Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
cambridgeshire canary

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

Recommended Posts

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.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hes competing with Rupp, Tettey, Skipp, Mclean.   

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, pete said:

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

Getting injured makes you incompetent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by seanthecanary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by seanthecanary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by dylanisabaddog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...