£5million bid for McCormack submitted

[manbearpig 0]

According to a few on twitter a £5 million bid has been put in from a championship club rumours are it''s more likely Derby but our name has been mentioned also!

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

£5m seems a lot for McCormack, whilst Norwich have Hooper, Grabban, Becchio, Wolfswinkle and Loza I don''t see the need for another striker. Especially one who seems very similar to Hooper in playing style.

[Buzz Killington 0]

I doubt we''ll keep hold of hooper and RVW though. If I was becchio, I doubt I''d want to stay either.

[# 0]

Twitter.............must be true then.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

[quote user="Wiz"]Twitter.............must be true then.[/quote]

Reported by the Leeds writer at the Yorkshire Evening Post.

 

Saying ''it''s on Twitter so it must not be true'' is like saying ''I heard it on the radio so it must not be true''. Twitter is a medium for news, not a news outlet.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

[quote user="Wiz"]Twitter.............must be true then.[/quote]

Reported by the Leeds writer at the Yorkshire Evening Post.

 

Saying ''it''s on Twitter so it must not be true'' is like saying ''I heard it on the radio so it must not be true''. Twitter is a medium for news, not a news outlet.

[/quote]

"Twitter is a medium for news" is not the whole story though.  A more complete statement would be  -

"Twitter is a medium for news, gossip, hearsay, rumour mongering, mischief making, downright lies, rubbish, innuendo, bullying and ego tripping". 

The news element is the only thing of any worth in that lot, but knowing which is news and which is any of the other things on that list is practically impossible to tell. 

[# 0]

On Waccoe (yeah I know) they seem to think Newcastle have bid 8 million for him.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

[quote user="Wiz"]Twitter.............must be true then.[/quote]

Reported by the Leeds writer at the Yorkshire Evening Post.

 

Saying ''it''s on Twitter so it must not be true'' is like saying ''I heard it on the radio so it must not be true''. Twitter is a medium for news, not a news outlet.

[/quote]


"Twitter is a medium for news" is not the whole story though.  A more complete statement would be  -


"Twitter is a medium for news, gossip, hearsay, rumour mongering, mischief making, downright lies, rubbish, innuendo, bullying and ego tripping". 


The news element is the only thing of any worth in that lot, but knowing which is news and which is any of the other things on that list is practically impossible to tell. 


[/quote]

 

It''s not hard to tell the difference between a tweet from an accredited journalist for the Yorkshire Evening Post and a tweet from a fabricated rumour account. The same way it isn''t hard to tell the difference between a headline on the front of the Sunday Sport and the headline on the front of the Sunday Times.

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

It''s not hard to tell the difference between a tweet from an accredited journalist for the Yorkshire Evening Post and a tweet from a fabricated rumour account. The same way it isn''t hard to tell the difference between a headline on the front of the Sunday Sport and the headline on the front of the Sunday Times.

[/quote]True, Bethnal. I would always trust the Sunday Sport more...

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="lake district canary"]"Twitter is a medium for news, gossip, hearsay, rumour mongering, mischief making, downright lies, rubbish, innuendo, bullying and ego tripping".[/quote]Blimey Lakey, sounds just like most of your posts. [:D]

[GJP 79]

[quote user="Buzz Killington"]  If I was becchio, I doubt I''d want to stay either.[/quote]

How many clubs do you think are going to pay Becchio what Norwich pay him?

[GJP 79]

Would be a good buy, in my opinion. I''d prefer Deeney but I like McCormack. I think he''s a quicker and better runner than Hooper.

[Tetteys Jig 830]

The moneys started to come in for Norwich now, from 33 to 1 to 4 to 1 in absolutely no time! Could mean nothing but it means at least someone is convinced.

[The Great Mass Debater 1,075]

Im somewhat disappointed by the idea of us throwing money at the goalscoring problem. Im worried that the real reason behind our inabilty to score has been overlooked.

Chris Hughton invested heavily in strikers, with what almost seemed to be a worrying detachment from them. It almost seemed like he thought that if he just spent a lot of money in that area, that it would sort itself out. He bought two prolific goalscorers and then seemingly left them to it to score the goals all on their own, whilst he worked on making the team solid. All this talk of buying in new strikers worries me that the lessons havent been learned. You cant just splurge a load of money and then think, job done, goals bought.

Norwich failed to score enough goals for a lot of more complex reasons than ''the strikers werent good enough''. We didnt have enough options in terms of the striking palate (ie we didnt have a big man, a fast man, a poacher and a number 10 - we just had 4 strikers which didnt really offer alternatives to each other in terms of the way they would play, and in the way that Holt and Jackson were different to each other). We didnt have strikers who complemented each other - the big question all season being ''are our two most expensive outlays supposed to be on the pitch together, and if not, why is one of our most expensive outlays not on the pitch and in a position to influence things?'' RvW and Hooper never seemed to fit together.

But the biggest reason we didnt score goals last season was because of our tactics and because of the midfield. Under Lambert we were the leagues 6th highest scorers. Perhaps they were not mature or sustainable tactics, but we scored because we gambled. We attacked in numbers and the team were able to support the forwards in numbers.

Under Hughton the team were drilled to stay rigid in their formation and to take on more defensive discipline. This meant the forwards were isolated, unsupported and in attacking with a slow build-up, were outnumbered by defenders, and when any crosses did come in from the wings, they were often drifted-in inswingers from inverted wingers which are harder to convert - giving us the statistic that you might have seen, that Robert Snodgrass crossed more than any other player in the division, and yet had the poorest rate of conversion from his crosses in the division. Also the midfield could not retain possession and could not recycle the ball or switch defence to attack effectively.

The problems with scoring goals were evident from the very first moments of Chris Hughtons tenure. Even in his first few games the team were huffing and puffing to score goals, when previously it had been almost effortless.

Im not saying we need to return to the gung-ho style of Lambert, but the contrast illustrates the point very well I feel; which is that you cannot oversimplify goal-scoring. You cannot just throw millions at a player and expect that that will automatically bring you goals. Luis Suarez would have struggled to score goals in our team last year.

Id like to see the investement in the squad aimed at rectifying these problems, with the current strikers retained, a return to conventional wingers with an emphasis on crossing the ball from the byline and sorting out the central midfield - where in my opinion, the problem has always been.

If we''re splurging the kind of money thats being talked about, Id much rather it was on some quality central midfielders who can dictate tempo, retain possession and add some badly needed creativity. For too long we''ve relied almost completely on Wes for this, and as we saw last season, when Wes is out of the team, there is zero creativity. We need Wes'' creativity in a more rounded player - ie a deeper central midfielder, or one who plays where Wes does, but offers a goal threat. I would hope that every part of our budget was being invested in pursuing this key player, rather than misunderstanding the lessons from last season and replacing the strikers, effectively replacing the gun but still using blank bullets

[Darth Catbeard The Old 0]

I''d bet we''ll be addressing those problems in training, I''m sure Adams will be able to coach these players to attack in a more effective, fast, pass and move kind of way. I''m sure the real problems you allude to will be addressed

If we are in for McCormack then alongside Grabban it seems that Adams prefers strikers who can also play, create their own chances and offer a lot more for the team which will improve out attack no end by itself. Nobody but Hughton knows why he favoured poachers with pretty much nothing to their game on the ball but whatever... I''m just glad we''re shaking this part of the team up.

[The Great Mass Debater 1,075]

Also meant to say that if we are going to be bringing in new strikers, we need to make damn sure we know why we''re signing them - do they compliment each other if we''re playing more than one, or if we arent, are they different weapons to each other? We want to make damn sure that when we kick off we have strikers who give us options. A striker with pace to unlock slow defences, a striker with some muscle to compete with physical defences etc, or to change the tactics if its not working. We cant just end up with 4 strikers who are all the same and dont offer us alternatives. Grabban seems to have been bought for his pace, which if fine. I dont just want us to go and buy the divisions top 4 scorers without any thought as to how and where they will play, what they will offer and how theyll fit into the team. We need to learn from the simplistic mistakes that were made last season

[Darth Catbeard The Old 0]

From what I''ve seen I''d agree Grabban has the pace, he''s also got a decent long range shot so should trouble the slower defenders and in attempting to close down his shooting it should create gaps for our other strikers to exploit.

McCormack is much more technically gifted, he can go round players, is a great passer, makes intelligent runs and obviously is a great finisher, with a complete player like this as an option up top it should negate the need for a ''number 10'' and allow us to play 442

We''d lack physicality and strength from these two for sure, but I reckon they''d compliment each other well. This doesn''t seem like we''re just signing the highest scorers for the sake of it. It shoudld work much better than the two off the shoulder poachers we tried to play together last season

[The Great Mass Debater 1,075]

Well thats reassuring. There''s just the worry that they looked at last season and thought ''right, problem was that we didnt have strikers proven in this division, not going to make that mistake again. And seeing as we didnt really scout for championship level players last season because we had our head in the sand until April, lets just get the top scorer list and buy them. This Chris Martin bloke seems good, anyone know anything about him?''

Of course Im being facetious, but Im just concerned they seem to think the problem is the strikers, whereas I dont. I agree we need a broader palate when it comes to strikers, so as long as different weapons are being brought in to give us plan B and plan C thats fine. I just dont want the baby being thrown out with the bathwater.

I still believe we''ve got two great strikers in Hooper an RvW, we just need to learn to utilise them properly and not forget that the standard of defences and goalkeepers has just dropped, so Hooper and RvW are surely not going to struggle as much as last season

[MancCanary 0]

GMB - I totally agree with everything you''ve said.

The lack of a big bustling target man does worry me. I can only assume we''re getting the replacements for RVW (and maybe Hooper) in first before selling or loaning them out. But yeah we deffo need a different option. We''ve missed Holt ever since he left.

We''ve also missed a Wes type player (as you point out), and to be honest, in terms of keeping possession and passing well from deep positions, we''ve missed Fox. I''m not saying these 2 should''ve been in the team last season, but we haven''t replaced those types of players - who can pass and keep possession.

[MancCanary 0]

Perhaps we''ll be swapping Becchio for McCormack?

[ncfcstar 287]

[quote user="Wiz"]On Waccoe (yeah I know) they seem to think Newcastle have bid 8 million for him.[/quote]I thought you never went on other teams boards Wiz??????

[king canary 7,562]

I don''t see Derby having £5m to chuck around unless they have sold Will Hughes. Really in this league there is only us, Fulham and Cardiff who can chuck about that sort of money now Leicester and QPR have gone up.

I''m still confident RVW won''t be here come the start of the season so I''d think a strike force of Grabban, Hooper, McCormack and Becchio is not too shabby. I may be wrong about this but I also believe that Grabban and McCormack are also capable of playing out wide which gives us some more options.

[Darth Catbeard The Old 0]

Woohoo it should be us!

http://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/Derby-County-5m-bid-Leeds-United-star/story-21232275-detail/story.html

A front two of Grabban and McCormack backed by even just an average Championship team without players like Snodgrass, Ollson, Howson, Bennet, Redmond etc should see us top 6 minimum!

Please let this come off!

[Buzz Killington 0]

Probably none, but his naughty tweet towards the end of last season, as well as the clubs complete lack of confidence in him, to me at least, means even if another club won''t pay his wages, he won''t be playing here. Depends how much he wants to play I guess.

[morty 0]

I hope it us that has made the bid, not only because he is a good player, but to continue teh feeder club hilarity. Every Leeds fan I know now hates us lol.

[sgncfc 1,221]

Deeney would suit us better than McCormack and is a different type of striker to what we already have. He wouldn''t cost £5m either. If McCormack is worth that though, how much are we going to get for Hooper? He has to be worth more.

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="sgncfc"]Deeney would suit us better than McCormack and is a different type of striker to what we already have. He wouldn''t cost £5m either. If McCormack is worth that though, how much are we going to get for Hooper? He has to be worth more.[/quote]

Troy deeney is crap.

[Unhinged Canary 375]

[quote user="morty"]

I hope it us that has made the bid, not only because he is a good player, but to continue teh feeder club hilarity. Every Leeds fan I know now hates us lol.

[/quote]I concur. Purely for the comedy aspect, it would be hilarious.Plus I''m utterly convinced that we will see the first ever reported cases of human beings actually exploding. Mostly in the Leeds area. [:D]

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="Darth Catbeard The Old"]Woohoo it should be us!

http://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/Derby-County-5m-bid-Leeds-United-star/story-21232275-detail/story.html[/quote]

Graeme Bailey @GraemeBailey  ·  2m

Leeds have received a bid for Ross McCormack - the first of

the summer. Fulham are the bidders. Other clubs are set to bid over the

weekend.

[Rolf Harris 31]

Grabban Hooper McCormack

433?