Could be Ross McCormack ?

[Lessingham Canary 108]

According to the Daily Mail,,,,,,,,

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3110154/Ross-McCormack-interests-Norwich-boss-Alex-Neil-seeks-boulster-squad-Premier-League-return.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

Still scored goals in a poor Fulham side, could do job for us, what do you all think ?

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Not convinced he was worth £11M in the first place.

Didn''t look anything when he came here, but under the circumstances, I''d cut him a bit of slack

ANY player, no matter how unfit, lacksidasical, attitudinal etc under AN , I would be prepared to hold fire on. He (AN) could polish a turd, I am convinced

[BroadstairsR 2,273]

Good find.

 

Having lost my appetite for expensive foreign imports, I quite like the idea of signing this player. Charlie Austin is another, but I feel that he would be out of our reach.

 

It was quite controversial when Fulham signed this player due to the money they paid. Despite a shaky start (something to do with being overweight?) he did settle well and his return last season was more than acceptable in view of that team''s poorish season.

 

The big question is whether or not Fulham want to re-coup all their money. I wouldn''t want us to pay the full Monty, ie. £11m, but somewhere around £8m might seem a decent deal.

 

Fulham are making no secret of their interest in the Ipswich striker Daryl Murphy. Talk is that £4m will be put on the table. Perhaps there is a connection?

 

Either way, I feel that £8m for McCormack is a far better deal than £4 million for a 32 years old striker with one outstanding season under his belt after many years of really being nothing special at all.

[Yellow Wal 315]

A quality player with, apparently, not the best attitude or commitment.

Considering the improvement shown by some of our other players under AN we could then have an exceptional player if we signed him.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

Lots of clubs have been linked to McCormack since last Jan - he seems a go to player for a bit of speculation.

Hard to see where he would fit into the current formation, not a lone man type striker who will hustle and bustle defenders.

He is plays in a similar fashion to which AN used Hooper, sitting deeper off a striker. But as Hooper barely got any game time it would be strange for Norwich to spend a large amount of money on a similar player.

Interesting how McCormack was credited with having a fantastic attitude at Leeds, but since moving to Fulham it has been called into question a lot. Hard to know which is the truth, or if he changed massively since getting a big money move.

[ricardo 8,034]

OverpricedOverratedNo thanks

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="ricardo"]OverpricedOverratedNo thanks[/quote]Overweight. [;)]

[Tetteys Jig 851]

Harsh about his attitude. That''s what i''d consider his main strength. He is very similar to Hooper in that sense but people bring out the "Overweight" card on him as he''s a victim of his own strengths. When you come back from a couple of months out, you aren''t going to be firing on all cylinders as normal and that stands out more for players like GH and Ross McCormack.

I like him as a player but not for £11m and not while we still have Gary Hooper who in my book is a better version of him. I doubt we''d play him as the lone striker but he''d fit right in to that Hooper/ Wes role.

[Crafty Canary 547]

Similar player to Hooper and probably not as good. Unless AN intends to sell Hooper I can''t see why he would want McCormack. What is starting to become apparant is that City will not be paying RVW level fees for players this close season.

[Indy 3,471]

I hope that AN doesn''t start filling our squad with Scottish no hopers!

Yes he''s a great manager but his transfers so far just the two don''t look the greatest.....

Don''t rate McCormack for the premiership and too much like Hooper, not a loan striker in my book, would be very disappointed with this signing. Surely we can attract better?

[ZLF 335]

*Shakes head*

No thanks ..If we are going to gamble on Ross or jordan rhodes types we may as well

keep the cash and stick with ricky - a better option than these two by some way - even if seen as the devil we know..

[Kingston Yellow 259]

Crafty - "What is starting to become apparant is that City will not be paying RVW level fees for players this close season."

There is absolutely nothing whatsoever to base that assumption on Crafty. Our season only finished last week for god''s sake.

[Molly Windley 76]

Be crazy to pay a large fee for a 28 year old player without a proven Premier League record of scoring goals. If we paid big money then we would have to secure him on a long term contract to protect the investment, but 2 seasons down the line (unless he is a sensation) then at 30 his resale value will be slashed.Possible loan?

[yoda 0]

We wasted 8 million on a striker before let''s not do it again.I''d rather we spent a bit more and got somebody proven at premier level.

[lake district canary 4,833]

Yoda - "We wasted 8 million on a striker before let''s not do it again.I''d rather we spent a bit more and got somebody proven at premier level."

 

I think Crafty may be right.   The club must surely feel they had their fingers burned by buying Fer and RVW.  RVW may still prove his worth under AN, but they must surely think very carefully before launching out and spending £5million + for players.   Older players with experience, young potentials, yes, in the £2m - £4m range, but no more gambles  or frittering away huge sums on players.  The emphasis has to be on teamwork and any £5m + players must be of the type that fit into that.  I still think we have four strikers up to the job -  Jerome has been a revelation recently, Grabban has the pace, Hooper has proved his goal scoring ability and RVW is a wild card.  If the team is up to it and at the races, those strikers will score in the prem. 

 

If we are to spend really big money, I would rather it was on the level of competition for Tettey or Wes - roles in the team that if either of them are injured or off form, we will need quality to cover them.

 

 

[BroadstairsR 2,273]

[quote user="yoda"]We wasted 8 million on a striker before let''s not do it again.I''d rather we spent a bit more and got somebody proven at premier level.[/quote]

 

I''m not really with you there Yoda as I think £8m should remain our ceiling for the time being.

 

On the surface of it, we have three decent strikers on-board with only an outside chance of Hooper amongst them seeking a move. It looks like RVW might come back and he could surprise us, but likely not.

 

Two have been (or will be) removed from the books, in Lafferty and Becchio. We therefore need, at least one more.

 

We have tried the option of a prospect from  European football, and it failed. However, there might just be another Christian Benteke out there and no doubt our scouts are looking A fast powerful African-based striker always appeals, but again, this route can be risky. Again it is up to the scouts.

 

Home grown talent is expensive and not in abundance, McCormack, Rhodes, Austin, Long?

 

Weimann has been mentioned in despatches.

 

Perhaps we should look to getting a player on loan from one of the big boys? This has worked for some in the past.

 

It is not easy, but I would still not want us to break the bank.  

[tricky974 63]

I don''t think that McCormack that good of a player to warrant a fee of around 8-11 million we must have a better scouting system than that, for example weren''t we looking at Bony and Benteke I realise that we ended up with RVW but we have signed gems before that I personally have never heard of such as Tettey I am hoping that we sign a few gems because thus far I have been unimpressed with the players that have been linked, that may just be me.

Regardless though of who we do sign I will support them and will do the same for RVW if he stays, I thought that we have made a mistake previously when we signed Dion Dublin and won''t be so quick to judge from now on.

[Yorkshire Canary 118]

Jerome with PL experience and more or less the same age cost about £2m. Whilst he was a bargain anything more than about £5m for Mc Cormack would be stupid. he is the wrong age to recoup a fee and looked considerably overweight when he played here

[ZLF 335]

Its about the right price for the right player.   A benteke,bony,drogba type would be perfect - age,  current league etc will determine the price and we would be silly to walk away from one just because the price does not meet an arbitary limit.

buying british will bring that price up quickly and we dont need a hooper type finisher.   The striker is a tough buy to make this season - but they have to be better than we have.

[Indy 3,471]

[quote user="tricky974"]I don''t think that McCormack that good of a player to warrant a fee of around 8-11 million we must have a better scouting system than that, for example weren''t we looking at Bony and Benteke I realise that we ended up with RVW but we have signed gems before that I personally have never heard of such as Tettey I am hoping that we sign a few gems because thus far I have been unimpressed with the players that have been linked, that may just be me.

Regardless though of who we do sign I will support them and will do the same for RVW if he stays, I thought that we have made a mistake previously when we signed Dion Dublin and won''t be so quick to judge from now on.[/quote]

As much as I love Dion we were relegated to league one because we didn''t sign quality that season....so I don''t we should be referencing Dion!

This is only press talk like the lad from Plymouth, AN said he was looking to add quality and not just bolster the squad so for me there is nothing in this! Won''t be too happy with letting RVW or Hooper go to be replaced by on paper a far lesser player.

[ZLF 335]

[quote user="Indy"] AN said he was looking to add quality and not just bolster the squad so for me there is nothing in this! [/quote]This is core for meHowever I think we can make signings in 2 groups; those for 2-5 years such as this if they genuinely look good prospects and wont affect the 25 man squad limit.  

and those for immediate use..   I think ANs assessment is spot on;  we have a good core squad and we need to add 3-5 players with genuine quality - not more squad players.  Any new player in this group have to be better than we have,  hungry to succeed and improve,  and ready now to push a current, popular first teamer out of their position.

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,627]

No, no and no.Fulham spent £11m on him last summer and they''d want at least half that back, probably more. And for a player who turns 29 in August, with no top flight experience, that is way too much.

[Crafty Canary 547]

Kingston Yellow wrote the following post at 04/06/2015 11:14 AM:

Crafty - "What is starting to become apparant is that City will not be paying RVW level fees for players this close season."

There is absolutely nothing whatsoever to base that assumption on Crafty. Our season only finished last week for god''s sake.

Kingston Yellow, call me an old cynic but when I read articles such as O''Neill saying we have a squad as good as any of about half the clubs in the premiership I ask myself is this just a page filler or is it softening fans up for lower value signings.

I then read about supposed interest in a young Plymouth full back and an average forward like McCormack and I come to the conclusion that big transfer fees are not on the agenda.

This doesn''t mean that lesser value signings won''t do a good job for us. I do hope though that we can find a good quality goalscorer and a really good centre back for the coming season. I would be happy with just the two such signings.

[Andy G 15]

Would rather have Chris Martin back.

[jaemae2 0]

[quote user="Crafty Canary"]Similar player to Hooper and probably not as good. Unless AN intends to sell Hooper I can''t see why he would want McCormack. What is starting to become apparant is that City will not be paying RVW level fees for players this close season.[/quote]

There aren''t many players outside of amateur football that aren''t "not as good" as Hooper. This is laughably wrong.

[jaemae2 0]

Yes Hooper defintiely shows his "goal scoring ability" AGAINST TEAMS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN RELEGATED FROM LEAGUE 1. Too bad he sucked against everyone else, unless it was a PK. He only scored 3 goals from play against ANYTHING out of the bottom 6.

[Iwans Big Toe 382]

JAEMAE IN HOOPER RANT SHOCK!

[Samwam27 606]

Out of curiosity does anyone have player stats for Jerome, Hoops, Grabban & Johnson.

I''d love to know minutes played verses goals this season for each, to weigh up their ratios.

Haven''t seen that in any posts. Everyone slates Hoops, but am sure he played far less minutes than Grabban or Jerome, and still managed a good goal tally

[Molly Windley 76]

[quote user="Samwam27"]Out of curiosity does anyone have player stats for Jerome, Hoops, Grabban & Johnson.

I''d love to know minutes played verses goals this season for each, to weigh up their ratios.

Haven''t seen that in any posts. Everyone slates Hoops, but am sure he played far less minutes than Grabban or Jerome, and still managed a good goal tally[/quote]BJ`s stats here http://www.whoscored.com/Players/12490/Show/Bradley-JohnsonClick players from squad on left of page for their stats

[BroadstairsR 2,273]

Hooper''s return of 12 goals and 6 assists wasn''t too bad considering the game time he had.

 

I believe that he started the season off with an injury, which didn''t help.

 

His name on the bench impressed opposition supporters throughout the season, more latterly a Boro forum before the final, where the strength of our bench was mentioned when the team news was announced.

 

For one reason or another he hasn''t set the World on fire at Carrow Road, but he is generally appreciated by the supporters.