January Transfer Window - 2023

[burchy]

3 hours ago, Villaphan04 said:

Another thing that I want to keep in mind is -- we need/should get a few out the door in the summer. I keep coming back to McGinn, Sanson & Nakamba. The setup we have means that we don't need to have 7 senior midfielders for 2 spots & it feels like those 3 are going to be the ones who might find themselves with less gametime. Think we should let one or two of them go

I’d be inclined to let all three go and upgrade McGinn with a younger more technical player so reducing the CM count but upping the quality levels.

[burchy]

Not sure where to post this but with Emery on board I’m hoping we develop a way of playing (which seems the case) and start buying players that are obviously back ups for players that are in the 1st team so when they leave (selling at the right time is also something we need to get better at) we’ve already got their replacement in place.

We need a conveyor belt of talent coming through the club. We seem to be doing it at academy level already.

We’ve been guilty over the years of having to change our shape and style of play as a result of not doing the above, I’m hoping that changes moving forward. 

[Philosopher]

8 hours ago, TRO said:

I remember how Peter Withe changed us from a decent mid table team, to a serious top half contender.

A player of similar ilk, will do it again.

I am not interested in the "old football" argument.....we have seen in this World cup how such players have flourished and won games.

World Cup is a world away from premier league. It's slower, with less movement. The players don't have the team to build a rapport with each other in the same way they do in club football. A target man can be more effective in world Cup football.

But if you look at it properly it's the quick strikers that have had a greater effect. Kane was rubbish for example. We saw more from Rashford in one game then Kane in 3.

Your point out Giroud, but he has Mbappe and Dembele suppling him, and the only decent they played (England) outplayed them, and Giroud was now more than a passenger apart from the goal. And remember he was up against Stones and Maguire. Either one is fine alongside a genuine world class defender, but together, they're an accident waiting to happen.

Take Morroco as an example, lot of the players are performing well at this World Cup, but none of them would be a first team regular for a top 6 team. Their no 8 for example would have to increase his output by at least 15% to put in the same kind of performances.

[Laughable Chimp]

14 hours ago, sne said:

Linked to Terem Moffi, can't say I know anything about him. Has 10 in 14 for Lorient this season.

He's only 6ft 2 thou so no were near tall enough.

He’s probably worth a punt. But his stat profile suggests he’s more of a poacher type, relying mostly on his finishing and doesn’t involve himself in the game otherwise.

For example, he has less open play touches per 90 than any other striker in ligue 1 this season.

 

[Steero113]

2 hours ago, Philosopher said:

World Cup is a world away from premier league. It's slower, with less movement. The players don't have the team to build a rapport with each other in the same way they do in club football. A target man can be more effective in world Cup football.

But if you look at it properly it's the quick strikers that have had a greater effect. Kane was rubbish for example. We saw more from Rashford in one game then Kane in 3.

Your point out Giroud, but he has Mbappe and Dembele suppling him, and the only decent they played (England) outplayed them, and Giroud was now more than a passenger apart from the goal. And remember he was up against Stones and Maguire. Either one is fine alongside a genuine world class defender, but together, they're an accident waiting to happen.

Take Morroco as an example, lot of the players are performing well at this World Cup, but none of them would be a first team regular for a top 6 team. Their no 8 for example would have to increase his output by at least 15% to put in the same kind of performances.

Peronally, thought Kane was fantastic against France (penalty spoon aside). 

And Senegal. 

[Philosopher]

1 hour ago, Steero113 said:

Peronally, thought Kane was fantastic against France (penalty spoon aside). 

And Senegal. 

I guess that depends on how you see it. For me Kane was dropping far to deep, to play some lovely passes to players you'd rather Kane be on the receiving end of.

You can't  play an attack of Kane, Foden, and Saka, because none of those players will run in behind. Saka terrified the French defenders and ironically he was the first player Southgate subbed. Just ridiculous.

England have a wealth of top quality number 10's but they insist on playing him in the no 10 role when he lacks to ability to dribble past players. It's stupid.

Kane is good when he has someone like Son or Rashford. Players that will run in behind from deeper positions and have the instincts of a striker. But this makes the team one that has to exploit the transition. They will still lack the ability to breakdown a stubborn defensive side. As Kane is not a top no 10, he is a top no 9, that needs legs around him. For me building a team around him is rather limiting. As if you play him with a no 10, they just get in each others way. You need a shadow striker in that 10 position to make it work.

[HKP90]

5 hours ago, burchy said:

Not sure where to post this but with Emery on board I’m hoping we develop a way of playing (which seems the case) and start buying players that are obviously back ups for players that are in the 1st team so when they leave (selling at the right time is also something we need to get better at) we’ve already got their replacement in place.

We need a conveyor belt of talent coming through the club. We seem to be doing it at academy level already.

We’ve been guilty over the years of having to change our shape and style of play as a result of not doing the above, I’m hoping that changes moving forward. 

I'm not sure I'd be massively happy if we only buy players who are backups, rather than first teamers, but I get your point regarding positions, and I hope we do buy to fit the way of playing, not change the way we play because of who we are buying as we have done in the past. 

[nick76]

38 minutes ago, HKP90 said:

I'm not sure I'd be massively happy if we only buy players who are backups, rather than first teamers, but I get your point regarding positions, and I hope we do buy to fit the way of playing, not change the way we play because of who we are buying as we have done in the past. 

I agree for the sheer fact we want to be challenging those European places regularly in the future and not be a mid table and lose their best player every transfer window.  That will still happen more than we would like by the elite teams but we aspire to be more than just a midtable team, so yes let’s buy the next replacement but also buy players that are better than 1st teamers now so we can push up the league.

[Lupinthe5th]

Terem Moffi sounds like he would be a wonderful signing for 15-20Mil

[Villaphan04]

9 hours ago, nick76 said:

I think McGinn should be bench warming now but despite people keep saying he could be sold, he continues to start games.  He’s not coming on as sub but is starting most of the games under Emery so far just like previous managers so I’m not sure he’s going anywhere in the near future.  It’s too early to say Emery will continue starting him but he’s started most competitive and friendly games under Emery, small sample I know.

He's started 1 of the 2 PL games under Unai so not really sure you can read that. Can't really take the friendly games as what he's going to do for the rest of the year as we don't have a full complement of squad available. 

[MaVilla]

8 minutes ago, Villaphan04 said:

He's started 1 of the 2 PL games under Unai so not really sure you can read that. Can't really take the friendly games as what he's going to do for the rest of the year as we don't have a full complement of squad available. 

Tbf mcginn only started that PL game due to injuries.

No way he would have started if we didn't have those Injuries.

[TRO]

16 hours ago, Aston_Villan4 said:

But we can’t get caught up in who is doing what for whom in this World Cup. We’ve seen that recently with Damsgaard who is doing nothing at Brentford so far.

I agree.

[Xela]

23 hours ago, sne said:

Linked to Terem Moffi

One of my favourite Star Wars characters. 

[TRO]

8 hours ago, Philosopher said:

World Cup is a world away from premier league. It's slower, with less movement. The players don't have the team to build a rapport with each other in the same way they do in club football. A target man can be more effective in world Cup football.

But if you look at it properly it's the quick strikers that have had a greater effect. Kane was rubbish for example. We saw more from Rashford in one game then Kane in 3.

Your point out Giroud, but he has Mbappe and Dembele suppling him, and the only decent they played (England) outplayed them, and Giroud was now more than a passenger apart from the goal. And remember he was up against Stones and Maguire. Either one is fine alongside a genuine world class defender, but together, they're an accident waiting to happen.

Take Morroco as an example, lot of the players are performing well at this World Cup, but none of them would be a first team regular for a top 6 team. Their no 8 for example would have to increase his output by at least 15% to put in the same kind of performances.

You make some salient points, I have to agree.....but wingers need a target man.....like a darts player, needs a board.....something to aim for.

Football is about opinions and I accept the view of centre forwards, drifting in an out, but Giroud has scored more international goals than Thierry Henry, and a c 2.5% career conversion rate, no mean feat.....He is a clear and present Danger to defences.....underrated imo.....Where Kane is possibly overrated and creeps in to midfield too much....clinical in front of goal, when he's there.

There is always a case for the quick strikers, and I accept, they are the popular choice, but 17% of all goals scored are headers, who wants to miss out on that....not to mention the knock downs for the quick strikers.

Rashford is great on form, but Inconsistent, I have seen him have some stinkers, so its subjective.....Just like Harry rarely misses penalties, but taking a second against a clubmate as Goalie, changes the odds...just saying.

Its all on the day.....It's just that, when we play competitive opposition, its rarely our day, for one reason or another.

 

 

[nick76]

57 minutes ago, Villaphan04 said:

He's started 1 of the 2 PL games under Unai so not really sure you can read that. Can't really take the friendly games as what he's going to do for the rest of the year as we don't have a full complement of squad available. 

I’m not sure I agree, he’s playing very strong teams in the friendlies and McGinn is starting and yes friendlies are just friendlies but it’s currently (along with the games before the break) the only evidence of anything.  Peoples views on McGinn  is swaying them that McGinn could be sold but the evidence is he’s getting as much game time and starting as anybody else.  I agree we don’t know what he’s going to do for the rest of the year but evidence to date, McGinn’s a key part of the squad with nothing to suggest he will be sold.  Again, I think he needs to be benched and upgraded but those that keep saying he’s likely/probably will be one of the first out the door, I can see no evidence of that apart from peoples hopes.

[nick76]

55 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

Tbf mcginn only started that PL game due to injuries.

No way he would have started if we didn't have those Injuries.

Based on what? I agree he shouldn’t but I don’t think there is evidence to suggest Emery would’ve done different.

Anyway I’m backing out of this conversation, I never meant to defend McGinn, I just find it strange people think he could go when no evidence suggests that’s true…anyway I’m out of this discussion because I agree he should be benched.

[MaVilla]

34 minutes ago, nick76 said:

Based on what? I agree he shouldn’t but I don’t think there is evidence to suggest Emery would’ve done different.

Anyway I’m backing out of this conversation, I never meant to defend McGinn, I just find it strange people think he could go when no evidence suggests that’s true…anyway I’m out of this discussion because I agree he should be benched.

Buendia and watlins started the previous PL game that we won versus manure.

Watkins and buendia were both injured for the second PL game.

Mcginn started that second game in buendias slot.

Although not impossible, It's highly unlikely mcginn would have started if buendia was fit.

 

[nick76]

7 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

Buendia and watlins started the previous PL game that we won versus manure.

Watkins and buendia were both injured for the second PL game.

Mcginn started that second game in buendias slot.

Although not impossible, It's highly unlikely mcginn would have started if buendia was fit.

 

Maybe, maybe not!  Just have to wait and see unfortunately 

[pintpotvilla]

6 hours ago, Philosopher said:

I guess that depends on how you see it. For me Kane was dropping far to deep, to play some lovely passes to players you'd rather Kane be on the receiving end of.

You can't  play an attack of Kane, Foden, and Saka, because none of those players will run in behind. Saka terrified the French defenders and ironically he was the first player Southgate subbed. Just ridiculous.

England have a wealth of top quality number 10's but they insist on playing him in the no 10 role when he lacks to ability to dribble past players. It's stupid.

Kane is good when he has someone like Son or Rashford. Players that will run in behind from deeper positions and have the instincts of a striker. But this makes the team one that has to exploit the transition. They will still lack the ability to breakdown a stubborn defensive side. As Kane is not a top no 10, he is a top no 9, that needs legs around him. For me building a team around him is rather limiting. As if you play him with a no 10, they just get in each others way. You need a shadow striker in that 10 position to make it work.

I think you sum up the Kane situation very well. England don't score enough goals against top sides. This could well be because our centre forward wants to play as a No.10. Kane is a great passer of the ball but unfortunately those great passes should be reaching Kane. We need a CF who will play as one and make sure when the killer pass or cross is made he is there to finish it. England are an unbalanced attacking unit and of course defensively they are always likely to concede. Your point regarding taking our best chance of a goal (Saka) off was mind boggling. We will never win anything with Southgate in charge, he just doesn't understand when to use his substitutes

[burchy]

McGinn plays CAM in a 4231 for Scotland mostly, where to be fair to him he’s f pretty effective, so perhaps we need to put him firmly as CAM competition for Buendia, if we go with a 4231/442 hybrid

That would suggest we definitely need some more CM options in January, if Sanson is off.