Woodgate or Coloccini

[Slugsy]

I don't rate Colo - thought he was poor in the prem - admittedly didn't see him in other countries so can't say he is a poor defender and has been comfortable in the Championship but gave me no confidence he is a quality premiership defender.

 

 

[tmonkey]

Would take Colo over Woodgate every day of the week.  Colo has a bit more class about him and is fit far more often.

 

Despite the fact I rate Woodgate higher, I am still much happier to have the Argie here. He came with a reputation of being virtually unbreakable and so far he's lived up to it. I reckon he will be ok in the premier provided we can upgrade the midfield by then.

 

Selling Woodgate for £13m was the best piece of business Fat Fred ever did.

 

It's like the Milner sale though. Useless if that money isn't reinvested wisely. Especially since we spunked large amounts on Boumsong/Coloccini and most likely similar wages on insufficient goods (maybe Coloccini will be better next year? Regardless, he was mediocre last).

 

Woodgate eventually got fit and gave 2-3 good seasons for Boro/Spurs. Let's say we had kept the faith with him, put up with the 2 years of injury that he suffered whilst at Madrid - would we have been relegated last year had he been playing the same amount of time for us as he did for Boro/Spurs? Maybe the scenario is a bit far fetched, but still, at the time I would rather have kept the player, and even the lengthy time out after the sale hasn't changed my stance, because we threw that money away without having the hope of a quality centreback returning to fitness.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

How the money's spent isn't a factor in whether a sale was the right move. It all goes on the bottom line at the end of the day. We would prefer the money for transfers, but that's not how it works.

[tmonkey]

How the money's spent isn't a factor in whether a sale was the right move. It all goes on the bottom line at the end of the day. We would prefer the money for transfers, but that's not how it works.

 

Have to disagree. You say it isn't a factor in judging a sale, but that's merely your opinion as to what factors contribute to making a good or bad sale decision. I don't see why that shouldn't be a factor. Keegan for example stated on several occassions that he should be judged on the sale of a key player by looking at the replacements (Cole, Milner spring to mind).

 

Woodgate wasn't sold to ease or repay any debts given how the money was stated to be available and then spent in the next window iirc on Boumsong/Babayaro and Amdy Faye. I think it's reasonable to expect that unless the sale is forced due to debts or a poor financial position, key players, even flawed ones, should only be sold with an adequate replacement plan in place. More so when the club is in decline and starting to struggle, as it was during Woodgate's sale, because the risk then becomes that the club is no longer in a position to attract suitably high calibre replacements. So a plan (with potential replacements already identified/scouted/lined up) is paramount for selling key players, otherwise it's just a case of taking a stab in the dark and risking much of what has been built up for a quick buck, and if that plan is faulty, then I see no issues with claiming the sale was flawed and shouldn't have gone ahead.

[cubaricho]

You could argue that the sales of Milner and Woodgate are why we are in such a great financial situation compared to most.  Like Ian quite rightly said - it all goes to the bottom line.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

How the money's spent isn't a factor in whether a sale was the right move. It all goes on the bottom line at the end of the day. We would prefer the money for transfers, but that's not how it works.

 

Have to disagree. You say it isn't a factor in judging a sale, but that's merely your opinion as to what factors contribute to making a good or bad sale decision. I don't see why that shouldn't be a factor. Keegan for example stated on several occassions that he should be judged on the sale of a key player by looking at the replacements (Cole, Milner spring to mind).

 

Woodgate wasn't sold to ease or repay any debts given how the money was stated to be available and then spent in the next window iirc on Boumsong/Babayaro and Amdy Faye. I think it's reasonable to expect that unless the sale is forced due to debts or a poor financial position, key players, even flawed ones, should only be sold with an adequate replacement plan in place. More so when the club is in decline and starting to struggle, as it was during Woodgate's sale, because the risk then becomes that the club is no longer in a position to attract suitably high calibre replacements. So a plan (with potential replacements already identified/scouted/lined up) is paramount for selling key players, otherwise it's just a case of taking a stab in the dark and risking much of what has been built up for a quick buck, and if that plan is faulty, then I see no issues with claiming the sale was flawed and shouldn't have gone ahead.

 

You got me there.

 

Obviously if selling players leaves a weakness in the squad then that should be addressed, but that's a football decision rather than a financial one.

[Tooj]

Woodgate has always been far more injury prone and Coloccini has that little bit more class. Although Woodgate provides more of a physical presence than Fab'. They both have their pro's and con's but in our current and even previous back four (the one with Woodgate in) I rekcon Fab' would've probably been the better option...

 

Even though I said I'd rather have Colo in this thread due to Woodgate's injuries did you even watch him when he played here?

[Tooj]

Woodgate played behind Speed and Dyer, mate. The only thing he has/had on Coloccini is strength and perhaps heading ability.

 

Reading of the game, decision making, leadership etc

[Tooj]

Disagree with that, Ferdinand is probably the most naturally talented defender i've ever seen. Though i'm sure some will disagree because of his poor recent form.

 

Paul McGrath my lord. Paul Mcgrath.......

[Heron]

Woodgate has always been far more injury prone and Coloccini has that little bit more class. Although Woodgate provides more of a physical presence than Fab'. They both have their pro's and con's but in our current and even previous back four (the one with Woodgate in) I rekcon Fab' would've probably been the better option...

 

Even though I said I'd rather have Colo in this thread due to Woodgate's injuries did you even watch him when he played here?

 

Aye.

 

I guess i'm just working more on recent memory though. Obviously it doesn't help when Woodgate was never fit too like.

[cp40]

Disagree with that, Ferdinand is probably the most naturally talented defender i've ever seen. Though i'm sure some will disagree because of his poor recent form.

 

Paul McGrath my lord. Paul Mcgrath.......

 

 

Kevin Scott tbh.

[Karjala]

Colo.

 

Weve had enough experience of paying players who never play, and are continuing to do so in Barton.

[Ronaldo]

Woodgate played behind Speed and Dyer, mate. The only thing he has/had on Coloccini is strength and perhaps heading ability.

 

Reading of the game, decision making, leadership etc

 

Is that a joke? Only one player has ever called him a leader at nufc - you can guess who it is.

 

As for the other two, Coloccini is as good in those respects imo.

[Jayson]

[Tooj]

Woodgate played behind Speed and Dyer, mate. The only thing he has/had on Coloccini is strength and perhaps heading ability.

 

Reading of the game, decision making, leadership etc

 

Is that a joke? Only one player has ever called him a leader at nufc - you can guess who it is.

 

As for the other two, Coloccini is as good in those respects imo.

 

Seeing as he organised all of our defence I can quite easily say it isn't. I haven't seen any of these leadership qualities Coloccini's time here. And his decision making was one of his biggest weaknesses last year, got caught in two minds over if he should hold his position or attacking the ball quite a lot last year. And as we found out that hesitancy costs you in the Premiership.

[Ronaldo]

Likewise, Woodgate's decision making cost him in La Liga. There's a difference between having natural decision making skills and making the right decisions every time in a new league.

[Tooj]

Likewise, Woodgate's decision making cost him in La Liga. There's a difference between having natural decision making skills and making the right decisions every time in a new league.

 

Did it? Maybe-so on his debut but Real Madrid's defensive record with Woodgate in the team was absolutely immense.

[Tooj]

A quick look states Madrid had 10 clean sheets in the 13 games Woodgate played in his last season for them. Obviously not all down to him but their record was nothing like that when he wasn't in the team. Awful decision making indeed.

 

*nice edit btw*

[Liam Liam Liam O]

A quick look states Madrid had 10 clean sheets in the 13 games Woodgate played in his last season for them. Obviously not all down to him but their record was nothing like that when he wasn't in the team. Awful decision making indeed.

 

*nice edit btw*

 

[Ronaldo]

VI would be the authority here, but I saw him caught out a fair few times in his brief spell over there.

 

Woodgate was the better player in a toon top as I said, but there's on one or two things holding Colo back from the same level. He doesn't burn £20 notes in the Dickens Inn either.

[Rich]

What am I missing with Colo? Has he got any stronger, taller or quicker since last season?

 

Not sure if it's just some daft inbuilt bias against the bloke carrying over from his performances last season, although I will readily admit that he has had a couple of storming games this season - as in really outstanding centre-half displays, the likes of which I haven't seen for a good while.

 

Still think he's going to be an absolute liability if we go up next year against stronger, faster, better forwards.

 

Doesn't hold a candle to Woodgate, but again that could be the bias talking because I loved that bloke when he was here. One thing he definitely had over Colo was acceleration/general pace as well, like. Certainly from a recovery perspective.

[Ronaldo]

A quick look states Madrid had 10 clean sheets in the 13 games Woodgate played in his last season for them. Obviously not all down to him but their record was nothing like that when he wasn't in the team. Awful decision making indeed.

 

*nice edit btw*

 

That proves very little tbh. As I said, I saw him fuck up a fair few times and i'm probably not the only one.

[Tooj]

A quick look states Madrid had 10 clean sheets in the 13 games Woodgate played in his last season for them. Obviously not all down to him but their record was nothing like that when he wasn't in the team. Awful decision making indeed.

 

*nice edit btw*

 

That proves very little tbh. As I said, I saw him fuck up a fair few times and i'm probably not the only one.

 

You mean the fact their defence looked a hell of a lot better when he was in the team proves nothing? Like it never did when he was here as well. O'Brien and Bramble together was shaky to say the least but when Woodgate played alongside either of them they both looked complete different players.

[Tsunami]

I can't see how you can compare the two players. Colo is less injury prone but Woodgate was the far superior player. He was without doubt the best defender we've had in my 35 years of going to matches which goes back to Moncur.

 

Sadly, I'd have to take Colo given the choice, but it's a bit like asking Tony Green or Billy Askew? Injured players are no use to anyone.

[Ronaldo]

Well he was probably one of their two best defenders, so of course it would look better. He was a brilliant player, not saying any less.

 

What I am saying is that his decision making looked off at times, as i'd expect with most players playing in a new league.