2 hours ago, RIP Mourinho said:

Who even buys established strikers in the Prem and it actually work?

Liverpool - focal point in their prime was Salah and Mane, both signed for about what we paid for Jackson and neither were world beaters when signed. Firmino was a relatively unknown entity signed to supply them. 

Utd - Rashford came through the academy and is their biggest threat. Ronaldo, Cavani, Lukaku, Ibra, Falcao etc. all ultimately failed one way or another. Jury is out on Holjund.

City - Only team to have done it with Haaland. A player of Haaland's ability isn't joining Chelsea though when Madrid and City want them.

Arsenal - Saka is an academy player and Martinelli cost pennies. Jesus was their big money signing up top and he's scored 12 goals in 35 games for them. Not exactly setting the world alight, even still only cost £45m.

Spurs - Kane was an academy player. Son cost £22m and Richarlison, their big money signing, is dog sh*t.

I don't understand this weird obsession pundits have that we should have gone out and spent huge on an established number 9. We did that with Torres, Morata, Lukaku etc. and they all failed. Jackson could end up scoring 30 goals this season or score 10 and offer more with his link up. Either way, i'd take either over having to watch another striker come in for big money, whether that be Osimhen or whoever, and see them struggling to even control a ball in the Prem. 

 

TL;DR: people have shiny toy syndrome.

Top teams don't seem to have a No 9 target man goal machine these days.

Apart from City now, goals are spread around the team, Salah's not a traditional striker but scores loads.

Arsenal had goals spread around a number of players.

I just hope we don't keep repeating the doomed No 9 gamble 

 

2 minutes ago, dermott said:

The age limit thing has been doing the rounds without a single credible source. Someone on the radio? QED.

It was Andy Jacobs, ( is that his name) life long fan. 

Doesn't mean its true I know , but it's a good ammo.  😂😂😂

18 minutes ago, dermott said:

The age limit thing has been doing the rounds without a single credible source. Someone on the radio? QED.

It seems the Torygraph ( telegraph)  reported it, so I'm with you , it's not a credible source and a load of bollocks . 

6 hours ago, Sconnie Blue said:

You may have a point, but Mitrovic was playing in a Fulham side with zero pressure and in a counter attacking set up. Not a given his output would translate here, and at 29 years old for £50m we'd be expecting immediate contributions. 

Although I find it difficult to compete against £400kpw that Al Hilal were offering. 

Compared to what Chelsea have paid for a big bunch of youngsters and the latest was Palmer for 45m then I dont see how paying 50m for Mitrovic was a bad option. He obviously wouldn't have joined once Al Hilal wanted him but he was better value than the majority of transfers over the last year. 

16 hours ago, dermott said:

The age limit thing has been doing the rounds without a single credible source. Someone on the radio? QED.

Matt Law reported it

18 minutes ago, Sheva said:

Matt Law reported it

Does that make it true? 

3 minutes ago, dermott said:

Does that make it true? 

I don't know? Just letting you know where it came from.

2 minutes ago, Sheva said:

I don't know? Just letting you know where it came from.

Thank you. My broader point was that because someone, in this case in isolation, says something it gets taken seriously. Matt Law has been an unreliable source for a while now.

Edited September 6, 20232 yr by dermott

36 minutes ago, dermott said:

Thank you. My broader point was that because someone, in this case in isolation, says something it gets taken seriously. Matt Law has been an unreliable source for a while now.

The Athletic who's been on the money since the owners arrived at the club have reported the same thing.

10 minutes ago, OriginalS said:

The Athletic who's been on the money since the owners arrived at the club have reported the same thing.

I imagine they got that from Matt Law 🙂 

4 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

I imagine they got that from Matt Law 🙂 

I don't understand why anyone would think Matt Law is lying or why it even matters if he is.

Surely the fact the club didn't attempt to actually sign a player over 25 this summer is the definitive proof of the transfer strategy.

35 minutes ago, Whats_The_Mata? said:

I don't understand why anyone would think Matt Law is lying or why it even matters if he is.

Surely the fact the club didn't attempt to actually sign a player over 25 this summer is the definitive proof of the transfer strategy.

Definitive proof? Or a coincidence to which a narrative has been attached? I won't want you on the bench with a gavel next time I appear in court. Let me rephrase that. If I ever appear in court.

3 hours ago, Whats_The_Mata? said:

I don't understand why anyone would think Matt Law is lying or why it even matters if he is.

Surely the fact the club didn't attempt to actually sign a player over 25 this summer is the definitive proof of the transfer strategy.

Regardless of the age issue, who exactly would people have wanted them to sign over the age of 25? People seem to be very hung up on this experience/age issue and I'm unsure why. What difference would it make unless the player is of high quality?

So many talented players on the market these days are under 25. Olise was 21 i think. People wanted Colwill to return to the fold and he's 19. Look at Man Utd, team with a lot of age and experience but hardly helping them so far is it. 

I suppose if its no-one over 25 then that rules Ivan Toney out in January. 

18 minutes ago, enigma said:

Regardless of the age issue, who exactly would people have wanted them to sign over the age of 25? People seem to be very hung up on this experience/age issue and I'm unsure why. What difference would it make unless the player is of high quality?

So many talented players on the market these days are under 25. Olise was 21 i think. People wanted Colwill to return to the fold and he's 19. Look at Man Utd, team with a lot of age and experience but hardly helping them so far is it. 

Utd just paid £70m for about 6 good months of Casemiro too. On his decline already. 

 

Utd won the efl cup, got to the fa cup final and top 4 but a stat of Casmiero has been dribbled past 12 times means it's not working.

I know people keep questioning the experience issue but a lot of the players we have signed are raw. We've spent likely around 600m on players that have not had a full season of football under their belt in a competitive league.

21 is a good age these days but they are still football babies in terms of games played at a high level, we're doing this all in 2 windows while having club expectations of achieving top 4.

Experience is a valid concern, there's a debate in the other thread about Declan Rice/Caicedo.

Declan Rice has been playing in this league since he's 19 years old and has over 200 appearances. Caicedo has 45 and is 2 years younger, Rice is a more experienced signing. They don't have to be 30+ to be experienced.

 

Edited September 6, 20232 yr by Sheva

20 minutes ago, Sheva said:

I know people keep questioning the experience issue but a lot of the players we have signed are raw. We've spent likely around 600m on players that have not had a full season of football under their belt in a competitive league.

21 is a good age these days but they are still football babies in terms of games played at a high level, we're doing this all in 2 windows while having club expectations of achieving top 4.

Experience is a valid concern, there's a debate in the other thread about Declan Rice/Caicedo.

Declan Rice has been playing in this league since he's 19 years old and has over 200 appearances. Caicedo has 45 and is 2 years younger, Rice is a more experienced signing. They don't have to be 30+ to be experienced.

 

But Rice wanted to go to Arsenal and as far as I remember majority of our fanbase were frothing at the thought of Caicedo. We were linked with Caicedo when Lampard was here 3 seasons ago. He would have cost us 4/5m back then. We also were interested in Rice as Lampard mentioned. People can blame the new ownership, but Roman left us weaker by not signing players for key areas sooner. We could have got Rice 2/3 seasons ago. No point talking about Rice now. We have to strike why the iron is hot. We won the league in 2014/15 and should have strengthened further to go again for the league but didn't. The same should have happened with Conte, but again, we didn't. I'm all for accepting that the new ownership has made mistakes, but the previous ownership could have done so much better to keep us competitive. 

8 hours ago, dermott said:

Thank you. My broader point was that because someone, in this case in isolation, says something it gets taken seriously. Matt Law has been an unreliable source for a while now.

That's why I christened him " Matt Flaw" a while back 

🤪

16 hours ago, enigma said:

But Rice wanted to go to Arsenal and as far as I remember majority of our fanbase were frothing at the thought of Caicedo. We were linked with Caicedo when Lampard was here 3 seasons ago. He would have cost us 4/5m back then. We also were interested in Rice as Lampard mentioned. People can blame the new ownership, but Roman left us weaker by not signing players for key areas sooner. We could have got Rice 2/3 seasons ago. No point talking about Rice now. We have to strike why the iron is hot. We won the league in 2014/15 and should have strengthened further to go again for the league but didn't. The same should have happened with Conte, but again, we didn't. I'm all for accepting that the new ownership has made mistakes, but the previous ownership could have done so much better to keep us competitive. 

I just used Rice as an example of someone who could be called experienced and it's different signing Rice when he's 19/20 because signing Rice at that age means he's playing with players like Kante, Kovacic and Jorginho who have hundreds of apps under their belt. I am all for signing younger inexperienced players but I don't think it's sensible signing a lot of them to play together and develop together while trying to achieve expectations of the club.

We're going to have a lot more results like Forest and people are already throwing their toys out of the pram, nothing ever goes straight forward at this club. There's going to be alot of ups and downs, look at Newcastle, they are taking it slow and they kept a core amount of players who were fighting relegation at the time. They added a few young quality players but also players who've already played 100+ games of competitive football, they will slowly do this every window and will continue to improve.

Let's be honest here, we could have spent over a billion to just end up where Newcastle are right now, that's a possibility or we could have spent that much to challenge City and nobody knows right now. That's the risk and people are right to have concerns because spending a billion should come with expectations.

Edited September 7, 20232 yr by Sheva

20 hours ago, Ernie_blue said:

Utd won the efl cup, got to the fa cup final and top 4 but a stat of Casmiero has been dribbled past 12 times means it's not working.

Yes that's the good 6 months. They were top 4 anyway before he came. He's been diabolically poor this season. 

The owners despite doing well shifting players that didn't want to be here imo have got it wrong again for the 3rd window straight.

It all comes down to squad make up. Our squad is very void of genuine world class talent. You can argue you shouldn't need world class players to compete in the league just world class coaching.

However, due to the amount of money in the league now there is top quality coaches and players for teams that usually wouldn't be able to accommodate them. Therefore the emphasis and pressure is even greater for the top teams to stay on top. 

Signing all young players and assuming they can get us into the top 4 and compete in the league is a huge gamble. I'm surprised no one in the senior team has raised alarm at this plan.

We were in relegation form last season, sure we spent a lot of money to try and rectify the situation. Yet we didn't buy many proven players that are mid 20s ready to compete now not in 3 years time. 

I'm ngl I'm quite ticked off with their recruitment strategy, they are too obsessed with young players. We cannot guarantee any of these will reach their potential whatever that may be. Sure our previous model might have been unsustainable we would have run out of world class coaches to keep jumping to 

The signing policy though tended to work, sure we didn't compete for the league for a while but no one did City have dominated this era domestically. At least we signed genuine top footballers in their prime before these owners took over. 

Since then the only players in their prime we've signed are Sterling and Nkunku everyone else was either older (PEA, KK) or below 22/21yrs. You need a balance, we need more 25 year olds who are proven quality and can help us compete for titles now. 

One thing I don't think these owners grips is no matter how talented the coach they still need cheat codes to win games. That's genuine star players, it's no coincidence Pep finally won the UCL with City once Haaland signed, they also have Silva, KDB, Rodri the list goes on. Liverpool have Salah, VVD, Alisson etc. You need world class players and we just don't seem to sign them anymore.

What are our scouts doing how are they only identifying a handful of youth players that cost £80- £100m or worst dozens of young £20-£25m who don't even see the first team. 

36 minutes ago, LongtimerLurker said:

The owners despite doing well shifting players that didn't want to be here imo have got it wrong again for the 3rd window straight.

It all comes down to squad make up. Our squad is very void of genuine world class talent. You can argue you shouldn't need world class players to compete in the league just world class coaching.

However, due to the amount of money in the league now there is top quality coaches and players for teams that usually wouldn't be able to accommodate them. Therefore the emphasis and pressure is even greater for the top teams to stay on top. 

Signing all young players and assuming they can get us into the top 4 and compete in the league is a huge gamble. I'm surprised no one in the senior team has raised alarm at this plan.

We were in relegation form last season, sure we spent a lot of money to try and rectify the situation. Yet we didn't buy many proven players that are mid 20s ready to compete now not in 3 years time. 

I'm ngl I'm quite ticked off with their recruitment strategy, they are too obsessed with young players. We cannot guarantee any of these will reach their potential whatever that may be. Sure our previous model might have been unsustainable we would have run out of world class coaches to keep jumping to 

The signing policy though tended to work, sure we didn't compete for the league for a while but no one did City have dominated this era domestically. At least we signed genuine top footballers in their prime before these owners took over. 

Since then the only players in their prime we've signed are Sterling and Nkunku everyone else was either older (PEA, KK) or below 22/21yrs. You need a balance, we need more 25 year olds who are proven quality and can help us compete for titles now. 

One thing I don't think these owners grips is no matter how talented the coach they still need cheat codes to win games. That's genuine star players, it's no coincidence Pep finally won the UCL with City once Haaland signed, they also have Silva, KDB, Rodri the list goes on. Liverpool have Salah, VVD, Alisson etc. You need world class players and we just don't seem to sign them anymore.

What are our scouts doing how are they only identifying a handful of youth players that cost £80- £100m or worst dozens of young £20-£25m who don't even see the first team. 

If you make a panic signing faced with a deadline closing in, how often does that player turn out to be amazing?

We made a panic sale faced with a deadline of extension from the British Gov and the PL. 

On 05/09/2023 at 17:41, The Rising Sun said:

Top teams don't seem to have a No 9 target man goal machine these days.

Very true.

Apart from CL/PL winners Man City (Haaland), La Liga winners Barcelona (Lewandowski), Serie A winners Napoli (Osimhen), oh and Bundesliga winner Bayern have just signed Harry Kane.

1 hour ago, Gonoir Beniashile said:

Very true.

Apart from CL/PL winners Man City (Haaland), La Liga winners Barcelona (Lewandowski), Serie A winners Napoli (Osimhen), oh and Bundesliga winner Bayern have just signed Harry Kane.

Spoil sport !

I was thinking really about top teams in our league, until Haaland I can't remember a traditional striker target man No 9 at top clubs ..? Kane maybe. ?

Son and Salah shared the golden boot as top scorers not long ago and they aren't traditional No 9 

I dunno how those strikers would do in our league but Lewandowski scored a lovely goal v Spurs awhile back

Thanks for your reply .