collapse collapse

Please donate to help towards the costs of keeping this site going. Thank You.

Follow us on...

Author Topic: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.  (Read 188828 times)

Offline RussellC

  • Member
  • Posts: 5134
  • Location: Kent- the arsehole of England
  • GM : 04.04.2016
Re: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.
« Reply #735 on: January 18, 2016, 04:37:59 PM »
Guzan's always struck me as being a bit of a dumbo. I couldn't really care less about the chewing-gum incident, but it does kind of suggest that he hasn''t really grasped the severity of the situation.

The issue with his distribution is more to do with his terrible decision making than it is his ability to kick a football. The same can be said of his general positioning at free-kicks too. He always seems to set the wall-up in a position that impairs his view, and therefore not giving himself enough time to react to the direction of the shot.

It's no coincidence that his removal form the team coincided with our up-turn of results last season. The general aura of panic was removed as soon as Given was brought in top the team, and the effect was visible throughout the whole team. Exactly the same thing has happened now wit Bunn's inclusion. Guzan's career has been on a downward trajectory for some time now, and the sooner we get rid the better in my opinion.

Offline Chris Smith

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 35613
  • Location: At home
  • GM : 08.01.2025
Re: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.
« Reply #736 on: January 18, 2016, 04:50:41 PM »
Then he (Cumbes) went and played cricket in the summer, those were the days

I think he's one of the top blokes at old Trafford now, don't know if he's still there


I am sure I saw somewhere that he had retired but was apparently one of the main drivers of the redevelopment of the ground.

Offline frank black

  • Member
  • Posts: 3327
Re: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.
« Reply #737 on: January 18, 2016, 05:41:01 PM »
I think Bunns worse than Guzan.

When the shots-headers come in he doesn't look anywhere near em, in fact he moves/dives after they go past him. He's been lucky they have been just past the posts.

Mind you they're both pretty gash.

Offline PeterWithesShin

  • Member
  • Posts: 67456
  • GM : 17.03.2015
Re: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.
« Reply #738 on: January 18, 2016, 05:44:30 PM »
I don't think there was much of an improvement to the defence when Given came in. We conceded 12 in the last 4 games he started.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2016, 05:51:02 PM by PeterWithesShin »

Online Dave

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 41700
  • Location: Bath
  • GM : 04.01.2024
Re: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.
« Reply #739 on: January 18, 2016, 05:47:36 PM »
It's no coincidence that his removal form the team coincided with our up-turn of results last season. The general aura of panic was removed as soon as Given was brought in top the team, and the effect was visible throughout the whole team.

Guzan was in goal for the wins over West Brom, Spurs and Sunderland. Was dropped after the Man City game, Given came in and conceded two goals against Everton, kept a clean sheet against West Ham (who had one shot on goal) then followed it up by conceding six in his last league match. Eight goals in three matches doesn't sound like a massive improvement to me.

Offline supertom

  • Member
  • Posts: 18751
  • Location: High Wycombe, just left of Paradise.
Re: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.
« Reply #740 on: January 18, 2016, 09:26:18 PM »
I don't think there was much of an improvement to the defence when Given came in. We conceded 12 in the last 4 games he started.
The defence is the bigger problem. As for Given, he wasn't fantastic by any stretch but lets face it there are howlers and then there's the kind of howler Guzan had at Man City, which really happened after a season of looking decidedly dodgy for the most part. I also recall that Southampton match could have run into a cricket score were it not for Given.

We are of course long overdue signing a decent new stopper though. No debate about that.

Offline RussellC

  • Member
  • Posts: 5134
  • Location: Kent- the arsehole of England
  • GM : 04.04.2016
Re: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.
« Reply #741 on: January 19, 2016, 11:01:43 AM »
It's no coincidence that his removal form the team coincided with our up-turn of results last season. The general aura of panic was removed as soon as Given was brought in top the team, and the effect was visible throughout the whole team.

Guzan was in goal for the wins over West Brom, Spurs and Sunderland. Was dropped after the Man City game, Given came in and conceded two goals against Everton, kept a clean sheet against West Ham (who had one shot on goal) then followed it up by conceding six in his last league match. Eight goals in three matches doesn't sound like a massive improvement to me.

Guzan played in the league win over West Brom (in which we conceded) but Given kept a clean sheet in the Cup game a few days later. Yes, Guzan was dropped after the Man City game, but it's probably worth noting that it was because of a monumental error that cost us at least a point. Given was also in goal at Wembley v Liverpool when the team gave an as assured performance as they ever did in either Lambert or Sherwood's tenures.

As far as I'm concerned it was no coincidence last season that our upturn of form happened directly after Guzan was dropped, and exactly the same has happened this season. Hopefully this time his absence from the starting line-up will be longer lived.


Online Dave

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 41700
  • Location: Bath
  • GM : 04.01.2024
Re: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.
« Reply #742 on: January 19, 2016, 11:20:50 AM »
As far as I'm concerned it was no coincidence last season that our upturn of form happened directly after Guzan was dropped, and exactly the same has happened this season. Hopefully this time his absence from the starting line-up will be longer lived.


That's the point - it didn't happen directly after Guzan was dropped. Unless our "upturn in form" didn't include the wins away at Spurs and Sunderland?

What happened was is that there were some good performances with Guzan in goal, some good performances with Given in goal and some pretty shit ones with both of them as well.

Offline RussellC

  • Member
  • Posts: 5134
  • Location: Kent- the arsehole of England
  • GM : 04.04.2016
Re: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.
« Reply #743 on: January 19, 2016, 11:31:16 AM »
As far as I'm concerned it was no coincidence last season that our upturn of form happened directly after Guzan was dropped, and exactly the same has happened this season. Hopefully this time his absence from the starting line-up will be longer lived.


That's the point - it didn't happen directly after Guzan was dropped. Unless our "upturn in form" didn't include the wins away at Spurs and Sunderland?

What happened was is that there were some good performances with Guzan in goal, some good performances with Given in goal and some pretty shit ones with both of them as well.

Granted. But in my opinion it was the calmness that Given brought to the rest of the side for the games that got us across the line in the League and to the cup final (where I also though he kept the score-line down!) that was crucial. I’m not particularly arguing that Given made a huge impact, more that removing Guzan did. Same this time around. I honestly think that we’d have been 4 or 5 points better off last season and 2-3 this, had Given/Bunn been the first choice all season.

Offline rob_bridge

  • Member
  • Posts: 8273
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Shirleyshire
Re: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.
« Reply #744 on: January 19, 2016, 12:10:03 PM »
It is probably helpful to point out that Given's wages were 2-3 times that of Guzan's and his worth to the team 2011-15 was about the same

Online Dave

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 41700
  • Location: Bath
  • GM : 04.01.2024
Re: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.
« Reply #745 on: January 19, 2016, 12:22:23 PM »
Granted. But in my opinion it was the calmness that Given brought to the rest of the side for the games that got us across the line in the League and to the cup final (where I also though he kept the score-line down!) that was crucial. I’m not particularly arguing that Given made a huge impact, more that removing Guzan did. Same this time around. I honestly think that we’d have been 4 or 5 points better off last season and 2-3 this, had Given/Bunn been the first choice all season.

I disagree on pretty much every point. Guzan's confidence is at rock-bottom and the sooner we replace him with a new long-term option the better it will be for all parties, but as a few people alluded to earlier in the thread I think there's a fair bit of revisionism about how long he has been out of form.

Given coming in last season changed very little (apart from the number of goals we were conceding went up quite dramatically). I don't think with Guzan in goal we would have conceded six to Southampton or four to Arsenal.

But hey, opinions and all that.

Offline Fin Feds Dad

  • Member
  • Posts: 1386
  • Location: M6 north
  • GM : 09.08.2016
Re: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.
« Reply #746 on: January 19, 2016, 12:39:56 PM »
If he wasn't considered good enough to end the season, there is no way he should have started the next season - simple as that.

Online PaulWinch again

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 49020
  • Location: winchester
  • GM : 25.05.2024
Re: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.
« Reply #747 on: January 19, 2016, 02:17:00 PM »
Now I agree with that, him being dropped at the end of last year and then us conducting a pretty open pursuit of a new goalkeeper in the summer completely undermined him. He should have gone then.

Offline Breezeblock

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2943
  • Location: Sandybackistan
  • GM : 29.11.2024
Re: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.
« Reply #748 on: January 19, 2016, 02:26:19 PM »
Just did a quick bit of number crunching on goalies to see how they compare, as it seems that Guzan may well not play again for the 1st team.
Obviously, it is unfair to compare different era’s and there’s more to keeping that just conceding goals.
Its only a ‘rough’ guide so bear that in mind. The stats are for starts only so don’t include sub appearances or account for sendings off / injures. It only includes goalies who started 25 or more league and cup games.
Like I say, just a ‘rough’ guide, so don’t take it too seriously! (plus I haven't actually checked the figures too closely)



Sorry chap but any table that has Jim "careless hands" Cumbes as our best keeper is going to be taken with a shovelful of salt.

Offline john e

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19207
  • GM : 28.06.2024
Re: The Brad Guzan Depreciation thread.
« Reply #749 on: January 19, 2016, 06:22:06 PM »
Just did a quick bit of number crunching on goalies to see how they compare, as it seems that Guzan may well not play again for the 1st team.
Obviously, it is unfair to compare different era’s and there’s more to keeping that just conceding goals.
Its only a ‘rough’ guide so bear that in mind. The stats are for starts only so don’t include sub appearances or account for sendings off / injures. It only includes goalies who started 25 or more league and cup games.
Like I say, just a ‘rough’ guide, so don’t take it too seriously! (plus I haven't actually checked the figures too closely)



Sorry chap but any table that has Jim "careless hands" Cumbes as our best keeper is going to be taken with a shovelful of salt.

And Enkelman 7th in the all time list,

 


SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal