Jump to content

Now That's What I Call Transfer Rumours! 7


Rich

Recommended Posts

It might have been on the Athletic, but by all accounts, Tielemans is a down to earth family man.

 

He's a fantastic footballer and would be an asset at progressing and developing our play in the final third. It's worth bearing in mind, Howe is capable of taking his game up a notch as well.

 

While it seems his downturn in form is in line with the form of his club, I think the major concerns are his engine and athleticism. If he's coming in to replace Bruno, Willock or Joe, he's going to be asked to press at intensity. Howe and the recruitment team will know if he's capable of that or not. I'd imagine if they can get Shelvey grafting, they can get Tielemans doing the same.

 

 

Edited by The Prophet

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I seen him much but most of the time Gordan hasn’t been that good. Seen him cause some problems in some games but the prices being quoted to Chelsea seemed a bit excessive but that could be due to Chelsea tax, he seems a bit of a hot head who gets involved in stuff that he doesn’t need to.

 

I would be more open minded to McTominay especially as we are so light in CM.

 

Ultimately I guess if Howe was in favour of signing them I would trust him. Hasn’t made a mistake in the market yet to be fair..

 

 

Edited by Tisd09

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tisd09 said:

Not that I seen him much but most of the time Gordan hasn’t been that good. Seen him cause some problems in some games but the prices being quoted to Chelsea seemed a bit excessive but that could be due to Chelsea tax, he seems a bit of a hot head who gets involved in stuff that he doesn’t need to.

 

I would be more open minded to McTominay especially as we are so light in CM.

 

Ultimately I guess if Howe was in favour of signing them I would trust him. Hasn’t made a mistake in the market yet to be fair..

 

 

 

 

I mean, it's easy to argue that he has.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of the three where would  you place them on the Chris Wood Transfer Rating Scale?

 

1. Rubbish player never wanted him

2. average player but Eddie could work his magic.

3. Don't rate him... But when we sign him, I will pretend he has always been quality?

 

1. McSauce 2. Gordon, 3. Tielemans

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Tisd09 said:

Not that I seen him much but most of the time Gordan hasn’t been that good. Seen him cause some problems in some games but the prices being quoted to Chelsea seemed a bit excessive but that could be due to Chelsea tax, he seems a bit of a hot head who gets involved in stuff that he doesn’t need to.

 

I would be more open minded to McTominay especially as we are so light in CM.

 

Ultimately I guess if Howe was in favour of signing them I would trust him. Hasn’t made a mistake in the market yet to be fair..

 

 

 

Wood was 100% a mistake.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

Does Tielemans do well in pressing and defensive stats? I can't see us signing anyone who doesn't. 

 

Edit: He does alright on tackles and interceptions, but he does get dribbled past a lot. 

 

 

 

 

If he gets dribbled past a lot his tackling can't be good? :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

 

I mean, it's easy to argue that he has.

I’m assuming you mean Wood. He did a job last season and played a part in keeping us up IMO, he hasn’t contributed much this season but I wouldn’t call Wood a mistake when we needed a striker last season. It could have been a choice between Wood or nobody??

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

Wood was 100% a mistake.

Once again, for the dunces at the back. 

We were relegation fodder 

New owners, new manager knew we needed a striker or it was Gayle*

 

We went out, early doors, paid a release clause for an experienced striker as a cushion just in case. Then went looking for a better one which didn't happen. 

One of the earliest signs that the ownership/manager both meant business AND were prepared to fork out. 

Guess what, thickos? It worked. 

 

100% NOT a mistake. 

 

* no disrespect to Gayle 

 

 

Edited by Groundhog63

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

Wood was 100% a mistake.

Absolute garbage.

 

He was overpriced, of course, but we knew and accepted that.

 

He was brought in to achieve a specific objective (helping us stay in the league), which he achieved with flying colours.

 

Anything useful he does subsequently, like scoring the winner in a League Cup match (that’s then seen us make the semi final), or scoring at Southampton and Leicester, is simply a bonus, aside from the less obvious stuff around his tactical performance.

 

He’s not good enough for where we want to get to, and he’ll be phased out soon enough, but he’s done his job to enable us to get there. Money well spent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know why people have such an issue admitting Wood was a bad signing. His stats speak for themselves. It's possible to think Howe is doing God's work, whilst admitting he made one stinker of a signing. All good managers have their flops.

 

 

Edited by Skeletor

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Skeletor said:

Don't know why people have such an issue admitting Wood was a bad signing. His stats speak for themselves.

I think people who criticise the signing have a habit of forgetting the circumstances around. 
 

It was a panic buy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see both sides of the argument with Wood.

 

No doubt he is poor. His pressing and off the ball work are commendable, but he his goal scoring instincts and finishing are total gash.

 

That said, we bought him because he was a quick, hassle free buy to give us an option up top at a time we had no striker. He was then part of side that went on an incredible run to dodge relegation.

 

Given the latter you could argue he was £25 million well spent, even if he has no use going forward.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd hazard a guess that its because people genuinely don't think he was a bad signing and don't feel the need to admit to anything. 

 

£25m was too much obviously, in that sense it's a bad signing, but his impact on the team at the time was pretty clear to see at the time imo.

 

 

Edited by Kid Icarus

Link to post
Share on other sites

From my point of view we would have been relegated if we had not signed him, of course the argument is we could have purchased someone else. Do I think we could have made a move for a better striker? Yes I do, but obviously Eddie thought he was the best option available at the time. He played a part in keeping us up. I would not shed a tear however if he was sold this month.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, RobsonsWonderland said:

Of the three where would  you place them on the Chris Wood Transfer Rating Scale?

 

1. Rubbish player never wanted him

2. average player but Eddie could work his magic.

3. Don't rate him... But when we sign him, I will pretend he has always been quality?

 

1. McSauce 2. Gordon, 3. Tielemans

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your scale is wrong. Gordon is above average and Tielemans is an excellent footballer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

If he gets dribbled past a lot his tackling can't be good? :lol:

 

He wins a lot of tackles, more than Longstaff for example. But he does get dribbled past more often, maybe because something to do with his ability when he's on the back foot or has to readjust. Longstaff does too. 

 

He's obviously a lot more creative than anyone we have though, crosses and expected assists etc. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...