Who Would You Rather Have?

[Clint 221]

Johnson and Hooper or Jarvis and Bamford? We effectively replaced the former pair with the latter.

For me, the first two, all day long.

[Making Plans 942]

Definitely a bad move getting rid of Johnson. Not been great at Derby but that''s probably because he was City through & through.Players like him don''t grow on trees.We have missed his drive, his enthusiasm, his motivation, his shooting & his goals. Not one of those qualities have been replaced by any of the players that we already had or by those that have been brought in.We might have got £7m for him but that £7m has probably cost us 10 points and survival.People claim he is not PL standard and that may, or may not, be so.But when I see the likes of Dorrans, Mulumbu, Ofoe, Naismith, Jarvis and even Redmond in the squad and getting picked then I have to wonder what might have been if we had kept Bradley.

[djc 0]

Jarvis (assuming worst case scenario of relegation) if he stays next season and gets match fit during summer has the quality to rock the championship. He was superb for us when he joined, prior to his injury... #fingerscrossed

[TIL 1010 4,815]

Hindsight tells you Johnson and Hooper all day long but who would have thought Jarvis would take a backward step from his first couple of games and Bamford look so out of place.

[Making Plans 942]

[quote user="djc"]Jarvis (assuming worst case scenario of relegation) if he stays next season and gets match fit during summer has the quality to rock the championship. He was superb for us when he joined, prior to his injury... #fingerscrossed[/quote]Apart from one game (out of 13 appearances) I haven''t seen anything from Jarvis that suggests that he "has the quality to rock the Championship".As far as I can see it was a panic buy based on one decent performance and yet another £2.5m chucked down the drain.We may be hard nosed & difficult to deal with when it comes to buying quality PL players (e.g. Brady) but we are a soft touch when it comes to taking in other PL Clubs unwanted rejects (Dorrans, Jarvis, Mulumbu etc).They may be cheap but you only get what you pay for and we have, on too many occasions, paid out good money, and exorbitant wages, for carp players who are most definitely not value for money and nowhere near as good as BJ.

[quote user="TIL 1010"]Hindsight tells you Johnson and Hooper all day

long but who would have thought Jarvis would take a backward step from

his first couple of games and Bamford look so out of place.[/quote]It''s not hindsight though. There were plenty of people at the time saying it was a bad move to get rid of Johnson and Hooper and they have been proved right.

[GJP 79]

Jarvis has always been inconsistent. That''s what you get with him. But still a decent player to have in our squad.

As for Johnson and his work rate and motivation...Tettey and Howson always worked harder. You would see them sprint past Johnson more than you would see him sprint past them.

Bamford could have given us something but if he is the kind of lad that needs an arm round the shoulder and all that he probably hasn''t found the right manager. A shame because he''s got ability, real ability.

Hooper, well, AN is pretty fixated on one upfront and you need to give Hooper more help than we are prepared to.

[Well b back 3,285]

[quote user="Making Plans"]Definitely a bad move getting rid of Johnson. Not been great at Derby but that''s probably because he was City through & through.Players like him don''t grow on trees.We have missed his drive, his enthusiasm, his motivation, his shooting & his goals. Not one of those qualities have been replaced by any of the players that we already had or by those that have been brought in.We might have got £7m for him but that £7m has probably cost us 10 points and survival.People claim he is not PL standard and that may, or may not, be so.But when I see the likes of Dorrans, Mulumbu, Ofoe, Naismith, Jarvis and even Redmond in the squad and getting picked then I have to wonder what might have been if we had kept Bradley.[/quote]

Redmond ? lol

[Capt. Pants 4,300]

Hooper was useless in the lone striker role but it''s ironic that as soon as we sold him AN often went to 2 upfront, albeit from substitutions as we had to chase games. Mbok and Jerome just doesn''t work.We could get BJ back next season if we tried hard enough.

[damn that Ralph Coates! 47]

[quote user="Capt. Pants"]Hooper was useless in the lone striker role but it''s ironic that as soon as we sold him AN often went to 2 upfront, albeit from substitutions as we had to chase games. Mbok and Jerome just doesn''t work.We could get BJ back next season if we tried hard enough.[/quote]

if Brady leaves, and Derby go up, I''d contemplate BJ on loan for us in Championship.

[hardley1 0]

Jarvis Is very injury prone. Maybe subjected to rough treatment from defenders. Each successive injury reduces his performance levels. Hence he passed his use by date at thr hammers

[HampsteadCanary 0]

It depends what we want from our strikers. At the moment, I''d rather have someone like Hooper who you trust to put away a golden chance but rely on the other players more for the build up play.

[Chip20 69]

[quote user="Making Plans"]It''s not hindsight though. There were plenty of people at the time saying it was a bad move to get rid of Johnson and Hooper and they have been proved right.[/quote]

Hmm, I''m not sure anything of the sort has been "proved". To be proved we would have to replay the entire season again but with those two in the squad (and actually playing at some point) ending with our survival in the EPL. All we are actually left with is some people''s own individual belief that things would have been different had those two been retained and utilised.

[ZLF 276]

I would rather have tried bamford and jarvis and them not work out than have no ambition and stick with 2 players proven to be beyond their capability in the prem.

Any signing is a gamble - but as we have seen with ruddy, bassong, olsson, martin, bennett, whittaker etc once your know that players are not up to prem standard they are unlikely to miraculously improve a second time around - all all of the above were better placed to succeed that the revisionist view of johnsons and hoopers actual ability.

Both great championship players (who should do well there again next season) but neither as good as the alternatives in the squad that is likely to be relegated.

[Tumbleweed 106]

We have been promoted, relegated, promoted and now almost certainly relegated with a Championship squad. Frankly all these different permutations are much of a muchness. Any differences or preferences between X and Y are marginal at best in my view. This precise dialogue illustrates to me why we are the PL''s 21st club- we do not go and get the significant step up in quality needed (and often in just a couple of positions) to stabilise at the higher level. To the extent we buy these sorts of good solid Champs/squad PL players we will always be an ordinary side and the occasional promotion and subsequent relegation will be our fate.

[BroadstairsR 2,218]

You are probably right Tumbleweed but the fact that we will end up probably less than half a dozen goals and a three or four points from survival and a massive step forward for the Club means that such finely balanced permutations could well have made all the difference.

Johnson and Hooper instead of Jarvis and Bamford? Easily for me.

They couldn''t have done much worse

[ec-p 99]

Johnson and Hooper for me too. Crazy to sell Johnson POTS, with double figures scored from left midfield. Admittedly we got a great price for him. Brady supposedly his replacement but played half the season in defence, you couldn''t make it up! And Hoops did actually score a handful when we were in the Premier last time, could''ve made the crucial few points difference with Mbokani and Hooper, never tried, again you couldn''t make it up!

[If wed only kept Howie.. 3]

Surely that should be Brady and Mbokani for Johnson and Hooper?