How Do We Solve Our Goal Scoring Crisis

[Holmowl]

2 hours ago, ZicoSterland2 said:

I would be suprised. He has hardly ever looked like scoring in his time here. Sadly he is a shadow of what he once was. This second coming is repeated week on week on here but never happens.

And yet in the last few seasons his record is miles better than our other options.

[Emilianenko]

3 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

And yet in the last few seasons his record is miles better than our other options.

It’s the old cliche that we are playing with ten men when Rhodes starts. Funny how results don’t reflect that.

[parajack]

1 hour ago, fpowl said:

Yes I’m 100% serious actually I’m going as far as saying this is fact 

 

and I’ll stand by my point I’m saying I honestly believe that 30 year old Rhodes will be offered a 7 year contract when it happens too FACT! 

Only at S6 could that happen,any where else and that comment would look ridiculous.....Should it happen? no of course not,not in a million Years....JR money(not wages,they are what you 'earn' has he allegedly done that?) are one of the factors that have dragged this Club into the FFP mire(& others too)

 

NO i dont blame them,in truth most on here would do exactly the same,doesn't in my view make it sit any easier though does it...

He hasn't worked at S6,,as a player,he needs to go,probably in my view into retirement or coaching,if he fancies it.

 

Maybe he will resurrect what has been a dire period in his career at another club,as a free agent,who knows in today's 'who wants to be a millionaire' football lottery,thats called the 'modern' game..

[ZicoSterland2]

37 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

And yet in the last few seasons his record is miles better than our other options.

His record here is appalling for a striker on 35k a week who cost circa 9 million . I remember the Huddersfield game in division 1 ,sat watching and thinking wow he is destined for the big time. He went to Blackburn and did well there but from then on he has done little or nothing. One cameo a season is a absolute garbage return on the outlay we have invested in him.

[Holmowl]

39 minutes ago, ZicoSterland2 said:

His record here is appalling for a striker on 35k a week who cost circa 9 million . I remember the Huddersfield game in division 1 ,sat watching and thinking wow he is destined for the big time. He went to Blackburn and did well there but from then on he has done little or nothing. One cameo a season is a absolute garbage return on the outlay we have invested in him.

 

Forget what he cost. It’s spent.

 

Will he score more between Preston and the transfer window than Paterson, Kachunga, Marriott and Windass?

 

 

Edited November 19, 2020 by Holmowl

[gurujuan]

It’s a bit odd that we are discussing Jordan Rhodes, as an option to solve our goalscoring crisis. He hasn’t looked as if he would rack up the goals since he’s been here. For what it’s worth, given the players we have, he has as good chance of starting as anyone else. The problem is, we are missing the point here, Rhodes nor any of the other strikers are likely to thrive in the way that Pulis plays. Getting the ball from back to front as quickly as possible, usually bypassing the midfield, will not suit any of them. As much as I dislike those tactics, to make them work, you require a target man, or someone who is quick and can run in behind. Ideally, you may be lucky enough to find a player like Rondon, who combines both those attributes. Without acquiring such a player/players, the conversation needs to be about how we can best utilise what we have. That requires the manager to perhaps play a slightly different way, as it would be counterproductive to keep pumping the ball long if you don’t have the personnel to make that system work

[Holmowl]

5 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

It’s a bit odd that we are discussing Jordan Rhodes, as an option to solve our goalscoring crisis. He hasn’t looked as if he would rack up the goals since he’s been here. For what it’s worth, given the players we have, he has as good chance of starting as anyone else. The problem is, we are missing the point here, Rhodes nor any of the other strikers are likely to thrive in the way that Pulis plays. Getting the ball from back to front as quickly as possible, usually bypassing the midfield, will not suit any of them. As much as I dislike those tactics, to make them work, you require a target man, or someone who is quick and can run in behind. Ideally, you may be lucky enough to find a player like Rondon, who combines both those attributes. Without acquiring such a player/players, the conversation needs to be about how we can best utilise what we have. That requires the manager to perhaps play a slightly different way, as it would be counterproductive to keep pumping the ball long if you don’t have the personnel to make that system work

Unless you are advocating playing 5-5-0 or similar we have to decide upon a striker or a strike partnership from the 5 we currently employ.

 

I don’t see the point in saying “none of the above”. Face reality.

 

Rhodes is the most likely to score from the weak list we have. Moreover, unlike the others, we know that deep down in Rhodes there is a very regular goal scorer. In the others you can delve as deep as you want - they won’t score enough.

 

Anyway - Rhodes has been put up for today’s press-conference. Pulis looks to have decided, and I will be delighted if this is so.

[gurujuan]

2 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

Unless you are advocating playing 5-5-0 or similar we have to decide upon a striker or a strike partnership from the 5 we currently employ.

 

I don’t see the point in saying “none of the above”. Face reality.

 

Rhodes is the most likely to score from the weak list we have. Moreover, unlike the others, we know that deep down in Rhodes there is a very regular goal scorer. In the others you can delve as deep as you want - they won’t score enough.

 

Anyway - Rhodes has been put up for today’s press-conference. Pulis looks to have decided, and I will be delighted if this is so.

But I’m not saying that am I. Earlier in the thread, I did actually advocate using Rhodes as a spearhead. My point was, whether we use him, or any of the other forwards, it will be wasted if we persist with these long ball tactics. None of them have the ability to, either win the ball aerially, or the pace to run in behind. Not only will those tactics not suit our front players, but they also negate the midfield, the area where we have our most creative options. This for me will be a test of the managers tactical abilities Will he be able to make the necessary tweaks that suit the personnel, or will he continue with the long ball stuff, showing us that he is probably just a one trick pony

[Holmowl]

Just now, gurujuan said:

But I’m not saying that am I. Earlier in the thread, I did actually advocate using Rhodes as a spearhead. My point was, whether we use him, or any of the other forwards, it will be wasted if we persist with these long ball tactics. None of them have the ability to, either win the ball aerially, or the pace to run in behind. Not only will those tactics not suit our front players, but they also negate the midfield, the area where we have our most creative options. This for me will be a test of the managers tactical abilities Will he be able to make the necessary tweaks that suit the personnel, or will he continue with the long ball stuff, showing us that he is probably just a one trick pony

Apologies.

 

I reckon we underestimate Pulis.

 

 

[gurujuan]

5 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

Apologies.

 

I reckon we underestimate Pulis.

 

 

I hope you are right

[Holmowl]

8 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

I hope you are right

Mrs H says I never am, so fear the worst.

[nevthelodgemoorowl]

I am with Holmowl on this with a variation.

 

Under Monk when we were fortunate enough to get our noses in front Monk made the inevitable stance of defend the lead to the death. We are all well aware of the disappointing outcomes of that strategy.

 

I don't place the whole of the blame on Monk even though players who could play the game very well were discarded. Compacting the games became a big factor just as quality we had was being shown the door. Consequently any chance of getting our noses two or more goals in front were off the agenda. 2-0 it is often said is a dangerous lead but the lead of 2 or more gives an opportunity, not to us, but generally an opportunity for a little less stress on players and little more relaxation and less tension. Conceding late, sometimes conceding late more than once becomes a fetter on players in terms of confidence, relaxation, energy levels and confidence. 

 

Hence the game all too often started by winning our share of the ball, pressing and retaining possession but morphing from 80 minutes on into scared rabbits staring into headlights. Dropping deep and not closing down. As fans we became resigned to the inevitable it not only wore us down but wore down the players and this tactical abomination all belonged to Monk !  

[gurujuan]

19 minutes ago, nevthelodgemoorowl said:

I am with Holmowl on this with a variation.

 

Under Monk when we were fortunate enough to get our noses in front Monk made the inevitable stance of defend the lead to the death. We are all well aware of the disappointing outcomes of that strategy.

 

I don't place the whole of the blame on Monk even though players who could play the game very well were discarded. Compacting the games became a big factor just as quality we had was being shown the door. Consequently any chance of getting our noses two or more goals in front were off the agenda. 2-0 it is often said is a dangerous lead but the lead of 2 or more gives an opportunity, not to us, but generally an opportunity for a little less stress on players and little more relaxation and less tension. Conceding late, sometimes conceding late more than once becomes a fetter on players in terms of confidence, relaxation, energy levels and confidence. 

 

Hence the game all too often started by winning our share of the ball, pressing and retaining possession but morphing from 80 minutes on into scared rabbits staring into headlights. Dropping deep and not closing down. As fans we became resigned to the inevitable it not only wore us down but wore down the players and this tactical abomination all belonged to Monk !  

That’s an interesting point. I always thought, with players like Bannan, Brown and Luongo, it would be easier to see out those games. Totally get the bit about us maybe not really having the quality to go on and look for more goals, but by keeping hold of the ball better, we could exert a bit more control. I guess those players, if available, also fell into that collective mindset
 

[ZicoSterland2]

2 hours ago, Holmowl said:

Unless you are advocating playing 5-5-0 or similar we have to decide upon a striker or a strike partnership from the 5 we currently employ.

 

I don’t see the point in saying “none of the above”. Face reality.

 

Rhodes is the most likely to score from the weak list we have. Moreover, unlike the others, we know that deep down in Rhodes there is a very regular goal scorer. In the others you can delve as deep as you want - they won’t score enough.

 

Anyway - Rhodes has been put up for today’s press-conference. Pulis looks to have decided, and I will be delighted if this is so.

Rhodes was a very good goal scorer past tense. We have seen nothing from him in 3+ seasons. Out of the forwards we have I would say Windass is the most likely to score based on current form not 5 seasons ago.

[ZicoSterland2]

29 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

That’s an interesting point. I always thought, with players like Bannan, Brown and Luongo, it would be easier to see out those games. Totally get the bit about us maybe not really having the quality to go on and look for more goals, but by keeping hold of the ball better, we could exert a bit more control. I guess those players, if available, also fell into that collective mindset
 

Again it comes down how many games will Brown and Luongo actually play ? My guess is around 50%. We need some fitness and steel adding to the midfield.

[ZicoSterland2]

58 minutes ago, nevthelodgemoorowl said:

I am with Holmowl on this with a variation.

 

Under Monk when we were fortunate enough to get our noses in front Monk made the inevitable stance of defend the lead to the death. We are all well aware of the disappointing outcomes of that strategy.

 

I don't place the whole of the blame on Monk even though players who could play the game very well were discarded. Compacting the games became a big factor just as quality we had was being shown the door. Consequently any chance of getting our noses two or more goals in front were off the agenda. 2-0 it is often said is a dangerous lead but the lead of 2 or more gives an opportunity, not to us, but generally an opportunity for a little less stress on players and little more relaxation and less tension. Conceding late, sometimes conceding late more than once becomes a fetter on players in terms of confidence, relaxation, energy levels and confidence. 

 

Hence the game all too often started by winning our share of the ball, pressing and retaining possession but morphing from 80 minutes on into scared rabbits staring into headlights. Dropping deep and not closing down. As fans we became resigned to the inevitable it not only wore us down but wore down the players and this tactical abomination all belonged to Monk !  

Monk made Jos look attacking. You are right though that the squad looked totally shot of confidence. 

[ZicoSterland2]

2 hours ago, Holmowl said:

Apologies.

 

I reckon we underestimate Pulis.

 

 

I agree here Pulis is no mug. I might not like hoofball but a few wins will sweeten the taste, and TP is known for getting points.

[gurujuan]

1 hour ago, ZicoSterland2 said:

Again it comes down how many games will Brown and Luongo actually play ? My guess is around 50%. We need some fitness and steel adding to the midfield.

We do yes, the three are very good at this level, but can they stay fit, but we could do with at least one more option. 

[Holmowl]

2 hours ago, ZicoSterland2 said:

Rhodes was a very good goal scorer past tense. We have seen nothing from him in 3+ seasons. Out of the forwards we have I would say Windass is the most likely to score based on current form not 5 seasons ago.

Why?

 

Windass 1 goal 800 mins

Rhodes  1 goal 180 mins (4 in last 800)

[ZicoSterland2]

25 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

Why?

 

Windass 1 goal 800 mins

Rhodes  1 goal 180 mins (4 in last 800)

Simple Rhodes can't get in the team. Manager after manager can't be wrong. He isn't good enough.