Jump to content

Why Sheffield Wednesday shouldn't sign Ross McCormack [article]


Recommended Posts

Following on from an excellent suggestion yesterday, I have produced another article on why we shouldn't spend an inflated transfer fee on Ross McCormack and instead look to get a full season out of Gary Hooper. Let me know what you think!

 

https://clftbl.wordpress.com/2016/06/18/why-sheffield-wednesday-shouldnt-sign-ross-mccormack-for-8-12-million-anyway-swfc-ffc/

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, @cl_ftbl said:

Following on from an excellent suggestion yesterday, I have produced another article on why we shouldn't spend an inflated transfer fee on Ross McCormack and instead look to get a full season out of Gary Hooper. Let me know what you think!

 

https://clftbl.wordpress.com/2016/06/18/why-sheffield-wednesday-shouldnt-sign-ross-mccormack-for-8-12-million-anyway-swfc-ffc/

Great article mate and very well written. Certainly opens the eyes more for the should and shouldn't posters. Top marks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice stats as usual, but if (and it's a big if) we signed McCormack, surely he'd partner Hooper more often than he'd replace him? You should be comparing McCormack with Nuhiu and João...and the conclusion would be that we should sign him!

 

:manager:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great stuff cl.

 

So in the season where Hooper came to us unfit, he was still more prolific than McC. 

 

Their full championship careers show the same.

 

Hooper 44 goals in 94 matches = a goal every 2.1 matches.

 

McC 116 goals in 303 matches = a goal every 2.6 matches.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

Nice stats as usual, but if (and it's a big if) we signed McCormack, surely he'd partner Hooper more often than he'd replace him? You should be comparing McCormack with Nuhiu and João...and the conclusion would be that we should sign him!

 

:manager:

Exactly. They're 2 very different types of players and could compliment each other rather than compete against each other. Its already been said too, that whoever ends up signing him, the figure will be much less than £12m, albeit bolstered by add-ons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

Great stuff cl.

 

So in the season where Hooper came to us unfit, he was still more prolific than McC. 

 

Their full championship careers show the same.

 

Hooper 44 goals in 94 matches = a goal every 2.1 matches.

 

McC 116 goals in 303 matches = a goal every 2.6 matches.

 

Now do a similar breakdown for the the types of goals scored, and creativity/assists. Hooper is a centre-forward, McCormack is a second-striker. They have different traits. McCormack is excellent at set-pieces; he's like a championship Wayne Rooney. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, @cl_ftbl said:

Following on from an excellent suggestion yesterday, I have produced another article on why we shouldn't spend an inflated transfer fee on Ross McCormack and instead look to get a full season out of Gary Hooper. Let me know what you think!

 

https://clftbl.wordpress.com/2016/06/18/why-sheffield-wednesday-shouldnt-sign-ross-mccormack-for-8-12-million-anyway-swfc-ffc/

 

There is no statistical analysis that can tell me why we should not sign RM. Not that I think it's going to happen anyway but there is one simple thing that tells me that we should. A striker that will almost guarantee us 20 goals plus. 7m or 12m he should be our no1 target if we want to go up. No need to compare him with Hooper. Together these 2 could give us around 50 goals next season if you base that on stats. Of course they can play together any decent coach will see to that. 

 

It it has come to something when fans are saying why we should not sign the best striker in the league. Seriously come on. If we can get him, afford him, then he is a must. Hooper, RM and FF as an attacking trio will scare this league shitless! 

Edited by WayneTheOwl
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, wilyfox said:

Not gonna bother reading the full article. The fact McCormack is even being compared to Hooper shows a lack of understanding. They're chalk and cheese. 

 

Well as I say in the article, they both possess different traits and both are better at different things (I.e McCormack dribbling/ Hooper heading). The whole point of the article was to say if we were to sign him as a main source of goals, we should save our money and look no further than Gary Hooper who is more prolific when considered in context. I also suggest that they could even link up together as a strike partnership moving FF to the left and playing Hooper as a target man role with McCormack off him. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, WayneTheOwl said:

 

There is no statistical analysis that can tell me why we should not sign RM. Not that I think it's going to happen anyway but there is one simple thing that tells me that we should. A striker that will almost guarantee us 20 goals plus. 7m or 12m he should be our no1 target if we want to go up. No need to compare him with Hooper. Together these 2 could give us around 50 goals next season if you base that on stats. Of course they can play together any decent coach will see to that. 

 

It it has come to something when fans are saying why we should not sign the best striker in the league. Seriously come on. If we can get him, afford him, then he is a must. Hooper, RM and FF as an attacking trio will scare this league shitless! 

 

Pretty much that ^

 

I question whether DC would spend that much on one player. So far, such speculation is only hot air. But, fact remains that McCormack is the calibre of proven player we need to bridge the gap to top 2. If such players are too expensive, then maybe the reality is that automatic promotion is beyond us as a club. Trying to bargain our way into the top 2 within a year or two would be very difficult. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, wilyfox said:

 

Now do a similar breakdown for the the types of goals scored, and creativity/assists. Hooper is a centre-forward, McCormack is a second-striker. They have different traits. McCormack is excellent at set-pieces; he's like a championship Wayne Rooney. 

We have one of them already... He's called Fernando. It's been proven time and time again that Hooper isn't at his best when playing with Fernando. Hooper suits being the little man in a 'big man/little man' partnership. 

 

Mccormack doesn't solve that issue, he makes it worse. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, IstillhateSteveBould said:

lol

Has holmowl written that?

 

 

 

Major difference between the 2, that seems to be ignored, is Hooper is playing in a much better side.

 

That's certainly a valid point, but it's a mammoth task ranking teams/players on what comprises a better side. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ramone said:

We have one of them already... He's called Fernando. It's been proven time and time again that Hooper isn't at his best when playing with Fernando. Hooper suits being the little man in a 'big man/little man' partnership. 

 

Mccormack doesn't solve that issue, he makes it worse. 

 

Ah, but what you're overlooking is that when Hooper and Forestieri play upfront together, they don't have Forestieri cutting in from the left flank...

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
×
×
  • Create New...