When/If Quintillà comes back would you like to see Sørensen get his debut in midfield?

[cambridgeshire canary 7,798]

Beacause as much as I do think he would be a great addition to midfield think it's fair to say said position is pretty packed.

 

Ruup/Vrančić/Dowell/Stiepermann/Skipp/Mclean/Tetty.. Fair to say we are not short of options around that area. Would you prefer to see him as his natural role replacing Tetty or more central?

 

... And I'm saying 'if' Quintillà comes back rather than will beacause I have had a feeling for a while there's more going on behind the scenes with him than we are aware of. Then again I used to think Ruup was awful and wanted him out the club so fair to say I am wrong quite often.

 

 

[Haus 267]

Hes competing with Rupp, Tettey, Skipp, Mclean.   

 

Not so much Dowell or Stieperman - they are further forward. 

[cambridgeshire canary 7,798]

3 minutes ago, Haus said:

Hes competing with Rupp, Tettey, Skipp, Mclean.   

 

Not so much Dowell or Stieperman - they are further forward. 

Indeed, but they can still play central from time to time.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 2,035]

We may need him as cover at centre back??

[The Real Buh 3,765]

He’s earned the right to be included and compete

[Rich T The Biscuit 676]

7 minutes ago, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

We may need him as cover at centre back??

I think that's one of the clear benefits of him, he hasn't looked out of place at LB which suggests he could also do RB, his little cameo in the centre of midfield was good and he can drop in to centre half. 

I'd even give him a go up top after his finish yesterday 😂

[dylanisabaddog 6,136]

I would play him and Rupp as the defensive midfielders. Even at left back he is more constructive and imaginative with his passing than Skipp. 

[YellowSubmarine 43]

He was brought in as a starter but unfortunately got a knock and had a wasted international trip which gave Skipp the opportunity to grab and has done. 

He was coming in as a starter in either division as a centre midfielder, not as a versatile cover man. 

[pete 371]

Would rather have a competent LB which does not seem to be Quintella, Sorensen doing a fine job there.  If we can recruit a proper LB put Sorensen as a further option as DM.

[FenwayFrank 2,717]

35 minutes ago, pete said:

Would rather have a competent LB which does not seem to be Quintella

Getting injured makes you incompetent?

[NFN FC 1,142]

I would like to see him in his natural position. He's clearly a solid all-round footballer with some brains. He's gonna be our 1st DM on the team sheet in the future. I see him as taking over from Skipp soon enough. I don't think Skipp will be staying past the end of season so we should get him established there. 

He's done a tremendous job at LB but the sooner Quintilla and McCallum are back the better! 

 

[seanthecanary 168]

2 hours ago, YellowSubmarine said:

He was brought in as a starter but unfortunately got a knock and had a wasted international trip which gave Skipp the opportunity to grab and has done. 

He was coming in as a starter in either division as a centre midfielder, not as a versatile cover man. 

I'm not quite so sure about that.  I don't think Spurs would have loaned us a player that they rate very highly without some assurances of first team football.  I don't think Skipp was signed as a squad player.

[YellowSubmarine 43]

Just now, seanthecanary said:

I'm not quite so sure about that.  I don't think Spurs would have loaned us a player that they rate very highly without some assurances of first team football.  I don't think Skipp was signed as a squad player.

Skipp was signed because he was a free loan and to boost the number of HG players in the squad. Sorensen was going to be signed even if we stayed in the PL, as a starter. 

[seanthecanary 168]

8 minutes ago, YellowSubmarine said:

Skipp was signed because he was a free loan and to boost the number of HG players in the squad. Sorensen was going to be signed even if we stayed in the PL, as a starter. 

If you say so but clubs don't loan out promising young players for experience to not have them play is all I'm saying.  I doubt the loan was "free" either.  In the lead up to signing Skipp some media outlets were reporting a fee in the region of £1m. While that maybe overhyped, a lot of loans now involve a fee.

Also, we announced the signing of Sorenson on the 20th July, we were relegated by then so there is no way he was signed as starter in the Premier League.

Edited December 10, 2020 by seanthecanary

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,615]

9 minutes ago, YellowSubmarine said:

Skipp was signed because he was a free loan and to boost the number of HG players in the squad. Sorensen was going to be signed even if we stayed in the PL, as a starter. 

I think we paid a hefty loan fee for Skipp, which we wouldn't have done had he not been earmarked as a starter. I think Sorensen has pretty much said himself that he was signed as a Tettey understudy with the long term aim of becoming the 'number eight' box-to-box player. 

[Jim Smith 2,610]

Skipp is playing well. Not so sure why he's being written off in this thread. The abulity to rotate Rupp, Skipp and Sorensen in those central midfield positions in the second half of the season would be nice. We have missed Rupps pass rate and ability to run with the ball in the last few games.

Cantwell coming back in will also give us a new dimension.

[YellowSubmarine 43]

46 minutes ago, seanthecanary said:

If you say so but clubs don't loan out promising young players for experience to not have them play is all I'm saying.  I doubt the loan was "free" either.  In the lead up to signing Skipp some media outlets were reporting a fee in the region of £1m. While that maybe overhyped, a lot of loans now involve a fee.

Also, we announced the signing of Sorenson on the 20th July, we were relegated by then so there is no way he was signed as starter in the Premier League.

Okay, We’ll you stick to listening to the media outlets or you can trust me on it was a free loan 🙂 

Regarding Sorensen, Just because it was announced on the 20th of July that doesn’t mean the deal had been agreed for a while. It wouldn’t have been very smart of the club announcing signings while staff were on the furlough scheme would it?

[YellowSubmarine 43]

51 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

I think we paid a hefty loan fee for Skipp, which we wouldn't have done had he not been earmarked as a starter. I think Sorensen has pretty much said himself that he was signed as a Tettey understudy with the long term aim of becoming the 'number eight' box-to-box player. 

Hefty fee and recruitment under SW have never been in the same sentence since he’s been here. Why would we pay a hefty fee to develop a player for somebody else? 

[Midlands Yellow 4,682]

You would hope he’d be an upgrade on McLean and enable us to compete better if promoted to the big boys league. 

[seanthecanary 168]

9 minutes ago, YellowSubmarine said:

Okay, We’ll you stick to listening to the media outlets or you can trust me on it was a free loan 🙂 

Regarding Sorensen, Just because it was announced on the 20th of July that doesn’t mean the deal had been agreed for a while. It wouldn’t have been very smart of the club announcing signings while staff were on the furlough scheme would it?

Is that you Stuart?  It's me, Margaret. 

Edited December 10, 2020 by seanthecanary

[jaberry2 769]

4 minutes ago, YellowSubmarine said:

Hefty fee and recruitment under SW have never been in the same sentence since he’s been here. Why would we pay a hefty fee to develop a player for somebody else? 

I see what you say. But you have to pay for top talent and Skipp is top talent.

[seanthecanary 168]

2 minutes ago, jaberry2 said:

I see what you say. But you have to pay for top talent and Skipp is top talent.

Are you sure that Daniel Levy, the notoriously tough transfer negotiator wouldn't let us have their highly rated U21 midfielder with no assurances of first team football just to improve our homegrown quota and for free?  Seems like the deal of a lifetime for Spurs.

[NeymarSmith 136]

4 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

I would play him and Rupp as the defensive midfielders. Even at left back he is more constructive and imaginative with his passing than Skipp. 

Sorry but how can you drop skipp! He is exactly what we have been crying out for for ages!

Not going to start the rupp war again, but he isn't too different to Kenny, okay at everything without really excelling, not too attacking nor defensive, can hit a nice pass but few and far between. Best thing going for those two is their energy and how busy they are.

Where as skipp; His combativeness and steel have been huge this season. I add aswell that he has picked up the ball this season in a couple of moments in games and drove and carried the ball into the opposition's half.

Especially considering how young he is and this being his first full season! I think he is Very good and we will be incredibly lucky to have him for another year.

[YellowSubmarine 43]

1 minute ago, seanthecanary said:

Are you sure that Daniel Levy, the notoriously tough transfer negotiator wouldn't let us have their highly rated U21 midfielder with no assurances of first team football just to improve our homegrown quota and for free?  Seems like the deal of a lifetime for Spurs.

Well when not many clubs at Championship level where willing to take him and now he could potentially play 40+ games for club and country what’s he going to be worth in the summer? Probably a lot more than the media outlets quoted, which is peanuts to Spurs anyway. 

[NeymarSmith 136]

1 hour ago, YellowSubmarine said:

Skipp was signed because he was a free loan and to boost the number of HG players in the squad. Sorensen was going to be signed even if we stayed in the PL, as a starter. 

How are you so sure on this?

If it was just for HG why not get any young lad in the academy or on a free to fill that. 

I'm sure they have seen something in him, and frankly if you cannot see the use of skipp beyond being HG then I worry for ya dude.

[dylanisabaddog 6,136]

8 minutes ago, NeymarSmith said:

Sorry but how can you drop skipp! He is exactly what we have been crying out for for ages!

Not going to start the rupp war again, but he isn't too different to Kenny, okay at everything without really excelling, not too attacking nor defensive, can hit a nice pass but few and far between. Best thing going for those two is their energy and how busy they are.

Where as skipp; His combativeness and steel have been huge this season. I add aswell that he has picked up the ball this season in a couple of moments in games and drove and carried the ball into the opposition's half.

Especially considering how young he is and this being his first full season! I think he is Very good and we will be incredibly lucky to have him for another year.

He passed the ball forward once in the first 45 minutes yesterday. You may not like Jose but put your trust in him. He knows a defensive midfielder when he sees one and he doesn't rate Winks or Skipp. Spurs will laugh their heads off if we buy him. 

Edited December 10, 2020 by dylanisabaddog

[YellowSubmarine 43]

3 minutes ago, NeymarSmith said:

How are you so sure on this?

If it was just for HG why not get any young lad in the academy or on a free to fill that. 

I'm sure they have seen something in him, and frankly if you cannot see the use of skipp beyond being HG then I worry for ya dude.

Because Skipp on loan for free was better than options below him in the academy and free transfers. Oh and added to the HG quota

[dylanisabaddog 6,136]

2 minutes ago, YellowSubmarine said:

Because Skipp on loan for free was better than options below him in the academy and free transfers. Oh and added to the HG quota

What on earth makes you think the Skipp loan was free? 

[NeymarSmith 136]

8 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

He passed the ball forward once in the first 45 minutes yesterday. You may not like Jose but put your trust in him. He knows a defensive midfielder when he sees one and he doesn't rate Winks or Skipp. Spurs will laugh their heads off if we buy him. 

Firstly I don't understand what me liking Jose or not has to do with skipp being a good DM.

Maybe skipp at present is not at the level required for spurs, which is fine as he is young. I think I've read that he is highly rated at spurs anyway, did Jose himself not say Skipp is a future captain at spurs? 

Secondly, I can't argue about the one forward pass yesterday. If it is even true I am unsure. He also played second half, what was his passing stats there. Further more he did defend well and made himself available all 90mins yesterday so.

I am unsure if it is true but he isn't really in the team to be creative or forward passing, more to break up play and defend. How anyone can say he hasn't been very good this year is beyond me.

[NeymarSmith 136]

11 minutes ago, YellowSubmarine said:

Because Skipp on loan for free was better than options below him in the academy and free transfers. Oh and added to the HG quota

Unsure how you have the inside knowledge and I am sure that you won't say.  But fine man, you are entitled to your opinion on why they signed skipp, I just happen to disagree