Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
Jacks Back

Why we still need Holt

Recommended Posts

People seem to be desperate to accept for £4m *apparently* offered by Wigan,  but why?  I know that''s decent money for his age, but it''s not like we are in financial trouble and need to sell. His personality and the boost he gives to the squad is priceless.  And, assuming Vaughan leaves,  we only have Holt, RVW and Becchio up front.  Some fans seem to think we''ve out-grown players like Holt,  but even if i he doesn''t play every game he is still capable of doing a job for us next season.So do you think we should sell Holt? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
His personality and the boost he gives the players is not priceless at all. In fact his personality last season was anything but a boost to anyone.

He still has the ability to ''do a job'' but I think we want a bit more than that now and 4 mill for a player who can just do a job is good business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
£4m for a 31/2 year old footballer who we''ve had the best of and only bought for 400k is a must sell situation.

Grant has been amazing for us and without him we wouldn''t be where we are now, but there comes a time when it''s best to move on, for both parties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
love holt and I am one of his biggest fans. but 4m for someone who is unlikely to be a regular starter for us next season and is getting on in age is just a ''must accept'', I don''t like it but that''s how it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Holt should stay. He should have a role as a squad player. It''s the replacement cost not realisable value which should be used in evaluating whether £4m is a good deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can see both sides. He is absolutely not irreplaceable, no one is and he is becoming less so each year, but could easily have a role to play next season. £4m would be a lot to turn down - but I doubt it is even on offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of being captain and motivator, Holt would be ex-captain presumably, and possibly third choice striker.(He might even become fourth choice if Becchio demonstrates skills. I am assuming that we shall sign another striker, as three would be too risky.) Much depends on his attitude. In 2011 he came back for the new season as fit as we have ever seen him, and even quicker than before. Last year we wondered. If he could show the same determination as in 2011, he might displace one of the new signings.

He has been a great servant to the club, and perhaps we owe it to him not to be a bench warmer, even sharing with Becchio, but to permit him to move where he would be nearer his family and/or getting regular games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Branston Pickle"]I can see both sides. He is absolutely not irreplaceable, no one is and he is becoming less so each year, but could easily have a role to play next season. £4m would be a lot to turn down - but I doubt it is even on offer.[/quote]I doubt we would get £4m as well. But £2m-£2.5m would pay for half of Toivonen, who certainly can play up front (and would have sell-on value if need be, which has to be factored in when assessing the overall cost). Buy Hooper or similar and you have the four strikers posters seem to think we need. Two goalscorers in RVW and Hooper and two target men/line leaders in Becchio and Toivonen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We will need far more than just RvW in the striking department.  What if he flops, or gets injured...  At the moment the only backup is the unproven Becchio who has hardly impressed (in his few appearances) since signing in January and is also no spring chicken turning 30 this year.  Holt can still be a big player for us next season and to go into the season without him is a very big risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that selling Holt this summer would be one year too early. Nobody is a "must sell" at £4m for us now.

He''s a captain, still capable of winning a game for us, and we didn''t win a single game that Grant Holt didn''t start last season.

His ability and influence is understated by many Norwich fans. His ''problems'' last season were overstated by many Norwich fans.

Not that the problems didn''t exist, he had a difficult year, but I think that keeping hold of him would be a gamble worth taking for the sake of £4m quid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Last summer his tweets were often about nights out, stag parties, and drinking copious amounts of beer.

This summer his tweets are of family holidays and six mile runs.

That bodes well. I think he''s up for this season, and as long as Hughton feels that he is up for it then I''d like him here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I find it a bit wierd that loads of people on here wants to see the back of Holt.

Why?

I really think we need him in our squad.

We need depth in the squad and I think he has an important part to play next season.

God I hope none of the players or potential new signings ever read the garbage on these forums.

Most of our supporters just bitch, moan and get off on being negative about anything and everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As a few people have already stated on here there is no guarantee that RvW will settle in straight away.

Also why are we only thinking of playing one up front?

I´m sure that Grant and RvW together would work well.

After all for large periods of last season we werent creating anything so to have an international quality striker feeding on scraps or the occasional freekick is utterly pointless. Toivonen to win flick ons for RvW or GH to do the same. Holt is an intelligent enough player to play behind RvW in much the same role as Rooney likes to play. Not saying GH is in the same league but could certainly play there....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="TheNewBoy"]I think that selling Holt this summer would be one year too early. Nobody is a "must sell" at £4m for us now.

He''s a captain, still capable of winning a game for us, and we didn''t win a single game that Grant Holt didn''t start last season.

His ability and influence is understated by many Norwich fans. His ''problems'' last season were overstated by many Norwich fans.

Not that the problems didn''t exist, he had a difficult year, but I think that keeping hold of him would be a gamble worth taking for the sake of £4m quid.[/quote]

Pretty much this ^^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until he is proven to no lonnger being an assett on the fielf, any talk of letting him go is preposterous.

People moan that his play was aggressive and moody. Hmmmm to me it looked like he cared. It looked like he didn''t want to settle for a good-effort-against-big-team loss or even draw.

Nobody outside of Norwich "fans" is saying he has passed his sell by date. Most of the supposed fans who do want him gone while he is still at or near the top of his game have no real reason other than "I feel".

Those that say to keep him as a 3rd or 4th strike option also seem misguided. To me. Why not at leazt try lining him up with RVW or at very least have him as attacking midfielder as he seemed to do quite well several times last season. The only fly in that ointment was his great centering passes often went begging when the striker didn''t read the play right. You know Holt would have been on the end of those passes if they were coming his way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Houston Canary"]Until he is proven to no lonnger being an assett on the fielf, any talk of letting him go is preposterous.

People moan that his play was aggressive and moody. Hmmmm to me it looked like he cared. It looked like he didn''t want to settle for a good-effort-against-big-team loss or even draw.

Nobody outside of Norwich "fans" is saying he has passed his sell by date. Most of the supposed fans who do want him gone while he is still at or near the top of his game have no real reason other than "I feel".

Those that say to keep him as a 3rd or 4th strike option also seem misguided. To me. Why not at leazt try lining him up with RVW or at very least have him as attacking midfielder as he seemed to do quite well several times last season. The only fly in that ointment was his great centering passes often went begging when the striker didn''t read the play right. You know Holt would have been on the end of those passes if they were coming his way.[/quote]The problem with that argument is that if it became apparent he wasn''t up to it any more we would be stuck with him without a replacement, because the transfer window would have shut. And the chances then of being to offload him in January would sharply diminish, other clubs knowing he was a busted flush.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And the problem with your argument PurpleCanary is that it is nothing but hypothetical. It''s like saying "the problem with not signing a top class goalkeeper is that if Ruddy gets injured in September it will be too late to buy one".

We have Holt, Becchio, Van Wolfswinkel, and room for one other. Four strikers is enough, full stop,

I just don''t see how a player can go from scoring three goals in three PL games to completely incapable of playing football in a few months... just not realistic. The bloke is 32 not 36.

I wouldn''t even rule out the possibility of him being here until his contract expires in 2015, why not? Kevin Davies made his England debut at 33, age didn''t exactly prove a barrier to Kevin Phillips either, and Iwan Roberts was useful for a couple of seasons at 33/34.

I doubt Holt is costing us any more money than any other 32 year old of his ability, not like the lad is going to be on £50k a week is it. Debt free, £60m in Sky money, a Dutch International on the books, the biggest transfer budget in our history, we don''t need to be taking big risks by flogging our only proven Premier League striker to a relegation rival for a few million quid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"]

The problem with that argument is that if it became apparent he wasn''t up to it any more we would be stuck with him without a replacement, because the transfer window would have shut. And the chances then of being to offload him in January would sharply diminish, other clubs knowing he was a busted flush.

[/quote]He was up to the task during a difficult defensively-minded season last year.  Any replacement could be leveled with the same charge of possibly not being good enough.  I don''t think anyone is saying we should be reliant on Holt, just that given new signings he will likely slip down the pecking order this season.  Having said that, I would not be surprised if Holt is still top scorer at the club in 12 months time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even if Holt became a bit part player next season, scored 4 or 5 off the bench, and then got allowed to leave for £0 next summer to Carlisle or Australia, turning down £4m would have been worth it.... That''s 4 or 5 goals closer to another £60m next summer. It is short-termist to think about £4m now when the goal has to be £60m next summer.

What''s the bigger risk? Leaving the team short of the goals necessary to secure £60m next summer, or risking £4m on Grant Holt?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wish Morty, his wife is a hottie and he supposedly has a manhood almost as large as his bank balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="TheNewBoy"]I wish Morty, his wife is a hottie and he supposedly has a manhood almost as large as his bank balance.[/quote]Yeah but according to a lot of people here, he is a washed up nobody[;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="TheNewBoy"]And the problem with your argument PurpleCanary is that it is nothing but hypothetical. It''s like saying "the problem with not signing a top class goalkeeper is that if Ruddy gets injured in September it will be too late to buy one".

We have Holt, Becchio, Van Wolfswinkel, and room for one other. Four strikers is enough, full stop,

I just don''t see how a player can go from scoring three goals in three PL games to completely incapable of playing football in a few months... just not realistic. The bloke is 32 not 36.

I wouldn''t even rule out the possibility of him being here until his contract expires in 2015, why not? Kevin Davies made his England debut at 33, age didn''t exactly prove a barrier to Kevin Phillips either, and Iwan Roberts was useful for a couple of seasons at 33/34.

I doubt Holt is costing us any more money than any other 32 year old of his ability, not like the lad is going to be on £50k a week is it. Debt free, £60m in Sky money, a Dutch International on the books, the biggest transfer budget in our history, we don''t need to be taking big risks by flogging our only proven Premier League striker to a relegation rival for a few million quid.[/quote]

 

No, it isn''t like that. The injury scenario IS hypothetical, and hard to allow for, unless you are one of the mega-clubs that can have triple cover in any position (although since you mention keepers, that is the one area when you may be able to get a emergency loan). I am talking about Hughton - as a professional - having to make a judgment this summer on whether he thinks Holt is still up to it. That is not theoreotical at all. That is very practical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="TheNewBoy"]I think that selling Holt this summer would be one year too early. Nobody is a "must sell" at £4m for us now. He''s a captain, still capable of winning a game for us, and we didn''t win a single game that Grant Holt didn''t start last season. His ability and influence is understated by many Norwich fans. His ''problems'' last season were overstated by many Norwich fans. Not that the problems didn''t exist, he had a difficult year, but I think that keeping hold of him would be a gamble worth taking for the sake of £4m quid.[/quote]

 

Spot on.[Y]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well I''m confident Purple Canary that Hughton''s judgement will be that Holt remains an important member of our squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Holt must stay. We all know the stats and his influence last season.

This despite our incredulous ''tactics'' he was up against for most of that time.

Play like we did in the last two games and the old Holty swagger will be back. With Calderwood''s permission of course :-)

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  

×