Jump to content

Next signing almost over the line....Happy about this?


Recommended Posts

Guest Jack the Hat
On 24/06/2022 at 19:35, TrickyTrev said:

A good signing but that’s now Wilks, Gregory, Smith, Windass and Paterson up front.

 

We won’t be playing him out wide as we play wingbacks and it’s starting to feel like we have one too many forwards.

 

I’m not moaning as he is a good signing but it feels a little bit like when we signed Winnall but then went and got Rhodes anyway as well.

 

I really don’t want to come across as negative as he is a good signing but I just feel like with so many strikers, there’ll be a lot of chopping and changing up front and it’ll not allow the continuity for a partnership to form over time.

It’s a bit different because we paid a million for winnall and 10 million for rhodes when we already had Hooper (3mill) foresteri (3 mill) fletcher (40 k per week) Joao(3 mill)- rather than 200k for the lot. Sorry did I say a bit different or incomparable ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jack the Hat said:

It’s a bit different because we paid a million for winnall and 10 million for rhodes when we already had Hooper (3mill) foresteri (3 mill) fletcher (400 k per week) Joao(3 mill)- rather than 200k for the lot. Sorry did I say a bit different or incomparable ?

Corrected for you! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Jack the Hat said:

It’s a bit different because we paid a million for winnall and 10 million for rhodes when we already had Hooper (3mill) foresteri (3 mill) fletcher (40 k per week) Joao(3 mill)- rather than 200k for the lot. Sorry did I say a bit different or incomparable ?

My point wasn’t about amount paid, it was about having too many strikers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, TrickyTrev said:

My point wasn’t about amount paid, it was about having too many strikers.

Gregory, Smith Widnass, Wilks

 

Thats 4

 

Get rid of Paterson and Sow, dont think they'll be happy being 5th and 6th choice!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jonnyowl said:

Gregory, Smith Widnass, Wilks

 

Thats 4

 

Get rid of Paterson and Sow, dont think they'll be happy being 5th and 6th choice!

Pato will still play, maybe somewhere else, hopefully at RWB.

Sow will leave.

 

But do you think that Windass and Gregory will be happy as 3rd and 4th choice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, TrickyTrev said:

My point wasn’t about amount paid, it was about having too many strikers.


We don’t have too many strikers. We’ve two!

 

We have two players, Windass and Paterson, who can ‘do a job’ as striker, and if he signs Wilkes falls into the same category. I’d prefer we sign a third out and out striker.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The above, in order:-

 

Smith

Gregory

Windass

Smith

 

Personally I like two central strikers who know that role and excel in that role. Windass is a good forward but he’s not a striker and he floats wide. This leaves Gregory isolated. We had the same issue when NML went up front. We ended up with one striker and three wide players. The result is you score fewer goals.

 

Look back to the FF days. When he played wide we scored at almost 2 per game. Why? Because it meant two proper strikers AND a goal-hungry wide player. When he played up front we scored less than one per game. Why? Because it effectively left us one up front and three wide men as FF always dropped deep and left.

 

Of course the flexibility to change things up by bringing on a speedy Windass-type mid 2nd half, or adopting a front 3 occasionally is sound, but if we go to the cost of both Windass and Wilkes it looks likely they’d be used as strikers or that the 352 will be regularly dropped.

 

As 352 was so successful, and we’ve now got Smith which improves our 2, I think diluting our use of 352 would be a mistake.

 

Opinions eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

The above, in order:-

 

Smith

Gregory

Windass

Smith

 

Personally I like two central strikers who know that role and excel in that role. Windass is a good forward but he’s not a striker and he floats wide. This leaves Gregory isolated. We had the same issue when NML went up front. We ended up with one striker and three wide players. The result is you score fewer goals.

 

Look back to the FF days. When he played wide we scored at almost 2 per game. Why? Because it meant two proper strikers AND a goal-hungry wide player. When he played up front we scored less than one per game. Why? Because it effectively left us one up front and three wide men as FF always dropped deep and left.

 

Of course the flexibility to change things up by bringing on a speedy Windass-type mid 2nd half, or adopting a front 3 occasionally is sound, but if we go to the cost of both Windass and Wilkes it looks likely they’d be used as strikers or that the 352 will be regularly dropped.

 

As 352 was so successful, and we’ve now got Smith which improves our 2, I think diluting our use of 352 would be a mistake.

 

Opinions eh?


I think we could easily be looking to a 433 as a plan B in games in 2nd halves when needed.

 

Windass -  Smith or Gregory - Wilks 

 

would be a really handful  against a tiring defence.

 

Already looks to be a huge upgrade on last season when we had Kambari, Sow, Berahinho, Pato , Shodipo as the options off the bench majority of the time.

 

Could see Sow going and us picking up a young speed merchant striker/winger on loan from a prem side as another different option.

 

zero loan signings so far.  And the squad isnt far off at all.  Looking good got to say.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The amount of people who think Windass is a striker is worrying.

 

The first opportunity Moore got to give him a start this season he played him as a 10 against Wycombe behind Gregory & Kamberi. Prior to that in 20/21 he used him as a 10 behind Rhodes & Paterson. 
 

Moore will most likely use Smith, Gregory, Wilks & Paterson as strikers & Windass will compete with Bannan for the 10 spot while Bannan can also be used in CM. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 24/06/2022 at 21:53, fpowl said:

I’m honestly baffled by some people’s concerns on here where does he fit in? We’re overloaded in strikers ? 
 

You can't say that DM doesn't have a clue and then praise him for giving us plenty of attacking options... they have their online image to preserve  lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

The above, in order:-

 

Smith

Gregory

Windass

Smith

 

Personally I like two central strikers who know that role and excel in that role. Windass is a good forward but he’s not a striker and he floats wide. This leaves Gregory isolated. We had the same issue when NML went up front. We ended up with one striker and three wide players. The result is you score fewer goals.

 

Look back to the FF days. When he played wide we scored at almost 2 per game. Why? Because it meant two proper strikers AND a goal-hungry wide player. When he played up front we scored less than one per game. Why? Because it effectively left us one up front and three wide men as FF always dropped deep and left.

 

Of course the flexibility to change things up by bringing on a speedy Windass-type mid 2nd half, or adopting a front 3 occasionally is sound, but if we go to the cost of both Windass and Wilkes it looks likely they’d be used as strikers or that the 352 will be regularly dropped.

 

As 352 was so successful, and we’ve now got Smith which improves our 2, I think diluting our use of 352 would be a mistake.

 

Opinions eh?

 

Go out there lads and bang some goals in play a basic 442 but change if you need to, the fans will overanalyse it. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if you’re moving Wilks and Windass into midfield then you’re dropping Byers or another to accommodate Bannan. If Windass or Wilks plays behind a lone striker then one of smith or Gregory miss out. May not matter as much with 5 subs but there are players there who will want a lot of game time and it will take some management.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jonnyowl said:

Gregory, Smith Widnass, Wilks

 

Thats 4

 

Get rid of Paterson and Sow, dont think they'll be happy being 5th and 6th choice!

Given the system we play and the fact we don’t play with wingers or wide attackers we have the 6 that you have listed.

 

We could get rid of Paterson and Sow but that’s easier said than done and Paterson will still be on a Championship contract.

 

To me this signals an intent by Moore to “tinker” with the forward line on a regular basis and it’s my belief that this will be to the detriment of the club.

 

Regular changes to the attack won’t allow a decent partnership to develop and it’ll interfere with any attempt to create continuity, personally I’d like to see 2 forwards given a run of 10 to 12 games at the start of the season to see how the partnership develops. Preferably that would be Windass and Gregory, I look back at that goal at Oxford last season and there’s some really potential in that partnership but it needs to develop.

 

After our defeat to Huddersfield in the playoffs when talking about the number of strikers we had at the club, it was Andy Hinchcliffe who said ‘sometimes less is more’.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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...