Hugill doesn't offer anything

[Mullet 293]

Of all the signings NCFC made in the summer the only one I see as a mistake is Hugill. I don't think he offers anything. I may be wrong I hope I am but he doesn't inspire me at all. This is just my uneducated "opinion" based only on what I see and is in no way personal or moaning

[cambridgeshire canary 6,778]

Yes lets judge him from a ten minute cameo.

[East Rider 551]

15 minutes ago, Mullet said:

Of all the signings NCFC made in the summer the only one I see as a mistake is Hugill. I don't think he offers anything. I may be wrong I hope I am but he doesn't inspire me at all. This is just my uneducated "opinion" based only on what I see and is in no way personal or moaning

I think you will eventually be proved wrong Mullet. He may not be a Pukki or Grant Holt, but he does give us another option and we have been crying out for that in the past. Using him in a last ten minute panic session may not get the best out of him however, this is a long season and I suspect we will be happy he is in our team come the spring.

[Mullet 293]

6 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Yes lets judge him from a ten minute cameo.

I based what I said on his performances so far this season not just tonight. So far his contribution is scoring a penalty

[Mullet 293]

3 minutes ago, East Rider said:

I think you will eventually be proved wrong Mullet. He may not be a Pukki or Grant Holt, but he does give us another option and we have been crying out for that in the past. Using him in a last ten minute panic session may not get the best out of him however, this is a long season and I suspect we will be happy he is in our team come the spring.

I really hope so. So far he looks like a weak link to me but there is plenty of time for him prove me wrong

[Christoph Stiepermann 1,139]

Looks like a classic case of trying too hard to me. He only gets 10-20 minutes here and there and tends to just give away fouls or lose the ball trying to force things. I reckon if you gave him a run in the team and he just played his natural game he would do okay. He's a decent player, not a natural finisher and doesn't have that poachers instinct but he's a good focal point and hold up player who could get 10-15 goals a season for an attacking team if he played week in week out.

 

Now the problem here is he won't start most games here so long as Pukki stays fit, he's not the type of player to generally make an impact late in games and while he's reasonably strong and good in the air he's not exceptional in either area even at this level so he's not a dangerous  weapon to bring on late in games. 

 

He's good backup at this level. Nowadays it does take around 2M to find proven decent quality backup striker in the Championship. If he helps secure us some points, gets a handful of goals this year and does a good job for the team if Pukki is out injured for a period we would have got our monies worth from him. If we get promoted he'll have to be shipped out as he's nowhere near that level but that's not something we have to worry about right now. 

[Branston Pickle 3,679]

He’s not exactly hit the ground running, but I think he’ll turn out to be a decent signing.  We definitely need to get a bit more of an aerial threat in the box from someone/somewhere....our corners and ‘traditional’ crosses at the moment do seem to hold little threat.  

[hogesar 9,722]

Its hardly surprising that Hugill looked more threatening with Xavi fit - naturally left footed and a good crosser of the ball. 

I dont think today particularly called for him and had Idah been available I reckon he would have played.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

Think he's a bit too desperate to score a goal from open play, probably trying to hard in a strange way.

He is definitely technically limited, although still think he could become useful as the season drags on when teams start getting fatiqued and the games get a bit scrappier. 

Although he's defo one that should be left behind if we get promoted, can see why West Ham only gave him 3 games in the league above.

Edited November 3, 2020 by TeemuVanBasten

[Uncle Fred 526]

The staggering fact is there was the perfect striker just down the road at Peterborough somehow our scouting network completely missed him leaving Brentwood to pick up the bargain of the year

instead we landed with this numpty 

you couldn’t make it up 

[Branston Pickle 3,679]

Brentwood, indeed.....he did actually cost Brentford approaching £10m which tells you precisely why we “missed” him

[BroadstairsR 2,199]

For a target man he's not yet shown to be much of a target man and he makes little impact.

Compare him.last night, with Millwall's Matt Smith when he came on. He didn't do a lot but still (@ 6' 6" admittedly) caused a certain amount of panic in the City defence on a couple of occasions.

I've previously said that with Hugill you get what it says on the tin. The promises don't amount to much at the moment it would seem.

Difficult to perceive that West Ham had previously paid a reported £10m for him, easy to see why that move flopped and I wouldn't rate him anywhere near half that from what I have seen so far.

Despite the plusses and minuses surrounding the acquisition of Rhodes you could at least anticipate a poacher's goal from him. Right now I'd have preferred that Jordan, but at least we have Idah's return to anticipate with some positivity.  

 

Edited November 4, 2020 by BroadstairsR

[Midlands Yellow 4,044]

5 hours ago, Branston Pickle said:

Brentwood, indeed.....he did actually cost Brentford approaching £10m which tells you precisely why we “missed” him

We couldn’t sign a player from Peterborough for a fairly modest sum with add ons? 

[Terminally Yellow 2,477]

*sighs*

It always disappoints me to see fans write off new players. Fact is, in the ten games we've played, he's played just 273 minutes - the equivalent of three games.

In those 273 minutes, he's scored one penalty (something which the rest of our lot struggle to do), created another against Rotherham by being the threat that caused the defender to put the ball in his own net and in my view helped create the space Vs Birmingham that Vrancic drove into to score his goal.

In three games, he's contributed directly or indirectly to three goals. Can he do better? Absolutely. But early days and entirely inaccurate to say he "offers nothing".

Edited November 4, 2020 by Terminally Yellow

[Clint 221]

The thing with Rhodes is that we could change the style of play when he came on but equally he would naturally fit into how we normally play. Hugill definately doesn’t do the latter so unless we just start lumping the ball upto him and getting crosses into the box whenever he plays, I can’t see how it’s going to work. Although it is early days and I hope he comes good but Idah looks a much better option at this stage. I’m still not sure why we just didn’t sign Rhodes at the end of his loan, having signed Drmic and now Hugill since, that looks like it would’ve been money well spent.

Edited November 4, 2020 by Clint

[Terminally Yellow 2,477]

1 hour ago, Midlands Yellow said:

We couldn’t sign a player from Peterborough for a fairly modest sum with add ons? 

A fairly modest sum! Come on, Midlands, come out of that fantasy world you're living in for a minute.

When did we last spend £10m on one player? 

When did we last spend £5m on one player?

Ivan Toney cost Brentford more than our entire spend this season. And was purchased because of sales of their star players. 

He's also very similar to Pukki and Idah. Why have a third striker who offers no different to what we have already?

Absolutely, he'd have been a superb signing. But it neither made financial or logical sense to sign him.

 

[Midlands Yellow 4,044]

10 minutes ago, Terminally Yellow said:

A fairly modest sum! Come on, Midlands, come out of that fantasy world you're living in for a minute.

When did we last spend £10m on one player? 

When did we last spend £5m on one player?

Ivan Toney cost Brentford more than our entire spend this season. And was purchased because of sales of their star players. 

He's also very similar to Pukki and Idah. Why have a third striker who offers no different to what we have already?

Absolutely, he'd have been a superb signing. But it neither made financial or logical sense to sign him.

 

Hopefully if we’re promoted (again) we are not going to shirk on signings at that kind of price range. I doubt he’s exactly the same type of forward as Pukki and a new forward was paramount for this campaign. 

[Capt. Pants 4,274]

Funny how Brentford can afford a £10m player, yet us with £30m odd of sales and parachute payments can't.

Hugill is ordinary at best and well behind Idah already. He's not that good with his back to goal, not particularly good in the air. Felt for him a bit yesterday as the substitutions resulted in our worst period of the game where we created little and had no control of midfield and conceded possession.

Concerning that we have bought a player who thrives on crosses and balls into the box, yet have only Quintilla who can put a decent ball in for him. 

[Uncle Fred 526]

It’s not that we couldn’t afford to sign him with our parachute payments sales of the youngsters

its the usual stowmarket 2 not wanting to spend the cash again and their general lack of ambition

You have to keep coming back to the question of where has all the money gone 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️

[NeymarSmith 132]

Can't believe I am putting this in writing, but I do kind of have to agree with @Uncle Fred

 

It pains me.

[Dr Greenthumb 750]

11 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Yes lets judge him from a ten minute cameo.

You judge people on Instagram posts

[Dr Greenthumb 750]

9 hours ago, Branston Pickle said:

Brentwood, indeed.....he did actually cost Brentford approaching £10m which tells you precisely why we “missed” him

Good thing we haven’t sold any players for big fees, or had a season in the prem with TV money! 

[Terminally Yellow 2,477]

1 hour ago, Uncle Fred said:

It’s not that we couldn’t afford to sign him with our parachute payments sales of the youngsters

its the usual stowmarket 2 not wanting to spend the cash again and their general lack of ambition

You have to keep coming back to the question of where has all the money gone 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️

The ****ing accounts have been released just today and you're asking where the money has gone?

What a ****.

[Terminally Yellow 2,477]

1 hour ago, NeymarSmith said:

Can't believe I am putting this in writing, but I do kind of have to agree with @Uncle Fred

 

It pains me.

He's a complete ****, a parody and not even a Norwich fan. 

Don't feed the trolls.

[Terminally Yellow 2,477]

2 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Hopefully if we’re promoted (again) we are not going to shirk on signings at that kind of price range. I doubt he’s exactly the same type of forward as Pukki and a new forward was paramount for this campaign. 

We got Jordan Hugill. 

[pete 320]

Listening to SSN Norwich continually played through the middle ignoring the flanks never a ploy to get the best out of a striker such as Hugill.  The substitutions apparently put the kybosh on any kind of fluidity.  Once we get crosses in we'll see Hugill at his best.  Don't write him off too quickly.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

I think we will see a role for Hugill this season.

In the Bournemouth game we were crying out for him in the box with Quintilla continuously putting floated crosses which would've been ideal for him - unfortunately he never came on until the final phase but even still he managed to make a nuisance of himself. He also looked a threat in the Rotherham game when we were getting crosses into the box.

Unfortunately since then we have been missing Quintilla and unable to play to his strengths at all. Sorenson has been good but he offers nothing in terms of crosses from the left - and Aarons is a threat on the other side but often opts to cut inside and work his way to the edge of the area and inside with the ball very much staying on the floor. I think as others have mentioned in our recent fixtures Idah would have probably been the preferred option had he been available.

IMO it will only be a matter of time on Quintilla's return until he put a cross on a six pence for Hugill to belt one in.

I do agree however his hold up play looks sloppy at this moment in time. His demeaner and appearance also resembles someone whose had a few pints and is on their way to an end-of-night kebab. Not the most subtle in the tackle either.

However, what we have seen under Farke is a continuous chain of players who fail to pull up any trees in the opening months and then (often suddenly) find their feet - i.e. Vrancic, Marco, Cantwell, Krul, Hernandez and most recently Rupp - there is no reason to believe Hugill won't be the same. I appreciate he has not come from abroad as most of those players have, but our style of play must be just as unfamiliar to him and the fact we have not been able to utilise him correctly can't have helped either.

In any case I'm happy to give him more than ~5 starts in a new team before writing him off completely as a mistake 👍

[Number9 272]

41 minutes ago, pete said:

Listening to SSN Norwich continually played through the middle ignoring the flanks never a ploy to get the best out of a striker such as Hugill.  The substitutions apparently put the kybosh on any kind of fluidity.  Once we get crosses in we'll see Hugill at his best.  Don't write him off too quickly.

And they set up to defend the central areas where we were attacking. And when we replicated the subs we had made earlier it wasnt a huge surprise to them because they're watching our previous games. 

 

[sgncfc 1,253]

3 hours ago, Capt. Pants said:

Funny how Brentford can afford a £10m player, yet us with £30m odd of sales and parachute payments can't.

Hugill is ordinary at best and well behind Idah already. He's not that good with his back to goal, not particularly good in the air. Felt for him a bit yesterday as the substitutions resulted in our worst period of the game where we created little and had no control of midfield and conceded possession.

Concerning that we have bought a player who thrives on crosses and balls into the box, yet have only Quintilla who can put a decent ball in for him. 

Well, Brentford made £28m up front for Watkins so that probably helped a bit and another potential £20m odd for Benrahma gives them some further insurance.

You think Toney would have joined us to be a back up striker? And you also think Buendia, Vrancic, Rupp etc can't cross a ball?

You really also think that Hugill is "not that good with his back to goal, not particularly good in the air?" Have you seen Hugill play before this season?

[Gordon Bennett 789]

2 hours ago, pete said:

Listening to SSN Norwich continually played through the middle ignoring the flanks never a ploy to get the best out of a striker such as Hugill.  The substitutions apparently put the kybosh on any kind of fluidity.  Once we get crosses in we'll see Hugill at his best.  Don't write him off too quickly.

Those first three words are the big flaw in your post. 

Also maybe folk should wait to see who achieves what over a whole 46 game season before bigging up Toney and writing off Hugill.