|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Feb 3, 2015 0:46:10 GMT 1
Dixon better than Robinson ?
An " interesting " view
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Feb 3, 2015 0:46:55 GMT 1
We're normally on the same page, but as much as it may say it on the tin, I really can't see it myself.....not at all. Plays wing back for his country
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Feb 3, 2015 0:48:41 GMT 1
Dixon better than Robinson ? An " interesting " view In Robinson's early days I was in this camp but boy has he improved over half a season, didn't look great for the L666s goals at the weekend but has been gotten better every time i've seen him.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Feb 3, 2015 2:21:46 GMT 1
... But still an odd deal when you think about it. He could have stayed at the club for wages as cover until the summer. Instead we have given him away and will have to get someone in possibly not as good, slow to adapt and possibly at higher wages. In the summer we will have no left backs when Robinson returns to QPR.
|
|
|
Post by trailingleg on Feb 3, 2015 3:05:20 GMT 1
I took to Dixon for his role at Wednesday away in the 'towel is ours' match. Good luck to him.
|
|
|
Post by Nickhudds.UTT on Feb 3, 2015 8:25:26 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by HuddsTerrier on Feb 3, 2015 8:50:44 GMT 1
I like Dixon and feel he's a lower end Championship player. For me the best of the ones who left this window and only one likely to get in the team at present
Never complained when left out and seemed a good pro
Good luck to him and thanks for helping establish the club back in the Championship.
|
|
|
Post by detox on Feb 3, 2015 9:06:43 GMT 1
Dixon was out of contract in the summer anyway, and he'll be 29 this year..would we offer him another 3 years to take him to 32 ? He's been okay, but no more than that I'd say..but who is going to play there next season I've no idea.. Also,if Tommy Smith hadn't been injured he too may have gone this time...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2015 9:13:31 GMT 1
Dixon was out of contract in the summer anyway, and he'll be 29 this year..would we offer him another 3 years to take him to 32 ? He's been okay, but no more than that I'd say..but who is going to play there next season I've no idea.. Also, if Tommy Smith hadn't been injured he too may have gone this time... How many first team regulars under Powell have gone?
|
|
|
Post by detox on Feb 3, 2015 9:20:05 GMT 1
Dixon was out of contract in the summer anyway, and he'll be 29 this year..would we offer him another 3 years to take him to 32 ? He's been okay, but no more than that I'd say..but who is going to play there next season I've no idea.. Also, if Tommy Smith hadn't been injured he too may have gone this time... How many first team regulars under Powell have gone? Well, Dixon was a regular, as were Ward and Hammill at one point..Stead and paterson never were...things change...so basically it's fringe players who have gone...if we're saying Dixon had now become a fringe player...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2015 9:45:24 GMT 1
How many first team regulars under Powell have gone? Well, Dixon was a regular, as were Ward and Hammill at one point..Stead and paterson never were...things change...so basically it's fringe players who have gone...if we're saying Dixon had now become a fringe player... That's why I said "under Powell" Dixon has played 6 Championship games to Smiths 21, that to me makes Dixon very much a fringe player and Smith a first team regular.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Feb 3, 2015 9:48:24 GMT 1
How many first team regulars under Powell have gone? Well, Dixon was a regular, as were Ward and Hammill at one point..Stead and paterson never were...things change...so basically it's fringe players who have gone...if we're saying Dixon had now become a fringe player... Peltier (6), Dixon (3), Stead (1), Ward (1) & Hammill (1) have made a total of 12 starts under Powell so we can safely say we have got rid of non first teamers and benchwarmers at best and in no way shape or form can we describe Tommy Smith in that category.
|
|
|
Post by detox on Feb 3, 2015 9:56:39 GMT 1
Well, Dixon was a regular, as were Ward and Hammill at one point..Stead and paterson never were...things change...so basically it's fringe players who have gone...if we're saying Dixon had now become a fringe player... That's why I said "under Powell" Dixon has played 6 Championship games to Smiths 21, that to me makes Dixon very much a fringe player and Smith a first team regular. I wasn't advocating the sale of Tommy Smith, just saying there were rumours around before he got injured that Wednesday were interested...that's all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2015 10:07:49 GMT 1
That's why I said "under Powell" Dixon has played 6 Championship games to Smiths 21, that to me makes Dixon very much a fringe player and Smith a first team regular. I wasn't advocating the sale of Tommy Smith, just saying there were rumours around before he got injured that Wednesday were interested...that's all. Fair enough. Though if other clubs weren't interested in our young players I'd be more worried.
|
|
|
Post by townrwe on Feb 3, 2015 16:07:00 GMT 1
He always seemed a solid pro to me, He was perfect as back-up in the championship, Hope he regains his Scotland place, as he is one player that would be deserving of it.
|
|
|
Post by canuckterrier on Feb 3, 2015 16:46:34 GMT 1
We're normally on the same page, but as much as it may say it on the tin, I really can't see it myself.....not at all. Plays wing back for his country Faint praise there Doc. Now you're in Toronto you have a chance to get down to BMO field to watch the national team play. Oh, and bring your boots.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Feb 3, 2015 17:16:27 GMT 1
Plays wing back for his country Faint praise there Doc. Now you're in Toronto you have a chance to get down to BMO field to watch the national team play. Oh, and bring your boots. Hehe don't you mean 'runners' or 'sneakers' as they don't even play on grass tsk tsk tsk what's happened t'modern game?
|
|
|
Post by canuckterrier on Feb 3, 2015 19:52:16 GMT 1
Faint praise there Doc. Now you're in Toronto you have a chance to get down to BMO field to watch the national team play. Oh, and bring your boots. Hehe don't you mean 'runners' or 'sneakers' as they don't even play on grass tsk tsk tsk what's happened t'modern game? And don't go asking directions to the football field or you'll end up seeing helmets (the non-jack Hunt type) on the players.
|
|
|
Post by ritchie on Feb 3, 2015 20:12:05 GMT 1
... But still an odd deal when you think about it. He could have stayed at the club for wages as cover until the summer. Instead we have given him away and will have to get someone in possibly not as good, slow to adapt and possibly at higher wages. In the summer we will have no left backs when Robinson returns to QPR.what does that have to do with dixon leaving now? He's out of contract in the summer so we would have been left with no LBs in the summer either way.. unless you are saying we should have given him a new deal? which i would have to disagree on...sign a better LB in summer and get a loan/youngster for cover. Dixon aint bad backup but id rather we move towards having a quality first teamer and then a youngster as backup - rather than average backup on big wages, which limits what we can pay the starter
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Feb 3, 2015 20:38:29 GMT 1
... But still an odd deal when you think about it. He could have stayed at the club for wages as cover until the summer. Instead we have given him away and will have to get someone in possibly not as good, slow to adapt and possibly at higher wages. In the summer we will have no left backs when Robinson returns to QPR.what does that have to do with dixon leaving now? He's out of contract in the summer so we would have been left with no LBs in the summer either way.. unless you are saying we should have given him a new deal? which i would have to disagree on...sign a better LB in summer and get a loan/youngster for cover. Dixon aint bad backup but id rather we move towards having a quality first teamer and then a youngster as backup - rather than average backup on big wages, which limits what we can pay the starter I thought they are/were much of a muchness in truth in a poorly functioning unit. So we have a youngster as back up? and we will be able to get someone in better than Robinson/Dixon in the summer - and we have no cover? I'll be surprised if we can get someone better than Dixon cheaper on loan.
|
|
|
Post by ritchie on Feb 3, 2015 21:23:41 GMT 1
what does that have to do with dixon leaving now? He's out of contract in the summer so we would have been left with no LBs in the summer either way.. unless you are saying we should have given him a new deal? which i would have to disagree on...sign a better LB in summer and get a loan/youngster for cover. Dixon aint bad backup but id rather we move towards having a quality first teamer and then a youngster as backup - rather than average backup on big wages, which limits what we can pay the starter I thought they are/were much of a muchness in truth in a poorly functioning unit. So we have a youngster as back up? and we will be able to get someone in better than Robinson/Dixon in the summer - and we have no cover? I'll be surprised if we can get someone better than Dixon cheaper on loan. I dont really understand what you're on about Dixon isnt getting a look-in but will be costing 5k+ a week, caroll is back here so can act as backup, why bother pay dixons wages for another 6 months when he likely wont even play? We have till summer to identify a quality LB and will have a decent amount of wage budget free to get one. If between now and summer powell decides caroll isnt good enough then we can sign 2 LBs - but we dont need to sign 2 on high wages.. imo for a club like us to be successful we need to put as much of our resources as possible into the first 11, have cheaper/youngsters as backup, and hope for a bit of luck with injuries. high earner backups, although might increase competition a bit, will limit the overall quality of the first 11
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Feb 3, 2015 21:39:31 GMT 1
I thought they are/were much of a muchness in truth in a poorly functioning unit. So we have a youngster as back up? and we will be able to get someone in better than Robinson/Dixon in the summer - and we have no cover? I'll be surprised if we can get someone better than Dixon cheaper on loan. I dont really understand what you're on about Dixon isnt getting a look-in but will be costing 5k+ a week, caroll is back here so can act as backup, why bother pay dixons wages for another 6 months when he likely wont even play? We have till summer to identify a quality LB and will have a decent amount of wage budget free to get one. If between now and summer powell decides caroll isnt good enough then we can sign 2 LBs - but we dont need to sign 2 on high wages.. imo for a club like us to be successful we need to put as much of our resources as possible into the first 11, have cheaper/youngsters as backup, and hope for a bit of luck with injuries. high earner backups, although might increase competition a bit, will limit the overall quality of the first 11 We'll see how the plan works at Millwall if Robinson gets crocked in the first two minutes. No idea how much Dixon costs per week but surprised if it's £5k. Will he be taking a voluntary pay cut going to Dundee United? I agree it's strange that the the club have been obviously prepared to pay both Dixon and Robinson's wages since the summer. No competition for places could also be a significant issue - this season is very far from over. I'd forgotten about Caroll in truth. I thought he had some potential but was puzzled when he disappeared after those first couple of games. Much of a muchness meant I didn't think Robinson was much better than Dixon.
|
|
|
Post by ritchie on Feb 3, 2015 22:55:32 GMT 1
I dont really understand what you're on about Dixon isnt getting a look-in but will be costing 5k+ a week, caroll is back here so can act as backup, why bother pay dixons wages for another 6 months when he likely wont even play? We have till summer to identify a quality LB and will have a decent amount of wage budget free to get one. If between now and summer powell decides caroll isnt good enough then we can sign 2 LBs - but we dont need to sign 2 on high wages.. imo for a club like us to be successful we need to put as much of our resources as possible into the first 11, have cheaper/youngsters as backup, and hope for a bit of luck with injuries. high earner backups, although might increase competition a bit, will limit the overall quality of the first 11 We'll see how the plan works at Millwall if Robinson gets crocked in the first two minutes. No idea how much Dixon costs per week but surprised if it's £5k. Will he be taking a voluntary pay cut going to Dundee United? I agree it's strange that the the club have been obviously prepared to pay both Dixon and Robinson's wages since the summer. No competition for places could also be a significant issue - this season is very far from over. I'd forgotten about Caroll in truth. I thought he had some potential but was puzzled when he disappeared after those first couple of games. Much of a muchness meant I didn't think Robinson was much better than Dixon. I imagine it is around that but a complete guess. If robinson gets crocked then we can get a loan in
|
|
|
Post by EastCoastTerrier on Feb 4, 2015 0:28:51 GMT 1
I'm hoping this means there's a permanent deal in place for Robinson in the summer
|
|