Printable View
In the Eredivisie.Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
Jozy Altidore scored 23 goals there.
Alfonso Alves scored like 100 goals in Holland and then was shit in Middlesborough. There is a track record of Eredivise attackers being terrible in England.
We bought Eduardo from the Croatian league after selling Henry!! Dude! :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermind84
We’re really shifting goal posts here. What happened to quality strikers not being on the market? I think we have a serious scouting problem if they dismissed Suarez but had no problem going for players like Chamkah, Gervinho, Podolski and Giroud. Putting aside goal scoring records, stats and club rep, they have eyes. It should be clear as day which of the punch suits our style and who doesn’t. Dribbling ability, pace, stamina and intensity, handling pressure…Suarez is one example of many. It’s like us missing out on top keepers whilst we had Almunia, missing out on David Silva, Mata, David Villa..Xabi Alonso….it’s quite incredible. We had a flawed transfer strategy and I really don’t know how and why you’re making excuses for it. Especially when you can see where the money was spent.
for 8 million, DUDE!Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
The point I was making, and what you keep ignoring, is that Suarez cost 22 million in 2011. This club didnt have that much money and hedged the money they did have on bad contracts.
You are speaking with hindsight instead of remembering 2011.
none of them cost 22 million.Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
were the club ever in for any of those players, minus Mata? And Mata isnt really hot stuff anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
The Xabi Alonso stuff seems like it was made up. Once Liverpool couldnt get Gareth Barry, Alonso was going nowhere. Villa and Silva were not serious.
I’m not ignoring the fee. I totally understand that £22m isn’t cheap. But when you take £10m and another £12m, spend it on two lesser players it equates to the same fee. Is that hard to understand? And we’re talking about a very flawed player from the French league and a kid that’s never played in the Premier League. Does that make sense?Quote:
The point I was making, and what you keep ignoring, is that Suarez cost 22 million in 2011. This club didnt have that much money and hedged the money they did have on bad contracts.
and the thing i will repeat again, is that Wenger has done this before and the fans lauded him for it when those players turned into an Henry or Fabregas or Adebayor or RVP. He messed up with the players he bought for those fees but I get why he did it. Also the club needed more bodies, more depth. It turned out to be completely wrong and we needed a magician like Suarez but I get what the thinking was.Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
And Giroud is not a very flawed player. Thats crap. He is limited due to his lack of speed, but very flawed he is not. The wastemen you wanted earlier like Ba and Bony are flawed.
edit: I will amend this, Bony is not a wasteman. Remy is though.
The flawed player I was referring to was Gervinho. The more depth argument doesn't work if you're combining the fees of Ox, Campbell, and Park with Gervinho's. Gervinho was a first team regular and the rest barely or never featured to help our season. We might have well spent £20m+ on a player that would feature and contribute.
What Wenger has done before and what he was lauded for is a different matter. He got it wrong but that's different to the players and money not being there. It's not a valid excuse. He was trying to make £20m stretch over 2 or 3 players and we just ended up diluting the quality of player. Yes, he messed up and that is the point I've been making from the start. I don't believe the type of player we needed was never available.
:gp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
IMO our flaws in the transfer market have more to do with Wenger's desire to be proven right than anything else. He persists with players that he has developed rather than cashing in his chips and moving on - when more pragmatic managers would either accept that they are perennial crocks or that they will never fulfill their promise. Which brings us back to the question that I posed originally. With Walcott, I don't think the problem is the manager's vision for the player and what he brings to the team, I think it is that his castle may be built on sand - because there's no point building the team's new approach on a striker who looks like never being there for a whole season. We have Giroud who has shown consistently that he can't do the business over a period of time, and his alternative that is usually crocked. Wenger seems to insist on shooting himself in the foot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
I agree with Wenger persisting with players and being stubborn but I don't think that's the case with Theo playing as striker or the striker position in general. Theo's had to really fight his way past the crowd for that position. This wasn't planned. If Wenger had his way, Sanogo would be his second striker from the bench. If Welbeck hadn't gotten injured, I doubt Theo would have had a long run either.Quote:
Originally Posted by IBK
Theo playing as striker reminds me of how Flamini and Song emerged as DM's. If you recall, Wenger had Flamini pegged as a wingback and Song as a CB. If it weren't for injuries, neither player would have played in their preferred position. That's the case for Theo. He was a striker when we bought him, Wenger thinks otherwise and he's stubbornly played on the wing most of his career.
We've seen a few changes in personnel up front but Wenger has consistently valued height and power over pace and mobility. Adebayor, Bendy, Chamakh, Giroud, Sanogo...he's given more games and chances to these sorts of players over short, quick and nimble strikers. Maybe it's a fear of the shorter players being bullied off the ball but I think yesterday showed the weakness in having someone to slow to lose his marker and gets caught up in the physical battles.
We've had plenty of opportunities to move away from this sort of striker, as said, it goes as far back as Adebayor, but it's been an age since we bought a striker with pace. I just don't think Wenger has been looking for that sort if striker. When speaking of Martial moving to Utd, he said he saw him more as a wide player and not a striker.
As for building a castle on sand, I think we're building that if we continue on with Wenger. Regardless of who we buy or the type of player we need, he'll find a way to crock them. I thing his actions of the weekend proves the point I've been saying for a while. Sanchez imo would be the ideal candidate to convert into a striker. He's perfect for it. But he's just been crocked so we end up at square one again.
The manager needs to buy more quality in the key positions and then learn how to rotate the squad so he can keep players fresh. Plenty of opportunity for Theo, Bif and A.N.Other if Wenger was sensible with his selection policies. As it is, his version of rotation is to change the whole team when he doesn't care about the result. Rest of the time the same players get run to death. Going back to buying quality in depth, he won't ever do that so everything else is a non-starter.