Rhodes and reach

[Athelwulf]

As a matter of interest, what exactly did bonny 'Boro finish up paying for Rhodes?

[theowlsman]

1 minute ago, Athelwulf said:

As a matter of interest, what exactly did bonny 'Boro finish up paying for Rhodes?

 

Rhodes Tax?

[MysticOwl]

8 minutes ago, theowlsman said:

Latest news is that us, Derby, Norwich, and someone else, interested in loaning him. Boro want to sell, not interested in loaning him. Would also need to bring someone else in to make it happen.

 

If you believe journo twitterings

Owlsonline just tweeted we were in talks with Rhodes.

Edited August 31, 2016 by iliveinthenow

[Inspector Lestrade]

1 minute ago, iliveinthenow said:

Owlsonline just tweeted we are in talks with Rhodes.

 

 

Could you work at the same place as your Dad?

[Costello 77]

19 hours ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

Twitter says all sorts of shît, though.

 

If you believe what you read on there, Tupac works in an Indian takeaway in Dundee, aliens caused 9/11, and Mary Berry is Bruce Forsyth in a wig.

You could have cited three implausible stories to illustrate your point.

[theowlsman]

4 minutes ago, iliveinthenow said:

Owlsonline just tweeted we were in talks with Rhodes.

 

They're jealous cos Owls Talk sorted the Reach deal

[Guest Copthorneowl]

18 hours ago, gurujuan said:

Not sure about the Rhodes deal. Seems a lot to pay to borrow a player who might only be sat on the bench. And sat next to Hooper, in all probability, someone who was bought to do the job that some think Rhodes will do. 

 

I think you're absolutely right at the moment we've got expensive strikers on the bench - this will be more the case and if, and it is an if he's successful we are still unlikely to sign him cos he will stil be 10/12 mill with high wage to go with it We don't need him we need Hooper to do what he did last year and has done throughout his career and our other strikers to get back on track and play like they did for 2/3rds of last season.

[StudentOwl]

18 hours ago, gurujuan said:

Not sure about the Rhodes deal. Seems a lot to pay to borrow a player who might only be sat on the bench. And sat next to Hooper, in all probability, someone who was bought to do the job that some think Rhodes will do. 

Difference being that that Rhodes can play 90 minutes more than half the time... something Hooper can't do (as the stats from his last 100+ Championship games show)

[Guest Copthorneowl]

1 minute ago, StudentOwl said:

Difference being that that Rhodes can play 90 minutes more than half the time... something Hooper can't do (as the stats from his last 100+ Championship games show)

Hoppers not playing 90 minutes on account of his performance on the pitch and some fitness issues (which I don't condone) your a bit of a stats man and should therefore have more faith in Hooper because his stats throughout his career are A1.

 

Rhodes looked second best to Hooper when he turned out for Boro last season and that's why they've binned him.

[StudentOwl]

2 minutes ago, Copthorneowl said:

Hoppers not playing 90 minutes on account of his performance on the pitch and some fitness issues (which I don't condone) your a bit of a stats man and should therefore have more faith in Hooper because his stats throughout his career are A1.

 

Rhodes looked second best to Hooper when he turned out for Boro last season and that's why they've binned him.

His goals-per-minute are the best in the league

He gets subbed off when starting a game 50% of the time (the reasons of which can certainly be debated... Anything and everything from fitness to tactical changes are the reasons from one time or another I'm sure) and has only started two thirds of Championship games he's played in

 

Whatever the reasons for his limited game time, over the course of a season I would back Rhodes to get more goals than Hooper every time, purely just due to the higher volume of minutes he gets on the pitch. 

 

Of course, that becomes a moot point if we increase the amount of time Hoops gets on the pitch, be that by improving his fitness or taking other measures

[Guest Copthorneowl]

1 minute ago, StudentOwl said:

His goals-per-minute are the best in the league

He gets subbed off when starting a game 50% of the time (the reasons of which can certainly be debated... Anything and everything from fitness to tactical changes are the reasons from one time or another I'm sure) and has only started two thirds of Championship games he's played in

 

Whatever the reasons for his limited game time, over the course of a season I would back Rhodes to get more goals than Hooper every time, purely just due to the higher volume of minutes he gets on the pitch. 

 

Of course, that becomes a moot point if we increase the amount of time Hoops gets on the pitch, be that by improving his fitness or taking other measures

Pleased to see that you agree with me then.

[Earlsfieldowl]

Strikers don't become carp over night and just don't think Rhodes fitted in with the Boro system...he did a job for them but maybe he isn't seen a s Prem std

 

Must admit I don't think he'd be right for us either - I still think Hooper can and will do a good job here.

 

People should be careful for what they wish for...and far to quick to write him off (scored 9 in 13 last season) -  there is no guarantee any replacement would do better

 

For starters, where would Rhodes play and who would make way for him?  Fletcher - no chance...Hooper and Rhodes together, can't see that happening either - too similar.

 

 

 

[StudentOwl]

4 minutes ago, Copthorneowl said:

Pleased to see that you agree with me then.

It's been my viewpoint the last few months

 

Right this very second, assuming money is no object, I'd prefer Rhodes... I think Hooper has limitations that for whatever reason haven't been overcome during his career that have meant he just can't hack lots of minutes on the pitch. Rhodes at least, has shown he can play for long enough to score 20-25 goals a season.

 

As it is, money is an object, so again... Something of a moot point

[Blue and white]

5 minutes ago, Earlsfieldowl said:

Strikers don't become carp over night and just don't think Rhodes fitted in with the Boro system...he did a job for them but maybe he isn't seen a s Prem std

 

Must admit I don't think he'd be right for us either - I still think Hooper can and will do a good job here.

 

People should be careful for what they wish for...and far to quick to write him off (scored 9 in 13 last season) -  there is no guarantee any replacement would do better

 

For starters, where would Rhodes play and who would make way for him?  Fletcher - no chance...Hooper and Rhodes together, can't see that happening either - too similar.

 

 

 

I'm not taking the bait.

[Guest Copthorneowl]

Just now, Earlsfieldowl said:

Strikers don't become carp over night and just don't think Rhodes fitted in with the Boro system...he did a job for them but maybe he isn't seen a s Prem std

 

Must admit I don't think he'd be right for us either - I still think Hooper can and will do a good job here.

 

People should be careful for what they wish for...and far to quick to write him off (scored 9 in 13 last season) -  there is no guarantee any replacement would do better

 

For starters, where would Rhodes play and who would make way for him?  Fletcher - no chance...Hooper and Rhodes together, can't see that happening either - too similar.

 

 

 

 

Very well put agree 100%. Also need to take into account Rhodes has been made available fairly late in the window - only clubs with cash for 10 mill plus to spend on a striker (NUFC, AV, Norwich and new money) have already done their business. Boro obviously know they can't sell him now so loan the only avenue for them. Can't believe he fits into our pay scheme and would cause problems fitting him in, however seems there are so many posts re us and him there must be something in it but not a goer for me.  However if CC thinks he can fit him in fair enough.

[dorian gray]

20 hours ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

Twitter says all sorts of shît, though.

 

If you believe what you read on there, Tupac works in an Indian takeaway in Dundee, aliens caused 9/11, and Mary Berry is Bruce Forsyth in a wig.

is that a wig, on a wig then, or does he take his off, to put hers on, i'm confused... 

[dorian gray]

19 minutes ago, Earlsfieldowl said:

Strikers don't become carp over night and just don't think Rhodes fitted in with the Boro system...he did a job for them but maybe he isn't seen a s Prem std

 

Must admit I don't think he'd be right for us either - I still think Hooper can and will do a good job here.

 

People should be careful for what they wish for...and far to quick to write him off (scored 9 in 13 last season) -  there is no guarantee any replacement would do better

 

For starters, where would Rhodes play and who would make way for him?  Fletcher - no chance...Hooper and Rhodes together, can't see that happening either - too similar.

 

 

 

 

14 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

It's been my viewpoint the last few months

 

Right this very second, assuming money is no object, I'd prefer Rhodes... I think Hooper has limitations that for whatever reason haven't been overcome during his career that have meant he just can't hack lots of minutes on the pitch. Rhodes at least, has shown he can play for long enough to score 20-25 goals a season.

 

As it is, money is an object, so again... Something of a moot point

have to agree hooper n' rhodes doesn't look like it'll work together, who'd do the shovel work?

for me hooper (when signed) was a poor mans rhodes, and a good buy for the money when compared...

but he appears to have dried up, and a tad out of fitness...

BUT, if we sign rhodes and still can't hit a barn door, then it has to be the supply...

fletcher is far from prolific, but has a job to do, so 'stick or twist'...

it's an expensive gamble, and i don't know the 'ins and outs' of it, trust in dc he hasn't let us down, and if he 'twists' i wish him the best of luck...

[Holmowl]

57 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

His goals-per-minute are the best in the league

He gets subbed off when starting a game 50% of the time (the reasons of which can certainly be debated... Anything and everything from fitness to tactical changes are the reasons from one time or another I'm sure) and has only started two thirds of Championship games he's played in

 

Whatever the reasons for his limited game time, over the course of a season I would back Rhodes to get more goals than Hooper every time, purely just due to the higher volume of minutes he gets on the pitch. 

 

Of course, that becomes a moot point if we increase the amount of time Hoops gets on the pitch, be that by improving his fitness or taking other measures

 

The stat about only starting 75% of his Championship matches. Does that include those 18 cameos for Sothend as an 18 yo?

[Holmowl]

57 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

His goals-per-minute are the best in the league

He gets subbed off when starting a game 50% of the time (the reasons of which can certainly be debated... Anything and everything from fitness to tactical changes are the reasons from one time or another I'm sure) and has only started two thirds of Championship games he's played in

 

Whatever the reasons for his limited game time, over the course of a season I would back Rhodes to get more goals than Hooper every time, purely just due to the higher volume of minutes he gets on the pitch. 

 

Of course, that becomes a moot point if we increase the amount of time Hoops gets on the pitch, be that by improving his fitness or taking other measures

 

The stat about only starting 75% of his Championship matches. Does that include those 18 cameos for Sothend as an 18 yo?

[MMC]

Sorry to be Buzz Killington, no chance you will get Rhodes. Karanka doesn't want him to be sold, we've just paid through the eyes for him in January and the battering ram that is Negredo was just better suited for the first 3 games. Nugent is always a better choice off the bench as he brings a ridiculously high work rate to the table and really puts tired defenders under pressure.

 

Reach is all but done according to our end. I'll echo my previous sentiments on the lad, he'll prove to be a great signing for you. He can play LB/LW/CAM/CF/RW, has a bit of pace, a bit of strength and a phenomenal workrate no matter where you put him.