The cult of Grant Holt

[Katie Borkins 1]

Let''s say that if we do sign a striker, he has to be better (in Hughton''s opinion) than what we currently got - i.e. Holty.

 

Now I was pondering this yesterday and I reckon if we did get a big signing to play up front then would the crowd give him a fair crack of the whip, or would they be calling for Grant Holt the minute our new boy missed his first couple of chances or hit his first lean spell?

 

Now don''t get me wrong, Holty has been a standout player and I reckon his attitude and commitment and perseverance has been little short of inspiring across the playing squad - but do you reckon there''s a danger our fanbase is so in love with him that any newcomer doesn''t get a fair chance to prove what they can do before the Snake Pit are yelling "get him off and get Holty on"?

 

Bor recognises that in titling this thread using the word "cult", we might get a few funny old posters here saying "you''re a cult" or so forth, but I''ll take that squit on the chin in the interest of discussion.

 

[Bws Cat 0]

Perhaps a striker to rival Holt will give him a bit more incentive and fight to get into the squad and prove his worth. It worked last year.

And I would take the snakepit and it''s opinions with a pinch of salt.

[vlad666 207]

This wont be a popular choice but i think Connor Wickham would be the perfect signing. Perfect to learn under Holt and eventually take over leading the line. Got all the atributes for a lone striker.

[Bury Yellow 2]

I get where you''re coming from Bor3 but I really don''t think the majority of supporters are that thick.

If we managed to get a fairly decent striker in and he was the real deal he would get a fair crack there is no doubt.

[Aggy 944]

I think you may have a point bor. That''s why, in many ways, I hope we wait until the summer when we might be able to afford/entice a far bigger name. (To clarify that - in the summer, we would have more money. Also, big name signings would be more likely to come when they know they''re signing for a club starting their 3rd season in the prem, and they''re guaranteed a full season in the top flight, rather than potentially getting relegated only a few months later.)

If it was a really impressive signing, I think people would give him time. If it was an average one (think CMS or other rumoured players over the last two windows or so) and I think they''d find it harder to get full support of the crowd if they had a bad game or two.

It''s not just the cult though - it''s also that Holt does so much more than put the ball in the net. His whole persona and spirit is something that carries the team so much of the time. Would we be able to get a striker who could do a similar job, or would we need to strengthen elsewhere in order to be able to accommodate a striker who solely put the ball in the net?

[Jimmy Bone - Superstar 2]

How about someone like Danny Grahem to help us through the rest of this season and to compete with Holty for a place up front and then, if we stay up, some more investment in the summer on a longer term striking option?

[havemyhowsonit 0]

Have to agree with the Connor wickham post.

That boy is as strong as an ox and with game time he will be a seriously good striker.

Stuff the Ipswich links there just another football team.

Him and Danny graham. Possibly a back up goalkeeper that''s all we need in January.

[PurpleCanary 6,385]

[quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]

Let''s say that if we do sign a striker, he has to be better (in Hughton''s opinion) than what we currently got - i.e. Holty.

 

[/quote]

 

A false premise.

[Mister Chops 7]

Interesting question for once, Bin Boy Bor.Part of football fan psychology is that when the players in the first team aren''t doing well, players who are not in the first team somehow have their status enhanced.  We saw this in our relegation season when the likes of Luke Daley and Cody Mac were portrayed as the answer to all our problems simply by not being part of a dismal team.With a larger than life player like Grant Holt this status boost would be amplified as he has absolutely been there and done it, and all with the style and bravado of a comic book hero.  So if we did sign a player that became first choice striker and Holt dropped to the bench, it would not take the Carrow Road crowd long to make their feelings known.  I do not believe a "big name" striker would get much of a chance to prove themselves.I am fairly sure one of the reasons Morison is so evidently unpopular is that Lambert made him first choice at the start of last season and a lot of people cannot forgive Morison for something that wasn''t really his fault.

[Unhinged Canary 375]

[quote user="Mister Chops"]I am fairly sure one of the reasons Morison is so evidently unpopular is that Lambert made him first choice at the start of last season and a lot of people cannot forgive Morison for something that wasn''t really his fault.[/quote]That and the whole ''lazy and useless'' thing too........

[Syteanric 1]

we need 2 strikers, for a couple of reasons1. Holty is now 31 - we need someone coming in mid 20''s with experience to plan for the future.2. the comfort zone. if Holt is partnering someone up front they could both get in their comfort zone knowing the back up isnt good enough.. with another decent striker on the bench the pressure is on to perform to not lose your place in the side.point 2 is probably the most important. a 20 goal a season Holt with 2 x 10-15 goal strikers battling it out could really make the difference in january.

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]

Let''s say that if we do sign a striker, he has to be better (in Hughton''s opinion) than what we currently got - i.e. Holty.

 

[/quote]

 

A false premise.

[/quote]I''m not sure about that.  I agree here with Robin:[quote user="Beauseant"]

 The reality is that we need to invest in a

striker who isn''t just an upgrade on Morison, but also on Holt. Holt has

been, and still is, outstanding, but at 31 and playing the way he does

there is always a good chance of injury. In an ideal world we need

to bring in someone younger who can start with Holt available to come

off the bench or start the occasional game. Nothing lasts forever in

football and being so reliant on one player who''s the wrong side of

thirty isn''t a sustainable policy.

[/quote]The question being, would an "upgrade" get a fair go because he wouldn''t have the cult hero status Holt has rightly earned?

[PurpleCanary 6,385]

[quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]

Let''s say that if we do sign a striker, he has to be better (in Hughton''s opinion) than what we currently got - i.e. Holty.

 

[/quote]

 

A false premise.

[/quote]

I''m not sure about that.  I agree here with Robin:

[quote user="Beauseant"]

 The reality is that we need to invest in a striker who isn''t just an upgrade on Morison, but also on Holt. Holt has been, and still is, outstanding, but at 31 and playing the way he does there is always a good chance of injury. In an ideal world we need to bring in someone younger who can start with Holt available to come off the bench or start the occasional game. Nothing lasts forever in football and being so reliant on one player who''s the wrong side of thirty isn''t a sustainable policy.

[/quote]

The question being, would an "upgrade" get a fair go because he wouldn''t have the cult hero status Holt has rightly earned?

[/quote]

 

My reasoning for nearly but not quite agreeing with Beau and for saying Bor''s is a false premise, as put in another thread, is this:


While generally agreeing (now there is a first...) I would put it slightly differently. I think we need someone who can stand in for Holt this season, who would not have to be an upgrade necessarily, but as good as or nearly as good as.

Where we do need a distinct upgrade is for Jackson, because - as Beau indicates - the reason why Hughton sticks with 4-4-1-1 and makes changes very late is that he doesn''t feel Jackson is up to the Premier League. The adjective pretty much always used here is "lively". Well, headless chickens are lively.

That means (even if we keep Morison) at least two new strikers, but one of them could be a loan deal, to get us through the rest of the season, and then we can have a reassessment, depending on which division we''re in.

[star_manic 0]

we definitely need an upgrade in the forward line, and it must be a player with speed. i reckon that overall we are the slowest team in the EPL which was evident in the Baggies match.

[drurys testamonials V 15 0]

Saw an interesting quote from Fergie.

 

Said something about him not buying into the cult of a player but with Van Persie there is something.