Jordan rhodes

[glory.win or die. 270]

According to Twitter (norwich dream team/HITC) we might be in for Jordan Rhodes on loan. Funding his £40k wages by selling Nelson Oliviera.

Personally not sure he is the 1) the type of player we are looking for in terms of age or ability to play as a loan striker or 2) the value we are looking for in regards wages which I''m sure would pre off others on less.

But it''s always good to get the rumours in early.its a long summer until we play again.

I don''t think this one is going to happen but it would be great if it did and he found his finishing boots again just to upset our friends in Suffolk.

[FenwayFrank 2,456]

Anyone that believes this needs to cut back on the beer

[Herman 9,710]

I think you are quite right in your assesments 1 and 2, considering the structure the club are trying to bring in. Although I wouldn''t be upset at getting rid of Oliveira to fund someone else, I highly doubt it would be for this move. (Saying that, I called Olive''s impact completely wrong, so you never know.[:S])

[ZLF 271]

Doesn''t make the criteria of player we are looking for. And e simply offers nothing outside of the pen area. Too old, too slow, too expensive and simply not good enough. He can''t get a game ahead of hooper FFS.

This now simply a hardy annual rumour less likely to happen this year than ever. As paddy would say, circus.

The other rumour heard week was Defoe. Preposterous but less ludicrous than Rhodes.

Oliveira leaves does at least seem possible..

[glory.win or die. 270]

Is francis jeffers still playing? We need a fox in the box.

[kick it off 1,948]

Given our new wage structure, even if we wanted him we would certainly not be paying anything near 40k per week. Nonsense rumour (thankfully)

[paul moy 235]

.. and injury prone.   Do we ever learn !!

[Herman 9,710]

[quote user="glory.win or die."]Is francis jeffers still playing? We need a fox in the box.[/quote]1 good season in 20. That could be a goer[Y]

[BroadstairsR 2,138]

His eye for goal might well be seen as ''just what the doctor ordered'' and the kind of striker that many of us have been longing for for most of the last season.

Rhodes''s record of goal-getting at both Huddersfield (73 in 124) and Blackburn (83 in 159) is excellent, and although it has drifted to as to just 1 in 3/4 at @Boro and Wednesday that is luxurious compared with our current lot.

I like the idea, and at 28 there is still a lot to come. I don''t like the loaning bit much but suppose this the only route available.

With a reputation of being just a striker who just strikes and fails to contribute to the overall team effort I feel that he would not fit into the Farke way though (and perhaps stands comparison with Ramsay''s view of Greaves in 1966 ... the most high profile example of this of many over the years.) Rhodes flourishes in the box, Farke sees mid-field dalliance as the limits of attacking play (joke.)

Lone striker? I don''t know ... depends upon the support, speed into the box, wide men and quality of corners and free kicks.

Not the worst idea in the world for NCFC at this moment in time. Depends upon the money, which depends upon how much we get for Oliveira, should he still be in demand, or how much of the Maddison money is to be allocated to transfer dealings.

A fresh input of East Anglian air could herald a renaissance for the player and would surely upset the binmen, especially if we could put the hard working Martyn Waghorn alongside him.

[Bonzo 198]

Financially the devil is in the detail. For example if Rhodes is on £40k whether he plays or not this could mean he is simply out of our budget- but what if he is on much less if he doesn’t play?

Not playing at 28 is also a big deal. He’ll want games. On this basis the rumour could be plausible. Grant Hanley was another similar acquisition. Proven at the level but not playing and still ambitious enough to want to play international football. In each case both club and player stand to benefit from this sort of a move.

On a cautionary note if we do a deal like this it should be as a purchase not a loan. A loan doesn’t demand the same commitment from the player and a loan for a proven player is different in its managerial perspective to the dynamics of a loan for an emerging talent.

Even a successful loan could leave us in a weak position as the player could be recalled or exposed to other clubs rival bids.

[Clint 221]

I''d take Rhodes all day long but not on £40k a week.

Unless he has Naismith''s agent, at his age, I''m guessing he''d probably consider a pay cut and if Sheff Wed want to get rid, a deal could probably be brokered to suit all parties.

Maybe Webber could use his negotiating skills and sort a swap deal with Nelson and a bit of cash coming out way to help fund wages.

[glory.win or die. 270]

Regardless of the likelihood of this ( and I''m surprised no one has commented that they would rather sign Cecil rhodes) , what type of striker do we think we need to score in a farke team..

I''m not entirely sure that even at their best iwan Roberts or grant Holt would score many the way we play, so what type of striker would fit our way if play?

[First Wazzock 902]

Exactly, Glory, Win or Die.

We could have Mo Salah in the team and we still wouldn''t score. I can''t think of anyone who would be prolific with our style of play.

[king canary 7,577]

So many reasons this won''t happen.

Selling a permanent player to fund a loan move is madness.

Rhodes offers very little outside of finishing- any system with one up front needs a striker to do more.

He would probably be on double most of the squad.

[Guest]

This old chestnut pops up every summer.

[Yellowbeagle 0]

I don''t for one moment believe this is true. We''d be getting rid of Nelson who is not the best hard worker off the ball because that''s what we require in the current system and replacing him with someone who does even less.

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,423]

The last time we had a striker who was anything like prolific was Holt , under Lambert. We moved the ball forward early, and encouraged support players to get into the box . Time and again we scored because we overloaded certain areas , or at least matched teams with body count.

One game sticks in my head. It was against Newcastle in the Prem - that year Newcastle had got off to a flier but when they came to us both centre back were out. So Lambert played long balls on top of the defenders , Holt got a couple also Hoolahan and Morison.

I can''t recall us playing like this for ages. Certainly never under Farke . As a result our strikers don''t get the ball early enough , or in the right areas enough , to be "prolific" .

Anyone watching Jerome''s goal for Derby against Fulham must ask themselves when he had such a chance from open play recently?

Some might describe our build up as patient. I think it is torturous. Fine when we score early/ first, and we can exploit space in behind as we did with Villa - but that was started by a world class goal from 25 yards from Murphy.