Dwight McNeil

[Steero113]

1 minute ago, avfc1982am said:

I remember now. Simon Jordan mentioned this a few months ago on talkshite. Apparently the owners raised the initial 30m to push the sale through then took a loan out to cover the rest over a 10 year period. Left them with an annual deficit that needs balancing. Pretty scummy.

If Dyche upped sticks and left it would leave Burnley in so so much trouble. Pretty sure his battling, super aggressive yet turgid style is the only thing that will work with the players they have available. 

If the club are in that much debt already after a dodgy takeover if they were to drop this season I fear they may not return for a very very long time. 

[sparrow1988]

1 minute ago, avfc1982am said:

I remember now. Simon Jordan mentioned this a few months ago on talkshite. Apparently the owners raised the initial 30m to push the sale through then took a loan out to cover the rest over a 10 year period. Left them with an annual deficit that needs balancing. Pretty scummy.

Another case of legally right and morally, well, questionable at best. Also using the cash reserves of the club to pay off the outgoing owners should not be allowed. Now it's nothing compared to the debt that the Glazers burdened United with but it still doesn't sit right.

[MotoMkali]

16 hours ago, PieFacE said:

I really dislike the way people judge players purely by a set of stats these days. There's so much more that goes into it and so many variables that just looking at stats alone is largely useless imo. 

Yeah if you watch any Burnley game you can see he offers nothing going forwards as well. You don't need stats for that. 

[Wezbid]

45 minutes ago, VillanousOne said:

None of his stats suggest he is better than El Ghazi, just because he is British and younger it seems people get over excited. He's looked ok when he's played against us, but nothing special at all. Admittedly that is small sample set of matches to have watched him in.

Obviously depends heavily on what the cost would be. Definitely for me the most uninspiring link so far and only resurfacing because Everton apparently want to sign him.

Stats can really muddy the waters. 

Chris Wood:

Minutes played - 2741 Goals - 12 Minutes per goal - 228

Ollie Watkins:

Minutes played - 3328 Goals - 14 Minutes per goal - 238

We'd all rather Ollie by a country mile for what he brings as a whole. Stats can't always show the whole picture. 

Chris Wood's minutes per goal the season before were 174, less than a goal every other game. 

[PieFacE]

10 minutes ago, MotoMkali said:

Yeah if you watch any Burnley game you can see he offers nothing going forwards as well. You don't need stats for that. 

Burnley as a team don't really offer a whole lot going forward. 

[ChicagoVillan1983]

I trust the system - if our team thinks he fits it's likely because of some super grimey detailed stats that say what he'll bring to the team. We are going a lot deeper these days than a lot of teams, and are thinking about what makes the whole unit fit together. I really believe in the project until proven otherwise. It's working so far...

[HanoiVillan]

1 hour ago, Wezbid said:

Ollie Watkins:

3328 Goals

Bold prediction for Ollie's future career, but I reckon he's got a chance. 

[Keyblade]

Spurs signing the lad Bryan Gil who plays very similar to McNeil for 25m + Lamela. Seems to be the going rate and doesn't seem to be too many savings abroad.

[Thug]

1 hour ago, Wezbid said:

Stats can really muddy the waters. 

Chris Wood:

Minutes played - 2741 Goals - 12 Minutes per goal - 228

Ollie Watkins:

Minutes played - 3328 Goals - 14 Minutes per goal - 238

We'd all rather Ollie by a country mile for what he brings as a whole. Stats can't always show the whole picture. 

Chris Wood's minutes per goal the season before were 174, less than a goal every other game. 

Depends at which stats you look at and for what reason.

Looking at how many goals they scored will tell you who scores more goals.

looking at their running, tackling dribbling, blocking, GCA etc etc will show you that Watkins puts in twice as many tackles, and about 20 times as many dribbles and so on.

If you want a player that just puts the ball in the net, then Wood > Watkins 

if you want a player that is practically a defender/midfielder/striker rolled into one player AND scores goals then Watkins>>>>woods

Quite frankly, there’s not a lot of players in the Watkins mould - THATs what makes him much more valuable.

 

[VillanousOne]

2 hours ago, Rolta said:

I thought he looked good and on another level to El Ghazi, tbh. El Ghazi's scoring record was great last season, but he didn't have that much more to his game for me—McNeil seems more than at home in the Prem from the times I've seen him play. And he's only young too.

The old 'god all he does is score really important goals what an absolute barsteward' argument.

Edited July 20, 2021 by VillanousOne

[Rolta]

26 minutes ago, VillanousOne said:

The old 'god all he does is score really important goals what an absolute barsteward' argument.

Trezeguet also scored important goals, but there's obviously more to being a player at the very top level than that! 

[StanBalaban]

I think we overlook the fact that we have smart people at the helm. IF McNeill has been identified as a target, then the recruitment team have done so based on a lot more information than we have.

Chances are they haven't. but I think we're past the days of taking punts on players.

Also, I mentioned this in the Arsenal thread about Ben White... if McNeil is bought for £40m quid, then he becomes a £40m player. Being 21 and English, he only has to continue his current progress to become a £50m quid player. Overpriced? Definitely! But that "English" premium buys you a minimal risk player that is settled in the league and improves the team. If things continue, he's an asset that stays with the team, or is bought by another club and a similar premium is passed on to the next buyer.

Edited July 20, 2021 by StanBalaban

[VillanousOne]

33 minutes ago, Rolta said:

Trezeguet also scored important goals, but there's obviously more to being a player at the very top level than that! 

I'd say goals are probably the most important part of an attacking player's arsenal other than assists. If it was being young, British and having potential that counted more, then Davis would be higher rated.

[Czarnikjak]

1 hour ago, VillanousOne said:

The old 'god all he does is score really important goals what an absolute barsteward' argument.

The question is would we score more goals and conceded less AS A TEAM if someone else was on the pitch instead of given player.

I don't care if someone scored 10 goals while he is on the pitch if he makes us considerably worse team overall.

In ice hockey they have a very good stat called +/-. You get plus for every goal your team scores and minus for every conceded one while you are on the ice. At the end of the season you end up with a +10 score for example or -5 and you can compare players impact.

Obviously we will never know if we fared better last season if Mcneil played El ghzaziz minutes, all I am trying to say is that the most important question when you signing a player is: Is he gonna make our team better not how many goals or assists he made.

[VillanousOne]

24 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said:

The question is would we score more goals and conceded less AS A TEAM if someone else was on the pitch instead of given player.

I don't care if someone scored 10 goals while he is on the pitch if he makes us considerably worse team overall.

In ice hockey they have a very good stat called +/-. You get plus for every goal your team scores and minus for every conceded one while you are on the ice. At the end of the season you end up with a +10 score for example or -5 and you can compare players impact.

Obviously we will never know if we fared better last season if Mcneil played El ghzaziz minutes, all I am trying to say is that the most important question when you signing a player is: Is he gonna make our team better not how many goals or assists he made.

If I (i'm not so this is just opinion not fact just like your argument) was signing a winger or striker, the first thing I would want to consider is how many assists and goals that player is capable of based on how he has performed for his current and previous teams. I don't really care if they are good at Ice Hockey.

I've not seen any claims made that playing El Ghazi means we concede more goals, or suddenly forget how to pass and generally fall apart.

There is this weird belief on some of these threads that every modern footballer 'has to cover every blade of grass, put in heroic tackles, blocks and die for the cause' or they are somehow bringing the team down.

I love McGinn he's got the 'moxy and spunk' some crave, but he goes missing for long spells in games, gives the ball away a lot but doesn't get the dog's abuse Anwar does.

It won't be long before more people round on Traore for 'not tracking back enough' despite his incredible goals.

If Dean and Co want McNeil then he will get my 100% backing just like any other player that puts on a Villa shirt. Again my opinion but I don't see signing McNeil as a priority at all unless Burnley are desperate to sell him for a reasonable transfer fee, which seems pretty damn unlikely.

 

[Rolta]

1 hour ago, VillanousOne said:

I'd say goals are probably the most important part of an attacking player's arsenal other than assists. If it was being young, British and having potential that counted more, then Davis would be higher rated.

If the player loses the ball a lot and looks like they're not going to cut it to the standard we need then the goals just cover up that fact. There's a lot more to consider than just goals. 

Edited July 20, 2021 by Rolta

[MotoMkali]

3 hours ago, Thug said:

Depends at which stats you look at and for what reason.

Looking at how many goals they scored will tell you who scores more goals.

looking at their running, tackling dribbling, blocking, GCA etc etc will show you that Watkins puts in twice as many tackles, and about 20 times as many dribbles and so on.

If you want a player that just puts the ball in the net, then Wood > Watkins 

if you want a player that is practically a defender/midfielder/striker rolled into one player AND scores goals then Watkins>>>>woods

Quite frankly, there’s not a lot of players in the Watkins mould - THATs what makes him much more valuable.

 

Well not even Watkins had 2 goals disallowed by his left bollock. And hit the woodwork 7 (?) times. A couple inches here or there and he's on 20 goals. 

[Kiwivillan]

If we had attacking player who played 3000 mins for 2 goals and 6 assists last season, everyone on here would want him gone/upgraded 

What's so special about McNeil because I've never seen it

[Tomaszk]

1 hour ago, Kiwivillan said:

If we had attacking player who played 3000 mins for 2 goals and 6 assists last season, everyone on here would want him gone/upgraded 

Not if he was as good at Dwight McNeil I wouldn't.

I don't want El Ghazi or Traore starting particularly and they scored a nice amount each.

1 hour ago, Kiwivillan said:

What's so special about McNeil because I've never seen it

Decent at football.

[VillanousOne]

1 hour ago, Rolta said:

If the player loses the ball a lot and looks like they're not going to cut it to the standard we need then the goals just cover up that fact. There's a lot more to consider than just goals. 

in your opinion.

repetition doesn't make something fact

It isn't just about goals, but last I checked that is how you win games.

It's like arguing a gun should do more than 'just fire bullets'

Edited July 20, 2021 by VillanousOne