Rhodes

[jonesy87shef]

He hasn’t been anywhere near up to the standard for the money we paid.

 

That being said the football was so negative for the managers he played with. He thrives with balls into the box and when he’s facing goal. I can’t remmeber him missing say 12-15 chances for us. Watch other forwards at this level and they can do easily miss that in 5 games. Think it speaks volumes about the service our forward get and also his inability to create chances for himself. 

 

I banged on about it for ages and there wasn’t a recent thread about touches we have in oppositions boxes, shots in the area etc. We often play to deep and when we do get forward we don’t work it into the box.

 

He might get a chance again and I kind of hope he does. Players like Billy Sharpe at 33 have had dips in form like his in terms of goals, but in their attacking set up, loaning the box and putting the ball in there he thrives. I seen them as very similar players and no reason he can’t score goals given the opportunity. Problem is I don’t see us playing that way so he will more than likely continue to be an expensive flop.

 

Fresh start for everyone anyway pre season under Bruce for me.

[Blue and white]

16 minutes ago, jonesy87shef said:

He hasn’t been anywhere near up to the standard for the money we paid.

 

That being said the football was so negative for the managers he played with. He thrives with balls into the box and when he’s facing goal. I can’t remmeber him missing say 12-15 chances for us. Watch other forwards at this level and they can do easily miss that in 5 games. Think it speaks volumes about the service our forward get and also his inability to create chances for himself. 

 

I banged on about it for ages and there wasn’t a recent thread about touches we have in oppositions boxes, shots in the area etc. We often play to deep and when we do get forward we don’t work it into the box.

 

He might get a chance again and I kind of hope he does. Players like Billy Sharpe at 33 have had dips in form like his in terms of goals, but in their attacking set up, loaning the box and putting the ball in there he thrives. I seen them as very similar players and no reason he can’t score goals given the opportunity. Problem is I don’t see us playing that way so he will more than likely continue to be an expensive flop.

 

Fresh start for everyone anyway pre season under Bruce for me.

Absolutely spot on fella.

[Jim]

I think our style of play will change under Bruce where there will be more of an emphasis of getting the ball in the box more. If we do this Rhodes will benefit, come to think of it so will Nuhiu. He’s looked more of a 6 yard box poacher over the last 12 months if you look at the type of goals he’s scored.

[vulture_squadron]

Will depend on finance I suppose but while JR hasn't scored many goals, only Forestieri has managed to score 15 goals or more in the league in the past 4 seasons. And he creates chances for himself.

 

More important to change the style of play to create more chances. But no point having JR, Hooper, Fletcher, Joao and Winnall. If we're playing 1 up top we need to get rid of some of them and bring in some wide players.

[Quist]

Bruce chose to go for Hogan instead of Rhodes at Villa. He did not attempt to sign Rhodes at Villa. When asked at the time he said he preferred Hogan as ha had pace. Rhodes is not his type of forward player he likes them with pace.

[jonnyowl]

Can't see someone paying money for him, he's not setting the world alight at Norwich.

 

He'll either stay or go out on loan again to get his reported £40k a week wage of the bill.

[torres]

His best days are behind him 

 

They were when Middlesbrough signed him 

 

They certainly were when we signed him 

 

We need to claw as much back of the ridiculous outlay as we can. 

[airborne_rat_of_s6]

7 hours ago, S36 OWL said:

 

But we persevere with Dave with a similar record. 

Worse this season. Utter bobbar

[The Night-Owl]

Don't get at all why we ever bought Rhodes for when we needed to strengthen other areas of the team that we still haven't strengthened yet. At the time he was a bit part player for Middlesboro low on confidence. He didn't suit Karanka's defensive style and he didn't suit Carlos' style. We'd just signed Winnall and all we needed was a extra bit of creativity or some pace and power. Our recruitment ever since Wembley as been so poor. I hope now with Bruce coming in and the likes of Hector on loan, that Chansiri's learnt his lesson from the past mistakes.

[FreshOwl]

Player of the past, lost what little pace he had, his instinctive awareness in and around the box has also dropped 

 

get rid 

[Sonny]

Daz is adamant that a permanent deal with Norwich is already done and he’ll be gone this month. Not sure why not announced in that case but we’ll see.

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

I don't think Rhodes has particularly lost his touch: he's probably operating at a similar level to what he always has, but the game has changed around him and strikers of his ilk are no longer regular starters for many teams at this level.

 

At his 'peak', in four seasons playing in the Championship for Blackburn, he averaged a goal every 164 minutes, which isn't totally out of sync with his goal every 194 minutes for Middlesbrough or his current rate of a goal every 181 minutes for Norwich. In fact, since establishing himself as a senior pro, the only Championship team he's struggled to score for at a decent rate has been Wednesday, where he's averaged a goal every 360 minutes so far.

 

The problem Wednesday have is that when Rhodes was scoring goals every other week, he tended to be played as part of a front two with traditional wingers getting regular crosses into the box: a style of football which is now out of fashion in the top two divisions of English football, meaning that we'll struggle to find many takers willing to pay anything like what we did for his services.

 

Norwich have taken him on loan this season, but their outlay is nothing like what we spent on him, and of course they're mostly using him as a substitute, since Pukki seems far better suited to playing the lone striker in a 4-2-3-1. Rhodes is making a valuable contribution to their season and is being used pretty effectively by their manager, but I can't imagine in a million years that they'd be willing to splash the kind of cash we did to secure a striker who'll start most games on the bench.

 

And that pretty much sums up Wednesday's conundrum: we've invested heavily in a striker who we don't get the best out of, but neither would the vast majority of clubs who could afford his services. We either need to alter our entire approach in order to try and get the best out of him on a regular basis; accept that we spent a ridiculous amount on a substitute - a potentially effective substitute, yes - but a substitute nonetheless; or we need to cut our losses and try to find a club who'll take him off our hands, whilst probably writing off a decent wedge of cash in the process.

 

All in all, it's a bloody mess!

 

Edited January 11, 2019 by areNOTwhatTHEYseem

[handworth52]

Rhodes is finished . Norwich don't use him or want him . his value will be now even lower . might be lucky for someone next season to pay half his wages sadly 

[handworth52]

1 hour ago, jonnyowl said:

Can't see someone paying money for him, he's not setting the world alight at Norwich.

 

He'll either stay or go out on loan again to get his reported £40k a week wage of the bill.

no club next season will pay him 40k a week . either we are stuck with him or he goes out on loan for a much lower amount and we end up paying half his wages. 

[dorian gray]

9 hours ago, Lord Snooty said:

I doubt in my heart the lad has any long term future here. I thought that before we signed him to be honest and that was a thought only strengthened after he arrived. 

 

That said...

 

The future is unwritten.

 For all we know Bruce might think he's a useful lad to have on the squad.  

 

He'd certainly look more of a threat the way we have played more recently since we have ditched the "100 passes across our back four while the opposition retreats and regains their defensive shape" approach which has haunted much of the last two years.

 

We'll just have to wait and see...

what many of the 'tiptap' boys haven't understood is that whilst 'playing the 100 passes' not only allowed the opposition time to defensively regroup. that assurance allowed them to attack us with larger numbers with the knowledge that once wednesday got the ball it would be a minimum of a couple of minutes at least before we mounted any sort of threat, thus allowing them to wander or stroll back into position.

walking pace football is needed in excessively high temperatures, it's not a great deal of good in the uk.

[dorian gray]

1 hour ago, Quist said:

Bruce chose to go for Hogan instead of Rhodes at Villa. He did not attempt to sign Rhodes at Villa. When asked at the time he said he preferred Hogan as ha had pace. Rhodes is not his type of forward player he likes them with pace.

we won't be able to assess the potential of our side until we have a forward with pace to drive at the opposition goal.

we've been hampered by the 'one idea' routine since dc bought the club.

[steelcityowlsfan]

He's an enigma is Rhodes but ask yourselves this, if he played for Wilder would he get 25 goals plus? There's something there with Rhodes but maybe it needs the right system or manager in place for him.

 

At 28 he's not over the hill and he never really had any pace but for some reason the goals have dried up. Very odd. 

[dorian gray]

8 hours ago, notts0wl said:

Adthe has a much better goal scoring record, holds up the ball very well and adds something different,

chuck him on when your 2-1 on to run down the clock or whatever. 

Not to mention he will be on peanuts comparatively... 

 

put a right forward on and be 4-1 up instead.

[The Night-Owl]

2 minutes ago, steelcityowlsfan said:

He's an enigma is Rhodes but ask yourselves this, if he played for Wilder would he get 25 goals plus? There's something there with Rhodes but maybe it needs the right system or manager in place for him.

 

At 28 he's not over the hill and he never really had any pace but for some reason the goals have dried up. Very odd. 

 

Think it's a combination of confidence but also not being played how he suits to play. His goals have dried up ever since his Blackburn days because when he was at Huddersfield and Blackburn, they pumped balls into the box and he tended to have a target man to feed off. But at Middlesboro, Wednesday and now Norwich, he's had to adapt to different systems and not had the crosses. Funnily enough he'd probably suit a team like the Pigs with plenty of balls into the box.

[dumboldowl]

9 hours ago, Lord Snooty said:

I doubt in my heart the lad has any long term future here. I thought that before we signed him to be honest and that was a thought only strengthened after he arrived. 

 

That said...

 

The future is unwritten.

 For all we know Bruce might think he's a useful lad to have on the squad.  

 

He'd certainly look more of a threat the way we have played more recently since we have ditched the "100 passes across our back four while the opposition retreats and regains their defensive shape" approach which has haunted much of the last two years.

 

We'll just have to wait and see...

 

I agree with most of that, except that we forgot to ditch the above mentioned approach during the Luton game, and as a consequence had to endure ninety odd minutes of absolute dross, with the same inevitable result that haunted us for the last two years.