Nick Woltemade

[Infinitely Content]

He would probably do quite well as a CF/F9 in a possession-heavy side who have goals in the wide players and midfielders (although I still even have doubts there as he's far too physically weak for this league at present). He's a playmaker, potentially a very good one, but he's not a striker at this point - we've seen this from his poor movement in the box, lack of intent and instinct to get into the box, and lack of that killer mindset in front of goal on occasion. I also have question marks about mentality, tenacity and aggression seem lacking.

The problem is we're not that kind of side, and there's only so much Howe can do without ripping it all up and starting again. You can't just become what you're not overnight, it takes time. The idea that there's a clear solution which Howe is just too stubborn to try is lazy and is just something being used by his detractors to find further fault with him and justify their position imo.

If you're going to rip up your entire philosophy and start again for a player - that player best be something special, and I don't think Woltemade is. He's talented, but not that talented. 

The mistake was buying him, not trying him in midfield or benching him.

[Paully]

4 minutes ago, Holmesy said:

No, but he is a £60m+ asset who isn't being deployed in a way that maximises his strengths. He's being shoe-horned into roles that are unfamiliar because of the manager's rigid system. You're never going to see the best of a player, even moreso a striker, by not playing to his strengths - it would have been the same if we'd played Isak in midfield.

15 minute cameos in games we are usually losing and under the cosh in doesn't feel like a fair crack of the whip, especially when our crosses are virtually non-existent now.

Exactly this for me!

[Infinitely Content]

It's really not as simple as "play to his strengths" when his strengths require a complete overhaul of everything else we've been set up to do as a team over the last few years (and had great success in doing so).

[Holloway]

1 hour ago, Chicken Dancer said:

Just stick Bruno and Tonali as the midfield 2 and at least give him a shot in the hole. We literally have nothing to lose - we’re not going down and we’re not getting Europe. 
 

Ramsey left, Elanga right and Wissa up top. Try get the summer signings some confidence and cohesion going into the summer, especially the ones going to the World Cup. 

 

12 minutes ago, Chicken Dancer said:

Playing him midfield was a disaster not sure how it can be dressed up. The fact we persisted with it even more so. 
 

He was actually doing canny up until Wissa came back and it became clear Howe was going to rotate or preferred others. That’s fine, it’s the manager’s call - but play him upfront or not at all imo. I say this as someone who rates him but can concede it probably won’t work in England for him (I do think he will have a canny career though). 
 

I also think his signing would be viewed a lot differently if his early goals were spread out rather than in a cluster. 

Make your mind up lad

[Mole]

I don't even think it needs to be a possession heavy side, just a team that wants to play through him. That can easily be accomplished without being a team that dominates the ball.

 

Just use him as a vocal point and allow the wingers the freedom to link up with him when it makes sense, tbh I struggle to understand why this hasn't happened.

 

I would think the center forward would be the focal point in most teams, but he has never felt like it at any stage since he's been here.

 

He's felt isolated, so the midfield and wingers also feel isolated so what we have is a disjointed team with no real identity on how they wish to win football matches.

 

 

 

Edited April 27 by Mole

[Chicken Dancer]

8 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

How was it a disaster? For a start, my recollection is that he even had a few good games in that position, particularly at Villa in the cup and then Qarabag. Decent against the mackems too. A few bad ones too, admittedly. Meanwhile Gordon occupied the CF position and did well. 

 

Where exactly was the disaster? 

He was absolutely awful there, a complete passenger and it got to the point where I actually felt sorry for him. 

Sure a few nice touches here and there but he was never a central midfielder in a million years.  

[Chicken Dancer]

3 minutes ago, Holloway said:

 

Make your mind up lad

Apologies lad. Play him as a *forward* or not at all. Not as a central midfielder. 

[Holloway]

This ripping the whole team up concept to fit him in is a bit wild to me, there's already been feasible suggestions put forward to accommodate him

[Holloway]

2 minutes ago, Chicken Dancer said:

Apologies lad. Play him as a *forward* or not at all. Not as a central midfielder. 

Ah right, up front signifies the strikers role to me 

[Chicken Dancer]

Just now, Holloway said:

Ah right, up front signifies the strikers role to me 

Yeah hence the *forward*.
 

It’s all a bit pointless anyway, we all know it’ll likely be 4-3-3 with Joelinton, Tonali and Bruno in midfield. 

[Yorkie]

8 minutes ago, Chicken Dancer said:

He was absolutely awful there, a complete passenger and it got to the point where I actually felt sorry for him. 

Sure a few nice touches here and there but he was never a central midfielder in a million years.  

 

Not gonna argue the toss on his performances (see page 310 onwards for people waxing lyrical about his performances at Villa/Qarabag). Personally I feel it could well be beneficial in the long run to get him involved in the play, even if he was a fish out of water. 

 

So we've established he got played in midfield and wasn't great. Where was this disaster though? 

[Holloway]

3 minutes ago, Chicken Dancer said:

Yeah hence the *forward*.
 

It’s all a bit pointless anyway, we all know it’ll likely be 4-3-3 with Joelinton, Tonali and Bruno in midfield. 

Remains to be seen,hope we see some significant tweaks

[r0cafella]

I've got no idea how good this lad is or how good he can potentially be personally. 

 

That being said, we don't and have never built attacks centrally under Eddie so I don't expect we will ever see the best out of him in the current set up. 

[Chicken Dancer]

1 minute ago, Yorkie said:

 

Not gonna argue the toss on his performances. Personally I feel it could well be beneficial in the long run to get him involved in the play, even if he was a fish out of water.

 

So we've established he got played in midfield and wasn't great. Where was this disaster though? 

It was pretty much universally agreed that he was playing like shit in midfield and the experiment was dead, yet we persisted with it a good few more times which led to nought. Aside from Villa (over half the game vs 10) and Qarabag (worst team I can remember us playing in a long time) did we ever win when he played midfield? Genuine question - I don’t know the answer.  
 

We’ve won comfortably more points with him upfront than anybody else (at home, probably won’t be too dissimilar away), so I don’t think it’s outrageous to say we’d have a few more points on board if we’d kept him upfront or at the very least played someone else in CM instead of him. Obviously hypothetical and we don’t know for sure, but there is evidence that backs it up. The Everton game springs to mind, and I’m sure there was another when he was brought off shortly after half time when we were losing. 
 

So whilst by definition him playing CM might not have been a ‘disaster’ (I still think it was), not playing him there could have contributed to us having a few more points and thus the season itself not being seen as the disaster it currently is. 

[Holmesy]

1 minute ago, Chicken Dancer said:

It was pretty much universally agreed that he was playing like shit in midfield and the experiment was dead, yet we persisted with it a good few more times which led to nought. Aside from Villa (over half the game vs 10) and Qarabag (worst team I can remember us playing in a long time) did we ever win when he played midfield? Genuine question - I don’t know the answer.  
 

We’ve won comfortably more points with him upfront than anybody else (at home, probably won’t be too dissimilar away), so I don’t think it’s outrageous to say we’d have a few more points on board if we’d kept him upfront or at the very least played someone else in CM instead of him. Obviously hypothetical and we don’t know for sure, but there is evidence that backs it up. The Everton game springs to mind, and I’m sure there was another when he was brought off shortly after half time when we were losing. 
 

So whilst by definition him playing CM might not have been a ‘disaster’ (I still think it was), not playing him there could have contributed to us having a few more points and thus the season itself not being seen as the disaster it currently is. 

Same with the experiment of lumping balls up to him from deep and asking him to hold it up. That's not the player we signed and we should have known that.
There's an argument that players can be coached to improve areas of their play, but when training time was limited due to Europe (combined with Eddie's high-intensity training style), wouldn't it make more sense to ask him to do the things we already know he can do, in positions we already know he can play?

[Yorkie]

1 minute ago, Chicken Dancer said:

It was pretty much universally agreed that he was playing like shit in midfield and the experiment was dead, yet we persisted with it a good few more times which led to nought. Aside from Villa (over half the game vs 10) and Qarabag (worst team I can remember us playing in a long time) did we ever win when he played midfield? Genuine question - I don’t know the answer.  
 

We’ve won comfortably more points with him upfront than anybody else (at home, probably won’t be too dissimilar away), so I don’t think it’s outrageous to say we’d have a few more points on board if we’d kept him upfront or at the very least played someone else in CM instead of him. Obviously hypothetical and we don’t know for sure, but there is evidence that backs it up. The Everton game springs to mind, and I’m sure there was another when he was brought off shortly after half time when we were losing. 
 

So whilst by definition him playing CM might not have been a ‘disaster’ (I still think it was), not playing him there could have contributed to us having a few more points and thus the season itself not being seen as the disaster it currently is. 

 

Cheers for the response but just feels like a massive stretch to me, and an overrating of how good a player he is right now. He's an incredibly rough diamond and certainly wasn't pulling up any trees in the CF position. Osula is more effective than him. 

 

The season could turn out to be disastrous but it's only really become that post-Barca where we've lost four on the bounce; prior to then it was just an up-and-down season. 

[Chicken Dancer]

Just now, Holmesy said:

Same with the experiment of lumping balls up to him from deep and asking him to hold it up. That's not the player we signed and we should have known that.
There's an argument that players can be coached to improve areas of their play, but when training time was limited due to Europe (combined with Eddie's high-intensity training style), wouldn't it make more sense to ask him to do the things we already know he can do, in positions we already know he can play?

Aye , he would be viewed a lot differently if he was 5’9 or something I reckon. 
 

He’s a giant so I think the assumption is he’s gonna be a brute but he’s a silky technician. 
 

I don’t reckon he will ever hit his full potential in England fwiw, he’s probably more suited to Italy or Germany. 

[Chicken Dancer]

Just now, Yorkie said:

 

Cheers for the response but just feels like a massive stretch to me, and an overrating of how good a player he is right now. He's an incredibly rough diamond and certainly wasn't pulling up any trees in the CF position. Osula is more effective than him. 

 

The season could turn out to be disastrous but it's only really become that post-Barca where we've lost four on the bounce; prior to then it was just an up-and-down season. 

Certainly not overrating him. I don’t think he’ll ever really work in the PL, I’m just pointing out we’ve won more points with him as a forward than anybody else. I think it’s without question if the club could do last summer again they’d never go near him. He’s probably as far away from an Eddie Howe player as you could get. 

 

I’m not demanding to ‘Free Nick’ or out like that, just the decision to play him midfield - in my opinion- cost us points.

[Yorkie]

1 minute ago, Chicken Dancer said:

Certainly not overrating him. I don’t think he’ll ever really work in the PL, I’m just pointing out we’ve won more points with him as a forward than anybody else. I think it’s without question if the club could do last summer again they’d never go near him. He’s probably as far away from an Eddie Howe player as you could get. 

 

I’m not demanding to ‘Free Nick’ or out like that, just the decision to play him midfield - in my opinion- cost us points.

 

Fair enough. Will agree to disagree. 

 

My overarching point is that, from the buffet table of reasons to explain the season's failure, I don't understand why so many are gorging on the Woltemade platter. It's an egg and cress sandwich, I'd expect to see loads left come the end of the do. Clearly I'd be emptying the PSR plate and angrily kicking away anyone trying to get their fingers in.

[Fak]

2 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

Fair enough. Will agree to disagree. 

 

My overarching point is that, from the buffet table of reasons to explain the season's failure, I don't understand why so many are gorging on the Woltemade platter. It's an egg and cress sandwich, I'd expect to see loads left come the end of the do. Clearly I'd be emptying the PSR plate and angrily kicking away anyone trying to get their fingers in.

 

This reads like a bobbydazzler post!

[Yorkie]

[wong989]

 Just can’t understand why we haven’t considered Wolt up top with one or both wingers and a midfielder aiming to link up closely with him. Thats his strength. When he drops deep, that’s why, because he can set someone away, and on the 18 he can turn and find space. Surely in that system AG can do his pressing and he can cut off pass lanes. This is my concern with Eddie, can he evolve past physical intensity and add technical football. Liverpool had to pull back on intensity under Klopp and evolve.

[joeyt]

45 minutes ago, Holmesy said:

No, but he is a £60m+ asset who isn't being deployed in a way that maximises his strengths. He's being shoe-horned into roles that are unfamiliar because of the manager's rigid system. You're never going to see the best of a player, even moreso a striker, by not playing to his strengths - it would have been the same if we'd played Isak in midfield.

15 minute cameos in games we are usually losing and under the cosh in doesn't feel like a fair crack of the whip, especially when our crosses are virtually non-existent now.

 

What are his strengths as a striker?

[janpawel]

I think to see the best of Woltemade, we need proper goal scoring wide players, the ones who can make runs in the half spaces, beat a man, draw players near them etc 

 

He's the type of player to enable the others around him. He's too slow, weak, and lacking the mentality to be the main force of a team

 

Trouble is if we platform him to do this, we don't have the attacking threat from wide areas or from midfield, though Bruno has done a good job scoring this season 

[Holloway]

7 minutes ago, janpawel said:

I think to see the best of Woltemade, we need proper goal scoring wide players, the ones who can make runs in the half spaces, beat a man, draw players near them etc 

 

He's the type of player to enable the others around him. He's too slow, weak, and lacking the mentality to be the main force of a team

 

Trouble is if we platform him to do this, we don't have the attacking threat from wide areas or from midfield, though Bruno has done a good job scoring this season 

This what Barnes is supposed to be