Players You'd Have Who We've FU**ed off

[Dave]

Given was finished, not good enough. As scary on crosses as Guzan

Given is not finished. He was one of our few players to emerge from our Cup Final appearance with any credit and would have been more competition for the goalkeepers position than anyone we currently have.

I'd ask for a little more than "better competition than Mark Bunn" for my £3m per year if I were spending it.

If I were feeling greedy I might even ask for somebody who has set foot outside their six-yard box once or twice in their twenty year career.

[saunders_heroes]

Given was finished, not good enough. As scary on crosses as Guzan

Given is not finished. He was one of our few players to emerge from our Cup Final appearance with any credit and would have been more competition for the goalkeepers position than anyone we currently have.

I'd ask for a little more than "better competition than Mark Bunn" for my £3m per year if I were spending it.

If I were feeling greedy I might even ask for somebody who has set foot outside their six-yard box once or twice in their twenty year career.

The thing is, you could probably get a really good player in on £3m per year but Lerner's plan was to get rid of Given and replace him with someone on a fraction of those wages, hence the squad full of shit we have right now.
The man is a genius!

[LeeB]

Given was finished, not good enough. As scary on crosses as Guzan

Given is not finished. He was one of our few players to emerge from our Cup Final appearance with any credit and would have been more competition for the goalkeepers position than anyone we currently have.

I'd ask for a little more than "better competition than Mark Bunn" for my £3m per year if I were spending it.

If I were feeling greedy I might even ask for somebody who has set foot outside their six-yard box once or twice in their twenty year career.

At a rough guess you'd make a fair case of around 30 keepers in this country alone that are better than Guzan, factor of in the foreign leagues then is probably closer to 100.

You'd think it would be straightforward for the club to find one that fits two criteria, first to be better than Guzan, and second be cheaper than Given.

No, fuck it, let's stick with the one that wasn't good enough before.

[Irish villain]

I reckon the team we had in 2006 would easily beat any line-up of the past four seasons. Players like Laursen, Bouma, Mellberg, Steven Davis, Gareth Barry, Milan Baros, JPA. They achieved 42 points that year, more than we have had in five seasons.

[Chris Harte]

I agree that three million is alot for Given but its preferable to the situation we have. Who knows, if Given was putting Guzan under pressure then maybe we'd be a few points better off than we are. Admittedly there's a whole "if me nan had bollocks she'd be me grandad" about this but if we were just say five points better off then that £3m could seem cheap in the scheme of things.

[Dave]

Given was finished, not good enough. As scary on crosses as Guzan

Given is not finished. He was one of our few players to emerge from our Cup Final appearance with any credit and would have been more competition for the goalkeepers position than anyone we currently have.

I'd ask for a little more than "better competition than Mark Bunn" for my £3m per year if I were spending it.

If I were feeling greedy I might even ask for somebody who has set foot outside their six-yard box once or twice in their twenty year career.

The thing is, you could probably get a really good player in on £3m per year but Lerner's plan was to get rid of Given and replace him with someone on a fraction of those wages, hence the squad full of shit we have right now.

Don't get me wrong, if we were spending Given's daft wages on goalkeepers who are better than Guzan and Bunn (and as Lee says, there are plenty of them), then that would be a much better situation than we're currently in. No doubt.

But not having a mediocre, elderly reserve goalkeeper as one of our highest paid players is on the whole a Good Thing rather than a Bad Thing.

[saunders_heroes]

Given was finished, not good enough. As scary on crosses as Guzan

Given is not finished. He was one of our few players to emerge from our Cup Final appearance with any credit and would have been more competition for the goalkeepers position than anyone we currently have.

I'd ask for a little more than "better competition than Mark Bunn" for my £3m per year if I were spending it.

If I were feeling greedy I might even ask for somebody who has set foot outside their six-yard box once or twice in their twenty year career.

The thing is, you could probably get a really good player in on £3m per year but Lerner's plan was to get rid of Given and replace him with someone on a fraction of those wages, hence the squad full of shit we have right now.

Don't get me wrong, if we were spending Given's daft wages on goalkeepers who are better than Guzan and Bunn (and as Lee says, there are plenty of them), then that would be a much better situation than we're currently in. No doubt.

But not having a mediocre, elderly reserve goalkeeper as one of our highest paid players is on the whole a Good Thing rather than a Bad Thing.

But getting rid of the wasters (like Given) was to free up wages for better players who were at the top of their game. How did that work out then?

[Dave]

Given was finished, not good enough. As scary on crosses as Guzan

Given is not finished. He was one of our few players to emerge from our Cup Final appearance with any credit and would have been more competition for the goalkeepers position than anyone we currently have.

I'd ask for a little more than "better competition than Mark Bunn" for my £3m per year if I were spending it.

If I were feeling greedy I might even ask for somebody who has set foot outside their six-yard box once or twice in their twenty year career.

The thing is, you could probably get a really good player in on £3m per year but Lerner's plan was to get rid of Given and replace him with someone on a fraction of those wages, hence the squad full of shit we have right now.

Don't get me wrong, if we were spending Given's daft wages on goalkeepers who are better than Guzan and Bunn (and as Lee says, there are plenty of them), then that would be a much better situation than we're currently in. No doubt.

But not having a mediocre, elderly reserve goalkeeper as one of our highest paid players is on the whole a Good Thing rather than a Bad Thing.

But getting rid of the wasters (like Given) was to free up wages for better players who were at the top of their game. How did that work out then?

Nowhere near as well as any of us would have liked. But I don't think I've suggested otherwise.

[saunders_heroes]

Given was finished, not good enough. As scary on crosses as Guzan

Given is not finished. He was one of our few players to emerge from our Cup Final appearance with any credit and would have been more competition for the goalkeepers position than anyone we currently have.

I'd ask for a little more than "better competition than Mark Bunn" for my £3m per year if I were spending it.

If I were feeling greedy I might even ask for somebody who has set foot outside their six-yard box once or twice in their twenty year career.

The thing is, you could probably get a really good player in on £3m per year but Lerner's plan was to get rid of Given and replace him with someone on a fraction of those wages, hence the squad full of shit we have right now.

Don't get me wrong, if we were spending Given's daft wages on goalkeepers who are better than Guzan and Bunn (and as Lee says, there are plenty of them), then that would be a much better situation than we're currently in. No doubt.

But not having a mediocre, elderly reserve goalkeeper as one of our highest paid players is on the whole a Good Thing rather than a Bad Thing.

But getting rid of the wasters (like Given) was to free up wages for better players who were at the top of their game. How did that work out then?

Nowhere near as well as any of us would have liked. But I don't think I've suggested otherwise.

No because the replacements turned out to be rubbish on a fraction of those wages.
You pay peanuts you get monkeys, etc.

[Dave]

I agree that three million is alot for Given but its preferable to the situation we have. Who knows, if Given was putting Guzan under pressure then maybe we'd be a few points better off than we are. Admittedly there's a whole "if me nan had bollocks she'd be me grandad" about this but if we were just say five points better off then that £3m could seem cheap in the scheme of things.

As SH says, maybe if we'd spent even half of the money we were wasting on Given's contract on a better goalkeeper than either of them, then Guzan could currently be putting that better keeper than him under pressure rather than one mediocre goalkeeper pushing another mediocre goalkeeper into being a bit better?

[Chris Harte]

I agree that three million is alot for Given but its preferable to the situation we have. Who knows, if Given was putting Guzan under pressure then maybe we'd be a few points better off than we are. Admittedly there's a whole "if me nan had bollocks she'd be me grandad" about this but if we were just say five points better off then that £3m could seem cheap in the scheme of things.

As SH says, maybe if we'd spent even half of the money we were wasting on Given's contract on a better goalkeeper than either of them, then Guzan could currently be putting that better keeper than him under pressure rather than one mediocre goalkeeper pushing another mediocre goalkeeper into being a bit better?

Weren't we supposed to have bid for the Stoke keeper who ended up at Chelsea? The bid failed yet there was no apparent fall back option. If we needed a keeper, why no fall back?

Another example of incompetence at the club?

[ciggiesnbeer]

I dont think the fans have ideas above their station. Its just the club have ideas below theirs.

[KevinGage]

I reckon the team we had in 2006 would easily beat any line-up of the past four seasons. Players like Laursen, Bouma, Mellberg, Steven Davis, Gareth Barry, Milan Baros, JPA. They achieved 42 points that year, more than we have had in five seasons.

You often hear it said that that team was nailed on to go down, yet the above lot were comfortably top 6/8 standard.   I would include Sorenson in that too.

Difference then was we just had a numpty for a manager.  Now it's wall to wall numpties.

[Matt C]

What we've give for Mellberg & Laursen now rather than the over excited Labrador that is Richards and the cumbersome Lescott.

[OzVilla]

James Collins and and NRC were discarded but they'd easily improve this team. And they're average at their best.