another lefty if we sell Taylor or Petrov, and we won't improve on Lee down the right. So the deal supposedly being discussed for Cahill would leave us with one area of focus our resources on.

What decision do you think I've made? I want one midfielder in, two strikers, 3 defenders (following Cahill going) and cover for the right. I'd also like to see if we can find a buyer for one of the leftwingers and bring in someone more reliable. If the one midfielder is Pratley, then I hope he's good enough.

Does Onuoha replace Cahill, or is he a new right back for us? (if it's true, obviously)

If we've really signed Pratley, I don't see us spending big in midfield. Pratley makes four recognised midfielders. Then if we really rate Vela, he can come in in a crisis. I'm not sure Barton, or any top midfielder, is on the cards.

I've seen Muamba have plenty of great games for us. I've seen him break up attacks almost all game vs Utd. He's man-marked Gerrard out of a game. He's completely dominated players like Barton and Modric. He's also had games where he's looked worse than useless. But he's a 23 year old, playing a role that players grow into. People are saying how great Parker is. A few years ago, when he was available, no Bolton fan wanted to touch him with a barge pole. He's matured into a role and his experience is showing. Different player in a different role, but no defensive midfield player is the finished article at 23. His passing needs to improve, but he doesn't lose the ball half as much as people claim. He can't shoot, but that's not his job. If we're relying on Muamba for goals, then something is very wrong. He drives forward well with the ball and having more movement upfront might see more come of it. I still say Muamba has the potential to be a good player. But he can't spray passes and shoot from 30 yards, so clearly he's shit. The fact that he has one of the highest tackle success rates doesn't seem to matter, nor does the fact he makes shed-loads of tackles. And for a player who always gives it away, his average pass completion over a season has been near 80% in the past (though when he's off form it can drop as low as 60%). He's not a super star.....but he gets vastly more abuse than he's due.