Jump to content

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

No, I don't think so - instead of who? Stieperman possibly, but I don't think he has the all round game to play in that role for us. He's not a replacement for Hernandez or Buendia so how would you fit him in?

I'd play him over Hernandez.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

Their owners have a lot of money though so will probably spend more than Fulham did, and spend it better.

Is that even possible!? I really hope for football's sake they don't.

25 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

No, I don't think so - instead of who? Stieperman possibly, but I don't think he has the all round game to play in that role for us. He's not a replacement for Hernandez or Buendia so how would you fit him in?

Instead of Hernandez. I like Hernandez, don't get me wrong, but nobody in the country outside of Norwich would choose Hernandez over Wilson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I alone, well nearly, in thinking that, yes there was a lot at stake, but in reality, it was an ordinary Championship match. No player stood out apart from the Derby keeper for the wrong reason. I think the media and pundits over egged that pudding yesterday.

But there is no doubt that Grealish and Wilson are good players. But we have good players who are worth as much as them now especially that ours are also in the limelight.

Yes, we have to increase the squad, presumably with better players than we have now but spending a lot of money on these players could backfire totally.

We have to hope the people and system that brought in the good players we have will do the same again.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Am I alone, well nearly, in thinking that, yes there was a lot at stake, but in reality, it was an ordinary Championship match. No player stood out apart from the Derby keeper for the wrong reason. I think the media and pundits over egged that pudding yesterday.

But there is no doubt that Grealish and Wilson are good players. But we have good players who are worth as much as them now especially that ours are also in the limelight.

Yes, we have to increase the squad, presumably with better players than we have now but spending a lot of money on these players could backfire totally.

We have to hope the people and system that brought in the good players we have will do the same again.

No doubt we've got players that would walk into either team and it wasn't a great game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re Wilson : unsure about him. He didn’t have a good game yesterday - nor did Mount or Abraham’s for that matter - so why would Norwich want to take on an expensive project.

If anything I’d take a Murphy twin back, at least they have pace to burn and some PL experience. 

Re Grealish For a claimed top class midfielder, yesterday was more evidence he isn’t. What did he do for  the first 70 minutes? Any slide rule passes, outrageous strikes on goal, dictated the tempo of the game? No. Yes Derby closed down his space but once again Hourihane looked a bigger threat.

What did he do to counter Derby in the last 20 minutes - again nothing. Grealish is still a good player but to compare him to Maddison’s skill set and attack attitude continues to puzzle me.

Of everyone on the pitch yesterday I’d look at Jack Marriott again as a possible Pukki backup.

Edited by Surfer
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Surfer said:

What did he do to counter Derby in the last 20 minutes - again nothing. Grealish is still a good player but to compare him to Maddison’s skill set and attack attitude continues to puzzle me.

 

There were no offers when he was touted at £15 million last season.

A decent player but lacks the vision of Maddison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Surfer said:

Re Wilson : unsure about him. He didn’t have a good game yesterday - nor did Mount or Abraham’s for that matter - so why would Norwich want to take on an expensive project.

Probably because they don't judge him based on just one game...

Share this post


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

They aren't short of cash though so I think they'll do OK if spent well. I like Dean Smith and think he'll steer them well.

I'm one of those who isn't fully convinced by Grealish but then I don't watch Villa every week. He's easily good enough for the Premier League but I'd personally take Maddison over him.

They've to pay Randy Lerner £30M due to promotion, big dent in the Kitty that. Oh, and agree ref Grealish, could easily amount to no more than Lee Hendrie.......someone who was touted as real talent at one time.

Edited by wcorkcanary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Tottenham bid £25m for him...

They dodged a bullet.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, ricardo said:

There were no offers when he was touted at £15 million last season.

A decent player but lacks the vision of Maddison.

I thought it was £50m they were claiming he was worth last season....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good player but it’s hard to see where the value is in such a deal. If we are buying cover then we can take a more risk on up and coming players or undiscovered talent. The other option is a free . Someone  like Dwight Gayle ( who plays outside as well as striker) would be available on a free - it’s way better value than £12m on Wilson or taking him on a loan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ricardo said:

Grealish not in the same class as Maddison IMO.

Agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Bonzo said:

Someone  like Dwight Gayle ( who plays outside as well as striker) would be available on a free

No he wouldn't

35 minutes ago, Bonzo said:

it’s way better value than £12m on Wilson or taking him on a loan

No it isn't

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Wilson came on loan then he would compete with / replace Hernandez? Stats wise they are about the same ... yes Wilson had 15 goals, but only 3 assists. Hernandez had 8 goals and 10 assists and we all know goals are part of his game he needs to work on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a moment in the first half yesterday when Villa had a three on three with Grealish on the ball and every opportunity for him to play the killer pass and he didn’t see it. A talented player no doubt but that moment showed why Madders is a touch better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Point with Wilson is it would be another good option if we got him on loan. We saw when Onel or Buendia we’re out we lacked back up in the wide areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Instead of Hernandez. I like Hernandez, don't get me wrong, but nobody in the country outside of Norwich would choose Hernandez over Wilson.

I love discussions about football - this is what forums are about! I would definitely play Hernandez over Wilson so that makes at least one person in the country, because I'm outside of Norwich. For the way Norwich set up and played this season, Wilson does not fulfil the same role at all - he doesn't have Hernandez's pace and is a more central player. Wilson is much smoother, with a more predictable game. 

Hernandez creates havoc - I accept often unintentionally - and he does things no one expects, also possibly unintentionally, but "disruption" off the wing is his role - that's what he's there for. Almost no one sussed him out this season, and it was clear that defenders were terrified by him. Wilson can't do that - he is closer in skill set to Stieperman than Hernandez but doesn't have Stieperman's ability in the air or physicality so cannot completely fulfil that role.

For Wilson to play in a Norwich team, he either replaces Buendia (unthinkable) or our set up would have to change to be closer to last season's (which accommodated Maddisons skill set) and that would be, in my opinion, a backward step. For a start Wilson is much easier to nullify than Maddison ever was (a job which Villa did quite easily), and again changing the set up would restrict Buendia's ability to roam.

Now, this might change in the PL because most of our width came from Lewis and Aarons going forward - if they try to do that next season the opposition will have better players to stop them, so Hernandez's role becomes even more crucial - replacing him with a naturally narrower player and one who can only impact a game if allowed to would not make sense. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

I love discussions about football - this is what forums are about! I would definitely play Hernandez over Wilson so that makes at least one person in the country, because I'm outside of Norwich. For the way Norwich set up and played this season, Wilson does not fulfil the same role at all - he doesn't have Hernandez's pace and is a more central player. Wilson is much smoother, with a more predictable game. 

Hernandez creates havoc - I accept often unintentionally - and he does things no one expects, also possibly unintentionally, but "disruption" off the wing is his role - that's what he's there for. Almost no one sussed him out this season, and it was clear that defenders were terrified by him. Wilson can't do that - he is closer in skill set to Stieperman than Hernandez but doesn't have Stieperman's ability in the air or physicality so cannot completely fulfil that role.

For Wilson to play in a Norwich team, he either replaces Buendia (unthinkable) or our set up would have to change to be closer to last season's (which accommodated Maddisons skill set) and that would be, in my opinion, a backward step. For a start Wilson is much easier to nullify than Maddison ever was (a job which Villa did quite easily), and again changing the set up would restrict Buendia's ability to roam.

Now, this might change in the PL because most of our width came from Lewis and Aarons going forward - if they try to do that next season the opposition will have better players to stop them, so Hernandez's role becomes even more crucial - replacing him with a naturally narrower player and one who can only impact a game if allowed to would not make sense. 

 

Wilson can and does play wide. You're right he's a different type of player to Onel- much more focused on cutting inside, making space for shots and making runs into the area than beating fullbacks on the outside but I don't think it would take a huge change is system to accommodate that. As you mentioned most of our width comes from the fullbacks so we don't hugely need a chalk on his boots type.

Where Wilson is better than Onel- for me is his decision making and final ball. Personally if you ask me who is going to have a better top flight career I'd take Wilson every time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, king canary said:

No he wouldn't

No it isn't

I stand corrected Gayle’s loan contract ends withWBA but he’s still a Newcastle player. My theory was brilliant otherwise ( before the facts intervened). Gayle won’t be free. As King Canary rightly points out. Nonetheless there may be other free options out there. On the subject of Wilson he does at least play almost everywhere upfront so his versatility is appealing. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Bonzo said:

I stand corrected Gayle’s loan contract ends withWBA but he’s still a Newcastle player. My theory was brilliant otherwise ( before the facts intervened). Gayle won’t be free. As King Canary rightly points out. Nonetheless there may be other free options out there. On the subject of Wilson he does at least play almost everywhere upfront so his versatility is appealing. 

 

The fundamental benefit of signing a player like Wilson over someone like Gayle is the resale value. Gayle is 28 and unlikely to be sold for a profit in the future. Wilson is 22/23 and with a strong season in the Premier League under his belt he'd be a £30m+ player.

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

×
×
  • Create New...