Jordan Rhodes

[Jimmy Bone - Superstar 2]

Just wondered what the thinking is on Jordan Rhodes now the season is underway?

He seems to be knocking in the goals now at Championship level, (another one tonight), and we look desperately in need of a goal scorer.

Should we have taken that gamble on him?

[shiplee15 0]

At £8m!? No!

[Jimmy Bone - Superstar 2]

Yeah but was it really £8m, and even if it was would have been good value if he got even a third of the goals he scored last season.

I just get the impression that he''s a natural goal scorer which seems exactly what we are lacking at the moment.

[Morisons Prozac 0]

Looks worth the sizeable fee but we simly didn''t have the money for him. Would like to see us go for him in the future though.

[Gingerpele 0]

Knocking in the goals? All two of them? :P

Well 2 in 2, but don''t think Rhodes scoring two is really any reason to reopen the ''is Rhodes worth it'' debate. If he''s still scoring in a couple months time (and we aren''t, which is unlikely in my opinion) then maybe its worth thinking about, but I still think £8 million is too much. Last summer (I think), Connor Wickham was the man to buy, Sunderland spent £8 or so million on him, don''t think they are too happy with that purchase yet, although he''s obviously still young. Although depends how much the initial fee was, was it £4 or 5 million?

[Cerberus 0]

Its all very academic. Either he is a roaring success (meaning Blackburn somehow get promoted or seek to cash in) or he flops and is available for a knock down price. Either way he is not a City player at present, and under either of the success/failure scenarios, nor is he ever likley to be in the near future.OTBC

[Yobocop 1,444]

Brilliant gp lol

[Gingerpele 0]

What is your problem peas?

[Yobocop 1,444]

Genuinely enjoyed your response and was simply acknowlegding that fact.

Even when you pay someone a compliment it''s wrong

Sorry I spoke

[CanaryOne 0]

2 for Huddersfield and 2 for Blackburn so yes it looks like he is carrying on from last season , of course we should have bought him even at £8 million it would have been a bargain if his goals kept us up . I would rather have Jordon Rhodes than a fat bloke who can hardly break into a run .

[King Klose 0]

[quote user="Ncfc"]2 for Huddersfield and 2 for Blackburn so yes it looks like he is carrying on from last season , of course we should have bought him even at £8 million it would have been a bargain if his goals kept us up . I would rather have Jordon Rhodes than a fat bloke who can hardly break into a run .[/quote]

Of course you would, you''re 23rd in the Championship.

[unique 466]

Rhodes may well have been priced out of our range, but I''m not convinced Ince or CMS (6 goals apiece already) were out of Norwich''s price bracket.

The longer Norwich go with their forwards firing blanks, the worse it will be watching Blackburn, Blackpool and Brighton, leading the Championship race.

There may be no need to panic yet, but the pattern of the season is usually set after ten or so games, and the fixtures that take Norwich to that point look far from favourable.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 2,035]

[quote user="unique"]Rhodes may well have been priced out of our range, but I''m not convinced Ince or CMS (6 goals apiece already) were out of Norwich''s price bracket. The longer Norwich go with their forwards firing blanks, the worse it will be watching Blackburn, Blackpool and Brighton, leading the Championship race. There may be no need to panic yet, but the pattern of the season is usually set after ten or so games, and the fixtures that take Norwich to that point look far from favourable.[/quote]

I agree ,this is the far more pertinent question, at £8m we and I''d imagine serveral other parties were always out of the running for Rhodes but is CMS was really someone that we wanted , we should have made it happen, instead of buying a keeper for £500k that we dont really need , and overloading our midfield with players , at leat two of which probably won''t even be in a matchday squad.

I wonder if those people of turned their noses up at the mention of CMS in the last week of August would still be if they realised that we would be relying on Jackson (who wasnt even on the bench vs Fulham) to score goals for us between then and January?

[Indy_Bones 444]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]I wonder if those people of turned their noses up at the mention of CMS in the last week of August would still be if they realised that we would be relying on Jackson (who wasnt even on the bench vs Fulham) to score goals for us between then and January?[/quote]Have we suddenly lost the services of Holt, Morison, Kane and Martin overnight GJL???Just because our other strikers are yet to get off the mark (based on just 4 games), they''re suddenly not good enough and we''re relying on Jackson instead?I''m sorry but this is a ridiculous suggestion, and somewhat insulting to our current strikers to boot.I didn''t want CMS here in August, I still don''t now and am likely to hold the same view in Jan and June as well. Brighton wanted too much money for a lower league striker who''s unproven at this level and who has previously struggled at CCC level. We only paid 400k for Holt, who at the time was the same age as CMS is now, and who like CMS, had previously only really performed massively well in L1 and L2, so where''s the justification for CMS costing around 10 times this much???And I would rather we spent 500k on bringing Bunn to the club than overspending on CMS instead, as it meant we have a solid and experienced keeper to provide cover for Ruddy in the event of injuries/suspension, rather than having to rely on more unproven talent in our two young keepers.The last thing we''d need is a repeat of the Gunn/Marshall debacle that cost us massively, as despite Marshall being a very well thought of young keeper, he simply didn''t have the experience and nous for the level he was at and crumbled tbh.CMS represented a gamble, and if he was only going to cost a million or so I''d have said fair enough, but at close to the reported 4 mil Brighton wanted, it was simply too much of a risk and I honestly think Kane was the better option.

[Howson is now! 0]

Still would have tried to go for Gary Hooper over Jordan Rhodes if any of the rumours were true. Already stuck a few in in the Champions League instead of the Championship.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 2,035]

Martin isn''t good enough for the championship, presumably Hughton knows this too otherwise he''d have given him a chance ahead of Kane, Morison struggles to play up front with Holt ,so it''s a case of one or the other and surely you can''t think that CMS is more of a gamble than asking a 19 year old Spurs academy player to score the goals we need?.

  The justification in paying that amount for CMS is the small matter of avoiding relegation.

[BroadstairsR 2,273]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

Martin isn''t good enough for the championship, presumably Hughton knows this too otherwise he''d have given him a chance ahead of Kane, Morison struggles to play up front with Holt ,so it''s a case of one or the other and surely you can''t think that CMS is more of a gamble than asking a 19 year old Spurs academy player to score the goals we need?.

  The justification in paying that amount for CMS is the small matter of avoiding relegation.

[/quote]

 

I agree with all of that. CMS, or whoever, we might live to regret not getting that additional striker in. If Hughton prefers to bring a rookie on in a situation like last Saturday then it begs the question as to why C. Martin remains on the books.

 

Surely that must have been a bit deflationary for the, reportedly, ever-egotistical Chris M. Let''s hope it spurs him in the right direction at last. He has talent.

[Highland Canary 78]

[quote user="BroadstairsR"][quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

Martin isn''t good enough for the championship, presumably Hughton knows this too otherwise he''d have given him a chance ahead of Kane, Morison struggles to play up front with Holt ,so it''s a case of one or the other and surely you can''t think that CMS is more of a gamble than asking a 19 year old Spurs academy player to score the goals we need?.

  The justification in paying that amount for CMS is the small matter of avoiding relegation.

[/quote]

I agree with all of that. CMS, or whoever, we might live to regret not getting that additional striker in. If Hughton prefers to bring a rookie on in a situation like last Saturday then it begs the question as to why C. Martin remains on the books.

Surely that must have been a bit deflationary for the, reportedly, ever-egotistical Chris M. Let''s hope it spurs him in the right direction at last. He has talent.

[/quote]

£8m for Rhodes/ £4m for CMS - presumably more in January given his current form - are good value if it makes the difference between PL football with the new TV deal and the Championship. I hope January is not too late

[Indy 3,471]

Do you seriously think CMS would do the business at this level?

 

Rhodes would take time, if he could make the step up!

 

In my book we should have taken the gamble on Rhodes but only with a lower initial fee with bigger milestone payments.

 

Or gone the way we have by loaning what is on paper a better option than CMS and Rhodes.

 

Holt will come good and score 12+ this season, Jackson, Morison & Kane will each get between 6-10 and the rest will come from our midfield.

 

Just remember we won''t need to score as many as last year if we can concede fewer goals.

[unique 466]

''Holt will come good and score 12+ this season, Jackson, Morison & Kane will each get between 6-10 and the rest will come from our midfield.''

Well, what a bold statement that is! Based on?.....the fact that Jackson, Morison and Kane have collectively scored THREE Premiership goals since the beginning of February???

I would hazard a guess that CMS would have reached that total within a month or two of the season starting....

If he wasn''t scoring goals, then his chasing down would be invaluable to our defending from the front.

I can''t presume that CMS would have been the definitive answer, but then nor can you presume that he wouldn''t have been.

The considerable increase in TV revenue makes it almost imperative to avoid relegation this season of all seasons, and judging purely on pre-season and the opening four games, I would very much doubt that our current strike force will muster a bare minimum 30 goals between them, and potentially 42 goals, as you infer.......

[Indy_Bones 444]

[quote user="unique"]''Holt will come good and score 12+ this season, Jackson, Morison & Kane will each get between 6-10 and the rest will come from our midfield.''

Well, what a bold statement that is! Based on?.....the fact that Jackson, Morison and Kane have collectively scored THREE Premiership goals since the beginning of February???

I would hazard a guess that CMS would have reached that total within a month or two of the season starting....[/quote]You claim that someone else has made a bold statement, and then follow up right away with one of your own!As for ''based on'', I''d probably agree with Moro and Jackson based on prior form at this level as Jackson was on a 5.5 game to goal ratio last season which would equal approx 7 goals if he played each game, and Moro was on a 3.8 ratio which would be approx 10 goals (he got 9 last season to be fair). Holt could be difficult to call this year, but again I don''t see why double figures and possibly 12 or more is a crazy suggestion. Kane is the real unknown quantity, but if he could maintain a similar scoring ratio to what he managed last year in the CCC, then 6 or more goals isn''t an unreasonable suggestion.I don''t get how you can claim CMS would be that impressive at this level however, as in his last 2 seasons in the CCC he couldn''t manage above 10 league goals a season (and that was playing pretty much every game), as for not scoring goals but defending from the front - WTF??? Hughton has clearly improved our defence and we''re much better in that area, what we need is a goalscorer not a defensive striker!We have no idea if CMS would have worked or not, but I agree with the boards choice to not spend 4 or so million gambling to find out if a journeyman lower league striker would be the answer!

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 2,035]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="unique"]''Holt will come good and score 12+ this season, Jackson, Morison & Kane will each get between 6-10 and the rest will come from our midfield.'' Well, what a bold statement that is! Based on?.....the fact that Jackson, Morison and Kane have collectively scored THREE Premiership goals since the beginning of February??? I would hazard a guess that CMS would have reached that total within a month or two of the season starting....[/quote]
You claim that someone else has made a bold statement, and then follow up right away with one of your own!

As for ''based on'', I''d probably agree with Moro and Jackson based on prior form at this level as Jackson was on a 5.5 game to goal ratio last season which would equal approx 7 goals if he played each game, and Moro was on a 3.8 ratio which would be approx 10 goals (he got 9 last season to be fair). Holt could be difficult to call this year, but again I don''t see why double figures and possibly 12 or more is a crazy suggestion. Kane is the real unknown quantity, but if he could maintain a similar scoring ratio to what he managed last year in the CCC, then 6 or more goals isn''t an unreasonable suggestion.

I don''t get how you can claim CMS would be that impressive at this level however, as in his last 2 seasons in the CCC he couldn''t manage above 10 league goals a season (and that was playing pretty much every game), as for not scoring goals but defending from the front - WTF???
Hughton has clearly improved our defence and we''re much better in that area, what we need is a goalscorer not a defensive striker!

We have no idea if CMS would have worked or not, but I agree with the boards choice to not spend 4 or so million gambling to find out if a journeyman lower league striker would be the answer!
[/quote]

You may agree with the decsison not to "gamble" £4m on CMS but the question is , are you happy with what we have got instead and convinced that between them they will score the goals?. Hughton must have identified him as someone he thought could help us to have made a bid for him in the first place and I just wonder how much more it would have taken to get him here?.....as I mentioned earlier ,could the money we spent on a backup keeper or even the £1m on another midfielder i.e Butterfield ,have been the difference in getting him here or not?

[Indy_Bones 444]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]You may agree with the decsison not to "gamble" £4m on CMS but the question is , are you happy with what we have got instead and convinced that between them they will score the goals?...as I mentioned earlier, could the money we spent on a backup keeper or even the £1m on another midfielder i.e Butterfield, have been the difference in getting him here or not?[/quote]The money spent on Bunn etc could well have been the difference in getting CMS, my point is that I don''t think he''s worth what we offered - never mind another mil or so on top of this, so yes I ''d rather we spent the money how we did than paying over the odds for CMS.That being said I wouldn''t have gone for either CMS or Kane as I wanted an more established striker at this level instead (e.g. Owen), but given a choice between CMS and Kane, then I''d probably take Kane as he impressed in his first ever season in the CCC despite his age, whereas CMS has twice struggled at that level and isn''t getting any younger and I doubt he''ll improve much over the next couple of years.Am I convinced we''ll score the goals, maybe not, but I don''t think CMS was the answer either, so to me personally it''s somewhat of a moot point.I''d have been willing to give CMS a chance for a more sensible transfer fee, and I would have been willing to gamble on the fitness of someone like Owen because of his pedigree and proven ability at this level, but I''m still fairly satisfied with what I''ve seen of Kane, and if we get Holt firing again and Moro back to his best, then how good our 4th and 5th choice strikers are is somewhat irrelevant...

[BroadstairsR 2,273]

You make sense Indy. but I still would have been happier with the option of another striker. Harry looks decent but it''s very risky to pin our fortunes on a nineteen years old loanee up front and somebody Like CMS would have probably plugged that gap better.

[Indy_Bones 444]

[quote user="BroadstairsR"]You make sense Indy. but I still would have been happier with the option of another striker. Harry looks decent but it''s very risky to pin our fortunes on a nineteen years old loanee up front and somebody Like CMS would have probably plugged that gap better.[/quote]Possibly so, but at a much higher cost and that''s my entire sticking point to be honest (aside from not personally rating CMS very highly [:D]).

[unique 466]

'' As for ''based on'', I''d probably agree with Moro and Jackson based on prior form at this level as Jackson was on a 5.5 game to goal ratio last season which would equal approx 7 goals if he played each game, and Moro was on a 3.8 ratio which would be approx 10 goals (he got 9 last season to be fair). Holt could be difficult to call this year, but again I don''t see why double figures and possibly 12 or more is a crazy suggestion. Kane is the real unknown quantity, but if he could maintain a similar scoring ratio to what he managed last year in the CCC, then  6 or more goals isn''t an unreasonable suggestion.''Let me get this right - Jackson would likely score 7 goals if he played each game. Moving forward with your brilliant deductions, we would need to play a strike force of Jackson, Holt, Morison and Kane in order for the four strikers to reach your targets.....

With the best will in the world, I can''t see Hughton playing a formation containing four strikers.

Your figures/argument are seriously flawed. I would suggest you try harder.

 

[Indy_Bones 444]

[quote user="unique"]Let me get this right - Jackson would likely score 7 goals if he played each game. Moving forward with your brilliant deductions, we would need to play a strike force of Jackson, Holt, Morison and Kane in order for the four strikers to reach your targets.....With the best will in the world, I can''t see Hughton playing a formation containing four strikers.Your figures/argument are seriously flawed. I would suggest you try harder.[/quote]I don''t need to try harder, you just need to try to understand what''s being said to you.Each players game to goal ratio gives us an idea what they are capable of scoring in a season, and last season Moro hit his target in 34 games (and had he not gone on a barren spell that would have been 20 games!) and Holt did it in 28 (and then added another 5 in the remaining 8 games).Kane was in the CCC so can''t compare equally, but he also managed to hit his ''quota'' of 6+ in just 19 games, in fact Jackson is the only one who would theoretically need to play pretty much the full season to do so.Therefore it''s perfectly possible that with clever substitutions and rotation, for all 4 players to hit the suggested numbers without needing to play some ridiculous 4 man attack suggestion.What''s truly frustrating here is that you''ve argued the toss about whether or not our existing strikers can perform to a suggested level, been given stats and a reasoned opinion to show how they potentially could and yet you call this a flawed argument, but then you have the audacity to claim that CMS would have done much better despite there being f**k all evidence to suggest this!I think it''s you that needs to try hardy buddy [;)]

[smooth 114]

I am sure we will look for a new forward and are doing it now.

Still think Europe is our best option. Uk prices are stupidly inflated, role on the window for us to bring in a threatening striker.

I am sure morison, Jackson and holt can score a few up till January ( and two of those need to start soon if they want to still be starters). I will say that Morison can play with holty upfront, if we have two fast wingers that get to the by line and put quality in the box then I still think we have the best striker force in the prem at attacking the ball in the box.

Quite simply we have not done that yet this season. We don''t have premiership fast wingers, but we have tricky wingers who have got good delivery so we def need to look at getting them the ball quickly and in space so they can take on the full back or whip in an early ball for the two strikers and alternate winger to be in the box with Howson on the edge of the box for those rebounds.

But I will concur that Kane will do a job, but we need a player who can be considered our new number 1 striker ahead of holty.

[Indy 3,471]

How can anyone question Morison, Holt & Jackson, they have all had 1 season more experience than CMS at this level!

 

It''s not like premiership clubs were climbing over each other to sign him! He''s 28 coming up to 29, would take time to settle into this league and that is one thing he does not have. In my opinion anything more than 1.5 million would have been money done the pan!

 

To claim CMS would score in the premiership is bold, given that Jackson is a far quicker player, can find the net and again on per if not bettet than CMS.

 

We have Vaughan available to recall in January and if he stay''s fit is a far better player than CMS.

 

I agree with most on this thread we could do with another stiker, but we need young hungry lower league players or proven premiership players of 28 years old, not a lower league journeyman who might score a couple goals.

[Yorkshire Canary 118]

There is a dilema as i see it. We are now much tighter as a defensive unit but in doing so creating less chances, only time will tell if this move will work in our favour or not. What i can say though is whatever strikers we have now need to be more clinical. We have what we have now up until January, i just hope we still have a fighting chance by that time