Tammy Abraham

[nick76]

3 minutes ago, Kiwivillan said:

Davis and Wesley played total of 281 mins last season and 90 of that was because Ollie suspended. We don't and won't play 2 up top. Do people not understand Smith formations?

Because Wes was injured and Davis is shit, I wouldn’t have played either of them either.  Do you not see that?

[nick76]

Next season as a Villa player…

 

 

[Keener window-cleaner]

14 minutes ago, Paul33 said:

Tammy would definitely be a big upgrade on Wesley and Keinan - no argument there - but I'm another who is not convinced that he is either (a) good enough for where we want to be going and (b) good enough to justify the sort of price tags being reported.

I may be wrong and if he does sign, I hope I am wrong but getting excitable because he did okay in the Championship here has me shaking my head.

Potential, possibly but I'd rather sign a player on the rise (eg: Watkins) than one that has really been going nowhere for some time now.

You make him sound like he is a has been on decline, he was integral in the Chelsea team under Lampard, it's only the last half a season under Tuchel that he hasn't played much, and is two years younger than Watkins.

I'm with you on the price tag. £30-40M is a lot of money, and I'm not sure we can spend that on a back up-player. The market under the pandemic is a bit strange, but I'm not sure who would be better value for money?

I guess if we got Abraham in we should loan out Wesley, and then see if we can get as much back as possible (or he improves and can contribute). Wesley and Abraham on the bench meaning we have £50-60M value of strikers on the bench doesn't seem plausible.  

[Zero7]

34 minutes ago, Kiwivillan said:

Davis and Wesley played total of 281 mins last season and 90 of that was because Ollie suspended. We don't and won't play 2 up top. Do people not understand Smith formations?

We need depth and options, it's not about playing 1 or 2 up top, what would happen if Watkins was out for 10-15 games, where are the goals coming from 

[maqroll]

Is there an actual legitimate link here or no?

[nick76]

Just now, maqroll said:

Is there an actual legitimate link here or no?

Percy the other day!

[Dave-R]

1 hour ago, Keener window-cleaner said:

Yes, and didn't he fit in like hand in glove to our system when he played for us? That was under Dean Smith too obviously.

He sure did mate.

He had a wicked relationship with the players as well, he was certainly one of the lads. Tammy just aided in bringing about the era of prem football for us but that was then and this is now and I believe he has matured and gotten better.

I hope Lange goes fetches him in, we need Tammy if not we need someone like Alavrez but we need something different than Wesley and Davis. As I've said many a time if it has to come to it I'd rather we use youth than Wes and Davis.

[Dave-R]

1 hour ago, nick76 said:

Because Wes was injured and Davis is shit, I wouldn’t have played either of them either.  Do you not see that?

abit of tough work a couple of them are, they dont take in what you say to them.

I, you and others have given these cloth ears many reasonable and valid reason, facts and truth as to why Tammy would be a great addition or the very least another CF who was brought in would be.

I myself have explained in detail, very in depth detail and tried to get my point across and I just feel that it falls on deaf ears Nick. I have said reasons if Watkins is out of the team for a particular reason or have or mentioned the tactical edge we'd have but it's like they don't want to hear about it. I can actually list a whole page full of why we need a CF but again it all hits brick walls.

I just wished he'd be brought in just to prove them wrong which I know he would. I also know he be utilised by Smith, both Watkins and Tammy would and this whole Watkins would play all season excuse is absolutely rubbish due to the fact Smith would be able to trust both and have confidence in them unlike Wes and Davis.

[roonst83]

14 hours ago, Dave-R said:

Do you understand the concept of rotating, refreshing, having depth in a position that isn't just anyone but quality. I take it you understand the whole word tactics because you must see a world of it having Watkins Wesley and Davis compared to Watkins and Tammy lol. 

I see here we go again labeling Tammy as a 40 million pound striker and that we somehow believe that is the price he would cost. Somehow I feel though you guys like to believe little bits of media articles but also disregard the rest, ie price you believe then him possibly joining us you disregard. Also have you not see how much we signed Buendia for and now Bailey, both 30 million correct? What make you think Lange couldn't pull off a similar type move???

Then there's the fact what if Tammy was bought he on a loan to buy and he work out, what then about the price he becomes totally worth it to any nay sayer.

I could go on and on debating why Tammy would benefit the club and I see one or two constant reasons why you think he shouldn't join, it's absolutely daft. The daft justifications you guys keep saying is the same, either it's 40 million or Tammy is shit or Tammy won't play much or we don't need to upgrade our backups, it's all proper madness considering I and many others have countered these reasons of you few time and time again. We give legitimate reasons as to why he'd benefit Villa but it seems to float on over heads 

It all make sense when you want to upgrade you team and have competition in positions.

Firstly your response was a tad rude which is uncalled for. But leaving that aside, you also seem to pigeon hole me with my views in a collective with other people who I have no idea who you mean. “You guys” etc. I speak for myself and don’t spend hours scrolling back through the thread to find other people who may or may not share my opinions I couldn’t care less and stand on my own with my views. And, in my opinion, my views make sense and are always well balanced. 

You also seem to have some delusions of grandeur in that the opinion and counter arguments you and others have are somehow more valid than mine or the others you seem to categorise me with. 

I won’t take the bait by responding to the nonsense comments of “do you not understand the word tactics” etc. And despite it being exhausting having to re-justify your own opinion on a forum which encourages that very thing from it’s contributors, it’s Sunday evening, my boys are in bed and my missus has Love Island on so I’ll indulge it; 

My opinion, and the place I’m coming from is that we spent £33m making Oli Watkins our main striker in a three-pronged attacked. Smith only plays one striker through the middle and Watkins was excellent in that role last season. Yes Watkins can be useful out wide but we have acquired specific wide forwards to fill those positions. Therefore, Watkins is our starting striker so there’s no role to “upgrade” as you put it, and spending £40+m on Tammy doesn’t make sense, to me, in my opinion, as far as I’m concerned etc etc, as I can’t see Tammy coming to a club unless he’s getting the starting role. Last time he played for us he was guaranteed that main striker role and now he isn’t.

Tammy won’t, in my opinion again, want to join a team where he has to be rotated. He’s had that at Chelsea and will feel he should be the starting striker for us. It makes no sense for us to move Watkins out wide and I can’t see us paying £40m for someone who won’t start for us. 

If it does happen and we sign him the I’ll be pleased. I like the guy. I just don’t see it happening and we have other areas to prioritise. 

 

Edited August 1, 2021 by roonst83

[TheStagMan]

1 hour ago, Dave-R said:

The invisible word is Villa that you somehow couldn't see mate

They are also In the prem league if by any chance you have not been paying attention for the past few years, we did actually make it up

We even signed some new players and have had many different shirts already.

Yeah, but we haven't got any E's for those shirts 

[Kiwivillan]

1 hour ago, Zero7 said:

We need depth and options, it's not about playing 1 or 2 up top, what would happen if Watkins was out for 10-15 games, where are the goals coming from 

West Ham finished 6th and top scorer with 10 was Antonio who played RB and RWB in previous seasons. Their only actual "striker" Haller scored 3 goals

[allani]

14 minutes ago, Kiwivillan said:

West Ham finished 6th and top scorer with 10 was Antonio who played RB and RWB in previous seasons. Their only actual "striker" Haller scored 3 goals

And if they had had a striker who scored 20 goals they might have finished higher.  They certainly wouldn't have finished lower.

Edited August 1, 2021 by allani

[allani]

16 minutes ago, Kiwivillan said:

West Ham finished 6th and top scorer with 10 was Antonio who played RB and RWB in previous seasons. Their only actual "striker" Haller scored 3 goals

Might also be the reason why West Ham are also seemingly linked with every striker going at the moment.  It's almost like they need to sign a striker because last season they had a RB / RWB leading the line and they need someone who will (hopefully for them) score a few more.  I don't think that there are many West Ham fans saying that they don't need to sign a striker this season because hey an ex-RB scored 10 (the same number as AEG) last season and so they are all good up front thank you very much.

[Dave-R]

49 minutes ago, roonst83 said:

Firstly your response was a tad rude which is uncalled for. But leaving that aside, you also seem to pigeon hole me with my views in a collective with other people who I have no idea who you mean. “You guys” etc. I speak for myself and don’t spend ho it a scrolling back through the thread to find other people who may or may not share my op ions I couldn’t care less and stand on my own with my views. And, in my opinion, my views make sense and are always well balanced. 
 

You seem to have some delusions of grandeur in that the opinion and counter arguments you and others have are somehow more valid than mine or the others you seem to categorise me with. 

I won’t take the bait by responding to the nonsense comments of “do you not understand the word tactics” etc. And despite it being exhausting having to re-justify your own opinion on a forum which encourages that very thing from its contributors, it’s Sunday evening, my boys are in bed and my missus has Love Island on so I’ll indulge it; 

My opinion, and the place I’m coming from is that we spent £33m making Oli Watkins our main striker in a three pronged attacked. Smith only plays one striker through the middle and Watkins was excellent in that role last season. Yea Watkins can be useful out wide but we have acquired specific wide forwards to fill those positions. Therefore, Watkins is our starting striker so there’s no role to “upgrade” as you put it, and spending £40+m on Tammy doesn’t make sense, to me, in my opinion, as far as I’m concerned etc etc, as I can’t see Tammy coming to a club unless he’s getting the starting role. Last time he played for us he was guaranteed that main striker role and now he isn’t.

Tammy won’t, in my opinion again, want to join a team where he has to be rotated. He’s had that at Chelsea and will feel he should be the starting striker for us. It makes no sense for us to move Watkins out wide and I can’t see us paying £40m for someone who won’t start for us. 

 

For a start if it came across rude to you I apologize I certainly do not mean for it to look like that to you. Your view is as good as everyone else's around here in my eyes so don't go feeling like it doesn't count because it does.

When I say you guys I am saying it as a collective group because there seems to be the same four or five that pop up constantly, try get the thread closed down, don't listen to why I and others see the good in having another quality CF would do for the squad. I'm not saying it's you but when I say you guys again it's me not pointing the finger at you solely in regards to not giving Tammy a chance. There are a couple other who just don't want to hear the people or anything they say no matter what we place in front of them and believe me we have spent alot of time some of us have trying to get the point across.

For a start none of us know what Tammy is thinking when it comes to joining Villa or whether he'd be happy or not as a rotational player. Secondly we have to do something because we can't just sit on Davis and Wesley as they are just not good enough.we have to do something as we can't just mount a challenge for a European spot with Watkins. Wes and Davis this coming season or a new CF a choice has to be made and I know what I'd rather have at Villa alongside Watkins fighting the fight to win us a European place or try to.

Having Tammy or another quality CF makes sure we keep ticking if Watkins is out for any particular reason. No one knows how much Tammy will cost for a start, Lange has just got us two players at 30 mill when it was expected by everyone we'd be paying more. This 40 million price tag is a floated media price, it doesn't reflect or isn't what Chelsea want because they have not stated.

There is so much good that can come from having Tammy or another CF and believe me I've spent weeks explaining to people pages upon pages back. I'm not saying it's you that I've explained to constantly because I don't remember speaking to you more than a couple of times in this thread but a couple of others it's been ridiculous. Again I apologise if I came across so strong and it seemed like I were being rude, I didn't mean to.

The whole idea of moving up in the prem is that we upgrade our team wouldn't you agree? Sure Watkins is capable and ace for a start and I don't question him at all I'm happy with the lad. However Tammy at the club and partnering with Watkins offers much in the way of for a start if Watkins is out due to sickness, being banned, Injury, needs to be refreshed or rotated, we do then have another quality player to carry on the work.

Remember that we have to keep scoring from the CF position and the moment we stop we start struggling more and the season is on the line. I know some of you think Watkins will do for a whole season but the moment you don't start using a secondary player a fair bit more and rotate and fair points through a season, we start having Injurys like what started to happen half way point last season. You remember Grealish injury last season yes?? Imagine when he got injured how our season declined, we could of maybe got to a euro place if that hadn't happen or we'd had Buendia earlier. So it appears that we have another situation in like last season's hitting us in the face and if we don't do anything about and Watkins gets Injured, we will struggle like hell if our backups can't score. Having Tammy to step in just guarantees the goals keep flowing. Again back to Grealish injury last season and how everyone was going barmy because we lost out and slid down the table, now imagine that same event this coming season or a similar one like it, fans will soon be going nuts because we didn't take the time to address an obvious danger or risk by bringing Tammy in where we had the chance to.

Back to price again on Tammy, but we may actually be able to get Tammy in on a loan to buy, wouldn't you be down for that at all knowing that wer ejust loaning to see how he works out?? What if Tammy were to go on a crazy goal scoring run with Watkins and the method I envision Smith using it all actually works, he'd be worth every bit then wouldn't he?

If Smith and the club made the move to get another CF in, then we have to trust the process and management right? We used a second striker in games last season, we would of used it more if we had of had better capable CF to shove on the pitch. Tammy at Villa allows Smith to use both Watkins and Tammy in different games and changing the starts up making us a fair bit more random. We are much tough to figure out if we had Watkins and Tammy than we are with Watkins, Davis and Wesley. It maybe that Smith uses Tammy for 3 games while Watkins takes up the next 5 games, then Tammy gets a bigger run and Watkins gets a smaller run because Smith highlights that one CF is better used again one bunch of opponents and the other CF against the other selected ones. Tactically there is just so much to look at and it makes us much harder to figure out.

There is just no reason why Tammy and Watkins can't be utilised in all games, one starting the other subbing and then change around. I understand your concerns but we really do need to do something before it's to late and window closes and we have to go with what we have. Smith was looking at alot more different changeable formations last season and if we are going to use a second striker in second half then having a quality CF to come on also makes sense. I remember when we used Davis, one game he did really good in the rest he was flat but my point is if Smith is going to up the time we make use of a second CF then in my opinion it makes sense to go and pay for one. Let's say Chelsea do want 40illion for Tammy, even at that price he's a fabulous player who will smash goal in.

Sorry for the long post again, there is plenty more I could put or say and I look forward to your reply.

 

Edited August 1, 2021 by Dave-R

[Dave-R]

10 minutes ago, allani said:

And if they had had a striker who scored 20 goals they might have finished higher.  They certainly wouldn't have finished lower.

Excellent point.

[allani]

3 minutes ago, Dave-R said:

Excellent point.

I think you flatter me.  I am still struggling to come to terms with the idea that we should get rid of Watkins because he scores too many goals and should instead play with Matty Cash up front because he might knock in a handful of goals and as a result of scoring fewer goals we will finish higher up the table because after all West Ham did....

Edited August 1, 2021 by allani

[Dave-R]

1 minute ago, allani said:

I think you flatter me.  I am still struggling to come to terms with the idea that we should get rid of Watkins because he scores too many goals and should instead play with Matty Cash up front because he might knock in a handful of goals and as a result of scoring fewer goals we will finish higher up the table because after all West Ham did....

That's funny

[nick76]

2 minutes ago, allani said:

I think you flatter me.  I am still struggling to come to terms with the idea that we should get rid of Watkins because he scores too many goals and should instead play with Matty Cash up front because he might knock in a handful of goals and as a result of scoring fewer goals we will finish higher up the table because after all West Ham did....

It’s why Southgate took so many RB’s to the Euro’s

[allani]

1 minute ago, nick76 said:

It’s why Southgate took so many RB’s to the Euro’s

**** it all makes sense now!  That is where I have been going wrong all these years.  That explains why there was no room for Watkins in the squad.  Gareth knew that if Harry got injured in the first match then he could simply put Walker on instead.  He obviously wouldn't carry the goal threat of Ollie but by taking fewer chances we would probably have won in the final against Italy.  Indeed all the time I spent getting frustrated by how negative and conservative Gareth was - what I should really have been upset about was that Gareth picked Kane at all.  He should have been on the bench as we would have done better with no centre forwards on the pitch.  How could I get it so wrong? 

[skarroki]

Antonio can't have played more than 10 games as a right back in the last 5 years. He's a great talent with brilliant versatility but I think it's silly to argue that West Ham played last season with a converted RB up top as and no recognised striker after Haller left. Antonio wears the #9 shirt and has probably played across the front line in 500+ matches in his career compared to maybe 20/30 at RB. 

He's a versatile forward player who has covered at RB on occasion. 

I do think West Ham are seriously light up top though and Antonio seems to be a walking sick note in the last year or 2 so Abraham going to them makes a lot of sense, way more than him moving to us.

Edited August 1, 2021 by skarroki