Most settled football team ever

[Lone Shark]

An unusual stat came to me today.

So far in the 6 games of the NFL so far, a full 13 players have started every game, with only one defensive slot (Fox/Keane/Sullivan) and one attacking slot (Kelly/Egan/Comerford/Coughlan) subject to change on any given week. I haven't checked every team yet, but this is way out in front of any other panel - and within that we've had very few positional switches either.

Is this a sign of a settled consistent team, or a manager not giving his other panellists a fair shot at earning a jersey? Is it a sign of a lack of depth?

Any thoughts?

[azoffaly]

I'd say it was a calculated gamble to ensure promotion, and also to get the team used to each other for the championship. In doing that, you do lose the benefit of seeing lads in competitive action that you might not be sure of.

I suppose from Pat's point of view mission A is almost accomplished, and time will tell if this strategy will pay off for mission B.

[OY13]

I think the management should be trying out some of the other players too, just my opinion but offaly are re building for a strong team hopefully in a few years and if they stay loyal to the lads there already, others wont get there chance to impress. It is also interesting to note that all the players who have got a run have come from the two selectors clubs apart from keane and sullivan!! Maybe its just a coincidence, any opinions??

[the bare biffo]

Like AZ I think this was a case of the prime objective being promotion and the best way to get there was to play the strongest team available in every match.
I dont think Pat Roe could afford the luxury of significant experimentation.
Secondly I dont believe theres anyone on the bench thats going to significantly improve the team.
The only bit I dont get is why O'Hara didnt get more of a crack.

[Bord na Mona man]

You can't stay experimenting forever.
I think some counties are in a constant "rebuilding" phase and never move on from there.
Every year you have managers pleading that their team contains several U21s.

There is a proper balance to be struck. You can't keep buying time by experimenting and rebuilding (or at least claiming you are).
At some stage you have to try and construct a long term settled team and try and improve what you have.

[Lone Shark]

For what it's worth, ridiculous and all as it sounds, if we have a miserable championship from here we'll still be in a better position than we were last year. You can say that the league is only the league all you like, but when the league dictates whether or not you get to play in the backdoor in the championship, then the league becomes pretty important.

I'm not trying to suggest that getting out of this division was the most difficult hurdle Offaly have ever had to cross, but it was crucial that we didn't stumble all the same and in that regard, if a settled team was what it took to make that happen, then so be it.

I'm quite surprised that more players haven't walked off the panel a la Conor Evans all the same. When you see Scott Brady limping around Casement Park and being left on rather than a sub used, it sends a fairly clear message about what you think about your second choice full back. Right now it's almost as if a panel of 20 would be enough for Roe, the rest are just for balancing out training games.

It is also interesting to note that all the players who have got a run have come from the two selectors clubs apart from keane and sullivan!! Maybe its just a coincidence, any opinions??

Fox, Comerford, Neville Coughlan as well. I don't think there's anything in this.

[Silken Thomas]

Is this a sign of a settled consistent team, or a manager not giving his other panellists a fair shot at earning a jersey? Is it a sign of a lack of depth?

Any thoughts?[/quote]

I am thinking along very similar lines to our other contributors with regard to two main points.
Namely the absolute necessity of getting out of Division 4 and a lack of alternatives on the panel.

With regards to John O' Hara I would have thought he would have been given significantly more chances to replicate( taking into account the sub-standard opposition) that sensational debut.

It is also interesting to note that all the players who have got a run have come from the two selectors clubs apart from keane and sullivan!! Maybe its just a coincidence, any opinions??

As for this, I have already highlighted one issue concerning one of these such players which can be viewed from an earlier debate and which greatly annoyed me at the time;
Namely; 'Roe Names A Strong Side'

Finally is the panel a closed book at this stage?
Considering Rory Guinan's early form this year with relation to Sigerson, League and Challenge Football, Could a call-up be warranted?
I'm sure L.S. is only salivating at the thought

[Lone Shark]

On the one hand I'd certainly be in favour of Rory Guinan getting a run, but I'd say the best chance he has of getting involved at this stage is if he plays a blinder in the first round of the club championships. On the other, there aren't really a lot of opportunities for a genuine tryout at this stage. Challenge matches are of limited value, and we only really have two games of note left - Clare in Ennis and the league final. It's probably a bit late to parachute him in for either of those two games.

Having said all that, there is a rather ridiculous queue for forwards slots. Last Saturday there were 15 subs named, plus James Coughlan as well, so 16 in total. Of those 16, ten were forwards, while you could make a case for Gerry Grehan or Stephen Lonergan to be forwards too. Add in a currently injured (but still part of the panel) Aidan Keenaghan, and you have rather a long waiting list for the attacking slots in the team. I'd say adding Rory Guinan to the queue would only increase the unsettled feelings all round.