Can we sign Jordan Rhodes then?

[curious yellow 184]

Drmic has scored his goals against Premiership teams with quality defences. It's wrong to dismiss them as tap ins- a good striker has to get the position to tap in. Drmic is probably the best at the club for this. 

Unfortunately he might find himself in the same position as Klose was for Switzerland - not picked for the national side because not playing in the Prem

I think he might be one to leave, in any case Rhodes is a good option, an experienced centre forward is useful in the Championship. 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

16 hours ago, ged in the onion bag said:

Do you really think we could get promoted with Rhodes playing regularly? 

Errrm, yes because it literally happened last season when he featured in three quarters of our games as we won the league. Where do people like you even come from, have you just decided to follow Norwich after our promotion? 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

21 hours ago, FenwayFrank said:

Most of it in the Spanish second division 

Played for the bigger sides in that division, decent career if you've stayed at the likes of Getefe and Málaga. They are probably the Norwich's of Spain. 

[ged in the onion bag 855]

1 hour ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Errrm, yes because it literally happened last season when he featured in three quarters of our games as we won the league. Where do people like you even come from, have you just decided to follow Norwich after our promotion? 

Now whose conveniently missing the points!!!     You clearly don't have the nouse / wherewithal to put together a structured intelligent response to the points made....  which is typically personified by the feeble desperate put down... sadly happens regularly on here.....     You evidently don't have much of a clue.      If you're going to reply, address the various points I made.   

Yours, a City fan since 1971.   

[Indy 3,290]

Why would anyone want a Rhodes when we’ve got Idah! Drmic would be very good in the championship too, then we have Pukki, if he stays we really don’t want Rhodes.

[king canary 7,580]

If we sign him we sign him. For me to be happy about it he'd need to be taking a fairly huge wage cut- he's reportedly on £40k a week at Sheffield Wednesday, even 25% of that would be too much for an aging back up who does little outside of finishing.

I think my issue as much as anything is the fact that every time the mere suggestion of a striker is floated, people seemingly can't see beyond Jordan Rhodes. He isn't the be all and end all of strikers there are plenty who could do what he does. Yet the obsession seems to mainly stem from being a nice guy in the dressing room- as far as I can see we've got enough of those.

[king canary 7,580]

10 hours ago, Aggy said:

Equally baffled how the same people can say (1) “he’s only scored 17 in the last 4 seasons” so must be awful but (2) he was definitely signed as our number 1 goal threat ahead of someone who had just scored 37 in his last 70.

Pukki wasn’t playing as a holding midfielder - he was clearly seen as our biggest goal threat, but could be that playing behind another striker. Why would you not play your biggest goal threat in the number 10 role and another out and out striker if your attacking midfield options offered (on paper at the start of last season) virtually no goal threat or were injured.

Buendia - unfit, Hernandez 0 goals in 12 the season before, Stiepermann 1 goal in 23 the season before, Vrancic injured, McLean, Leitner, Tettey, Trybull all more holding / defensive players.

As soon as Buendia was match fit, Hernandez scored a few in the first few games, Stiepermann actually did a job at number 10, Leitner and Tettey formed a partnership....as soon as that all happened, the striker with 17 in 4 seasons, who we had brought in on loan with no option to buy, moved to the bench and the striker with 37 in his last 70, who our head of recruitment has literally said that we identified as the target to bring in to help us score goals, stayed in the side. 

The intention might well have been for Pukki and Rhodes to play together all season. If you read my original post on the subject, I said Rhodes ended up not playing all that much because the likes of Buendia, Stiepermann, Hernandez did so well, meaning we could move Pukki further forward. But to suggest Rhodes was always seen as our main source of goals instead of Pukki and was only dropped because he wasplaying so badly is just trying to fit to an argument. 

Using your logic, Pukki was our first choice number ten and got replaced by Stiepermann because he was playing so badly.

As you say, each to their own.

Sure you can read it that way, the other way would be to say we started the season poorly and changes were made to reflect that- ie dropping Rhodes, bringing Buendia in, using Steipermann to play as the number 10. Personally I don't believe that was 'always the plan.' It seems to me the poor start to the season and particularly the laboured performance v Ipswich led to a switch in personnel. That was when Steipermann was given a start, that was when Pukki was pushed further up the field. I find it very tough to believe this was 'always the plan' rather than a reaction to our poor start to the season.

Your last sentence is absolute nonsense as Pukki didn't get dropped- he was pushed forward to take the place of Rhodes. That left a hole that Steipermann filled.  

As to the other point as to whether he's a decent number 2- it depends what you want from a number 2. 10 minute off the bench, the odd goal when you're chasing a game? Yeah, fine. A striker who could step up if our main forward went down injured or had a significant drop in form? Not for me Clive.

[Aggy 752]

7 hours ago, king canary said:

Sure you can read it that way, the other way would be to say we started the season poorly and changes were made to reflect that- ie dropping Rhodes, bringing Buendia in, using Steipermann to play as the number 10. Personally I don't believe that was 'always the plan.' It seems to me the poor start to the season and particularly the laboured performance v Ipswich led to a switch in personnel. That was when Steipermann was given a start, that was when Pukki was pushed further up the field. I find it very tough to believe this was 'always the plan' rather than a reaction to our poor start to the season.

Your last sentence is absolute nonsense as Pukki didn't get dropped- he was pushed forward to take the place of Rhodes. That left a hole that Steipermann filled.  

As to the other point as to whether he's a decent number 2- it depends what you want from a number 2. 10 minute off the bench, the odd goal when you're chasing a game? Yeah, fine. A striker who could step up if our main forward went down injured or had a significant drop in form? Not for me Clive.

I haven’t said it was always the plan. All I said is I haven’t seen anything to back up your assertion that “people forget Rhodes started as number one and lost his place as number one to Pukki because he played so badly”.

My point has been that Pukki was first choice striker all along and would have always started the season up front ahead of Rhodes IF it ever came to choosing between the two.

At the start of the season Buendia wasn’t fit and we had - on paper - no goal scoring midfielder (Hernandez 1 in 12 and Stiepermann 1 in 27 the season before, everyone else deeper midfielders). So we didn’t need to choose between the two because we were stronger with Rhodes and Pukki + 2 behind. That could have been the plan all season, who knows.

 

 But after six games, Buendia was fit enough to start, Hernandez had scored 3 in 6 I think, Stiepermann had got a goal or two in cup games and the whole team had been flat the last few games. So, we now had attacking goal scoring options to switch up the midfield, Buendia came in, which meant we only had room for Pukki or Rhodes up front.

 

I’m not convinced Pukki had been in significantly greater form than Rhodes at that point, they’d both scored 2. If Rhodes had always been first choice, I don’t see why you drop him then. You’d give him a couple more games in front of the tweaked midfield. Likewise, if Pukki had always been first choice. Pukki wasn’t dropped, suggests to me had always been first choice and Rhodes had always been number 2.

 

As to what you want from a number 2 - would probably agree with your comments. Didn’t you say yourself earlier we didn’t need much back up and Idah was sufficient? I think everyone who has advocated the Rhodes signing on this thread has said they wouldn’t be too upset with Pukki, Idah and Rhodes (IF the wages are right). Chances are we will only have three - Pukki, Idah plus one other (Drmic, Rhodes, someone else). Idah possibly starting if Pukki was out with Rhodes continuing to come on as a sub. 

[hogesar 9,619]

Drmic scored against spurs today.

Just sayin

[Indy 3,290]

We need Rhodes and is Jamie still playing, surely it’s time to get him back for a third go too!

[Alex Moss 2,165]

On 08/06/2020 at 14:19, TeemuVanBasten said:

Either you know this but have decided to conveniently forget to fit your angle, or you don't read enough about Norwich City topics and should therefore probably write less about those topics. 

Fair play to KC for not tearing you a new one one after that condescending bit of nonsense at the end of that post.

As for Drmic and Rhodes, Jordan’s a really nice guy but there’s no way on earth he’s as good as Drmic. If the measure of a footballers quality was in his ability to stay fit then you might have a point, but it’s not, and Drmic is of a higher technical pedigree which suggests to me he’s a better player - not to mention look at what level the 2 respective players have scored their goals at.

Another goal against Spurs today in his limited number of appearances, hopefully he will stay fit and help fire us to safety so the thought of taking backward steps such as being suggested is a very distant one. 

[Midlands Yellow 3,949]

Stay up then no go down then maybe. 

[Well b back 3,190]

15 hours ago, hogesar said:

Drmic scored against spurs today.

Just sayin

Apparently he was class, but I reckon most are ignoring your post lol.

In recent times ( please correct me if I am wrong ) with limited time he is out scoring Pukki. Now he is fit I think a few people will eat their words.

[hogesar 9,619]

4 hours ago, Well b back said:

Apparently he was class, but I reckon most are ignoring your post lol.

In recent times ( please correct me if I am wrong ) with limited time he is out scoring Pukki. Now he is fit I think a few people will eat their words.

Last few times I've seen him play he has looked good to me. Bit of physicality, good movement, decent touch and obviously he has scored a few recently. 

I harp back to it but people thought Vrancic was a waste of space when we first signed him and I just couldn't get my head around it because it was obvious he was technically very good and had something about him. Our fans seem to be pretty awful at judging talent unless they immediately start of fantastic.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

3 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Last few times I've seen him play he has looked good to me. Bit of physicality, good movement, decent touch and obviously he has scored a few recently. 

I harp back to it but people thought Vrancic was a waste of space when we first signed him and I just couldn't get my head around it because it was obvious he was technically very good and had something about him. Our fans seem to be pretty awful at judging talent unless they immediately start of fantastic.

Apparently, from what I can gather, you just have to read up more on Norwich City than other posters and this will give you the authority for the definitive ‘factual over opinion’ judgement on whether a players good or not ha ha

I like Drmic, he’s got talent clearly, and he needs a run in the side, you don’t just fluke some of those great goals on his highlights reel. He’s just injury prone this far, that’s all - I suspect if he wasn’t we wouldn’t have got anywhere even close to signing him last summer.

 

[Mason 47 1,375]

2 hours ago, hogesar said:

Last few times I've seen him play he has looked good to me. Bit of physicality, good movement, decent touch and obviously he has scored a few recently. 

I harp back to it but people thought Vrancic was a waste of space when we first signed him and I just couldn't get my head around it because it was obvious he was technically very good and had something about him. Our fans seem to be pretty awful at judging talent unless they immediately start of fantastic.

To be fair, I was one of those that didn't like Vrancic after his first season. I remember watching him up close from the Lower Barclay against Swindon and he looked just shattered trying to keep up with them. Since, he of course has managed to adapt into a really impressive midfielder and I'm more than happy to say I got that one wrong.

As far as the opposition to Drmic goes however, I think they'll stay vigilant even if he scores in every game from here on. Best just to keep him a secret 😇

[hogesar 9,619]

2 hours ago, Mason 47 said:

To be fair, I was one of those that didn't like Vrancic after his first season. I remember watching him up close from the Lower Barclay against Swindon and he looked just shattered trying to keep up with them. Since, he of course has managed to adapt into a really impressive midfielder and I'm more than happy to say I got that one wrong.

As far as the opposition to Drmic goes however, I think they'll stay vigilant even if he scores in every game from here on. Best just to keep him a secret 😇

Yeah that's completely fair and everyone gets players wrong. I certainly didnt think Stiepermann was capable of being a number 10 in a promotion winning side, put it that way.

I was more aimed at the people on here who use horrible cliches about players and dont give them a chance. That doesnt apply to you 🙂

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

23 hours ago, Alex Moss said:

As for Drmic and Rhodes, Jordan’s a really nice guy but there’s no way on earth he’s as good as Drmic.

I'll say this for the fourth time shall I.... it doesn't have to be Drmic or Rhodes, because we didn't replace Srbeny. A suggestion that we sign Rhodes doesn't have to result in a debate about whether Drmic is good enough. 

Drmic was the Rhodes replacement in the summer.

Srbeny replacement could be Idah, or we could decide that he isn't quite ready and loan him out (as we almost did in January).

Or, we could go with 4 strikers which we may well need in a 46 game league season + 2 cups + possibly play offs, after a much shorter pre-season due to covid-19. 

In my opinion Rhodes is better equipped than Srbeny, that should be the debate, whether Rhodes is good enough to justify taking Srbeny's spot and whether it will help with Idah's development. 

Edited June 13, 2020 by TeemuVanBasten

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

3 hours ago, Mason 47 said:

To be fair, I was one of those that didn't like Vrancic after his first season.

Me too, proved me wrong. 

[king canary 7,580]

Enjoying the ever moving goalposts on this thread...

The OP was suggesting signing him to play this season (ie v Premier League teams)

By page 5, what we're actually talking about is whether he's an option as a 4th choice striker in the Championship.

Also on page 1...

On 08/06/2020 at 10:21, TeemuVanBasten said:

But Drmic is gash and needs 6 chances to score and Rhodes is a different option for the last 10 or 15 minutes if chasing an equaliser. 

Drmic is gash!

On 09/06/2020 at 23:40, TeemuVanBasten said:

Besides, Drmic can be as effective as he wants in the minutes he plays.... its the minutes he can't play due to injury which concern me the most. and there is room for both in this squad because we let Srbeny go.

Actually, I'm just worried about his injuries!

12 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

I'll say this for the fourth time shall I.... it doesn't have to be Drmic or Rhodes, because we didn't replace Srbeny. A suggestion that we sign Rhodes doesn't have to result in a debate about whether Drmic is good enough. 

And it doesn't have to be a debate about whether Drmic is good enough!

By page 10 I expect he'll actually have been suggesting Rhodes as the kit man...

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

The initial idea was semi joking; whether we could get Rhodes in for the rest of this season given he’s out of contract at the end of June . Personally I’d be in favour given our dire straits and that Srbeny has gone, Drmic has been unconvincing/injury prone and Idah very inexperienced, whereas Rhodes is a proven goal scorer who knows our system. We need options with multiple strikers at the end of games when we’re behind. But it was pointed out this is not possible- spoilsport 😂. 

 

so it does raise the same question for next season. I think Drmic is just on loan so if we’re relegated would be very unlikely to stay? In which case Rhodes would definitely be a useful inclusion in the squad IMO given he’s already been part of a squad that won promotion under Farke’s. I’m not saying he’d be the only striker we should look at, just that it would be an obvious idea to explore.

[Mason 47 1,375]

16 minutes ago, It's Character Forming said:

 it does raise the same question for next season. I think Drmic is just on loan so if we’re relegated would be very unlikely to stay? In which case Rhodes would definitely be a useful inclusion in the squad IMO given he’s already been part of a squad that won promotion under Farke’s. I’m not saying he’d be the only striker we should look at, just that it would be an obvious idea to explore.

Drmic is all ours actually ICF. Him and Byram our 2 permanent signings from the summer.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

On 13/06/2020 at 22:34, TeemuVanBasten said:

I'll say this for the fourth time shall I.... it doesn't have to be Drmic or Rhodes, because we didn't replace Srbeny. A suggestion that we sign Rhodes doesn't have to result in a debate about whether Drmic is good enough. 

Drmic was the Rhodes replacement in the summer.

Srbeny replacement could be Idah, or we could decide that he isn't quite ready and loan him out (as we almost did in January).

Or, we could go with 4 strikers which we may well need in a 46 game league season + 2 cups + possibly play offs, after a much shorter pre-season due to covid-19. 

In my opinion Rhodes is better equipped than Srbeny, that should be the debate, whether Rhodes is good enough to justify taking Srbeny's spot and whether it will help with Idah's development. 

Yes, you can say it a 4th time of you like. I was going to respond but I think KC has already nailed it perfectly. Hope you’re still reading up far more about Norwich than the rest of us less qualified to comment posters 👍

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

On 14/06/2020 at 10:41, king canary said:

The OP was suggesting signing him to play this season (ie v Premier League teams)

Actually I started by asking if it was technically possible / legal for us to complete his signing and play him this season, which was clear to anybody with reasonable comprehension skills, like the following posters who seemed to comprehend this quite easily and subsequently discussed this clear question accordingly:

• Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man
• Aggy
• Dylanisabaddog
• Mason 47
• Flying Dutchman

For example:

On 08/06/2020 at 12:14, dylanisabaddog said:

Nothing been mentioned. Perhaps they have reached a gentleman's agreement to keep quiet about it and not play players not registered at the end of January. It would solve all the legal problems 

Perhaps these posters can give you the help that you need?

[king canary 7,580]

1 minute ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Actually I started by asking if it was technically possible / legal for us to complete his signing and play him this season, which was clear to anybody with reasonable comprehension skills, like the following posters who seemed to comprehend this quite easily and subsequently discussed this clear question accordingly:

• Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man
• Aggy
• Dylanisabaddog
• Mason 47
• Flying Dutchman

For example:

Perhaps these posters can give you the help that you need?

OK so you wanted to know if it was technically possible to sign him this season...but you weren't actually suggesting that we should sign him to play this season if possible?

Sure, makes total sense....

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

27 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

Yes, you can say it a 4th time of you like. I was going to respond but I think KC has already nailed it perfectly. Hope you’re still reading up far more about Norwich than the rest of us less qualified to comment posters 👍

Yes he, and you, have definitely perfectly nailed the art of not answering the question posed in the OP. 

And the answer is that we still don't know whether players who become free agents on 30th June can play for a new club this season, as the Premier League have yet to clarify. There was an article about it a few days ago in a tabloid.

So the answer to the OP is "nobody knows". Not hard is it.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

5 minutes ago, king canary said:

OK so you wanted to know if it was technically possible to sign him this season...but you weren't actually suggesting that we should sign him to play this season if possible?

Sure, makes total sense....

Yes, i wanted to know if it was an option. Its a perfectly valid question and the answer is still uncertain. 

But I wouldn't be against adding him to the squad to replace Srbeny. 

This is a player that Stuart Webber attempted to sign permanently for £0 just 10 months ago  King Canary, yet here you are trying to make out this is some sort of bizarre topic plucked straight out of the left field. 

Edited June 15, 2020 by TeemuVanBasten

[hogesar 9,619]

2 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Yes, i wanted to know if it was an option. Its a perfectly valid question and the answer is still uncertain. 

But I wouldn't be against adding him to the squad to replace Srbeny. 

This is a player that Stuart Webber attempted to sign permanently 9 months ago King Canary, yet you are making out this is some sort of bizarre left field topic. 

In KC's defence, I remember him not being keen on re-signing Rhodes 9 months ago too. 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

27 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

Yes, you can say it a 4th time of you like. I was going to respond but I think KC has already nailed it perfectly. Hope you’re still reading up far more about Norwich than the rest of us less qualified to comment posters 👍

Yes he, and you, have definitely perfectly nailed the art of not answering the question posed in the OP. 

And the answer is that we still don't know whether players who become free agents on 30th June can play for a new club this season, as the Premier League have yet to clarify. There was an article about it a few days ago in a tabloid.

So the answer to the OP is "nobody knows". Not hard is it.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

4 minutes ago, hogesar said:

In KC's defence, I remember him not being keen on re-signing Rhodes 9 months ago too. 

That's a perfectly acceptable opinion to have.

But I don't really understand the criticism of the topic of the thread which posed a valid question about the legality of signing and playing a player that we tried to sign just 10 months ago and who is unemployed in 16 days. 

Its a Norwich City forum isn't it? 

Edited June 15, 2020 by TeemuVanBasten