Jump to content

chicken

Members
  • Content Count

    4,058
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

chicken last won the day on July 24

chicken had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,870 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

2,318 profile views
  1. I mean you say that, but outside of the clubs I named, with the addition of maybe Atletico and a few others... I could see the likes of Benfica, Ajax, Villarreal, Salzburg, Sporting and Lille all being tempted to take him on in the future. The top teams, no, but then outside of those top teams, how often do you see others get through to the quarters?
  2. In this country? Possibly, elsewhere - no. Plenty of teams in Netherlands, France, Italy, Germany and Spain that would give him a chance I would think. If you are talking Man City, Liverpool, Real Madrid, Barcelona, PSG and Juventus, then possibly not... but I'd be surprised if he isn't on the radar of top leagues. As for being a failure... I'm not convinced he is.
  3. At this point, we can't sign anyone, if we decide to replace him, we get to decide the fee, if we want one at all. Rangers have just sacked their manager and it smelt of lazy journalism as it is. It's weird because the kind of people that are saying we should get rid of him are in that middle bit of a venn diagram who are also likely to say we should never have gotten rid of Mackay and Roberts upon promotion to the Premier League. Yet it's a pretty similar scenario. Players arguably past their best, very good Championship operators and what's the argument given? They would have been good for the changing room or the one or two occasions we might have needed them... I doubt McLean is one of our top earners. He is experienced in that he offers that experience to other players. It's clear to see that the players in the squad also value that. It is also clear, that despite what many on here say, he isn't guaranteed to start anymore. Sara, Nunez, Hayden and Gibbs all genuine competitors for those positions now. Not the not-ready Gilmour or the more-of-an-AM Lees-Melou or even the emperors new clothes Normann. None were consistent, some offered the occasional game where they were clearly better, Normann couldn't keep it going, Lees-Melou looked a different player further forward, Gilmour... The other issue about wages is that even a freebie we could pick up would be wanting a signing on fee on top. What sort of player would be free and be better than McLean and want the same wages? Realistically very few if any. And you can bet we wouldn't be the only team in the hunt for them. The only time when this argument therefore becomes valid, to me at least, is if say, Cantwell leaves after turning down a new contract saying it wasn't enough money. At which point there could be an argument that letting McLean go may have freed up more funds to keep Cantwell. But again, that would only really be an argument should the club he ends up at is a club playing at the same level as us next season. He's clearly not being given a contract to be a regular starter in the premier league. I think it's more a case of he doesn't cost anything to keep and we get full control over what happens from then onwards. We don't give him a contract and he leaves for free in the summer. If we don't gain promotion we'd be likely to lose Hayden, as it stands, though things can and do change. That would leave us with just Sorensen as the DM choice. We have Gibbs, Sara and Nunez who all have shown they can play at this level now - we just need that consistency from them. We don't need to be losing the only other experienced player in the middle - especially when all three of those could also be considered "assets" should we need to sell. It's the nature of our model. If we go up, and we feel we could replace him, then we can get in touch with Rangers and offer him on a loan with a view to a permanent. Or if even more confident that he's not needed, ask for a minimal fee or even on a free transfer - the same as we could do the following season - it puts us in the driving seat. It gives us security around future scenarios and makes sense. IMHO, there are other areas of the pitch that need more attention and have worse issues than McLean. The width, for example. Cantwell, Hernandez, Sinani and Martin are all out of contract. That leaves Tzolis, Rashica, Rowe, Springett and Mumba who can all play there. Rashica is unlikely to stay now I think. Tzolis is probably a 60-40 to stay at this point, I think the decision was he needed a palette cleanser. None of the others offer a great deal of experience though Mumba is looking good, I still think he'll be favoured as an attacking full back rather than a winger. He reminds me a bit of Olsson. Then you have the strikers - Pukki and Hugill are out of contract, Idah injury issues and Sargent. Idah needs an injury free season in him IMHO. Would we be happy with Sargent and him as our first choice two? I'd like to think we could add more experience to that. And there in lies the problem. If we can spend money, it'll be on a tight budget again. If we want to keep Hayden next summer it'll cost us, and we can't afford, even if we go up again, for wholesale changes of the team. We don't have a Buendia or Godfrey to sell to try and spread the value over the team again. We'd be looking at £25-30m again without sales I reckon.
  4. The only thing I could even suggest, because I agree with you, is fear of repercussions on the Iranian footballers. I say that because the captain has already been outspoken about the issues going on in Iran and that will not go down well. Add to that what they might consider as "fraternising" with people of a nation they are currently not on good terms with, to put it mildly.
  5. And Nunez and Sara. No one's saying he's a shoe in. If you read the article where Smith reflects this, the squad have a leadership team that are voted in by the players. McLean is in it. It's a squad game and if he slowly fades to a bench role, or back up left back role over the next two seasons we know what he can deliver when called upon. Makes sense. His replacements could already be at the club. Sara, Nunez, Gibbs and poss Hayden. Oh and the argument that he was only good because he played alongside Skipp? Go home. Shut the door and stand in the corner. I suppose Grant Holt was only good because of Wes Hoolahan. Huckerby because of Adam Drury. Bellamy because of Roberts. Pukki because of Buendia. Footy is all about finding players that work well together. We have always relied upon that more than having a team burgeoning with individual tallent.
  6. The answer is in the article. He has been injured so is stepping up his comeback from injury. As with many injuries to loan players, the parent clubs often like to assess the player before they are given the ok to continue (see Hayden). In some cases they are returned to the parent club for treatment. Either way, until we know more, probably not worth the conjecture.
  7. I'm almost just happy to see the butt-hurters who are so sure their eyes and expertese don't seem to be appreciated by the club...
  8. If Sarra and Nunez play better between the end of the world cup and before the end of January, then perhaps they will sanction a move to let him go and recoup some of the pittance we paid for him. They are the only players we have on contracts going forward, along with Gibbs, that can consider themselves genuinely good enough to at least challenge McLean for a position. We may not get to keep Hayden so we can't rely on it.
  9. I believe he was also signed off a trial... rather than being scouted as such.
  10. So have I. And McLean is head and shoulders at this point.
  11. This is still a huge question, not a certainty. As others have said, when it comes to Milwaukee Brewers, he didn't jump off the deep end. In fact, in interviews he has stressed that and has said he takes much pleasure of his longstanding relationship with them and the way in which they changed the club. Now, I am sure he would expect to do that quicker with us if he wants to see the same sort of change, I say that because as others have done, rightly, he is 65. I also think that he is taking his time to get to know this market better. I'm sure he already has done a lot of homework, it wouldn't surprise me if he has glanced at this forum once or twice, social media etc... to see what value there is left to be squeezed out of the norms. What that also means though is that this is exactly why he is saying that the model and the way the club are run is good. Player trading comes into that, the cost effectiveness of the academy comes into that. Therefore so does the quality and breadth of scouting. It really is worth noting at this point too, that he has also said on several occasions that he is friends with the Liverpool owners and sought their advice/views on things frequently. I think trying to second guess anything at this point, before we know better, is a bit foolish. People that are good at business know that different businesses follow different models and using a cookie cutter approach often leads to failure. This is actually evidenced in his interview where he talks about there being "some" areas that the Brewers and NCFC can share approaches such as player conditioning, nutrition etc but again, says they cannot be compared directly.
  12. I think the last ten years has shown us that the Barca membership style scheme is NOT what any club wants... it becomes a popularity contests and wannabe presidents promising the earth and therefore leaving the club in masses of debt, purely because they wanted to play president... I am not a financial expert, nor are the vast majority of Norwich fans. Whilst I think it would be nice to have more fan input on the club as a whole, I would not trust a system that relied upon fans voting in a popularity contest for a president... I would think this forum is a good enough reflection of why that could be disastrous.
  13. Yeah, no. You see what you did there? The double pivot requires one out and out DM eg: Tettey/Skipp and one more traditional CM who plays "holding" but can also break forwards. So on the one hand you have said that Sorensen is a DM and does not compete with McLean as different players, and on the other you say he would get ahead of Gibbs or Mclean for the spot alongside Hayden. That would be a straight two DM. It's worth noting that Farke used Reed, Skipp, Trybull and Tettey in the out and out DM role of the two and played Leitner, Vrancic, Rupp and McLean in the 2nd role alongside them. It's at this point he said that Vrancic didn't really have the legs for that role anymore and was probably more a No.10 as a result. That to me says it all. That 2nd player needs to be box to box. Sorensen is good defensively, and defensively positionally. But he isn't going to be played alongside Hayden, he's back up to him. If you played the two, we'd weaken the ability in the middle to move the ball, or for one of the two to bring the ball forwards as Gibbs has done, and actually how McLean does. If you were to play the two, it would be with a deeper lying middle of an attacking 3 behind the striker who is collecting those short balls, turning, or looking to knock it wide and hopefully progress up the pitch. That said, Smith has also gone with the likes of Nunez, Sara and Gibbs alongside Hayden so far, again, all of those drive with the ball and pass the ball. In any case, that wasn't the challenge. I'd still start McLean over Sorensen.
  14. Normann "I'm a tough tackling ball winning DM" snaps on a gentle breeze, positioning all over the place but can hit a nice long ball every now and then? Lees-Melou looked far better as an AM but generally struggled to get into games earlier last season. Both "could" have been better than McLean - neither delivered 'better' on a consistent basis. As Nutty says, you looking for just top flight? - Trybull and Leitner. If you disagree, you can blame Farke on those.
×
×
  • Create New...