Have we just bought Marcelino Núñez for $4 million?

[CANARYKING 634]

We’ll sign the cheque then he falls down the stairs 

[horsefly 4,287]

5 minutes ago, CANARYKING said:

We’ll sign the cheque then he falls down the stairs 

Put him up in a bungalow.

[GenerationA47 747]

3 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Put him up in a bungalow.

😆 Having searched high and low for one without a cellar, obvs. Also sponge flooring, & no doorbars, goes without saying

[The Great Mass Debater 1,078]

39 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Yes! We all know that's what you think. Meanwhile in the real world the experts (Farke, Webber, and various scouts) had a choice of very many footballers available at the bottom end of the market. The very future of their careers depended upon the choices they made, and you want us to believe they just "stumbled" upon some  random picks. Funny how they are considered completely responsible when an acquisition goes wrong, but not remotely responsible when one goes right.

Im saying I think Pukki proved to be far better than anyone anticipated

[paddycanary 538]

14 hours ago, Jason Shackell’s Limp Tack said:

Just remember there's no such thing as 'Curry Empenadas' anywhere... let alone in Chile. 

There's a restaurant in Belfast called Kurrito which combines Mexican & Indian cuisine. I highly recommend. Delicious!

[Google Bot 3,256]

💩💩💨

[horsefly 4,287]

12 minutes ago, The Great Mass Debater said:

Im saying I think Pukki proved to be far better than anyone anticipated

Whereas what you actually said was:

"Teemu I think we rather stumbled upon. I dont think anyone looked at him and thought 'aha, now there's a 30 goal a season striker'. 

Free punt really I think rather than inspired scouting, his record previously never suggested what was about to come - just ask Celtic fans".

Obviously Webber and Farke were entirely unaware that, "...all that potential that had seemingly laid dormant for years was released. Pukki scored 48 goals in 90 games for Brondby and once again interest in his services was high" (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49977448#:~:text=Pukki scored 48 goals in 90 games for,ever since he saw him play for Schalke)

I just don't think you need to begrudge the club (Webber and co) some credit for some really good judgement regarding the acquisition of certain players.

Edited July 29, 2022 by horsefly

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

13 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Pukki scored 48 goals in 90 games for Brondby and once again interest in his services was high

Don't know where they got those stats from, because I get 72 goals in 164 for Pukki at Brondby.

[Disco Dales Jockstrap 1,891]

3 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Whereas what you actually said was:

"Teemu I think we rather stumbled upon. I dont think anyone looked at him and thought 'aha, now there's a 30 goal a season striker'. 

Free punt really I think rather than inspired scouting, his record previously never suggested what was about to come - just ask Celtic fans".

Obviously Webber and Farke were entirely unaware that, "...all that potential that had seemingly laid dormant for years was released. Pukki scored 48 goals in 90 games for Brondby and once again interest in his services was high" (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49977448#:~:text=Pukki scored 48 goals in 90 games for,ever since he saw him play for Schalke)

@The Great Mass Debater is allowed to clarify his remarks horsefly. Furthermore, the point he is making is an entirely reasonable one.

Webber and co are not made of star dust and unicorns - they've made many good signings but also some bl00dy awful ones.

I don't think anyone anticipated how well Pukki would do. If it was that obvious, we wouldn't have been in with a sniff of getting him in the first place. So yes of course there was an element of chance/luck with how well Pukki's signing has turned out - as there is with all transfers to differing degrees.

OTBC

[jaberry2 550]

2 minutes ago, Disco Dales Jockstrap said:

@The Great Mass Debater is allowed to clarify his remarks horsefly. Furthermore, the point he is making is an entirely reasonable one.

Webber and co are not made of star dust and unicorns - they've made many good signings but also some bl00dy awful ones.

I don't think anyone anticipated how well Pukki would do. If it was that obvious, we wouldn't have been in with a sniff of getting him in the first place. So yes of course there was an element of chance/luck with how well Pukki's signing has turned out - as there is with all transfers to differing degrees.

OTBC

A sensible post.

[hogesar 9,618]

1 minute ago, Disco Dales Jockstrap said:

@The Great Mass Debater is allowed to clarify his remarks horsefly. Furthermore, the point he is making is an entirely reasonable one.

Webber and co are not made of star dust and unicorns - they've made many good signings but also some bl00dy awful ones.

I don't think anyone anticipated how well Pukki would do. If it was that obvious, we wouldn't have been in with a sniff of getting him in the first place. So yes of course there was an element of chance/luck with how well Pukki's signing has turned out - as there is with all transfers to differing degrees.

OTBC

Quite, but it's wrong to say we 'stumbled' upon Pukki. We will have scouted him, assessed how he'd fit into our style of play, his attributes that would work at Championship level (and above) etc etc. We didn't just see his name and go "Ah, why not lads".

Chance / Luck in all signings. Just like there's the flipside of being unlucky in bad signings. 

Webber has made far more good signings than bad, which is why he's still here.

[Disco Dales Jockstrap 1,891]

4 minutes ago, jaberry2 said:

A sensible post.

It'll never catch on... 😉

OTBC

[The Great Mass Debater 1,078]

I would liken the Pukki signing to the Drmic signing. Both on a free, perhaps put about a bit by their agent, player looking for a new home. International, decent record, could do a job. Pukki came off, Drmic didnt

[sgncfc 1,221]

11 minutes ago, The Great Mass Debater said:

I would liken the Pukki signing to the Drmic signing. Both on a free, perhaps put about a bit by their agent, player looking for a new home. International, decent record, could do a job. Pukki came off, Drmic didnt

The main difference being their injury record. Pukki has hardly missed a game in 10 years. Drmic, now he's fit, is scoring goals elsewhere but was clearly never match fit in a Norwich shirt. He was always a decent player but the timing was out.

[Disco Dales Jockstrap 1,891]

19 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Quite, but it's wrong to say we 'stumbled' upon Pukki. We will have scouted him, assessed how he'd fit into our style of play, his attributes that would work at Championship level (and above) etc etc. We didn't just see his name and go "Ah, why not lads".

Indeed, but I think TGMB clarified exactly what he meant quite clearly in his further posts.

I remember watching Pukki in his first game for us (against Stevenage I think?) and while you could undoubtedly see his qualities straight away few would of foreseen him going on to score 30 goals that season. Good scouting yes, but with a massive dollop of jam splodged on top! 

OTBC

[The Great Mass Debater 1,078]

4 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

The main difference being their injury record. Pukki has hardly missed a game in 10 years. Drmic, now he's fit, is scoring goals elsewhere but was clearly never match fit in a Norwich shirt. He was always a decent player but the timing was out.

So did we not bother to scout Drmic properly? Did we just watch his Youtube clips from 2015 when he looked great and disregard his career after that?

Edited July 29, 2022 by The Great Mass Debater

[jaberry2 550]

As much as I dont think much of Norwichs transfer strategy, I highly doubt they would of based the signing on a youtube highlight reel. With that being said they clearly did that with Mark Fotheringham. 

[RugbyCanary 94]

Still like 4231 is a better fit for us. 433 doesn't suit pukki but....let's see. 

Hayden Sara ??

Rashica pukki Nunez

(433)

Sara Hayden

Rashica dowell(Todd) Nunez 

  Pukki 

(4231)

Feels looks better.....I dunno. Cross fingers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[horsefly 4,287]

51 minutes ago, Disco Dales Jockstrap said:

@The Great Mass Debater is allowed to clarify his remarks horsefly. Furthermore, the point he is making is an entirely reasonable one.

Webber and co are not made of star dust and unicorns - they've made many good signings but also some bl00dy awful ones.

I don't think anyone anticipated how well Pukki would do. If it was that obvious, we wouldn't have been in with a sniff of getting him in the first place. So yes of course there was an element of chance/luck with how well Pukki's signing has turned out - as there is with all transfers to differing degrees.

OTBC

"Clarification" of one's comments is a very different thing from changing them. One can only respond to what has actually been said as opposed to a change a view later.

As for your second point, it's pretty damn obvious that no one can guarantee how a player will perform; plenty of teams have payed tens of millions for players who have proved ineffectual. But that doesn't alter the fact that Webber and co did extensive scouting and brought in players who they judged could perform to a high level. Pukki's record at Brondby hardly suggests his signing was a lucky random punt.

[horsefly 4,287]

50 minutes ago, The Great Mass Debater said:

I would liken the Pukki signing to the Drmic signing. Both on a free, perhaps put about a bit by their agent, player looking for a new home. International, decent record, could do a job. Pukki came off, Drmic didnt

Indeed! And both were well researched justified signings given their records; neither was merely "stumbled" upon, nor just a random "punt".

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

33 minutes ago, The Great Mass Debater said:

So did we not bother to scout Drmic properly? Did we just watch his Youtube clips from 2015 when he looked great and disregard his career after that?

Yep this is the thing, you would think the same level of due diligence was completed prior to Drmic signing as Pukki. So broadly its as fortunate that Pukki and Buendia etc turned into the players they did as it is unfortunate that Gilmour and Drmic etc did not (give or take). 

Overall our recruitment has been pretty mixed under Webber, unfortunately the premier league recruitment has been every bit as bad as our championship has been good (and it has been very good at that level).

So if we are giving 100% credit to the recruitment team for effectively rolling a 6 with Pukki and Buendia, foreseeing that these players would become hugely successful, then we should equally question why they couldn't keep rolling 6s - indeed the only player who comes close over the last 4 seasons is Skipp IMO. 

Or perhaps we should just accept that there is a strong level of luck / various intangible factors which cannot be foreseen when scouting a player. 

I do agree with @horsefly though that these signings clearly not 'punts', more like calculated risks. We know they won't all come good but if we hedge out bets well enough and have a high enough success rate overall then all is well! 

[horsefly 4,287]

1 hour ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Don't know where they got those stats from, because I get 72 goals in 164 for Pukki at Brondby.

There are several different ones to be found depending on their dates, and what they include (cup, games, league games etc). However, it doesn't really matter which ones you pick as his stats remain excellent, and show why Webber thought he was a worthwhile acquisition rather than a random punt on an out of form player who he hoped might come good.

[horsefly 4,287]

2 minutes ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

Yep this is the thing, you would think the same level of due diligence was completed prior to Drmic signing as Pukki. So broadly its as fortunate that Pukki and Buendia etc turned into the players they did as it is unfortunate that Gilmour and Drmic etc did not (give or take). 

Overall our recruitment has been pretty mixed under Webber, unfortunately the premier league recruitment has been every bit as bad as our championship has been good (and it has been very good at that level).

So if we are giving 100% credit to the recruitment team for effectively rolling a 6 with Pukki and Buendia, foreseeing that these players would become hugely successful, then we should equally question why they couldn't keep rolling 6s - indeed the only player who comes close over the last 4 seasons is Skipp IMO. 

Or perhaps we should just accept that there is a strong level of luck / various intangible factors which cannot be foreseen when scouting a player. 

I do agree with @horsefly though that these signings clearly not 'punts', more like calculated risks. We know they won't all come good but if we hedge out bets well enough and have a high enough success rate overall then all is well! 

Indeed! I think the main difference at PL level is simply explained by the fact that we don't have the financial resources to compete with other teams in the PL for the same pool of available players. Thus, Webber was always going to have to take more of a risk on (good) players that he had reason to believe could step up to that level rather than "proven" performers. We also have seen that even with proven performers things don't always go well (eg Maguire and Pogba at Man U).

[Danke bitte 965]

1 hour ago, jaberry2 said:

As much as I dont think much of Norwichs transfer strategy, I highly doubt they would of based the signing on a youtube highlight reel. With that being said they clearly did that with Mark Fotheringham. 

You say this but wasn’t RvW barely scouted and sourced from video clips by Hughton’s team? I’m pretty sure I read that from a reputable source, as in it wasn’t made up word of mouth 

[Danke bitte 965]

22 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Indeed! I think the main difference at PL level is simply explained by the fact that we don't have the financial resources to compete with other teams in the PL for the same pool of available players. Thus, Webber was always going to have to take more of a risk on (good) players that he had reason to believe could step up to that level rather than "proven" performers. We also have seen that even with proven performers things don't always go well (eg Maguire and Pogba at Man U).

This 100%. We can’t afford to buy proven players so we have to take punts or so to speak. I also wonder how much we got burned by RvW, Hooper, Naismith et al making us steer away from costly signings that still yield as much return as a punt?

[The Great Mass Debater 1,078]

47 minutes ago, RugbyCanary said:

Still like 4231 is a better fit for us. 433 doesn't suit pukki but....let's see. 

Hayden Sara ??

Rashica pukki Nunez

(433)

Sara Hayden

Rashica dowell(Todd) Nunez 

  Pukki 

(4231)

Feels looks better.....I dunno. Cross fingers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

433 does seem to be Smith's chosen tactic, as this video on Smith with Villa highlights

 

[rock bus 850]

8 minutes ago, Danke bitte said:

This 100%. We can’t afford to buy proven players so we have to take punts or so to speak. I also wonder how much we got burned by RvW, Hooper, Naismith et al making us steer away from costly signings that still yield as much return as a punt?

I think this is right and to be fair to Webber (which no one seems to want to) I expect that’s what he tried last season. Presumably he took a calculated risk that ar lease 2 or 3 of Rashica, PLM, Tzolis, Sargent, Normann and Williams would’ve turned out to be premier league quality. As bad as last season was, 2 real quality players with the squad as it stood might have been able to avoid relegation.

Obviously it turned out that absolutely none of them were at premier league standard (at least not yet) so in hindsight looks like a disaster. Although it may have still been a better decision; than putting all our money on 2 known premier league players and they end up being a disaster a La Naismith and us being relegated with the addition of them being a chain around our neck. At least with Webbers gamble we could ditch William and Normann, got some money back on PLM and there is at least some potential in Rashica, Sargent and Tzolis.

Don’t get me wrong i was fuming at our pathetic performance last season, but with time to reflect  and calm down together with building hope for this season I can at least perhaps understand what Webber was trying to do.

[The Great Mass Debater 1,078]

McGinn seems to be a hybrid of Hoolahan and Fox

[KiwiScot 1,436]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

Quite, but it's wrong to say we 'stumbled' upon Pukki.

Course we did. Probably someone was at this really boring party and then this random Finnish guy turned up and it turned into a great night! Who's that guy they said reply was "footballer. No Pukki no party" which the someone repeated to themselves again, and again. Back at Norwich the guy simply said "No Pukki no party!". "Sign him up"

Edited July 29, 2022 by KiwiScot

[kirku 1,332]

55 minutes ago, The Great Mass Debater said:

 

433 does seem to be Smith's chosen tactic, as this video on Smith with Villa highlights

 

In a 4-3-3, Nunez seems to be an 8, from what I've read:

Sara - Hayden - Nunez

Cantwell - Pukki - Rashica