Gotta feel sorry for Rhodes

[Bannofan]

36 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

You have totally made that up mate

 

Lack of ambition?

Greed?

 

Chansiri has knocked back all offers for him. How then is he supposed to move elsewhere when the chairmans put him in chains and padlocks?

 

My understanding is that Chansiri needed certain guarantees to cover Rhodes wages and an outstanding fee to Middlesborough. Only Norwich stepped up to pay Rhodes wages.  What are we supposed to do as a club,  

 

His wages were also why we couldn't even give Rhodes away - no -one would even contemplate signing him on a free with the wages he is on here.

 

The  lack of ambition comes from the fact that no matter how obvious it has been that he needed a new start, Rhodes has not been willing to ask for a transfer to kick start his career. Even on half his current wage he would be earning a hell of a lot for the level he would be playing at . 

 

For me that is greed. By the time his contract runs out here he will have done nothing for four seasons.   

 

 

[@owlstalk]

Just now, Bannofan said:

 

My understanding is that Chansiri needed certain guarantees to cover Rhodes wages and an outstanding fee to Middlesborough. Only Norwich stepped up to pay Rhodes wages.  What are we supposed to do as a club,  

 

His wages were also why we couldn't even give Rhodes away - no -one would even contemplate signing him on a free with the wages he is on here. 

 

 

None of that is Rhodes fault therefore to accuse him of lack of ambition and greed is just not only inaccurate and wrong it's also really unfair and misleading

[Bannofan]

6 minutes ago, CircleSeven said:

I am always very respectful that people have strong held views and have every right to express them. 
In this particular case though I find anyone making a statement like the above a bit nonsensical.

 

Rhodes didn’t sign himself to Sheffield Wednesday.

He didn’t force anyone to either pay him what he is being paid. 
He isn’t dropping himself or picking other players ahead of himself. 
He can’t sell himself to another club. 
He can’t loan himself to another club. 
He is available to play for Sheffield Wednesday.

 

Why would anyone, however rich they are or aren’t just take a massive pay cut based on circumstances they are not responsible for? Particularly when it’s not even within their own power to instigate that pay cut?

 

It doesn’t make any sense. 
 

I thought the move at the time was crazy and it clearly hasn’t worked out. 
 

But to suggest it’s his own fault for being greedy and selfish just doesn’t sit right with me. 
 

Thumbs up Jordan

 

I've explained all that in my first post that you obviously skimmed through.

 

1.  Rhodes did agree to sign for us, knowing how many strikers we had. We didn't kidnap him, just offered him a stupendous amount of money.

 

2.  No he didn't , but he is continuing to take his inflated wages knowing full well he isn't earning them . If he asked for a transfer and went somewhere else on less money to give his career a kick start that would show he still has ambition and wants to play football. 

 

3. He can ask for a transfer and let his agent know what his wage demands would be at another club.

 

4. No he can't loan himself to another club, which is why he would need to leave on a permanent deal.

 

5. He is available to play, but for whatever reasons he is showing no form or commitment, and whatever he does in training isn't enough to convince the last five managers here that he deserves a long run in the team. Managers accept a forward may have a goal drought lasting into double figures of games, but the won't accept a lack of effort or commitment.

 

"Why would anyone, however rich they are or aren’t just take a massive pay cut based on circumstances they are not responsible for? Particularly when it’s not even within their own power to instigate that pay cut?"

 

Because they are already very wealthy, and a massive pay cut would still constitute a very good wage, and they get to plat first team football regularly and perform to the standard they know they once did. Rhodes is being greedy by sitting out his contract knowing he  is not at the right club. He can do something about it, he chooses not to. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bannofan]

8 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

None of that is Rhodes fault therefore to accuse him of lack of ambition and greed is just not only inaccurate and wrong it's also really unfair and misleading

 

Why does it matter if it's his fault?  that is a ridiculous statement?  As soon as he wasn't in the first team picture under a few different managers he should have looked to rejuvenate his career elsewhere.

 

To sit in the reserves long term on a fat wage packet - no matter who's fault that is - shows greed and lack of ambition . I can't understand how it can be seen any other way? 

[@owlstalk]

2 minutes ago, Bannofan said:

 

Why does it matter if it's his fault?  that is a ridiculous statement?  As soon as he wasn't in the first team picture under a few different managers he should have looked to rejuvenate his career elsewhere.

And you know he definitely hasn’t done this or asked to do this?

 

You seem to be blaming Rhodes for being locked in at SWFC 

[Bannofan]

2 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

And you know he definitely hasn’t done this or asked to do this?

 

You seem to be blaming Rhodes for being locked in at SWFC 

 

Are you telling me that if Jordan Rhodes had asked to be put on the transfer list in the last two years , the club would have denied him ? seriously?

 

If really wanted to leave , it would have been a ' I'll drive him there myself' situation.

 

I find it astonishing that Abdi - despite suffering genuine injuries  - was universally labelled a wage stealer and someone who was bleeding the club dry , yet St. Jordan of Rhodes is some prisoner of circumstance, powerless to drop his wage demands for a transfer.   

[Holmowl]

@Bannofan

 

Rather than concentrate on things that none of us know anything about, what about the here and now? 

 

Compared to (1 goal in 250) Rhodes, who has impressed you as striker most from (1 goal in 775 mins) Paterson and (0 goals in 500 mins) Kachunga most to get your vote to start up front tomorrow evening?

 

And do you fancy one of them or (1 goal in 800) Windass for Saturday onwards in the crucial 8 games before the window opens?

[Bannofan]

2 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

@Bannofan

 

Rather than concentrate on things that none of us know anything about, what about the here and now? 

 

Compared to (1 goal in 250) Rhodes, who has impressed you as striker most from (1 goal in 775 mins) Paterson and (0 goals in 500 mins) Kachunga most to get your vote to start up front tomorrow evening?

 

And do you fancy one of them or (1 goal in 800) Windass for Saturday onwards in the crucial 8 games before the window opens?

 

Happy to have that conversation definitely, I think I've said further up somewhere ( or in another Rhodes thread)  , that he is now no worse than any other forward we have on the books, so I think we should play him whether the goals come or not.

 

I have a sneaking suspicion that given 90 minutes in every game - unless obviously knackered - he may slowly see a bit of confidence and love for the game returning. 

 

We haven't had the luxury of indulging him before , and we have had better options before , but now the other options we have - well we might as well play a spare centre halve up front, or spare midfielder. 

 

 

[CircleSeven]

Just now, Bannofan said:

 

I've explained all that in my first post that you obviously skimmed through.

 

1.  Rhodes did agree to sign for us, knowing how many strikers we had. We didn't kidnap him, just offered him a stupendous amount of money.

 

2.  No he didn't , but he is continuing to take his inflated wages knowing full well he isn't earning them . If he asked for a transfer and went somewhere else on less money to give his career a kick start that would show he still has ambition and wants to play football. 

 

3. He can ask for a transfer and let his agent know what his wage demands would be at another club.

 

4. No he can't loan himself to another club, which is why he would need to leave on a permanent deal.

 

5. He is available to play, but for whatever reasons he is showing no form or commitment, and whatever he does in training isn't enough to convince the last five managers here that he deserves a long run in the team. Managers accept a forward may have a goal drought lasting into double figures of games, but the won't accept a lack of effort or commitment.

 

"Why would anyone, however rich they are or aren’t just take a massive pay cut based on circumstances they are not responsible for? Particularly when it’s not even within their own power to instigate that pay cut?"

 

Because they are already very wealthy, and a massive pay cut would still constitute a very good wage, and they get to plat first team football regularly and perform to the standard they know they once did. Rhodes is being greedy by sitting out his contract knowing he  is not at the right club. He can do something about it, he chooses not to. 

 

 

 

 

 

I do understand why you think what you think and you have spelt it out very clearly but I think you are wrong. 

Most of your argument is based on applying a set of values that you hold to another person, and then stating because their values (which they also probably hold equally wholeheartedly) differ to yours they are immoral. 
 

The piece in the first point about Rhodes coming here when he knew we had loads of strikers and he only came here because we offered him loads of money made me smile though. I would imagine he was probably also told he would be played. The idea that him signing for a club who told him they wanted him and then expressed that desire in a large financial settlement makes him immoral is quite a stretch. 

Jordan Rhodes is just obeying the terms of the contract we offered him. 
 

The fact that we offered him this contract is our fault not his.

 

The greed accusation doesn’t make sense. It’s like accusing every lottery winner who doesn’t immediately give their winnings to charity because they don’t really need it because they weren’t starving before of being greedy. 
Or accusing every surgeon as being greedy because they get paid more than a nurse. 
 

Sure you may believe all of the above to be true but most people are in agreement that that is how the world we live in works. 
 

In Rhodes case he is just a bloke getting paid what we agreed to pay him. 
 

The fact that he may not be great at his job is our fault for agreeing to pay someone that much money without having any idea what we needed him for, or us building in any mechanism to stop paying him that much if it didn’t work out. 

 

[Mike Hunt]

22 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

@Bannofan

 

Rather than concentrate on things that none of us know anything about, what about the here and now? 

 

Compared to (1 goal in 250) Rhodes, who has impressed you as striker most from (1 goal in 775 mins) Paterson and (0 goals in 500 mins) Kachunga most to get your vote to start up front tomorrow evening?

 

And do you fancy one of them or (1 goal in 800) Windass for Saturday onwards in the crucial 8 games before the window opens?

Kachunga scored in the cup or don’t they count 

[Holmowl]

20 hours ago, Hookowl said:

 

He was binned by every manager we've had since he's been here, apart from Bruce who didn't have the luxury of being able to bin him. 

Was he?
 

Carlos - 36 out of his 39 games / 2166 out of 3510 mins

 

Bully - 3 out of 3 games / 270 out of 270 mins

 

Jos - 8 out of 21 games / 447 out of 1880 mins

 

Monk - 22 out of 57 games / 866 out of 5130 mins

 

 

Worth looking at Farke too. played him in 36/46 matches, playing 30% of the season minutes. Despite Farke playing one up front and having Pukki undroppable scoring 29 goals.

 

So the reality is that 2 managers in his career have “binned” Rhodes.

 

1. Jos 

2. Monk

 

 

[Holmowl]

8 minutes ago, hugeowl said:

Kachunga scored in the cup or don’t they count 

If you want to include Teflon Non-Stick Pans Cup games against Noddy FC that’s fine.

 

In which case he’s scored 1 in 646 minutes.

 

 

[Bannofan]

2 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

Was he?
 

Carlos - 36 out of his 39 games / 2166 out of 3510 mins

 

Bully - 3 out of 3 games / 270 out of 270 mins

 

Jos - 8 out of 21 games / 447 out of 1880 mins

 

Monk - 22 out of 57 games / 866 out of 5130 mins

 

 

Worth looking at Farke too. played him in 36/46 matches, playing 30% of the season minutes. Despite Farke playing one up front and having Pukki undroppable scoring 29 goals.

 

So the reality is that 2 managers in his career have “binned” Rhodes.

 

1. Jos 

2. Monk

 

 

 

 

What's interesting about the stats for Carlos and Bullen , is that fans who defend Rhodes claim he hasn't been played or been given a chance or a run of games. 

 

Granted there will be a lot of sub appearances, but subs can still score.

 

36 out of 39 games under Carlos...I think that is probably gone further than giving someone a chance, and moving into flogging a dead horse territory.  Actually shores up my opinion that he has been given more chances than he deserved due to his reputation and  financial burden. 

[Holmowl]

28 minutes ago, Bannofan said:

 

Happy to have that conversation definitely, I think I've said further up somewhere ( or in another Rhodes thread)  , that he is now no worse than any other forward we have on the books, so I think we should play him whether the goals come or not.

 

I have a sneaking suspicion that given 90 minutes in every game - unless obviously knackered - he may slowly see a bit of confidence and love for the game returning. 

 

We haven't had the luxury of indulging him before , and we have had better options before , but now the other options we have - well we might as well play a spare centre halve up front, or spare midfielder. 

 

 

Pleasure to engage in a friendly constructive exchange. 
 

I don’t disagree with any of that, and yes I’d missed your earlier post that Rhodes is our least bad option.

 

That’s my view, repeated (too) many times in recent weeks. I also think that of the 4 options we have, Rhodes is the only one with the possibility (however unlikely) of scoring regularly all season.

[CircleSeven]

1 minute ago, Holmowl said:

If you want to include Teflon Non-Stick Pans Cup games against Noddy FC that’s fine.

 

In which case he’s scored 1 in 646 minutes.

 

 

I try not to over rely on stats as an indicator of a players overall performance but in this case you can’t help but think these are bad numbers!

[Sergeant Tibbs]

12 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

Was he?
 

Carlos - 36 out of his 39 games / 2166 out of 3510 mins

 

Bully - 3 out of 3 games / 270 out of 270 mins

 

Jos - 8 out of 21 games / 447 out of 1880 mins

 

Monk - 22 out of 57 games / 866 out of 5130 mins

 

 

Worth looking at Farke too. played him in 36/46 matches, playing 30% of the season minutes. Despite Farke playing one up front and having Pukki undroppable scoring 29 goals.

 

So the reality is that 2 managers in his career have “binned” Rhodes.

 

1. Jos 

2. Monk

 

 

The reality is that under Carlos and Bullen he was never first choice, and used sparingly. 
 

Binning him isn’t possible. But several consecutive managers clearly don’t look to him as first choice. Even in the most desperate of times, our new manager clearly has reservations. 

[FreshOwl]

Not one inch of me feels sorry for him

[cowl]

These goals to minutes on the pitch stats are getting pretty dull, to be honest.

 

The manager, via the team, needs to find an effective way to get us scoring goals. It doesn't matter who gets the goals after all.

 

The problem we have though is that there are no strong arguments to put forward any one single player as being the most likely catalyst to change our atrocious scoring record.

 

There are a few weak arguments as to why one player is possibly a better bet than another, but nothing compelling.

 

Personally, I think until January when we might at least be able to have a stab at solving the problem directly, we're better off just working on effectively getting the ball forward and then rely on getting midfielders running late. It's something we should be doing anyway, but it seems right now that it's probably a better policy than endlessly recycling between each of our poor forward options.

[Holmowl]

6 minutes ago, Bannofan said:

 

 

What's interesting about the stats for Carlos and Bullen , is that fans who defend Rhodes claim he hasn't been played or been given a chance or a run of games. 

 

Granted there will be a lot of sub appearances, but subs can still score.

 

36 out of 39 games under Carlos...I think that is probably gone further than giving someone a chance, and moving into flogging a dead horse territory.  Actually shores up my opinion that he has been given more chances than he deserved due to his reputation and  financial burden. 

Grab a coffee and scratch your head over these figures. I find them really intruiging.

 

Under Carlos - 6 goals in 3510 mins - goal every 585 mins

Under Bullen - 1 goal in 270 mins - goal every 270 mins

Under Jos - 1 goal in 447 mins - goal every 447 mins

Under Monk - 4 goals in 866 mins - goal every 256 mins

(Under Farke - 6 goals in 1010 mins - goal every 166 mins)

 

Don’t you think it really baffling? 
 

Carlos had Hooper, Fletcher, Forestieri, Joao and Nuhiu. Yet he played Rhodes regularly despite him not scoring. 
 

At the other extreme, Monk had Kachunga, Marriott, Windass, Da Cruz, Paterson and an unfit Whickham, yet he hated playing Rhodes despite him having a very good scoring record for him.

 

[Holmowl]

6 minutes ago, Sergeant Tibbs said:

The reality is that under Carlos and Bullen he was never first choice, and used sparingly. 
 

Binning him isn’t possible. But several consecutive managers clearly don’t look to him as first choice. Even in the most desperate of times, our new manager clearly has reservations. 

What???

 

Under Bullen he played every minute.

 

Under Carlos he played more minutes than Hooper, Fletcher, Joao, Forestieri and Nuhiu.