StefanAVFC Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 (edited) I find it funny how people moan about us not signing players, then when we do sign one they moan that they're all for cheap and then when it's rumoured that we're spending a lot they moan that it's a waste. Wrong interpretation again Mantis. Its not signing players on the cheap or for big fees that posters are questioning. its purchasing players for positions we already have ample cover when other positions need strengthening. Trent already covered this a few days ago. With the way we play we actually don't have ample cover as things stand. If Benteke got injured we'd have to throw Helenius in at the deep end. So why buy Helenius in the first place then? Whats the point of wasting the limited funding we have on players who aren't yet able to do a job in the first team. Not the point. Helenius isn't ready to be a lone striker. He is ready to have a role in the team, but not up front by himself. Both him and Lambert have said he's more suited to the support striker role. How. Many. Times. And you can't really beat the 'limited funding' horse again, when Helenius cost less than a million IIRC Edited September 2, 2013 by StefanAVFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 That MOMS post is pretty spot-on. Despite some talk about his versatility by some on Twitter, he actually only ever plays as the main striker. Thus it will be a straight choice between him an Benteke (unless we revert to two up front) and you just can't see him getting many starts. As I said previously, I can see the logic in buying him but not when it will take a large chunk of our budget to do so (even if the fee is £4.5m, that is still a significant amount for us nowadays). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaguy Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 So because we generally play 4-3-3, we should never deviate from it nor have the options in the squad to allow us to do so?N'Zogbia, Tonev...Doubtful whether N'Zogbia will ever play for us again and Tonev isn't a specialised AMC (though hopefully he can evolve into one).When I watched Bulgaria international match 2 or 3 weeks ago Tonev played as a AMC, I think this is where he'll play for us. I'm pretty happy with the transfers and value of transfers so far. I cannot wait for the Newcastle game now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted September 2, 2013 Moderator Share Posted September 2, 2013 So because we generally play 4-3-3, we should never deviate from it nor have the options in the squad to allow us to do so?N'Zogbia, Tonev...Doubtful whether N'Zogbia will ever play for us again and Tonev isn't a specialised AMC (though hopefully he can evolve into one).You still haven't named one yet though, that fits our budget etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 Not the point. Helenius isn't ready to be a lone striker. He is ready to have a role in the team, but not up front by himself. Both him and Lambert have said he's more suited to the support striker role. How. Many. Times. And you can't really beat the 'limited funding' horse again, when Helenius cost less than a million IIRC Exactly. Seriousy Morpheus, go through the transfer speculation thread and read Trent's post on this a few days ago. He summed it up perfectly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 So because we generally play 4-3-3, we should never deviate from it nor have the options in the squad to allow us to do so? N'Zogbia, Tonev... Doubtful whether N'Zogbia will ever play for us again and Tonev isn't a specialised AMC (though hopefully he can evolve into one). You still haven't named one yet though, that fits our budget etc Signurdsson on loan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulver Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 One thing that stood out there, mentioning Kozak's ability to win flick ons, and drawing parallels with that same skill of Benteke, is wouldn't it be swell if they were flicking on for each other? As it stands, MOM points out, it's the fact that the flick ons go to the opposition that's the issue. Imagine Benteke playing off a guy who consistently knocked everything down to him and vice versa Not if we've also got Gabby and Weimann on the pitch no. We'd be over run in midfield and defence once again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oaks Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 He seems to have a decent record as a reserve striker TBF, he's young and sounds hungry. Sounds more like Benteke than Helenius, so if Benteke does get injured we won't have to change our play to much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 I find it funny how people moan about us not signing players, then when we do sign one they moan that they're all for cheap and then when it's rumoured that we're spending a lot they moan that it's a waste. Wrong interpretation again Mantis. Its not signing players on the cheap or for big fees that posters are questioning. its purchasing players for positions we already have ample cover when other positions need strengthening. Hang on Morpheus, Did you not say you would keep Bent for cover to Benteke as he could get injured etc? Now we are signing this cover you believe we have ample cover. Think you have an art of just liking to moan. Thats very gracious of you ST. The point is we already had Bent but then loaned him out while apparently paying anything from 4m-7m for another forward to be Benteke's understudy when that money could have gone towards a AM or DM. Not an art of moaning just finding it hard to understand our priorities when we are on a limited budget. You do seem to have cornered the art of misinterpretation however to suit your own agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted September 2, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted September 2, 2013 Anyone else cringe when you see CAM or AMC? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 Anyone else cringe when you see CAM or AMC? no... and i don't get why anyone would. would you prefer people type the full thing out? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted September 2, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted September 2, 2013 Anyone else cringe when you see CAM or AMC? Nope! I cringe that we've not bought one! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 Maybe Lambert, given that he actually manages the team and not us, thought another striker was a higher priority? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 One thing that stood out there, mentioning Kozak's ability to win flick ons, and drawing parallels with that same skill of Benteke, is wouldn't it be swell if they were flicking on for each other? As it stands, MOM points out, it's the fact that the flick ons go to the opposition that's the issue. Imagine Benteke playing off a guy who consistently knocked everything down to him and vice versa Not if we've also got Gabby and Weimann on the pitch no. We'd be over run in midfield and defence once again I doubt we'll see all 4 of them on the pitch too often Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted September 2, 2013 Moderator Share Posted September 2, 2013 Signurdsson on loan Haha I somehow doubt that is a deal that would ever have hit the drawing board. We seem to be wary of loan deals now plus relations between us and Spurs would appear to be a tad erm... strained Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted September 2, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted September 2, 2013 Maybe Lambert, given that he actually manages the team and not us, thought another striker was a higher priority? Well obviously. I want both Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted September 2, 2013 Moderator Share Posted September 2, 2013 Anyone else cringe when you see CAM or AMC?Yep its very FMtastic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 If you include Kozak and we keep playing the system which has improved our results then neither Kozak, Bowery or Helenius is going to be given much game time if our front three stay fit. That to me with limited funding available is a total waste of resources. Lambert is creating his own bomb squad for this season rather than actually using the limited finance to improve the first team. If Kozak does come in then yes it would seem likely that he will for the most part be back up to Benteke this season. Of course in certain games they could also very well play up top together. As for Bowery he came in for a few hudred thousand from Chesterfield and it may well be he will not make it at this level. I dare say he is on no more than around 5k a week so if he doesn't make it as a Prem player there will be no problem with off loading him. I also think he is seen by Lambert as more of a wide midfielder/attacker much in the same way as Gabby. As for Helenius it seems that he has been quoted as saying that he has been brought in as a wide attacker or to play just behind the main striker. With the above in mind I'd say we most definately need someone like Kozak as if Benteke gets injured we currently have no like for like replacement. It should also be remembered that Benteke will almost certainly be off at the end of the season so it is no bad thing if we can bring a potential replacement in for him now and get him up to speed this season whilst Benteke is still here. The point is though will those players immediately improve the first team considering we have limited finance and we did have Bent who is a proven goalscorer in the Premiership. We could have kept Bent until the end of this season as back up to Benteke leaving us spending whatever finance available on a AM or DM. Yes i've heard the argument about Bent's wages a million times but he is only out on loan and not sold so we could have him back again at the start of next season anyway. it just seems to me that for us to improve on last year you must improve the first team which we have with Luna and Okore in defence but improvement is also needed in midfield and our limited finance would have been better spent there than actually purchasing another forward who like Helenius and Bowery may get very limited game time this season. Yes that Darren Bent who was awful on Saturday. Darren Bent is not worth 80k a week for being a back-up striker. What do you not understand about that? As for this guy joining, as I did with Benteke, I will give the guy a chance. Lambert has obviously seen something in the lad to attempt to bring him in. Yes the same Darren Bent who has been injured and not yet match fit and you speak of giving a 'guy a chance.' No but he's proven Premiership quality isn't he. Injured, do me a favour. So you expect any player who hasn't played on a regular basis for some time to come in and perform to 100% of his ability. Your the one who needs to get real. He played against Wigan, he hasn't been injured. He's been in training, okay lets give him time haha. But our new signings you judge after 10mins of seeing them. So he hadn't suffered from injury with us and wasn't alienated to the 'bomb squad' by Lambert thereby limiting his match fitness in pre-season? Excellent stuff man. Yep totally wrong about Benteke but i wasn't the only one. The only other player i've passed judgement on is KEA who was poor last season (not the implication of ten minutes) and did warrant my initial judgement but he has shown signs of improvement this season so i'll give you that one but again i wasn't the only poster who commented negatively on KEA and he has still a long way to go to prove otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted September 2, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted September 2, 2013 (edited) EDIT - Not needed Edited September 2, 2013 by Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vandaq Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 what is the proper term? AM? I don`t get this. Billy bob mentality honestly. It`s a position. Just as you could say RAM/LAM is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts