|
Post by Frankiesleftpeg on Sept 1, 2015 10:49:10 GMT 1
I find it baffling that Lolley can't get in the team because of Scannell yet we are trying to sign Paterson who plays in pretty much the same position. Why not keep Lolley and try and sign a proper striker and some decent defenders.
|
|
|
Post by kingofgolcar on Sept 1, 2015 10:49:39 GMT 1
We have probably stalled this kids career by 2 years. We should have just let him go to Posh in the first place. The lad had was injured for a long time wasn't he?
|
|
|
Post by swissterrier on Sept 1, 2015 10:52:33 GMT 1
I find it baffling that Lolley can't get in the team because of Scannell yet we are trying to sign Paterson who plays in pretty much the same position. Why not keep Lolley and try and sign a proper striker and some decent defenders. You're not alone on that one. Haven't others said he (Patterson) can also play just behind the strikers??
|
|
|
Post by Frankiesleftpeg on Sept 1, 2015 10:56:11 GMT 1
I find it baffling that Lolley can't get in the team because of Scannell yet we are trying to sign Paterson who plays in pretty much the same position. Why not keep Lolley and try and sign a proper striker and some decent defenders. You're not alone on that one. Haven't others said he (Patterson) can also play just behind the strikers??I'm sure he can but so could Lolley if given the chance. Paterson's scored 13 in 66 games apparently for Forest which is hardly great. I'd bank on Lolley scoring a lot more given the opportunity.
|
|
Amigo
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
Posts: 4,817
|
Post by Amigo on Sept 1, 2015 10:59:28 GMT 1
You only have to look at Saturday to know Lolley doesn't actually play on the right even though he was probably supposed to be. Everytime we had the ball he was central which knocked us out of shape a bit but he'd may as well be given a go behind a striker. Him, Scannell, and Carayol behind a striker should cause teams problems.
|
|
|
Post by townrwe on Sept 1, 2015 11:03:15 GMT 1
You only have to look at Saturday to know Lolley doesn't actually play on the right even though he was probably supposed to be. Everytime we had the ball he was central which knocked us out of shape a bit but he'd may as well be given a go behind a striker. Him, Scannell, and Carayol behind a striker should cause teams problems. Always should have played in the no.10 role for me, or "in the hole" It would give us that balance we need.
|
|
rocky
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,018
|
Post by rocky on Sept 1, 2015 11:03:48 GMT 1
You're not alone on that one. Haven't others said he (Patterson) can also play just behind the strikers??I'm sure he can but so could Lolley if given the chance. Paterson's scored 13 in 66 games apparently for Forest which is hardly great. I'd bank on Lolley scoring a lot more given the opportunity. I've disagreed with you in the past with Lolley, but got to concede this seems a strange one. All I can think of is that Town think his constant injuries have become too much & it's just time to cut the ties & move on. Shame if true.
|
|
|
Post by townrwe on Sept 1, 2015 11:04:41 GMT 1
Scannell may still be off yet..... Dont discount it yet because its not allover the news, too many journos concentrating on Butterfield.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Sept 1, 2015 11:07:43 GMT 1
Scannell may still be off yet..... Dont discount it yet because its not allover the news, too many journos concentrating on Butterfield. This time last year he was off to Millwall for peanuts.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Sept 1, 2015 11:08:22 GMT 1
Scannell may still be off yet..... Dont discount it yet because its not allover the news, too many journos concentrating on Butterfield. This time last year he was off to Millwall for peanuts. Good business to hang on to him.
|
|
|
Post by townrwe on Sept 1, 2015 11:09:34 GMT 1
Scannell may still be off yet..... Dont discount it yet because its not allover the news, too many journos concentrating on Butterfield. This time last year he was off to Millwall for peanuts. Good decision to keep him then, and sell at the peak, if he goes....
|
|
|
Post by terriersyndrome on Sept 1, 2015 11:10:59 GMT 1
Jamie Paterson is quality, if it means sending Lolley out on loan to get him then so be it.. I'd say he's afew years ahead of Lolley in development & has more championship know how, which is what we need right now.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Sept 1, 2015 11:15:15 GMT 1
Jamie Paterson is quality, if it means sending Lolley out on loan to get him then so be it.. I'd say he's afew years ahead of Lolley in development & has more championship know how, which is what we need right now. I'd agree. Hoyle/Powell are clearly trying to reshape the squad in a major way (at least I'm hoping that's what they are trying to do). Maybe we will end up with a squad full of fit young athletes. We were warned by the Charlton fans that Powell like a lot of transfers.
|
|
|
Post by Frankiesleftpeg on Sept 1, 2015 11:28:25 GMT 1
Jamie Paterson is quality, if it means sending Lolley out on loan to get him then so be it.. I'd say he's afew years ahead of Lolley in development & has more championship know how, which is what we need right now. How do you get that then if you don't play them?
|
|
|
Post by AndySk on Sept 1, 2015 11:39:43 GMT 1
If Joe Lolley signs for Peterborough on a permanent deal he must be a screwball I imagine he's regretting not going there when he had the chance before we signed him
|
|
|
Post by bluedogs, Esq. on Sept 1, 2015 11:47:02 GMT 1
If Joe Lolley signs for Peterborough on a permanent deal he must be a screwball I imagine he's regretting not going there when he had the chance before we signed him Yes his running like forrest gump would have gone unnoticed there
|
|
|
Post by Essex Terrier on Sept 1, 2015 12:12:04 GMT 1
Jamie Paterson is quality, if it means sending Lolley out on loan to get him then so be it.. I'd say he's afew years ahead of Lolley in development & has more championship know how, which is what we need right now. How do you get that then if you don't play them? Change the record!!
|
|
|
Post by Frankiesleftpeg on Sept 1, 2015 12:13:11 GMT 1
How do you get that then if you don't play them? Change the record!! I could say the same. Every time I try to big them up, you put them down!
|
|
|
Post by Essex Terrier on Sept 1, 2015 13:07:03 GMT 1
Change the record!! I could say the same. Every time I try to big them up, you put them down! That's as maybe, but I think we saw on Saturday (those of us who actually went that is, instead of staying home to watch the twitter feed come through!) all the reasons why Lolley gets limited game time; Scannell at his best is a handful for any full back at this level (and there aren't many better than Konchesky!) and Lolley can definitely influence a game, despite being all one foot. I'd be happy to see him start if Scannell were injured or if we wanted to lay 2 wingers, but he (lolley) would be a liability, in my opinion, if we played him in the Butterfield role (as suggested elsewhere). Lolley should certainly be a "keeper" in my view, but I's not drop anyone at this stage just "to see if he was good enough", which is clearly madness! But what do I know?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2015 13:15:59 GMT 1
Jamie Paterson is quality, if it means sending Lolley out on loan to get him then so be it.. I'd say he's afew years ahead of Lolley in development & has more championship know how, which is what we need right now. I'd agree. Hoyle/Powell are clearly trying to reshape the squad in a major way (at least I'm hoping that's what they are trying to do). Maybe we will end up with a squad full of fit young athletes. We were warned by the Charlton fans that Powell like a lot of transfers.Just a shame all of ours are in the wrong direction, or for players not ready for the first team.
|
|
rocky
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,018
|
Post by rocky on Sept 1, 2015 13:26:22 GMT 1
I'd agree. Hoyle/Powell are clearly trying to reshape the squad in a major way (at least I'm hoping that's what they are trying to do). Maybe we will end up with a squad full of fit young athletes. We were warned by the Charlton fans that Powell like a lot of transfers.Just a shame all of ours are in the wrong direction, or for players not ready for the first team. I'll give you one thing pal, you're certainly consistent.
|
|
|
Post by tockyterrier on Sept 1, 2015 13:31:18 GMT 1
If Joe Lolley signs for Peterborough on a permanent deal he must be a screwball I imagine he's regretting not going there when he had the chance before we signed him Wouldn't matter where he went if his body can't take the physical requirements Sent from my HTC One mini 2 using proboards
|
|
|
Post by Frankiesleftpeg on Sept 1, 2015 13:38:00 GMT 1
I could say the same. Every time I try to big them up, you put them down! That's as maybe, but I think we saw on Saturday (those of us who actually went that is, instead of staying home to watch the twitter feed come through!) all the reasons why Lolley gets limited game time; Scannell at his best is a handful for any full back at this level (and there aren't many better than Konchesky!) and Lolley can definitely influence a game, despite being all one foot. I'd be happy to see him start if Scannell were injured or if we wanted to lay 2 wingers, but he (lolley) would be a liability, in my opinion, if we played him in the Butterfield role (as suggested elsewhere). Lolley should certainly be a "keeper" in my view, but I's not drop anyone at this stage just "to see if he was good enough", which is clearly madness! But what do I know? Nah we've already got five of them
|
|
|
Post by Essex Terrier on Sept 1, 2015 14:05:31 GMT 1
That's as maybe, but I think we saw on Saturday (those of us who actually went that is, instead of staying home to watch the twitter feed come through!) all the reasons why Lolley gets limited game time; Scannell at his best is a handful for any full back at this level (and there aren't many better than Konchesky!) and Lolley can definitely influence a game, despite being all one foot. I'd be happy to see him start if Scannell were injured or if we wanted to lay 2 wingers, but he (lolley) would be a liability, in my opinion, if we played him in the Butterfield role (as suggested elsewhere). Lolley should certainly be a "keeper" in my view, but I's not drop anyone at this stage just "to see if he was good enough", which is clearly madness! But what do I know? Nah we've already got five of them It'll be 6 soon enough? www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/13637261.AFC_Bournemouth__Camp_a_target_for_Huddersfield/?ref=arc
|
|
|
Post by swagner on Sept 1, 2015 14:52:36 GMT 1
Lolley was playing today at canalside so doubt he'll be off anywhere permanently, loan window open though
|
|
|
Post by kasabian21 on Sept 5, 2015 15:14:48 GMT 1
Off to Peterborough on loan. Deal will be done in a couple of days.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2015 15:18:07 GMT 1
Off to Peterborough on loan. Deal will be done in a couple of days. That would be a stupid move by the club. One of our best attacking threats. If this goes through, we really have lost the plot in the name of cost cutting. I doubt he's a top earner.
|
|
|
Post by 3Pipe on Sept 5, 2015 15:28:16 GMT 1
Off to Peterborough on loan. Deal will be done in a couple of days. source?
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Sept 5, 2015 15:35:15 GMT 1
Off to Peterborough on loan. Deal will be done in a couple of days. source? To be fair this boy is the lolleymeister
|
|
|
Post by teddytheterrier on Sept 5, 2015 15:36:13 GMT 1
Off to Peterborough on loan. Deal will be done in a couple of days. source? Hp
|
|