BennTozer interview after Chesterfield

[Hometown Unicorn]

Originally Posted by krux

The difference is that Pearson would have dealt with the balls in the box that we have conceded from this year that Tozer hasn't.

As someone else posted, Tozer is better at passing and quicker, but not as good in the air.

The problem I have is that for someone costing 4 times what pearson did, he should be dominating the opposition every single game.

We conceded plenty from set pieces with Pearson in the backline, this issue with us conceding from set pieces isn't exactly new.

[Hometown Unicorn]

Also, why does money keep getting brought into it? If Tozer can do a job in defence that others can't, why does it bother people what we paid for him? It's not as if it's our money that's being spent anymore.

[Percy Sugden]

Originally Posted by krux

The difference is that Pearson would have dealt with the balls in the box that we have conceded from this year that Tozer hasn't.

As someone else posted, Tozer is better at passing and quicker, but not as good in the air.

The problem I have is that for someone costing 4 times what pearson did, he should be dominating the opposition every single game.

Money is irrelevant…. It’s up to the owners if they want to pay big transfer fees and big wages.

I liked Pearson. He was a leader on the field and an asset to the club while he was here. Football ability wise, the 3 CB’s that have been starting are better.

I think many underestimate just how low standards had dropped around the club in recent years and just how long it will take to put right.

I feel optimistic about our chances. There are goals in the team, all the players we have signed have improved us and we’ve now got a good run of games to really push up into the higher reaches of the NL. There are still a few weaker areas in the side but PP has only been in 9 games - he didn’t write the retained list and had limited time to bring in the players he wanted. Put it this way, we won’t be signed Simon Ainge as an option upfront in January.

There’s loads of moaning on here but does anybody actually want to go back to the dark days of the WST?

[krux]

Originally Posted by Hometown Unicorn

Also, why does money keep getting brought into it? If Tozer can do a job in defence that others can't, why does it bother people what we paid for him? It's not as if it's our money that's being spent anymore.

I keep bringing money into it, because if we spend several times over on a player compared to what we spent previously, and he is the most expensive player in that position in the league, then I expect him to be a superstar (like Mullin is).

Its not about the money per se. If we overpay but they deliver , like mullin has, then thats fine, its not our money.

[krux]

Originally Posted by Percy Sugden

Money is irrelevant…. It’s up to the owners if they want to pay big transfer fees and big wages.

I liked Pearson. He was a leader on the field and an asset to the club while he was here. Football ability wise, the 3 CB’s that have been starting are better.

I think many underestimate just how low standards had dropped around the club in recent years and just how long it will take to put right.

I feel optimistic about our chances. There are goals in the team, all the players we have signed have improved us and we’ve now got a good run of games to really push up into the higher reaches of the NL. There are still a few weaker areas in the side but PP has only been in 9 games - he didn’t write the retained list and had limited time to bring in the players he wanted. Put it this way, we won’t be signed Simon Ainge as an option upfront in January.

There’s loads of moaning on here but does anybody actually want to go back to the dark days of the WST?

again, this misses the point on the money. Its not about how much we spend, its about how good and the impact that expensive player has.

If we sign a midfielder in January and for arguments sake spend £1m on a transfer fee, and pay them £25k a week then you would expect them to be better than Luke Young , say. if they weren't you would not be happy.

If they are better than luke young and lead us to promotion, then you wouldn't worry that we paid £1m for them when really they are only 'worth' £50k or whatever.

[billybersham]

Originally Posted by Wxm boy

Let's hope they start showing it soon then. Our defensive record with a fully fit Pearson was superb. You can argue we were quite a defensive team then, but let's be frank, we aren't exactly seeing free flowing attacking football now are we?? Not managed more than 1 goal in any of our home games so far.

I really hope it comes together and we have a great season. We all want the same thing, to get out of this horrible league. I would love nothing more than to be on here in a few months laughing about the time I thought a fully fit Pearson was better than Tozer.

So you say our defensive record with a fully fit Pearson was superb but he played 31 times in 19-20 season and we finished two places off relegation and it has been said by many that only covid kept us up.Also earlier on in that season we had many posts on here stating that Pearson had thrown the towel in and had given up even shouting when on the pitch.

[moynkeepthefaith]

Originally Posted by krux

again, this misses the point on the money. Its not about how much we spend, its about how good and the impact that expensive player has.

If we sign a midfielder in January and for arguments sake spend £1m on a transfer fee, and pay them £25k a week then you would expect them to be better than Luke Young , say. if they weren't you would not be happy.

If they are better than luke young and lead us to promotion, then you wouldn't worry that we paid £1m for them when really they are only 'worth' £50k or whatever.

I agree its not about money and for me Tozer is a better player than Pearson. The point being made is the money is not our problem anymore so we don't need to build a budget to sign anyone in January.
Fact is if offered i personally would not swap Tozer for Pearson simple.

[Jebudo]

Most make valid points here re money and yes we have it to burn at the moment but you do still have to have value for money.
In my opinion you need the right player for this league though as well, a back 3 of Hayden, Tozer and Pearson may have been better, 2 rolls royces and 1 made of conkers! Same applies in midfield, a midfield general who will boss the game and put his foot in where it hurts and I think you'd see a better James Jones and Jordan Davies (I'd love Tom Lowery here though) These 'generals' are probably the hardest player that suits this league to come by though. I do think the pairing up front is bob on but we lack quality cover for them.
I still think we'll be top 4 by the time the January transfer window opens and then we can address the issues and kick on, we'll be there or there abouts come the end of the season.

[Percy Sugden]

Originally Posted by krux

again, this misses the point on the money. Its not about how much we spend, its about how good and the impact that expensive player has.

If we sign a midfielder in January and for arguments sake spend £1m on a transfer fee, and pay them £25k a week then you would expect them to be better than Luke Young , say. if they weren't you would not be happy.

If they are better than luke young and lead us to promotion, then you wouldn't worry that we paid £1m for them when really they are only 'worth' £50k or whatever.

No it doesn’t. We’ve spent money on tozer. He’s better than Pearson, who would have cost less. I don’t think there is much more to say.