Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Dan Potts joins on short term contract (and leaves p5)

1356

Comments

  • sam3110
    sam3110 Posts: 21,284
    Scoham said:
    sam3110 said:
    The most important thing is, what's his squad number?
    15 according to the Sky Sports app. A reasonable choice for a CB.
    Hope he plays like El Kakouri for us then
  • eastterrace6168
    eastterrace6168 Posts: 22,595
    sam3110 said:
    Scoham said:
    sam3110 said:
    The most important thing is, what's his squad number?
    15 according to the Sky Sports app. A reasonable choice for a CB.
    Hope he plays like El Kakouri for us then
    Got some big boots to fill, Keith Jones and Eddie Youds...to name two...
  • Dazzler21
    Dazzler21 Posts: 51,360
    Could have done with giving him a run out today. Small was well off the boil second half.
  • Scoham
    Scoham Posts: 37,386
    https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/sport/charlton-athletic-boss-asked-for-update-on-duo-set-to-be-out-of-contract-this-month/
  • Off_it
    Off_it Posts: 28,873
    Who?
  • ross1
    ross1 Posts: 51,003
    NJ said he wants to reduce the size of the squad, but if he is trying to extend contracts for Potts and Hylton, who will he get rid of?
    I would assume Taylor and possibly REG but there must be others if he is keeping the first two 
  • MarcusH26
    MarcusH26 Posts: 8,056
    ross1 said:
    NJ said he wants to reduce the size of the squad, but if he is trying to extend contracts for Potts and Hylton, who will he get rid of?
    I would assume Taylor and possibly REG but there must be others if he is keeping the first two 

    Would expect Edun to go too. 
  • Off_it
    Off_it Posts: 28,873
    That article says he's a good man to have around the place. How is he with fixing light bulbs?
  • SteveACS
    SteveACS Posts: 377
    ross1 said:
    NJ said he wants to reduce the size of the squad, but if he is trying to extend contracts for Potts and Hylton, who will he get rid of?
    I would assume Taylor and possibly REG but there must be others if he is keeping the first two 
    He won't get rid of REG. He has been on the bench in all of the games in our good run. And why not? He can cover 3 positions. RB, CB, and DCM.

    Proper Curbs type signing.
  • Bedsaddick
    Bedsaddick Posts: 24,758
    I'm Sure he wants rid of Terry Taylor as well. That would be another mistake in my opinion. 

  • Sponsored links:



  • Hal1x
    Hal1x Posts: 4,265
    Off_it said:
    That article says he's a good man to have around the place. How is he with fixing light bulbs?
    excellent, unfortunately scared of heights!
  • killerandflash
    killerandflash Posts: 69,879
    “I brought them in, with the experience they have, because we’ve got a lot of young players."

    I sort of get that with Hylton, as our strikers are mainly young, but our defence has plenty of experience already with the likes of Jones and Gillesphey being 29. Surely Potts can only justify his place in the squad based on his ability and fitness, not on being a good bloke behind the scenes?
  • Kap10
    Kap10 Posts: 15,577
    If contracts are being given out for being good blokes around the place, I'm going to apply for one, although changing fluorescent lights is not my strong point, having brought LED replacements.
  • NabySarr
    NabySarr Posts: 4,290
    If Potts is fit and can’t get in the team ahead of Gillesphey then we shouldn’t be offering him another contract 
  • se9addick
    se9addick Posts: 32,050
    Hard to see the justification for extending Potts. 
  • IT_Andy
    IT_Andy Posts: 477
    killerandflash said:
    “I brought them in, with the experience they have, because we’ve got a lot of young players."

    I sort of get that with Hylton, as our strikers are mainly young, but our defence has plenty of experience already with the likes of Jones and Gillesphey being 29. Surely Potts can only justify his place in the squad based on his ability and fitness, not on being a good bloke behind the scenes?
    Agreed.  We can't have players purely for helping other players. Would have thought thats a job for Curtis Fleming and James Brayne. 
  • RonnieMoore
    RonnieMoore Posts: 4,509
    MarcusH26 said:
    ross1 said:
    NJ said he wants to reduce the size of the squad, but if he is trying to extend contracts for Potts and Hylton, who will he get rid of?
    I would assume Taylor and possibly REG but there must be others if he is keeping the first two 

    Would expect Edun to go too. 
    Hylton on a coaching /player contract, his main job is coach only been used cause if injuries 
  • RonnieMoore
    RonnieMoore Posts: 4,509
    NabySarr said:
    If Potts is fit and can’t get in the team ahead of Gillesphey then we shouldn’t be offering him another contract 
    Gillesphey been outstanding v Wycombe and Reading, in fact he had a decent season, much better in a 3 wins a lot of headers 
  • ForeverAddickted
    ForeverAddickted Posts: 94,442
    Depends on the wages he's on in the first place really... If we can buy an upcoming LCB who can seriously challenge Gillesphey and is cheaper, then might as well take that option - If we cant find a cheaper alternative till the summer, and keeping Potts doesnt break the bank, then I see no issue
  • Garrymanilow
    Garrymanilow Posts: 13,176
    Potts AND Hylton feels a bit like overkill. I get Hylton being around as he's a very canny player and that's something our strikers could learn as they're mostly quite young, but Potts hasn't been fit enough to justify staying on. I think he would be an improvement on Gillesphey if he could play regularly but he can't, and I'd hope by now that the professionalism and attitude Potts, Hylton and co bring would have started to rub off on the players without the need for a contracted chaperone all season. Potts is potentially blocking a better LCB coming in. If he's that professional and hard-working can't we just allow him to continue to train with us out of contract until he gets another club? I doubt we'd be without him for too long. 

  • Sponsored links:



  • AFKABartram
    AFKABartram Posts: 57,833
    se9addick said:
    Hard to see the justification for extending Potts. 
    To me it’s an extension to the wage cost of the manager (which I suspect is already expensive). He needs to have his people ‘in the building’ and I suspect for whatever reason he doesn’t feel he has enough of that within his coaching staff, so we need to add Hylton and Potts onto the wage bill 
  • fenaddick
    fenaddick Posts: 11,183
    Think it's telling he didn't get a club elsewhere too, unless he is that loyal to NJ he turned down other offers to not even warm the bench
  • Sage
    Sage Posts: 7,278
    AFKABartram said:
    se9addick said:
    Hard to see the justification for extending Potts. 
    To me it’s an extension to the wage cost of the manager (which I suspect is already expensive). He needs to have his people ‘in the building’ and I suspect for whatever reason he doesn’t feel he has enough of that within his coaching staff, so we need to add Hylton and Potts onto the wage bill 
    Was exactly my point I made a little while ago. NJ doesn’t have his own staff with him, Hart was a big part of his team, so without him or anyone else, he’s relying on previous Luton players who understood what he demands and can help to implement it here. He has to trust certain people in specific roles and this just an adaptation to that.

    I am not 100% on Potts staying on, he ought to be in the team if he was fit and ready to play. Hylton will almost certainly be kept on but depending on how many we shift out this window might determine how much of his salary goes down as a player and how much as a coach. 
  • Garrymanilow
    Garrymanilow Posts: 13,176
    Surely the more sensible thing is to give Jones the coaches he actually wants and not have to create these hybrid player/role model jobs?
  • Chunes
    Chunes Posts: 17,355
    We've had squads filled with shirkers in recent years, where even club comms were frequently calling them out for not trying. So if Jones feels like he needs these characters around, I'm inclined to trust him. This team works hard and has a good attitude, and I'd be wary of telling NJ who he needs or doesn't need to keep that going. 

    Sure, we could convert Potts & Hylton to pure coaching roles, but I'm not convinced a coach can have the same type of influence on the culture as a player, who is part of the group rather than just instructing it. 
  • thenewbie
    thenewbie Posts: 11,002
    Garrymanilow said:
    Surely the more sensible thing is to give Jones the coaches he actually wants and not have to create these hybrid player/role model jobs?
    Is it not possible that this is actually something that Jones has asked for INSTEAD of the "normal" model?

    A lot was made of the level of control he asked for and the demands he had when appointed - maybe this was one of them.
  • fenaddick
    fenaddick Posts: 11,183
    He's also only 30, he won't want to be a coach yet
  • Bailey
    Bailey Posts: 3,268
    Don't mind me saying but there has been two school of thoughts developing on here about who assembles this squad. I fall firmly in the 'Nathan Jones has assembled the squad since June 2024' not the owners or even Andy Scott. If a player or perhaps better to describe him as a guest, Dan Potts, is retained then I think it can be safely assumed that Nathan Jones is calling the shots. 
  • fenaddick
    fenaddick Posts: 11,183
    Bailey said:
    Don't mind me saying but there has been two school of thoughts developing on here about who assembles this squad. I fall firmly in the 'Nathan Jones has assembled the squad since June 2024' not the owners or even Andy Scott. If a player or perhaps better to describe him as a guest, Dan Potts, is retained then I think it can be safely assumed that Nathan Jones is calling the shots. 
    Not to derail the thread but I think it's a mix. Potts, Hylton, Berry, Campbell all clearly Jones signings. Probably Edwards too. I think Ahadme, Docherty and possibly even Mitchell might be down to Scott but Jones obviously gets final say. There is no problem in my eyes with Jones giving someone a profile he wants, I just don't trust Scott to get it right most of the time

Categories

“Marketplace”