I get that and in theory wouldnt doubt what you are saying bc i agree. but it seems in this situation its less an issue of adjustment, as it is one of depth itself.. i think we dropped the ball regarding the need for depth and ended up with a chaotic difference between starters and backups which is not something any amount of time can fix, simply bc the calibre of recruitment was in truth overly poor!
We knew off bat, how many games we would play in all comps, so why then, were the only worthy addition Cox and (the fintres risky) Eliopoulos to replace Marshal?? I get some are young projects (Coveny, Charlston), the rest though are below sub par.. Lackay, Swibel, Singh, (in what paralled universe are they replacements for Aguek or Lavalle is a question for the ages) Who decided Trenkov could be a worthy backup for Javi??? Or that 'a raw' Coveny was enough as backup for our centre backs for 2 comps? This decision alone has cost us more than any other bc for the most part it has forced us to sacrifice our midfield bite having to waste Giannakop in defence for too many games!
All we needed to do was replace Marshal (tick Eliopoulos), find another centre back bc of injury risks (young fringe) that would also push Janko & Eliop for a spot even when playing with Inglese in lineup! Brought in another MF and 2 proper strikers (or 1 striker and a floating forward)! All your money couldve gone here and been complemented by existing younger talents across the park to play as required...
When you sign players just for depth then your not getting better unless they are of similar calibre to those already there!