Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Half Ar5ed Hipster said:

Is the fact we're 'looking at Rhodes' pure conjecture anyway?

The original rumour came from The Sun.

This might be a lot of smoke and mirrors cast up by a journo adding 2+2 together and / or agents looking to drum up obvious interest in their client given we know Weds are looking to offload a number of players this summer and Rhodes has been playing for us.

It's up on the Pink Un main site, and they're very good at labeling speculation as "Transfer Rumours" or "Opinion" pieces.

When previously asked about his opinions on signing Jordan Rhodes permanently, Paddy Davitt had always quoted Stuart Webber saying "The numbers don't add up".  Like Timm Klose's contract, someone high up in the club (probably Webber himself) has most likely given Paddy an off the record update, complete with a few details that hadn't been released to the public domain before.

So I'd be surprised if Jordan didn't end up signing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

 ‘to Rhodes, or not to Rhodes’

Brilliant! Can we rename this thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

He isn't going to get many, if any 

 

Isn’t that Srbeny?

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nuff Said said:

I can’t believe the number of posters making comments along the lines of “we can do better”! Really? Perhaps they can suggest who is better, in our budget and likely to consider coming here?

I agree the chances are we will sign a forward from abroad who we’ve never heard of, but proven strikers at Premier League level are in a shop we can’t afford to buy from. Jordan - at a realistic cost - would be a decent buy. Somewhere between 5-10 goals from him could be enough to help us stay up, and we all know what that is worth.

It's not our job to find alternatives (why should we have to suggest any if we don't think Rhodes isn't the best option? (bizarre viewpoint).

This is the job of Webber and Farke and so far they have been proven (mostly) that they can find players to improve our squad for good prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

If he isn’t going to play, why spend money on him? 

This is the conundrum at the heart of the ‘to Rhodes, or not to Rhodes’ debate. The pro-Rhodes argument is ‘he’s a good guy and don’t worry that he isn’t a good player as he’ll never play’. The anti-Rhodes argument is ‘he isn’t good, so don’t waste money on him’. 

I can see merit in signing or not signing him. 

But to say ‘he’s not going to play, so let’s sign him’ is a crazy argument. 

My personal choice would be to get in two new players who can play in multiple attacking positions to back up Pukki and challenge Hernandez/Stipermann. 

If he isn't going to contribute much, it would be more sensible to keep the money and spend in January if we need reinforcements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This season we had 3 strikers - Pukki and Rhodes were competing for the starting position, Srbeny as 3rd choice.  Rhodes was effective to come on late when we needed a goal.

 

Next season I'd definitely like to bring in someone new to compete for the starting position or perhaps a different type of striker who could pose a different problem for defences ? 

 

Realistically we're going to have more games when we need a goal late on and so bringing a second striker on late in the game is going to be a necessary option - or sometimes replacing the starting striker with one or two new strikers late on.

 

Rhodes gives you an effective striker who has shown he can be a positive contributor to the squad even when he's getting limited game time.

 

The numbers have got to stack up, but it strikes me that given we could afford him last season, we should be able to afford him next season too, even as 3rd choice.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still maintain if Rhodes is happy to be a 3rd choice option potentially alongside one of our youngsters too, and the price is right for the club, it's almost a no-brainer.

Equally, everything Bethnal etc have said is true. I suppose it depends partially on the type of striker we're looking at (hopefully) to compete with Pukki for the number one slot. 

I don't personally see it happening because Rhodes is at an age where he can likely get one more good contract and I can see lots of championship clubs willing to spend 2m on him plus some decent wages.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

To say ‘he’s not going to play, so let’s sign him’ is a crazy argument.

We will need cover in case of injuries. That is why a player like Rhodes would be useful. Better an experienced player who can come on in an emergency - and in Rhodes it would be a player who is also valued around the place, an experienced head to help younger players and one who may still feel he has something to prove at PL level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's get the main signings out the way first and see how much dosh is left thereafter. Any player we get in should be better than what we have now to challenge for a first team place and that includes Pukki's role, not just back up players. I'm always a bit wary of signing a player who's happy not to play, especially on Prem league wages. Rhodes wasn't bought here to sit on the bench it just turned out Pukki was so damned good. We have moved on and sadly Jordan is not what we need. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

15 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

We will need cover in case of injuries. That is why a player like Rhodes would be useful. Better an experienced player who can come on in an emergency - and in Rhodes it would be a player who is also valued around the place, an experienced head to help younger players and one who may still feel he has something to prove at PL level.

At the start of the season Rhodes was the number one & Pukki was the back up!  It'd be interesting to see if we are going with 3/4 strikers by choosing from Pukki, Rhodes, Srbeny, Morris, Idah + any signing, or whether we'd use a player from another position if Pukki were injured (e.g. Wilson from Derby/Liverpool).

I realise it does sound a little crazy to be talking about Srbeny, Morris or Idah as potential Premier League strikers! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lake district canary said:

This is really doing him a dis-service. He has scored crucial goals in contributing to our promotion - and without them we may not have got it. The goals against Villa, away at West Brom and in the Millwall bonanza particularly.  Can't understand why people are so dismissive of him.  Nobody thinks he will be a first choice, but he could play an important role in the scheme of things, maybe mostly off the pitch, but as we saw when he did come on last season, he nearly always had chances to score - and give a striker like him chances and he will score goals.  So it's the Premier League? Bah! So what! Get him back!

 

Disagree on the dis-service..... he contributed last term in the Championship and I appreciate that as much as any other City fan.    But the statement responded too said 'Had Rhodes been given the minutes that Teemu Pukki got this year he would have scored a lot of goals.'.    Again, agreed with that he would, but we got promoted in a 4-2-3-1 formation and if Rhodes had played, Pukki wouldn't have..... he wouldn't have contributed to the extent that Pukki has, nowhere near it!....  The dynamic would have been different and we wouldn't have been promoted....    These were particular circumstances against all odds and it worked.   

Splendid Rush and Smooth have suggested he'd be ideal as a third striker.      Again, could agree with that, definitely better than no option at all  (although personally would rather see what Idah and Morris can contribute from the bench, we've all seen what happens when youngsters are given opportunity), however, let's concentrate the search and funds on a 'second' striker first and once that's sorted, maybe look a Rhodes as the third striker later.     If we end up with Rhodes as the second striker though and Pukki gets injured....  we leave ourselves in danger of undoing all the good work of this season.     Same applies to not having a decent keeper!   We have to reinforce these two positions as a priority.

If we sign Rhodes, it's likely to be a two or three year contract, and he's not going to play for us... let the lad enjoy his last few seasons playing football, not watching it.    If he does play for us, we'll likely be having an unsuccessful time and he'll be preventing opportunity for our younger players.   Can anyone honestly see him playing as the sole striker in the Premiership and us winning games?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

personally would rather see what Idah and Morris can contribute from the bench, we've all seen what happens when youngsters are given opportunity),

Neither (or Srbeny) have even played at Championship level, let alone Premier League.  But then Pukki hadn't played in England either, so what do I know!?  Romantically, it'd be amazing for Idah to make a contribution, but did I read he's out of contract at the end of June?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hoola Han Solo said:

It's not our job to find alternatives (why should we have to suggest any if we don't think Rhodes isn't the best option? (bizarre viewpoint).

This is the job of Webber and Farke and so far they have been proven (mostly) that they can find players to improve our squad for good prices.

To say we shouldn't buy Rhodes, for whatever reason, and that we need something better is a bit like me saying my Volvo isn't exciting enough and I want a Ferrari. Of course we all hope Webber and co can pull yet another surprise out of Europe, but it is always a risk, doubly so with a striker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Woodman said:

Neither (or Srbeny) have even played at Championship level, let alone Premier League.  But then Pukki hadn't played in England either, so what do I know!?  Romantically, it'd be amazing for Idah to make a contribution, but did I read he's out of contract at the end of June?

Idah is under contract until 2020.

If he’s as good as the hype he is ready to play games in senior football and should go out on loan. Although I can see him being around in the U23s for another season first. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Idah is under contract until 2020.

If he’s as good as the hype he is ready to play games in senior football and should go out on loan. Although I can see him being around in the U23s for another season first. 

...but not in the first team squad next season?  As I said, I think people might be getting a bit over excited about him.  He's 18 now and would have to be an exceptional talent to be in the squad as a sub or even as third choice striker.  If he was as promising as Rooney / Michael Owen, I suspect he wouldn't be at Norwich.  Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see him take the Premier League by storm!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be happy to sign Rhodes permanently or on loan again next season - he obviously fits in well with the squad and can be relied upon to make an impact as a sub or start games and score goals. He knows the system and style of play - something that Srbeny will be more familiar with now too.  

Comparing previous times he's been in the prem or wherever goal stats can be misleading - I suspect goals scored is one of many things looked at when signing a striker and might not be weighted as much as some of the views on here. 

In my dream world, where i can speculate as though I know something, I would think that a loan arrangement with a bonus fee and agreed sale fee if we stay up could be enough to get him again next season.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Woodman said:

...but not in the first team squad next season?  As I said, I think people might be getting a bit over excited about him.  He's 18 now and would have to be an exceptional talent to be in the squad as a sub or even as third choice striker.  If he was as promising as Rooney / Michael Owen, I suspect he wouldn't be at Norwich.  Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see him take the Premier League by storm!

He’s only just 18 so it’s still very early. 

Another season at U23 level isn’t going to harm his development significantly and a bad loan could be much worse. He gets a lot of hype due to being Irish and the press over there are always very active in bigging up their young players. The praise being lavished on him by some of the Irish media after scoring a brace against Luxumbourg U21s back in March was a bit embarrassing.

I don’t expect to see him in the match day squads next season. But I said that about Max Aarons about this time last year. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many goals did Pukki score for Celtic? How many Champs standard games had CZ played before he became a CB mainstay? Had we bought Aarons and bunged him straight in we would have been appalled. Did anyone expect Stieperman to be a goalscoring rampaging AM? Had anyone heard of Emi?

 

My point is that neither cost nor past performance at other clubs are pointers to whether someone is right. This team is a no name bugdet buy special cleverly put together. See Sanchez and Pogba as higher level examples of expensive"upgrades" which flopped. For me Rhodes ticks as many boxes as there are: probably cheap, experienced, fits the ethos, happy to be here, will not complain if used as back up and scoes goals when given the chance. Seems pretty low risk to me. Anyone better will cost too much, is risky, and takes budget from other positions needing upgrading.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, lake district canary said:

Isn't that the point? He isn't going to get many, if any appearances if we get another striker to compete with Pukki. I ask again who or what type of player are people wanting to get as a third or fourth striker who is experienced enough to be able to come on and possibly score vital goals?  A youngster? Because that is the only viable alternative. 

 

Bethnal makes a fair point though.... do we want a third choice who is a fairly one dimensional “poacher” type striker (especially one who would be on fairly high wages)? If he’s going to be third choice, we might be better saving the money and getting a 2nd choice out and out striker plus a second choice/rotation attacking midfielder who can fill in up top if Pukki and second choice get injured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aggy said:
11 hours ago, lake district canary said:

Isn't that the point? He isn't going to get many, if any appearances if we get another striker to compete with Pukki. I ask again who or what type of player are people wanting to get as a third or fourth striker who is experienced enough to be able to come on and possibly score vital goals?  A youngster? Because that is the only viable alternative. 

 

Bethnal makes a fair point though.... do we want a third choice who is a fairly one dimensional “poacher” type striker (especially one who would be on fairly high wages)? If he’s going to be third choice, we might be better saving the money and getting a 2nd choice out and out striker plus a second choice/rotation attacking midfielder who can fill in up top if Pukki and second choice get injured.

It is my impression that the kind of team we are will create chances for anyone who is up to speed with the system - we are so mobile as a team going forwards, opposing defenders can't keep up with it over 90 minutes - and I think that will be the same in the PL.  Rhodes is familiar with that, he is integrated with the squad and the way we do things - that should be enough to think he can be an option as third or fourth choice next season imo.

Yes, we would all like three or four full on guaranteed premier league proven strikers to go into next season - but it ain't going to happen. Pukki is going imo to be the main man again, a young striker bought in to work his way into the reckoning, Rhodes and yes, Srbeny.  

Edited by lake district canary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Hoola Han Solo said:

It's not our job to find alternatives (why should we have to suggest any if we don't think Rhodes isn't the best option? (bizarre viewpoint).

This is the job of Webber and Farke and so far they have been proven (mostly) that they can find players to improve our squad for good prices.

I think HHS has hit the nail firmly on the head. W&F have proven themselves in the recruitment market, and if their opinion is that JR is worth taking a punt on then I would firmly endorse their decision.

The fact that he was a good man to have around for team morale etc etc is a credit to him. However, W&F have shown (as in the case of Ivo Pinto) that sentimentality is not one of their determining attributes!

So, whilst I hope he is here next season, I have no doubt that W&F will make the right choice for NCFC🥇

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, lake district canary said:

It is my impression that the kind of team we are will create chances for anyone who is up to speed with the system - we are so mobile as a team going forwards, opposing defenders can't keep up with it over 90 minutes - and I think that will be the same in the PL.  Rhodes is familiar with that, he is integrated with the squad and the way we do things - that should be enough to think he can be an option as third or fourth choice next season imo.

Yes, we would all like three or four full on guaranteed premier league proven strikers to go into next season - but it ain't going to happen. Pukki is going imo to be the main man again, a young striker bought in to work his way into the reckoning, Rhodes and yes, Srbeny.  

Isn’t your penultimate sentence there though sort of the point.....we can’t afford to have three or four proven prem strikers. So, would we prefer two new out and out strikers (one being Rhodes who offers little by way of flexibility in covering other positions) with less money available to strengthen elsewhere, or one new striker plus one attacking midfielder who can play upfront if needs be?

I suppose if that attacking midfielder/forward IS the second choice striker and Rhodes is the third choice, then that could work.

However, it then again all comes down to money. The majority seem to think if he is cheap enough then we wouldn’t mind him being here next season. I wouldn’t want us to pull out all the stops to get him though if that means we can’t afford who we want in their positions - I don’t think he’ll be important enough next season for us to do that.

Either way - it will be interesting to see how we do approach his transfer window, and whether we can find any more gems from abroad.

Edited by Aggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aggy said:

I suppose if that attacking midfielder/forward IS the second choice striker and Rhodes is the third choice, then that could work.

You may be right there.  For me Pukki is an outsanding example of a player who can play a role off an attacker or out wide (where he started last season) and who can play up front on his own in a flexible team approach like we have.  Maybe we need a second Pukki!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps one thing that hasn't been mentioned is that Farke has more than once brought Rhodes on to play as a second striker alongside Pukki when we have been chasing the game. Millwall at home was an example. It often involved taking off a defender (Lewis) and going to our plan B.

So the decision may not simply be based on using him as cover for Pukki.

Personally I think he gives us worthwhile options but clearly only if the price is right. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of people are presuming that if he returns he will be third choice. It could be that he would still be the striker on the bench and we sign a player that can play wide and down the middle as I think Bethnal has suggested.

Edited by FenwayFrank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the main issue is nobody knows what the 'right price' is. Free transfer, £20k a week in the prem, halving to £10k if we get relegated- sign him up. £3m and £30k a week? No thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/05/2019 at 18:15, Hoola Han Solo said:

If he’s not good enough for Sheffield Wednesday then he’s not going to be good enough for us.

A lovely lad and a good influence last season, but we need players that are going to improve the squad. I think he’s past his best now unfortunately (and his best is the Championship anyway).

It's an interesting point Hoola Han Solo. I've looked at his goals and perhaps it's not Rhodes not being good enough for Wednesday but perhaps Wednesday not being good enough for Rhodes! Look closely at his goals for us this season - these are first class! He knows where to position himself, the attacking players just need to find him. We have pretty accurate players so Rhodes scores regularly when he's on the pitch. But perhaps Wednesday players just ain't accurate enough or good enough to find him with the ball. I am surprised at how few of our players are in the penalty area when we score as opposed to the number of opposition defenders.  How many times do you see Pukki score and turn away to celebrate and notice that he's was the only one in there and there are about 7 or 8 defenders marking nobody but him and perhaps one other. That's because the crossing player knows where Pukki is or is going to be. If people just lump it in and wish strikers get to the end of their crosses - it becomes a lottery.  Where other teams need 6 or 7 players charging into the penalty area to score, we only need one.

Wednesday are not playing to his strengths and are blaming Rhodes. Rhodes would be an asset to a team if they played to his strengths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×