Jordan Rhodes - gone to Blackpool

[angieram]

18 minutes ago, sage said:

It came from other sources first.  

I didn't know that. I missed out pages 3-11.

Not in the know!

[sage]

2 minutes ago, angieram said:

I didn't know that. I missed out pages 3-11.

Not in the know!

Well now you know

Edited July 18, 2023 by sage

[Ramos]

Just now, sage said:

We now you know

You we know now 

[sage]

Just now, Ramos said:

You we know now 

[Boycie]

2 hours ago, Big Trav said:

Honestly, I have no clue what’s gone on here. I was told this morning he was at Moor Farm yesterday and has agreed to sign. Wether Huddersfield have pulled out last minute I don’t know. If JCH is off to Coventry then maybe it frees Matty Godden up and we’d rather spend the wages there? 

[Anag Ram]

19 minutes ago, Ramos said:

You we know now 

 

[Foreveram]

1 hour ago, jono said:

That’s how real ITK talks because none of know for sure. We have information, from good sources that are often reliable but until the ref actually blows, no matter what we saw it won’t go on the scoreboard. Going to be interesting how it all settles. I am not at all worried. There are some weeks to go, Warne is not stupid or panicky. As the Ausis say,”She’ll be right mate” 
 

PS thanks @Big Trav. Love your delivery and openness, keeps us grounded 👍🏼🍻

I’m still waiting for my only bit of ITK information to turn up in the form of Flint, who I was told was a done deal.

[SSD]

Didn't James Collins play a friendly for Cardiff and then a couple of days after he joined us?

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

13 hours ago, Big Trav said:

Honestly, I have no clue what’s gone on here. I was told this morning he was at Moor Farm yesterday and has agreed to sign. Wether Huddersfield have pulled out last minute I don’t know. If JCH is off to Coventry then maybe it frees Matty Godden up and we’d rather spend the wages there? 

[DazzaRam]

I still think the deal is on. He was here Monday and its only Wednesday. Maybe a few things to sort Huddersfield end. 

[Terry Hennessy]

Carlton Palmer told FLW: “Derby are said to be leading the race to sign Jordan Rhodes. Jordan is 33 now and has scored a hatful in League One before.

“In a good side, which Derby will be next season, you would expect him to be looking to hit a target of 15 to 20 goals. He's experienced and if he drops down from the Championship he would be expected to play if fit regularly and weekly...

 

 

[Gabby'sThighs]

17 hours ago, FlyBritishMidland said:

This, this and this again.  I read this thread over breakfast and it made me want to back to bed and wake up in May when the season is over!!

I said in another thread on the main forum page that if we had 3 strikers, each contributing around 15 goals each we’ll be better off than last season.  We’re getting hung up on replacing 20+ goals from McGoldrick but ignoring pens (he had 4 and assuming someone else will score them) that leaves 18 league goals.  I think with a bit more out of Collins, and I think he will get more, Washington and Rhodes, if it happens, we’ll do that.  Plus goals from around the team, threats at set pieces, etc.  @Ambitious has given some good stats about Rhodes and I think he’s right.  In the right system, with the right players around him, he’ll score goals in L1.  Personally, I’d be quite happy with a free transfer and a 1 year contract with another 1 year option.

And I might be about to commit heresy and be struck by a bolt of lightening but towards the end of last season I think McGoldrick hindered us.  At time he could have passed more and played others in.  I think he got a bit too focused on his best goal scoring season.

I was just thinking along those lines.
Collins should get more than last season's 12, Washington is a 1-in-4 scorer at this level so should get something similar. Rhodes has played the last 13 seasons in the Championship (inc. one part-season in the Prem), and he knows how to score a few.

The team were too reliant on McGoldrick to do something last season, and I remember him missing last-minute six-yard headers in at least 2 games in last season's run-in. Hat-tricks against weaker teams were fun to watch but not necessarily decisive.

Fingers crossed we also get a Dobbin-standard loanee who can actually finish! A less wasteful player could have had 10 league goals last season from the chances he had.

Coulda, shoulda, woulda...

[Betty Swollocks]

41 minutes ago, Gabby'sThighs said:

I was just thinking along those lines.
Collins should get more than last season's 12, Washington is a 1-in-4 scorer at this level so should get something similar. Rhodes has played the last 13 seasons in the Championship (inc. one part-season in the Prem), and he knows how to score a few.

The team were too reliant on McGoldrick to do something last season, and I remember him missing last-minute six-yard headers in at least 2 games in last season's run-in. Hat-tricks against weaker teams were fun to watch but not necessarily decisive.

Fingers crossed we also get a Dobbin-standard loanee who can actually finish! A less wasteful player could have had 10 league goals last season from the chances he had.

Coulda, shoulda, woulda...

11 of McGoldrick`s goals came in 4 games. That`s not to underestimate his exploits, but for all his goals, they didn`t actually win us that many points. Plus, I felt, that in the last 3 or 4 months of the season we became too much of a one man team. Our entre system of play had to revolve around him. This, in turn, made us quite easy to play against.

We need more variety this season and the signings so far suggest that we will get it.

[rammieib]

1 minute ago, Betty Swollocks said:

11 of McGoldrick`s goals came in 4 games. That`s not to underestimate his exploits, but for all his goals, they didn`t actually win us that many points. Plus, I felt, that in the last 3 or 4 months of the season we became too much of a one man team. Our entre system of play had to revolve around him. This, in turn, made us quite easy to play against.

We need more variety this season and the signings so far suggest that we will get it.

Or thats because we had no goals from anyone else in the team?

[StarterForTen]

If the club were to sign Rhodes - to give us three strikers in him, Collins and Washington - it would be very rare (if ever) that all three are on the pitch at the same time. What is more likely (given a two up top formation) is that any two of those three are on the pitch for virtually every minute of league football next season. That equates to 8,280 minutes of match time between them.

If the trio contributed one goal between them for every 200 minutes of match time played, that equates to 41 league goals over the season - that's eight more than McGoldrick and Collins achieved last season. 

Point of this is that instead of getting hooked up on the taste of the individual ingredients, lets concentrate on the taste of the cake... and let the coaching team get on and bake it!

[Caerphilly Ram]

1 minute ago, rammieib said:

Or thats because we had no goals from anyone else in the team?

It’s still the same argument though. We were over-reliant on McGoldrick’s goals, that’s the fact. What we need is a goal threat from across the squad. Ideally having a main goal threat grabbing 20 goals or more AND others chipping in with double figures. 
Using a different system this season, with players supposedly better suited to the positions, and a squad that’s been drilled over the pre-season as to how the staff want them to play should lead to more goals being created and scored across the side….should 😬🤞

[Bris Vegas]

16 hours ago, sage said:

[May Contain Nuts]

50 minutes ago, Betty Swollocks said:

Plus, I felt, that in the last 3 or 4 months of the season we became too much of a one man team. Our entre system of play had to revolve around him. This, in turn, made us quite easy to play against.

We need more variety this season and the signings so far suggest that we will get it.

I just find this such a revisionist view, and one that only really started to be voiced when it became apparent McGoldrick was leaving.  That's not to say there weren't  some people having such thoughts, but it wasn't a widespread view.

Prior to that it was all about who we could get to complement him and take the workload off, nothing about us not sharing the play around as a tactic, or because of his presence.

The only reason our system 'revolved' around him was because he was the only one up there with the skill to get hold of the ball and make something happen - It wasn't an intentional ploy to make him central to everything, it's just that if we played the ball up to anyone else it would be wasted or come bouncing back.

Mendes-Laing was knackered and became ineffective (still saw loads of the ball), Barkhuizen jaded from finding himself mostly out of the team, Collins was never in the right place (more interested in hugging defenders), Dobbin again saw a lot of the ball, had plenty of chances but was massively wasteful in front of goal, Sibley was shifted around, Knight usually deployed at RB/RWB, White lightweight and ineffective. We didn't really have anyone in the squad capable of running in behind a defence once Osula left.

Removing McGoldrick from the team would have solved none of those issues. Having him in the team didn't see others starved of the ball, if anything it was the opposite - he'd win it back himself and bring others into play, without him it was pinball. His presence didn't force Collins to stand in the wrong place whenever we crossed the ball in.

It's all just seems very convenient, and strikes me more as a phrase I saw someone use the other day - copium.

Putting that aside...

We may well be that we end up a more balanced team this season, but we're nowhere near achieving that yet. Where is this extra variety? The only thing we've really added to the team in an attacking sense is the wingbacks, and they're really just doing the same job NML was doing last season (just from both sides now), and maybe some extra pressing from Washington.

The other players we've been properly linked with in attack (other than Ladapo but it doesn't seem likely we get him) have all been fox-in-the-box types, upgrades on Collins - there's no added variety there, and we no longer have anyone in the squad who'll drop deep and offer the extra element of control McGoldrick did.

Edited July 19, 2023 by Kokosnuss

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Kokosnuss said:

I just find this such a revisionist view, and one that only really started to be voiced when it became apparent McGoldrick was leaving.  That's not to say there weren't a couple of people having such thoughts, but it wasn't a widespread view.

Prior to that it was all about who we could get to complement him and take the workload off, nothing about us not sharing the play around as a tactic, or because of his presence.

The only reason our system 'revolved' around him was because he was the only one up there with the skill to get hold of the ball and make something happen - played the ball up to anyone else and it would come bouncing back

Mendes-Laing was knackered and became ineffective (still saw loads of the ball), Barkhuizen jaded from finding himself mostly out of the team, Collins was never in the right place (more interested in hugging defenders), Dobbin again saw a lot of the ball, had plenty of chances was massively wasteful in front of goal, Sibley was shifted around, Knight usually deployed at RB/RWB, White lightweight and ineffective. We didn't really have anyone in the squad capable of running in behind a defence once Osula left.

Removing McGoldrick from the team would have solved none of those issues. Having him in the team didn't see others starved of the ball, if anything it was the opposite - he'd win it back himself and bring others into play, without him it was pinball. His presence didn't force Collins to stand in the wrong place whenever we crossed the ball in.

It's all just seems very convenient, and strikes me more as a phrase I saw someone use the other day - copium.

Putting that aside...

We may well be that we end up a more balanced team this season, but we're nowhere near achieving that yet. Where is this extra variety? The only thing we've really added to the team in an attacking sense is the wingbacks, and they're really just doing the same job NML was doing last season (just from both sides now), and maybe some extra pressing from Washington.

The other players we've been linked with in attack have all been fox-in-the-box types, upgrades on Collins - there's no added variety there, and we no longer have anyone in the squad who'll drop deep and offer the extra element of control McGoldrick did.

I think on balance you are right - whether it's the benefit of hindsight or, more likely as you say, revisionism. I felt I might have been in a minority of one (though I probably wasn't and just failed to spot similar remarks) for adding any qualification to McGoldrick's brilliance at the time he was scoring most of our goals, chiefly that he gave the ball away far too much (on which point I have to only half-agree with your point about his adding an extra element of control).

But on the whole, I don't think he saw (much) more of the ball than anyone else; it is possible though that both fans and players alike started to place more emphasis and expectation on him as the season went on - and to a large extent he didn't disappoint because he did so well in front of goal.

[May Contain Nuts]

23 minutes ago, jameso said:

I felt I might have been in a minority of one (though I probably wasn't and just failed to spot similar remarks) for adding any qualification to McGoldrick's brilliance at the time he was scoring most of our goals, chiefly that he gave the ball away far too much (on which point I have to only half-agree with your point about his adding an extra element of control).

Hmmm, I can't say i noticed him giving it away that much, but I can accept that maybe I'm wrong!

When I'm talking about the 'element of control' I'm thinking of those times when he danced around opposition defenders, creating space and time for the other players to catch up - maybe he did give the ball away a lot after that, but the alternative would be that we didn't have possession of the ball in the first place?

I guess if we end up pressing better as a unit, we can skip the middle-man (McG) in favour of applying more pressure on their defence collectively - or maybe that's going to be Washington's role, harassing them rather than embarrassing them -  and winning the ball back that way (possibly higher up the pitch)

Edited July 19, 2023 by Kokosnuss