General Oxford mail if our best players had stayed

oufc1991

Well-known member
Joined
16 Dec 2017
Messages
3,869
What do people think would be our best starting #11 if players had stayed instead of being sold
This is the ox mail
1630659996552.jpeg
Personally I’d swap long for baldock I’d swap rothwell for Henry and o’dowda for Whyte and put roofe LW Whyte RW
 

Teddydee1980

Active member
Joined
1 May 2018
Messages
436
Definitely wouldn't have O'Dowda. Thought he was over-rated any case. Whyte all day.

And I think/hope we might have Seddon ahead of Ruffs come season end too.
 

dickwalton1964

Well-known member
Joined
12 Jun 2019
Messages
1,272
What do people think would be our best starting #11 if players had stayed instead of being sold
This is the ox mail
View attachment 7101
Personally I’d swap long for baldock I’d swap rothwell for Henry and o’dowda for Whyte and put roofe LW Whyte RW


Baldock wasn't sold though. There's a case for Henry, definitely. Also, if it's not about a player being actually sold then Maguie walks into a starting eleven.
 

oufc1991

Well-known member
Joined
16 Dec 2017
Messages
3,869
Baldock wasn't sold though. There's a case for Henry, definitely. Also, if it's not about a player being actually sold then Maguie walks into a starting eleven.
That’s true and I would have kept long but his injury problems keep popping back to haunt him who would you put mags 🤔
 

Fanatica

Active member
Joined
8 Apr 2018
Messages
177
Taylor
Roofe Henry
Brannagan
Lundstram Ledson
Skarz - Nelson - Dickie - Baldock
 

RyanioBirdio

Well-known member
Joined
1 May 2018
Messages
5,634
Rothwell is a strange one, hit and miss rotation option for us, never knew his best position. Since leaving he's been brilliant for Blackburn though.
He was clearly head and shoulders above most players at this level in terms of technical ability, he just never seemed to get given a run of games in a consistent role that suited him best. Because he was good enough to play several roles in a competent manner he suffered, and so did we. He was a good example of the false economies that football can often be riddled with in recent years. An obsession with ‘adaptable players’ who can play three different roles and give you six or maybe seven out of ten on a good day, rather than letting them play in their best position and smashing out eights and nines.

Good haircut when he was here, too. Very 1940/50s. Smash a moustache on him and stick a pack of ciggies up his sleeve and he was ready to advance on Berlin.
 

Jason N

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
1,205
Eastwood
Long Baldock Dickie Nelson Seddon
Ledson
Lundstram Brannagan
Whyte Taylor Roofe​
 
Last edited:

HampshireYellow

Well-known member
Joined
20 Dec 2017
Messages
6,395
The article was written on the premise that loan players couldn’t be included, hence why no Baldock.
 

Marked Ox

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
26,490
He was clearly head and shoulders above most players at this level in terms of technical ability, he just never seemed to get given a run of games in a consistent role that suited him best. Because he was good enough to play several roles in a competent manner he suffered, and so did we. He was a good example of the false economies that football can often be riddled with in recent years. An obsession with ‘adaptable players’ who can play three different roles and give you six or maybe seven out of ten on a good day, rather than letting them play in their best position and smashing out eights and nines.

Good haircut when he was here, too. Very 1940/50s. Smash a moustache on him and stick a pack of ciggies up his sleeve and he was ready to advance on Berlin.

Rothwell also got regular injuries/niggles when playing with us which stopped consistent runs in the team.
 

m

Well-known member
Joined
8 Dec 2017
Messages
5,782
Rothwell is a strange one, hit and miss rotation option for us, never knew his best position. Since leaving he's been brilliant for Blackburn though.


Yeah, and if you're considering what players have done since then you'd have to include Mowatt.

(Subject to whatever ownership/loan/sale rules have been applied)
 

Marked Ox

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
26,490
Ledson or Brannagan is a tough one?

Based on their time at Oxford only, then Brannagan just pips it out of the 2 for his additional attacking ability.

Lego, once settled, appears to have been very good at Preston so tricky if including that.
 

MJB

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
4,405
Imagine not including Henry. Absolutely nuts.
 

beyondthefourth

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
3,197
Imagine not including Henry. Absolutely nuts.
I don't think it's for contributions over the 5 years, it's players at their current level. Hard to argue that Lundstram, Ledson, Baptiste and all would walk straight back into our current first XI.
 

HampshireYellow

Well-known member
Joined
20 Dec 2017
Messages
6,395
Imagine not including Henry. Absolutely nuts.
It’s saying if you could have kept hold of any (permanent) players we’ve had over the past few years, what would be the best possible team Oxford could field today. I don’t think anyone would argue that Henry would, today, get in a midfield containing Lundstram, Ledson, Baptiste, Brannigan or Rothwell.
 

werthersoriginal

Well-known member
Joined
9 Dec 2017
Messages
9,068
It’s saying if you could have kept hold of any (permanent) players we’ve had over the past few years, what would be the best possible team Oxford could field today. I don’t think anyone would argue that Henry would, today, get in a midfield containing Lundstram, Ledson, Baptiste, Brannigan or Rothwell.
Henry's as good as most of those but a different sort of player. Have to go on the wing, or play 4-5-1.
 

Similar threads


Top Bottom