Jump to content
RUMBELOWS91

Wednesday's "outrageous" Rhodes valuation

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, quinnssweetshop said:

Just get rid of him, he's no desire to play for us, didn't give a to55 whilst he was here, bottled out of taking a penalty against his beloved Huddersfield


An absolute waste of money.  get him off the books. And no...I never wanted him here at the time either ( before anyone uses that excuse )
 

We don't need bottlers this season. We need people that want to play for the club.

did he opt out of taking a penalty because of 'his beloved 'uddersfield' or for other reasons, like he didn't fancy it?

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bluesteel said:

 

I think Rhodes can drop deep and retain the ball but it depends how quickly we then get it wide and into the box. Which recently wasn’t very quickly. He also had decent chances for us that he simply didn’t bury. I don’t think he’s a write off because of what he can’t do, what he can do is very useful if he is confident and I believe Bruce is the most likely to coax that from him too. Even Billy Sharp looked finished before he moved back to United.

 

But if we are offered money for him to allow one or two signings within FFP then on balance that seems preferable at the moment. Especially if it means he is in a different league and not scoring for a promotion rival.

'finishing' can be all about being 'on form, if you're out of 'touch or luck' you can get it over the bar from a yard out, when you're in form, it 'wants' to be in the net. I personally think rhodes is past his best, BUT i'm willing to be proven wrong on that.

to buy the kind of weapon that rhodes once was would cost more than half of what our ground was worth at this level, and if norwich with pockets full of 'premier league money' aren't willing to 'cough up' then he should stay here and have the opportunity of proving himself.

as for sharp, I think his heart was 'in it' at the sty, rhodes has no allegiance to our club other than 'contracted wages'. 

only time will tell, we have a better manager than anytime over the last 4 years, rhodes maybe a starter, or a goal hungry monster to bring off the bench when opposition legs are tired.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, A12owl said:

How many great players have missed a penalty. Do you write them all off?

I seem to recall Waddle missed an important penalty but he wasnt written off and rightly so.

Admittedly Rhodes pen was a bit woeful but that was one kick in his lifetime of scoring goals. 4 against us in one game.

Perhaps he might just recover a bit of pace with the right training. Was Carlos's training methods world class? How many crocks did we have under CC's reign?

Perhaps Carlos ruined JR but perhaps Bruce can resurrect a goalscorer in him again.

Lets hope so. 

Carlos didnt ruin Rhodes at all, he couldnt hit a barn door from 6feet from day one!

  • Like 2
  • Disagree 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Edited by RichieB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, chizumgeorge said:

Carlos didnt ruin Rhodes at all, he couldnt hit a barn door from 6feet from day one!

 

Something happened with Rhodes at Hillsborough which meant that we didn't get the best out of him.

 

It's particularly stark when you consider his average minutes per goal for the other Championship clubs he's played for as a senior pro:

 

Norwich - 168

Wednesday - 360

Middlesbrough - 194

Blackburn - 164

 

We're the only club who've failed to get a tune out of him.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/06/2019 at 07:24, Mr. Tom said:

I don’t think we can really talk about Rhodes in terms of the general model of our (broadly pretty dreadful) transfer activity/policy over the past 3-4 years. Despite the fact that most of us were delighted to get him here, the deal that brought him in was a uniquely naive and shortsighted one, even by our own maddeningly clumsy standards.

 

We paid so wildly over the odds for him that we can’t possibly sell at a ‘reasonable’ price now, having had so little out of him for the investment we made, without looking like total mugs. (Although the coldly pragmatic part of me says we probably still should do, for his sake and ours - even if it amounts to a tacit public admission that we got our pants pulled down.)

 

On the other hand, I’d love to see what he can do under Bruce, who I do believe will focus on bringing in some pace down the flanks to provide better service into the box. Finally. We haven’t had that in YEARS, and it was a big part of why JR didn’t get any joy here. Who knows, it could change things massively.

 

Either way, point is we’ve timed it all so badly that if we give him another season here and it doesn’t work again, we’ll barely be able to ask anything for him the year after - 30, contract winding down, high wage. (A million if we’re lucky?)

 

Had we made a better post-CC appointment than Jos, who knows. But the time we wasted treading water there played a big part in putting us where we are now re: Rhodes, ie. in a very awkward position.

 

One thing I really think we must bear in mind either way is that none of this is Jordan’s fault, and it’s unfair to talk the way some do as if he had anything to do with the fee. We’ve spent considerably more, collectively, on at least four or five other players who’ve contributed far less between them even than Rhodes has been able to in his frustrating time here so far.

 

There’s no use in pointing the finger at any one person, because it’s been a joint effort really, but the money we’ve frittered in the past few years on weird agent shenanigans and gross errors of judgment really has been shocking.

 

Rhodes may have had the highest individual price tag, but reactions to his time at Norwich have for me confirmed what we already knew: look past the silly numbers and he’s a player who will score goals (9 for Norwich = joint third top scorer for us, level with Reach), even when not fully sharp/on form/starting. A true pro who always works his butt off and is great for the dressing room. He’s still ours as things stand - it’d be absolutely joyful to see him hit 20 in a season here. Can he? I suspect so, but it’s a gamble.

 
We know we’ve stuffed up financially, and selling for just £3-4m now - although exacerbating our FFP issues in the very short-term - might well be less damaging overall than getting next to nothing in 12 months’ time (having already paid another year of his wages). Or perhaps not, depending on how the 3-year rolling loss period works out - you’d need the full accounts in front of you to really see all the permutations clearly.
 
Can we afford to roll the dice again on keeping him? Fletcher has played brilliantly this season, but not as a finisher, whereas that’s really all Rhodes does in the right setup. Bruce badly needs a player LIKE Rhodes, but we’ve not got the money to buy anyone established - it’s JR or a young loan gamble.
 
High stakes. Very tricky situation.

 

On 01/06/2019 at 07:26, quinnssweetshop said:

Just get rid of him, he's no desire to play for us, didn't give a to55 whilst he was here, bottled out of taking a penalty against his beloved Huddersfield


An absolute waste of money.  get him off the books. And no...I never wanted him here at the time either ( before anyone uses that excuse )
 

We don't need bottlers this season. We need people that want to play for the club.

 

On 01/06/2019 at 07:33, Mr. Tom said:

 

Sympathise with the frustration mate but honestly I think your first paragraph there is way off. It seemed far more like his struggle for form/service in a weird team shape here shredded what little confidence was left in him after his Boro debacle. He was visibly delighted to be here and worked hard, but looked broken by the time ‘pengate’ came along.

 

Don’t forget how toxic the atmosphere was becoming around S6 at that time. Yes he *should’ve* been able to shrug that off as a professional, but we all know his personality - he’s about the nicest guy in football, and for better or worse that tends to mean he’s very human with it. He was properly rattled, desire or commitment didn’t come into it for me.

 

Two brilliant posts from Mr Tom surrounding a hysterical and absurd post from quinssweetshop. 

Edited by i used to be sc_owl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, torryowl said:

16 out of 21 …….I don't know if that's  terrible  but seems like a decent record to me . 

 

Maybe he used to mix it up a bit, but every single pen for us and Norwich he put in the same place. I think he missed half of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s interesting how loads of people continue to ignore the fact that he missed loads of sitters for us...instead preferring to pedal the myth that we didn’t play the way that suited him.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don’t want to start thinking about having to bring him back into the fold, it simply creates more problems than it solves 

Let Norwich have him for £4m, there’s not exactly a line of suitors out there wanting to take him. He likes living in East Anglia, and he can earn himself a Premier League wage for a season. If it doesn’t work out, Norwich can loan him back to Ipswich, his first club. He’ll surely do well in LeagueOne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has dc upped his value to 10mil yet? 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I wouldn’t mind if he stayed  , if we are going to sign the much needed pace and creativity to get us up the pitch quicker . It’s proved the Carlos / jos way had its limitations when it came to the crunch and I think Rhodes could be useful in that kind of set up . We have offloaded a lot of resource drainers this summer , any signings incoming should be younger so a few older heads around would compliment that well 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, McRightSide said:

It’s interesting how loads of people continue to ignore the fact that he missed loads of sitters for us...instead preferring to pedal the myth that we didn’t play the way that suited him.

 

I think it's more nuanced than that.

 

Rhodes has a very specific skillset, and one which can be very effective if used in the right way. You can ask him to be a link-up player, but he'll never be great at it. You can ask him to be a target man, but he'll be wasting his time on something which detracts from his natural attributes. He's a bit of an anachronism, but if you want to get the best out of Rhodes, he relies on reliable quality deliveries into dangerous areas. If you're not going to provide that, then he'll offer very little.

 

Unfortunately, we asked him to try to adapt his game in ways which are probably beyond him, and which certainly didn't play to his strengths.

 

Once it became clear this wasn't working, his form unsurprisingly deserted him, his confidence waned, and his performances suffered.
 

As I posted earlier in this thread, he's scored goals at a decent rate for every other team he's played for, and Norwich used him to good effect last season. We're the only team who've failed to get goals out of him in this division, suggesting the issue may have been something else to do with our setup at the time rather than Rhodes himself, at least in part.

 

I'm not sure we'll ever truly see the best of Rhodes at Wednesday, as I'm fairly sure that Bruce will favour one up top next season, but if Norwich can't come to some kind of agreement, then I wouldn't be surprised to see him featuring to good effect off the bench, as he did for Norwich last season.

Share this post


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

 

I think it's more nuanced than that.

 

Rhodes has a very specific skillset, and one which can be very effective if used in the right way. You can ask him to be a link-up player, but he'll never be great at it. You can ask him to be a target man, but he'll be wasting his time on something which detracts from his natural attributes. He's a bit of an anachronism, but if you want to get the best out of Rhodes, he relies on reliable quality deliveries into dangerous areas. If you're not going to provide that, then he'll offer very little.

 

Unfortunately, we asked him to try to adapt his game in ways which are probably beyond him, and which certainly didn't play to his strengths.

 

Once it became clear this wasn't working, his form unsurprisingly deserted him, his confidence waned, and his performances suffered.
 

As I posted earlier in this thread, he's scored goals at a decent rate for every other team he's played for, and Norwich used him to good effect last season. We're the only team who've failed to get goals out of him in this division, suggesting the issue may have been something else to do with our setup at the time rather than Rhodes himself, at least in part.

 

I'm not sure we'll ever truly see the best of Rhodes at Wednesday, as I'm fairly sure that Bruce will favour one up top next season, but if Norwich can't come to some kind of agreement, then I wouldn't be surprised to see him featuring to good effect off the bench, as he did for Norwich last season.

With respect, trying to integrate Rhodes into our side, presents us with more problems than it solves. He cannot play the lone striker role, and there is no obvious pairing. You could point to Fletcher, he would seem to mirror the type of player who would previously partner Rhodes. This isn’t 2015 though, and that sort of pairing has gone out of fashion, and is easy to combat. If we are to use a two up front, one of them has to have pace. That’s not the only problem. People say, get in a couple of pacy wide players to provide the ammunition that a striker like Rhodes needs. Two touchline hugging wingers, puts a lot of strain on your central midfield pair, who both need to be strong, all action midfielders, capable of both, attacking, and defending. This makes, potentially our best player, Bannan, redundant. Similarly, Hutchinson would be displaced, as he doesn’t have the legs, or attacking capabilities, to get up and down the pitch. 

For me, that’s too many changes, just to try and incorporate a player who’s best days are probably behind him.

Edited by gurujuan
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, McRightSide said:

It’s interesting how loads of people continue to ignore the fact that he missed loads of sitters for us...instead preferring to pedal the myth that we didn’t play the way that suited him.

Missing a sitter once every couple of games and spending the rest of the time on the bench or having balls pinged at him from just outside our area as he goes up against two big hairy centre halves, expected to control the ball, beat both centre halves, run from opposition midfield & slot past keeper.

We were so slow going forward most times it was embarrassing, any hope of catching the oppos on the back foot were wasted after we passed it round the back for five minutes then launched it forward aimlessly. 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/06/2019 at 06:24, Mr. Tom said:

I don’t think we can really talk about Rhodes in terms of the general model of our (broadly pretty dreadful) transfer activity/policy over the past 3-4 years. Despite the fact that most of us were delighted to get him here, the deal that brought him in was a uniquely naive and shortsighted one, even by our own maddeningly clumsy standards.

 

We paid so wildly over the odds for him that we can’t possibly sell at a ‘reasonable’ price now, having had so little out of him for the investment we made, without looking like total mugs. (Although the coldly pragmatic part of me says we probably still should do, for his sake and ours - even if it amounts to a tacit public admission that we got our pants pulled down.)

 

On the other hand, I’d love to see what he can do under Bruce, who I do believe will focus on bringing in some pace down the flanks to provide better service into the box. Finally. We haven’t had that in YEARS, and it was a big part of why JR didn’t get any joy here. Who knows, it could change things massively.

 

Either way, point is we’ve timed it all so badly that if we give him another season here and it doesn’t work again, we’ll barely be able to ask anything for him the year after - 30, contract winding down, high wage. (A million if we’re lucky?)

 

Had we made a better post-CC appointment than Jos, who knows. But the time we wasted treading water there played a big part in putting us where we are now re: Rhodes, ie. in a very awkward position.

 

One thing I really think we must bear in mind either way is that none of this is Jordan’s fault, and it’s unfair to talk the way some do as if he had anything to do with the fee. We’ve spent considerably more, collectively, on at least four or five other players who’ve contributed far less between them even than Rhodes has been able to in his frustrating time here so far.

 

There’s no use in pointing the finger at any one person, because it’s been a joint effort really, but the money we’ve frittered in the past few years on weird agent shenanigans and gross errors of judgment really has been shocking.

 

Rhodes may have had the highest individual price tag, but reactions to his time at Norwich have for me confirmed what we already knew: look past the silly numbers and he’s a player who will score goals (9 for Norwich = joint third top scorer for us, level with Reach), even when not fully sharp/on form/starting. A true pro who always works his butt off and is great for the dressing room. He’s still ours as things stand - it’d be absolutely joyful to see him hit 20 in a season here. Can he? I suspect so, but it’s a gamble.

 
We know we’ve stuffed up financially, and selling for just £3-4m now - although exacerbating our FFP issues in the very short-term - might well be less damaging overall than getting next to nothing in 12 months’ time (having already paid another year of his wages). Or perhaps not, depending on how the 3-year rolling loss period works out - you’d need the full accounts in front of you to really see all the permutations clearly.
 
Can we afford to roll the dice again on keeping him? Fletcher has played brilliantly this season, but not as a finisher, whereas that’s really all Rhodes does in the right setup. Bruce badly needs a player LIKE Rhodes, but we’ve not got the money to buy anyone established - it’s JR or a young loan gamble.
 
High stakes. Very tricky situation.

Great post.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, chizumgeorge said:

Carlos didnt ruin Rhodes at all, he couldnt hit a barn door from 6feet from day one!

Rhodes and waddle in same sentence shocker

 

This is for other post earlier, not yours

Edited by billyblack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

Something happened with Rhodes at Hillsborough which meant that we didn't get the best out of him.

 

It's particularly stark when you consider his average minutes per goal for the other Championship clubs he's played for as a senior pro:

 

Norwich - 168

Wednesday - 360

Middlesbrough - 194

Blackburn - 164

 

We're the only club who've failed to get a tune out of him.

It's not worked out for him here. But he hardly looked like a goal machine at Boro. 

Hopefully we can move him on, but if he's on the wages quoted on here, er're lumbered with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Sergeant Tibbs said:

It's not worked out for him here. But he hardly looked like a goal machine at Boro. 

Hopefully we can move him on, but if he's on the wages quoted on here, er're lumbered with him.

When's he had a top winger with us to supply accurate crosses?

 

There's a reason Bruce's after Downing.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, gurujuan said:

With respect, trying to integrate Rhodes into our side, presents us with more problems than it solves. He cannot play the lone striker role, and there is no obvious pairing. You could point to Fletcher, he would seem to mirror the type of player who would previously partner Rhodes. This isn’t 2015 though, and that sort of pairing has gone out of fashion, and is easy to combat. If we are to use a two up front, one of them has to have pace. That’s not the only problem. People say, get in a couple of pacy wide players to provide the ammunition that a striker like Rhodes needs. Two touchline hugging wingers, puts a lot of strain on your central midfield pair, who both need to be strong, all action midfielders, capable of both, attacking, and defending. This makes, potentially our best player, Bannan, redundant. Similarly, Hutchinson would be displaced, as he doesn’t have the legs, or attacking capabilities, to get up and down the pitch. 

For me, that’s too many changes, just to try and incorporate a player who’s best days are probably behind him.

 

I tend to agree, and I think Bruce will as well.

 

I reckon we'll go with a lone front man, which instantly makes Rhodes redundant, you'd think.

 

However, if Rhodes is still here next season and can be integrated into the squad more successfully than we managed in the past, then we could do worse than use him from the bench as Norwich did last season.

 

It'll all depend on whether we can agree a fee with a potential suitor, I imagine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4_4_2 

Westwood

 

Palmer

Hector 

Lees

New Lb

 

PACE

HUTCH

BAZ

PACE

 

FLETCH

RHODES 

 

Share this post


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...