Bruce “I’ve offered...”

[FreshOwl]

1 hour ago, ZicoSterland2 said:

Nobody's seen him play the last 2 years as he hasn't got in the team either here or at Norwich. I am sure with the right service he would have done better here but that wasn't the system we played. It seems SB is looking at wingers and more pace but it maybe too late for Rhodes here. Nice bloke but just hasn't worked out for him.

He’s played enough to form an opinion, poo , not good enough anymore 

 

He’s slower than big Dave, even if we got wingers he wouldn’t get to the box in time 

[Yellowbelly]

Carlos never wanted Rhodes & made it plain from the beginning. His time here saw an erosion of his confidence & self belief leaving us with a very expensive player being wasted. Whether it was  the fault of Carlos not playing to his strengths or Rhodes not adapting to fit into our system is irrelevant, it demonstrates the lack of joined up thinking between the two most important people at the club - the manager & chairman.

[prowl]

3 hours ago, vulva said:

Then sell the 6th. 

 

It’s not difficult. United do this very well. Sell players, re-invest. 

Better to bring in another striker better than your best then sell the 6th.  Replacing the 6th best striker won't gain you much, he's a squad filler who will rarely get picked as a sub.

 

The best way of progressing is to decide your weakest player and replace him with much better but life is never that simple.

[dorian gray]

3 hours ago, shandypants said:

I stated at the time that it was wrong to sign Rhodes. Look back and check - it’s all there. 

you may have, very, very few joined in with you.

[dorian gray]

3 hours ago, Lincs Owl said:

So he is in charge of salaries?  I assume he's got degrees in Economics and Accountancy if he's going to steer us out of shallow FFP water.

Then again, he might be just a coach like just about every one of the over 71 EFL 'managers'. 

 

would you rather have the bank manager in charge of first team affairs then?

[asteener1867]

3 hours ago, Yellowbelly said:

Carlos never wanted Rhodes & made it plain from the beginning. His time here saw an erosion of his confidence & self belief leaving us with a very expensive player being wasted. Whether it was  the fault of Carlos not playing to his strengths or Rhodes not adapting to fit into our system is irrelevant, it demonstrates the lack of joined up thinking between the two most important people at the club - the manager & chairman.

Well that was us..Wasn't it?

I think it was Snoots who wanted him...I stand to be corrected...

Mighta been Costello..he's mad as a box of Frogs...I pmed them to try and talk sense...but they wouldn't listen.............

[stevie snerklebox]

7 hours ago, vulva said:

The Winnall signing was risk free. With his record at lower levels and what we paid for him, we will make money on that deal. 

We will lose money on Winnall. He's on 18k a week and scored four or five goals for us in nearly three years. Add that to the fact that he was palmed off to Derby in exchange for the hapless Butterfield so in my book that makes his signing nothing short of disastrous.

I reckon that we wil be lucky to get £750k for him. If you include the £2m he's cost us in wages we will lose money on Winnall even if someone actually takes him of our hands.

[Groundhopping Owl]

21 hours ago, vulva said:

Disagree. We were very close to promotion and had the chance to sign a player who was a proven at this level and could have got us over the line. It was a great signing at the time and the vast majority on here agreed with it. hindsight is a wonderful thing. 

 

Fulham gambled like we did the year after with Mitrovic, and it paid off. 

The Rhodes decision would have been less controversial if we hadn't signed Winnall a week beforehand. Regardless of whether you think signing Rhodes was a risk worth taking at the time, signing them both was utterly wasteful.

[SallyCinnamon]

4 hours ago, dorian gray said:

you may have, very, very few joined in with you.

 

Incorrect.

 

Whilst many at the time believed the chairman knew what he was doing, a lot also thought adding another striker when we lacked pace and creativity was ridiculous. 

[Owls2k]

22 hours ago, vulva said:

Disagree. We were very close to promotion and had the chance to sign a player who was a proven at this level and could have got us over the line. It was a great signing at the time and the vast majority on here agreed with it. hindsight is a wonderful thing. 

 

Fulham gambled like we did the year after with Mitrovic, and it paid off. 

Correct. Boro also did the same thing with Rhodes, he came off the bench and got important goals that got them promoted in the end.

[Guest Ash76]

10 hours ago, vulva said:

That’s irrelevant. If you’ve got 6 you try and get 7th that’s better than the 6th. And so on. Evolve the squad. 

 

Our problem hasn’t been buying players, it’s been not selling them. 

 

What about when you get the 7th and he's the 7th best?

 

9 hours ago, vulva said:

The Winnall signing was risk free. With his record at lower levels and what we paid for him, we will make money on that deal. 

 

Possibly if he wasn't on 17k a week

[Guest Ash76]

5 hours ago, dorian gray said:

you may have, very, very few joined in with you.

 

And me, always thought he was massively overrated at this level.

[Gob_Bluth]

7 hours ago, Yellowbelly said:

Carlos never wanted Rhodes & made it plain from the beginning. His time here saw an erosion of his confidence & self belief leaving us with a very expensive player being wasted. Whether it was  the fault of Carlos not playing to his strengths or Rhodes not adapting to fit into our system is irrelevant, it demonstrates the lack of joined up thinking between the two most important people at the club - the manager & chairman.

 

I think you're being harsh on Carlos there a little, I'd say Karanka at Boro was the man to start making Rhodes doubt himself and Carlos just compounded it.

 

I don't think Karanka wanted Rhodes at Boro either and had him bought just like Carlos did here

[Yellowbelly]

24 minutes ago, Gob_Bluth said:

 

I think you're being harsh on Carlos there a little, I'd say Karanka at Boro was the man to start making Rhodes doubt himself and Carlos just compounded it.

 

I don't think Karanka wanted Rhodes at Boro either and had him bought just like Carlos did here

Point taken, but a better man manager than Carlos could have used Rhodes tough time at Boro to motivate the player rather than just treating him exactly the same & destroying him basically. I don’t want to start bashing Carlos but I will say that both him & Jos we’re guilty of under utilising our record signing and writing off a substantial wedge of cash doing so. Obviously the price tag shouldn’t dictate game time but it seemed sometimes that a point was being made with the the way Rhodes was used. 

 

Or maybe I’m just imagining it, which admittedly isn’t beyond the realm of possibility. It will be interesting though how Bruce deals with the Rhodes situation.

[Athelwulf]

3 hours ago, Yellowbelly said:

Point taken, but a better man manager than Carlos could have used Rhodes tough time at Boro to motivate the player rather than just treating him exactly the same & destroying him basically. I don’t want to start bashing Carlos but I will say that both him & Jos we’re guilty of under utilising our record signing and writing off a substantial wedge of cash doing so. Obviously the price tag shouldn’t dictate game time but it seemed sometimes that a point was being made with the the way Rhodes was used. 

 

Or maybe I’m just imagining it, which admittedly isn’t beyond the realm of possibility. It will be interesting though how Bruce deals with the Rhodes situation.

 

I'm pretty sure that Rhodes was used as a lone striker at bonny 'Boro, which isn't his game.

 

I mean, you've got to be a top striker indeed to succeed in that role in the PL.

 

There are very few clubs in this country that can afford a forward of that calibre, and surely if a club had such resources then it wouldn't need to play that system because it could afford a better all-round team.

 

And it helps if you've got a top outfit behind you when up front alone, not one like 'Boro had.

[bobness]

16 hours ago, vulva said:

That’s irrelevant. If you’ve got 6 you try and get 7th that’s better than the 6th. And so on. Evolve the squad. 

 

Our problem hasn’t been buying players, it’s been not selling them. 

 

You're 100% right, which makes the signing of Rhodes more difficult to justify.

 

The discussion isn't about Rhodes as an individual, it's about the number forwards we had at the time. So any decision to sign him should have included offloading at least one forward, but it didn't. 

[Lord Snooty]

9 hours ago, asteener1867 said:

Well that was us..Wasn't it?

I think it was Snoots who wanted him...I stand to be corrected...

Mighta been Costello..he's mad as a box of Frogs...I pmed them to try and talk sense...but they wouldn't listen.............

 

[dorian gray]

13 hours ago, SallyCinnamon said:

 

Incorrect.

 

Whilst many at the time believed the chairman knew what he was doing, a lot also thought adding another striker when we lacked pace and creativity was ridiculous. 

it wasn't shouted, i'm really struggling to recall anyone who 'objected'.

as far as I can recall he was added as a loan with a 'buy on guarantee', and it wasn't him or 'pace and creativity' it was 'him alone' and quite a shot out of the blue.

the gaffer looking to add what at the time 'appeared' to be extra goals at a time when they would be needed. 

sorry but i'm afraid i'm struggling to find the 'this bloke is shyte, and we don't need him' topic on here at the time of his procurement.

maybe you could highlight some, of 'that time'.

[dorian gray]

13 hours ago, Ash76 said:

 

And me, always thought he was massively overrated at this level.

and you posted that 'before he was bought' where?

[vulva]

In recent time the only signing universally condemned on here was that of Bannan.