[Archived] Quality Or Quantity?

[Iceman]

Having seen certain players not being capable of stepping up to be a regular starter, do you guys think the squad should maybe have less players with more quality or do we need a big squad? With a smaller squad you cutting the wage bill to a certain extent, but still being able to pay good money for quality players. I was just sitting and thinking about it, and was hoping to get others thoughts on this.

[LeChuck]

Has to be quality every single time, doesn't it? I'd be amazed if anyone thought differently.

Aston Villa and Everton (and to some extent, ourselves last season) have shown what difference one or two quality players can make to an otherwise average team.

[Alan75]

Quality Quantity I couldnt give a flying fig.

All I want is players that give 110% prepared to sweat blood and tears for the club and supporters.

OHHHH for a Hendry, Short, Savage, Flitcroft, Micky Speight, Hawkins, FaZ, kEELEY ETC

[allrovertheworld]

Both please like Man United.

If I have to choose though it would be quality.Would I want 22 Keith Andrews over 11 Tugays'?No I wouldn't. Thats the best way I can explain it.

[1864roverite]

A Chris Price type of right back.

A Gordon Cowans type central midfielder

A Windy Miller type right winger

A Colin Hendry type defender

A Speedie like centre forward

that'll do for me (for now that is)

[Iceman]

Quality for me, over quantity. United have loads of quality, even their players on the bench will walk into other teams.

[DanLad]

Quality for me, over quantity. United have loads of quality, even their players on the bench will walk into other teams.

Erm...isn't that quality and quantity, then?

[RovertheHill]

Of course everyone would want quality and quantity but the reality is that only a few teams in the world can keep top quality players happy that aren't playing every game, and even they struggle. And of course, what do you mean by quality? Most of our accepted first-team are "premiership" quality players in that they would get into a significant number of prem teams but we arguably have nobody who would get into a top 4 side.

[rover6]

Quality obviously! Who ever heard of Quantity Street?

[Hughesy]

Quality and quantity id say.

Lose 8-10 players. 5 or 6 who we wouldnt really notice had gone.

Get rid of Rigters, Gallagher, Vogel, Brown - there are 4 straight away who we wouldnt even notice had gone and it would save us £70k a week/ £3.5m a year.

Add to them Ooijer & Mokoena (£50k week) who are both out of contract.

You then have RSC set to go on £65k a week - replace him with no more than a £50k a week player and there is another £15k a week saved.

Allow Simpson to return to United. (£20k)

You could then also consider the likes of Derbyshire (£25k), Tugay (£25k? - Have the legs gone?), Reid (£30k).

That frees up a total of £285k a week in wages £15m a year

Maybe even Warnock if we sign Givet on a permanent deal.

Replace them with a striker with pace (Cisse?), a younger striker (someone like Sturridge), Midfielder, Right Back, and maybe a right winger.

[neekoy]

Much rather Quantity, I think having 47 players is a good idea. Preferably on high wages, susceptible to injury and the most importantly a distinct lack of quality throughout.

[Jackson]

I'd set my stall out thus:

League one performance? League one wages.

That should limit the amount we carry. I'd follow the rule: Two out, one in, upon contract expiry, until we have a tight pack with limited quantity. We aren't Manure and we don't need any more squad players.