|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on May 22, 2011 23:08:18 GMT
Jamie O'Hara was last seasons Charlie Adam and he's really pulling up tree's a Wolves # Absolute, utter garbage. Come on at least deal with facts. O'hara would improve our midfield, but is not on the same level with Adam. He scored what, 1 goal last season for Portsmouth? Charlie Adam has scored...god knows, but double figures in both goals and assists. He is a very very good player. I'd take o'hara too.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on May 22, 2011 23:09:24 GMT
He's not even that bloody good, he can take free kicks and the odd Hollywood pass comes off, i'd have David Vaughan, Mark Noble or Jack Collison over that over-rated. mis-shape toothed, Dundonian tosser any day of the week. What garbage. I'll remind you of that when we sign him, because we WILL sign him, mark my words son
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on May 22, 2011 23:09:26 GMT
i see your point but at the same time is he not just a relatively good (not brilliant as MOTD would have us thinking) player in a shite team?? No. If anything its harder to be good in a shit team! He has to force posession for himself and he has to make passes that the rest of his "shite" players cant. He also has to score 12+ goals a season withou the help of his "shite" teamates. The fact that Adam was part ofa relegation team highlights just how good a player he was. He carried them, without him they would have probably ended up with less points than Derby! That's a very one-sided argument. The other side is he plays in an incredibly open and attack minded team that gives him lots of options to pick passes and shine. The whole team was built around him and that always makes players look better than they are. He's also a bit of a liability defensively as he's overweight, slow and immobile. I'm not saying he's a bad player but these are a few reasons why he's looked so good and probably wouldn't have the same affect for us.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on May 22, 2011 23:11:06 GMT
Charlie Adam no.1 priority imo...offer £6 million, see the reaction on Holloway's face and take it from there. If we cannot get him for under £11 million then sod it. no.2 = replacement for Fuller and Tuncay (one who can offer back up on the wing as currently if either of our wingers is not on top of their game we inevitably lose). no.3 = full back Then we can take it from there. Have you seen our bench - three players is nowhere near enough with Europe an all - nowhere near enough And someone else can waste their money on Adams I agree, i think we need at least 6 new better quality players AT LEAST. All i'm saying is lets prioritise, get our most important aquisitions, then build from there. Charlie Adam should be no.1 priority and i think he will be.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on May 22, 2011 23:14:31 GMT
No. If anything its harder to be good in a shit team! He has to force posession for himself and he has to make passes that the rest of his "shite" players cant. He also has to score 12+ goals a season withou the help of his "shite" teamates. The fact that Adam was part ofa relegation team highlights just how good a player he was. He carried them, without him they would have probably ended up with less points than Derby! That's a very one-sided argument. The other side is he plays in an incredibly open and attack minded team that gives him lots of options to pick passes and shine. The whole team was built around him and that always makes players look better than they are. He's also a bit of a liability defensively as he's overweight, slow and immobile. I'm not saying he's a bad player but these are a few reasons why he's looked so good and probably wouldn't have the same affect for us. No! beardy I just cant agree. Hes a great player, and has been a success in a terrible team. So do you think Whitehead and Delap would shine in Blackpool's team, score 30 yard screamers every couple of weeks and spray the ball about the park if they set the team up so they could thrive?
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on May 22, 2011 23:20:29 GMT
That's a very one-sided argument. The other side is he plays in an incredibly open and attack minded team that gives him lots of options to pick passes and shine. The whole team was built around him and that always makes players look better than they are. He's also a bit of a liability defensively as he's overweight, slow and immobile. I'm not saying he's a bad player but these are a few reasons why he's looked so good and probably wouldn't have the same affect for us. No! beardy I just cant agree. Hes a great player, and has been a success in a terrible team. So do you think Whitehead and Delap would shine in Blackpool's team, score 30 yard screamers every couple of weeks and spray the ball about the park if they set the team up so they could thrive? No but they also wouldn't be in a team that let the most goals in by a country mile. If you play like Blackpool do then all the attacking players will look better than they actually are and all the defensive ones will look shit as they are totally reckless and gung-ho. As i said, he's not a bad player by any stretch of the imagination but in that team everything is in his favour. I'd honestly rather take Joey Barton.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on May 22, 2011 23:22:28 GMT
Cole and Jerome plus Palacios would be a cracking transfer window.
Add a couple of up and coming players like Snodgrass and Maynard and I would be delighted.
|
|
|
Post by PoisonedDonkey on May 22, 2011 23:24:06 GMT
Cole and Jerome plus Palacios would be a cracking transfer window. Add a couple of up and coming players like Snodgrass and Maynard and I would be delighted. Cole and Jerome? Oh b-loody dear. God help us.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on May 22, 2011 23:24:31 GMT
No! beardy I just cant agree. Hes a great player, and has been a success in a terrible team. So do you think Whitehead and Delap would shine in Blackpool's team, score 30 yard screamers every couple of weeks and spray the ball about the park if they set the team up so they could thrive? No but they also wouldn't be in a team that let the most goals in by a country mile. If you play like Blackpool do then all the attacking players will look better than they actually are and all the defensive ones will look shit as they are totally reckless and gung-ho. As i said, he's not a bad player by any stretch of the imagination but in that team everything is in his favour. I'd honestly rather take Joey Barton. Now you have developed a one sided argument because we dont have any decent attacking midfielders and you know I cant argue against your case I guess Whelan is...what about if Whelan was in the Blackpool starting xi, would he be banging them in for fun? Whelan is a decent player in honesty, but as good as Adam? No chance. Joey Barton 5 years ago possibly. But cant stand the man, and now hes getting no younger. We have to look at younger options now as its about creating a team for the long-haul!
|
|
|
Post by march4 on May 22, 2011 23:26:26 GMT
Cole and Jerome plus Palacios would be a cracking transfer window. Add a couple of up and coming players like Snodgrass and Maynard and I would be delighted. Cole and Jerome? Oh b-loody dear. God help us. God help opposition defences. Jerome scored 11 Prem goals last season when he was fit. And Cole is a current England international who regularly gets into double figures goalscoring wise. They are perfect additions to our dogs' home.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on May 22, 2011 23:29:53 GMT
Cole and Jerome? Oh b-loody dear. God help us. God help opposition defences. Jerome scored 11 Prem goals last season when he was fit. And Cole is a current England international who regularly gets into double figures goalscoring wise. They are perfect additions to our dogs' home. Jerome I could just about accept as he has pace. Cole I beg no! The guy has barely proven hes a premier league striker bar that one season. looks quite out his depth whenever I see him to be quite honest. yes he played for England, but it means little as so did Jay Bothroyd But most crucially re Cole is that he is 28 next season, has reached his peak, and will not be improving. He is not the type of player that will improve with age in my view. If we have to sign a player past his peak i'd like to see Anelka in a Stoke shirt. You heard it here first
|
|
|
Post by PoisonedDonkey on May 22, 2011 23:31:14 GMT
He's not bad, but we could do alot better. ALOT better.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on May 22, 2011 23:32:09 GMT
God help opposition defences. Jerome scored 11 Prem goals last season when he was fit. And Cole is a current England international who regularly gets into double figures goalscoring wise. They are perfect additions to our dogs' home. Jerome I could just about accept as he has pace. Cole I beg no! The guy has barely proven hes a premier league striker bar that one season. looks quite out his depth whenever I see him to be quite honest. yes he played for England, but it means little as so did Jay Bothroyd But most crucially re Cole is that he is 28 next season, has reached his peak, and will not be improving. He is not the type of player that will improve with age in my view. If we have to sign a player past his peak i'd like to see Anelka in a Stoke shirt. You heard it here first Cole is still playing for England. He is a regular in the squad and played only 12 months ago. I'm sure I mentioned Anelka about 30mins ago, but I'm not going to create an issue, so long as we sign him ;D
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on May 22, 2011 23:33:14 GMT
No but they also wouldn't be in a team that let the most goals in by a country mile. If you play like Blackpool do then all the attacking players will look better than they actually are and all the defensive ones will look shit as they are totally reckless and gung-ho. As i said, he's not a bad player by any stretch of the imagination but in that team everything is in his favour. I'd honestly rather take Joey Barton. Now you have developed a one sided argument because we dont have any decent attacking midfielders and you know I cant argue against your case I guess Whelan is...what about if Whelan was in the Blackpool starting xi, would he be banging them in for fun? Whelan is a decent player in honesty, but as good as Adam? No chance. Joey Barton 5 years ago possibly. But cant stand the man, and now hes getting no younger. We have to look at younger options now as its about creating a team for the long-haul! Without question Whelan would score a lot more for Blackpool than he does for us and they would have conceded a lot less if he was in there instead of Adam. If you can't see that then you're an idiot. ;D It's swings and roundabouts and Whelan wouldn't cost 8-10 million so it's not exactly a fair comparison. I want quality in midfield as much as you do but i'm always willing to see a players faults aswell as his plusses and Adam has his fair share. I'll spin the argument for you. Do you really think Adam would score as many goals for us as he has for Blackpool?
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on May 22, 2011 23:34:21 GMT
Jerome I could just about accept as he has pace. Cole I beg no! The guy has barely proven hes a premier league striker bar that one season. looks quite out his depth whenever I see him to be quite honest. yes he played for England, but it means little as so did Jay Bothroyd But most crucially re Cole is that he is 28 next season, has reached his peak, and will not be improving. He is not the type of player that will improve with age in my view. If we have to sign a player past his peak i'd like to see Anelka in a Stoke shirt. You heard it here first Cole is still playing for England. He is a regular in the squad and played only 12 months ago. I'm sure I mentioned Anelka about 30mins ago, but I'm not going to create an issue, so long as we sign him ;D Heskey also was a regular, you want him too? Ah well I mentioned Anelka yesterday too you see But your right, as long as we get him its all good.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on May 22, 2011 23:35:35 GMT
Cole is still playing for England. He is a regular in the squad and played only 12 months ago. I'm sure I mentioned Anelka about 30mins ago, but I'm not going to create an issue, so long as we sign him ;D Heskey also was a regular, you want him too? Ah well I mentioned Anelka yesterday too you see But your right, as long as we get him its all good. Heskey WAS a regular Carlton Cole IS a regular in the England squad.
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on May 22, 2011 23:37:39 GMT
Heskey also was a regular, you want him too? Ah well I mentioned Anelka yesterday too you see But your right, as long as we get him its all good. Heskey WAS a regular Carlton Cole IS a regular in the England squad. So are Green and Upson and they're nowt special either
|
|
|
Post by march4 on May 22, 2011 23:38:49 GMT
Heskey WAS a regular Carlton Cole IS a regular in the England squad. So are Green and Upson and they're nowt special either Someone must rate them (and he probably looks like Postman Pat)
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on May 22, 2011 23:41:40 GMT
Now you have developed a one sided argument because we dont have any decent attacking midfielders and you know I cant argue against your case I guess Whelan is...what about if Whelan was in the Blackpool starting xi, would he be banging them in for fun? Whelan is a decent player in honesty, but as good as Adam? No chance. Joey Barton 5 years ago possibly. But cant stand the man, and now hes getting no younger. We have to look at younger options now as its about creating a team for the long-haul! Without question Whelan would score a lot more for Blackpool than he does for us and they would have conceded a lot less if he was in there instead of Adam. If you can't see that then you're an idiot. ;D It's swings and roundabouts and Whelan wouldn't cost 8-10 million so it's not exactly a fair comparison. I want quality in midfield as much as you do but i'm always willing to see a players faults aswell as his plusses and Adam has his fair share. I'll spin the argument for you. Do you really think Adam would score as many goals for us as he has for Blackpool? What?! You're saying Whelan would suddenly develop a technique for scoring on a consistant basis?! Whelan has played in a free role on 2 or 3 occasions this season in a 4-5-1 formation. In fact I think one of which was in our worst performance of the season at West Ham. I like Whelan , but to even begin to suggest he would become a prominent goalscorer simply because Blackpool would set up in a 4-5-1 with him as an attacking mid is wrong. Theres a lot more to scoring than just giving the ball a wack. Whelan's passing is nowhere near consistant enough either to be compared to Adam, and I actually think Glenn is one of our finest players at the minute! Would Adam score as many goals for us? Absolutely, more, because we are a better team than Blackpool. We often get the ball in good areas off flick ons outside the box but lack players with any composure at long range shooting. Hence we dont score many long rangers. It depends where you put Adam. You put him where I would (and I think Pulis would...behind the striker then he could score 15+)...put him in the cage and he'd be restricted, but he'd score a lot from set pieces still and would score a few from open play, and goes without saying would benefit Jones alot with his good vision!
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on May 22, 2011 23:45:22 GMT
In fact, I really struggle to see how people cant see how Charlie Adam would improve us vastly.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on May 22, 2011 23:46:41 GMT
In fact, I really struggle to see how people cant see how Charlie Adam would improve us vastly. I think he was excellent before Christmas. The speculaltion with Liverpool could have turned his head, but he has not been the same player since.
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on May 22, 2011 23:53:28 GMT
Without question Whelan would score a lot more for Blackpool than he does for us and they would have conceded a lot less if he was in there instead of Adam. If you can't see that then you're an idiot. ;D It's swings and roundabouts and Whelan wouldn't cost 8-10 million so it's not exactly a fair comparison. I want quality in midfield as much as you do but i'm always willing to see a players faults aswell as his plusses and Adam has his fair share. I'll spin the argument for you. Do you really think Adam would score as many goals for us as he has for Blackpool? What?! You're saying Whelan would suddenly develop a technique for scoring on a consistant basis?! Whelan has played in a free role on 2 or 3 occasions this season in a 4-5-1 formation. In fact I think one of which was in our worst performance of the season at West Ham. I like Whelan , but to even begin to suggest he would become a prominent goalscorer simply because Blackpool would set up in a 4-5-1 with him as an attacking mid is wrong. Theres a lot more to scoring than just giving the ball a wack. Whelan's passing is nowhere near consistant enough either to be compared to Adam, and I actually think Glenn is one of our finest players at the minute! Would Adam score as many goals for us? Absolutely, more, because we are a better team than Blackpool. We often get the ball in good areas off flick ons outside the box but lack players with any composure at long range shooting. Hence we dont score many long rangers. It depends where you put Adam. You put him where I would (and I think Pulis would...behind the striker then he could score 15+)...put him in the cage and he'd be restricted, but he'd score a lot from set pieces still and would score a few from open play, and goes without saying would benefit Jones alot with his good vision! You don't really listen do you? ;D Blackpool scored 9 more goals than us this season and they did that by committing too many players forwards at every opportunity. This has made players like Campbell and Adam look better than they are as "some people" measure success based on goals and assists. It's a lot easier to score and assist if you have players flooding forward whenever you get the ball. This obviously screws you defensively and why most people wouldn't touch any of their defenders with a barge pole. Adam looks like he's worth 8-10 million in an attacking Blackpool team but he wouldn't in a more restrictive Stoke team. I don't really rate Whelan, Delap or Whitehead but we need somebody that bridges the gap between them and Adam. He's too much of a show pony for us and would compromise us defensively. Joey Barton has the ability to play with and without the ball while i'm far from convinced with Adam. I don't like Barton as a person either but he would be much more suited to us than Adam. I don't see him playing in the hole at all. He's great at sitting deep and spraying long passes. Stick him in the hole and he'd do very little apart from take the free kicks as he wouldn't see enough of the ball.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on May 23, 2011 0:02:42 GMT
What?! You're saying Whelan would suddenly develop a technique for scoring on a consistant basis?! Whelan has played in a free role on 2 or 3 occasions this season in a 4-5-1 formation. In fact I think one of which was in our worst performance of the season at West Ham. I like Whelan , but to even begin to suggest he would become a prominent goalscorer simply because Blackpool would set up in a 4-5-1 with him as an attacking mid is wrong. Theres a lot more to scoring than just giving the ball a wack. Whelan's passing is nowhere near consistant enough either to be compared to Adam, and I actually think Glenn is one of our finest players at the minute! Would Adam score as many goals for us? Absolutely, more, because we are a better team than Blackpool. We often get the ball in good areas off flick ons outside the box but lack players with any composure at long range shooting. Hence we dont score many long rangers. It depends where you put Adam. You put him where I would (and I think Pulis would...behind the striker then he could score 15+)...put him in the cage and he'd be restricted, but he'd score a lot from set pieces still and would score a few from open play, and goes without saying would benefit Jones alot with his good vision! You don't really listen do you? ;D Blackpool scored 9 more goals than us this season and they did that by committing too many players forwards at every opportunity. This has made players like Campbell and Adam look better than they are as "some people" measure success based on goals and assists. It's a lot easier to score and assist if you have players flooding forward whenever you get the ball. This obviously screws you defensively and why most people wouldn't touch any of their defenders with a barge pole. Adam looks like he's worth 8-10 million in an attacking Blackpool team but he wouldn't in a more restrictive Stoke team. I don't really rate Whelan, Delap or Whitehead but we need somebody that bridges the gap between them and Adam. He's too much of a show pony for us and would compromise us defensively. Joey Barton has the ability to play with and without the ball while i'm far from convinced with Adam. I don't like Barton as a person either but he would be much more suited to us than Adam. I don't see him playing in the hole at all. He's great at sitting deep and spraying long passes. Stick him in the hole and he'd do very little apart from take the free kicks as he wouldn't see enough of the ball. Disagree totally. I think you're well off the mark with this one. In fact I think you're trying to make yourself believe that he wouldnt fit into a Stoke set up by coming up with all these theories about how he's responsible for Blackpool's relegation. I think you will find that the players around him were the reason for there goals conceded...have you not noticed the fact that they have a back 4 of barely a league 1 standard outfit?, and what makes it more remarkable, is the fact he's carried these players, that he single handedly brought that team points out of nothing. Aside from all the abilities i've mentioned, hes got it all right mentally. Has a great attitude, believes in himself (which far too many of our current midfielders dont), and thus he doesnt lack confidence. You can come up with your theories of how he would be overrun etc (based on absolutely 0 appearances in a 4 man midfield), but thats your mistake, because stick him in a Stoke shirt today, and I tell you now (whether he was playing behind Jones or instead of Delap), we wouldnt have been walking away disappointed after suffering a defeat that lacked invention and spark. He is a match winner. Joey Barton isnt, and hes also an utter bastard. As for all these players " flooding forward", do you really think they were responsible for Adam's success? They arent creative players, they are shit players who cost you about 25 k. I'd love to see how many assits to Charlie Adam there full backs have...i'd suspect a big fat 0.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on May 23, 2011 0:10:07 GMT
And you were meant to listen, as YOU asked the question
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on May 23, 2011 0:18:47 GMT
You don't really listen do you? ;D Blackpool scored 9 more goals than us this season and they did that by committing too many players forwards at every opportunity. This has made players like Campbell and Adam look better than they are as "some people" measure success based on goals and assists. It's a lot easier to score and assist if you have players flooding forward whenever you get the ball. This obviously screws you defensively and why most people wouldn't touch any of their defenders with a barge pole. Adam looks like he's worth 8-10 million in an attacking Blackpool team but he wouldn't in a more restrictive Stoke team. I don't really rate Whelan, Delap or Whitehead but we need somebody that bridges the gap between them and Adam. He's too much of a show pony for us and would compromise us defensively. Joey Barton has the ability to play with and without the ball while i'm far from convinced with Adam. I don't like Barton as a person either but he would be much more suited to us than Adam. I don't see him playing in the hole at all. He's great at sitting deep and spraying long passes. Stick him in the hole and he'd do very little apart from take the free kicks as he wouldn't see enough of the ball. Disagree totally. I think you're well off the mark with this one. In fact I think you're trying to make yourself believe that he wouldnt fit into a Stoke set up by coming up with all these theories about how he's responsible for Blackpool's relegation. I think you will find that the players around him were the reason for there goals conceded...have you not noticed the fact that they have a back 4 of barely a league 1 standard outfit?, and what makes it more remarkable, is the fact he's carried these players, that he single handedly brought that team points out of nothing. Aside from all the abilities i've mentioned, hes got it all right mentally. Has a great attitude, believes in himself (which far too many of our current midfielders dont), and thus he doesnt lack confidence. You can come up with your theories of how he would be overrun etc (based on absolutely 0 appearances in a 4 man midfield), but thats your mistake, because stick him in a Stoke shirt today, and I tell you now (whether he was playing behind Jones or instead of Delap), we wouldnt have been walking away disappointed after suffering a defeat that lacked invention and spark. He is a match winner. Joey Barton isnt, and hes also an utter bastard. As for all these players " flooding forward", do you really think they were responsible for Adam's success? They arent creative players, they are shit players who cost you about 25 k. Do you really think i sit here trying to 'make up' reasons why a certain player wouldn't suit us? ;D It's just my opinion, try and deal with it, it's not some sort of conspiracy against Charlie Adam or you. ;D I didn't say HE was reponsible for Blackpool getting relegated. All i've said is attacking players will always look better playing for teams who play like Blackpool or Arsenal and not so good playing for teams like us or Birmingham. I notice you dodged the bit about them outscoring us despite the fact we have much better players than they do. Adam is a decent player but we wouldn't get him for less than 8-10 million. I think we'd score more with him in but we'd also concede more aswell. I don't think the nett gain (if any) would be worthy of 10 million pounds. Barton could do all the work that Whelan does and create and score a lot more aswell and he's probably available for about 3 million. If Adam worked like Whelan and Barton do i'd have him in a heartbeat but he doesn't. You like to gloss over that part of his game while i prefer to include it aswell as his undoubted good points.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on May 23, 2011 0:29:26 GMT
Disagree totally. I think you're well off the mark with this one. In fact I think you're trying to make yourself believe that he wouldnt fit into a Stoke set up by coming up with all these theories about how he's responsible for Blackpool's relegation. I think you will find that the players around him were the reason for there goals conceded...have you not noticed the fact that they have a back 4 of barely a league 1 standard outfit?, and what makes it more remarkable, is the fact he's carried these players, that he single handedly brought that team points out of nothing. Aside from all the abilities i've mentioned, hes got it all right mentally. Has a great attitude, believes in himself (which far too many of our current midfielders dont), and thus he doesnt lack confidence. You can come up with your theories of how he would be overrun etc (based on absolutely 0 appearances in a 4 man midfield), but thats your mistake, because stick him in a Stoke shirt today, and I tell you now (whether he was playing behind Jones or instead of Delap), we wouldnt have been walking away disappointed after suffering a defeat that lacked invention and spark. He is a match winner. Joey Barton isnt, and hes also an utter bastard. As for all these players " flooding forward", do you really think they were responsible for Adam's success? They arent creative players, they are shit players who cost you about 25 k. Do you really think i sit here trying to 'make up' reasons why a certain player wouldn't suit us? ;D It's just my opinion, try and deal with it, it's not some sort of conspiracy against Charlie Adam or you. ;D I didn't say HE was reponsible for Blackpool getting relegated. All i've said is attacking players will always look better playing for teams who play like Blackpool or Arsenal and not so good playing for teams like us or Birmingham. I notice you dodged the bit about them outscoring us despite the fact we have much better players than they do. Adam is a decent player but we wouldn't get him for less than 8-10 million. I think we'd score more with him in but we'd also concede more aswell. I don't think the nett gain (if any) would be worthy of 10 million pounds. Barton could do all the work that Whelan does and create and score a lot more aswell and he's probably available for about 3 million. If Adam worked like Whelan and Barton do i'd have him in a heartbeat but he doesn't. You like to gloss over that part of his game while i prefer to include it aswell as his undoubted good points. No but your forgetting that we would in my opinion score so many more goals WITH him in the team that the fact we would (most likely) concede more would be outweighed by the more goals we score. Suppose we score 20 more goals WITH Adam in the team we might concede 10 more than this season....so what would you rather see? The end product would be beneficial. I dont deny that he is more vulnerable than Whitehead, Whelan and Delap in a defensive sense, but his qualities going forward would improve us. Its also worth noting that if we brought in a very competent "destroyer" such as Palacios then why could we not equal it all out with Adam in the team. A better defender than Delap, and a Adam would be a better attacker than Whelan...so actually if we sign a good partner for Adam then actually we may NOT concede more goals than this season. You dont need 2 defensive mids doing excactly the same job. And I still stand by the idea that Adam could be a very useful player playing behind a front man, his long shots and clever vision could be vital in and around the penalty area...something we havent seen at Stoke in a long long time. oh and re "making up" reasons for a player to suit us...I have often glorified Stoke players to others in order to promote what i would like to see happen. Its human nature bud. Also, as for this debate...i'm certainly NOT glossing over anything. I'm still mystified as to how you cant see his obvious qualities which would surely outweigh a slight lapse defensively. Its hardly like the guys a pussie, he can put in a tackle ffs ;D
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on May 23, 2011 0:48:38 GMT
Do you really think i sit here trying to 'make up' reasons why a certain player wouldn't suit us? ;D It's just my opinion, try and deal with it, it's not some sort of conspiracy against Charlie Adam or you. ;D I didn't say HE was reponsible for Blackpool getting relegated. All i've said is attacking players will always look better playing for teams who play like Blackpool or Arsenal and not so good playing for teams like us or Birmingham. I notice you dodged the bit about them outscoring us despite the fact we have much better players than they do. Adam is a decent player but we wouldn't get him for less than 8-10 million. I think we'd score more with him in but we'd also concede more aswell. I don't think the nett gain (if any) would be worthy of 10 million pounds. Barton could do all the work that Whelan does and create and score a lot more aswell and he's probably available for about 3 million. If Adam worked like Whelan and Barton do i'd have him in a heartbeat but he doesn't. You like to gloss over that part of his game while i prefer to include it aswell as his undoubted good points. No but your forgetting that we would in my opinion score so many more goals WITH him in the team that the fact we would (most likely) concede more would be outweighed by the more goals we score. Suppose we score 20 more goals WITH Adam in the team we might concede 10 more than this season....so what would you rather see? The end product would be beneficial. I dont deny that he is more vulnerable than Whitehead, Whelan and Delap in a defensive sense, but his qualities going forward would improve us. Its also worth noting that if we brought in a very competent "destroyer" such as Palacios then why could we not equal it all out with Adam in the team. A better defender than Delap, and a Adam would be a better attacker than Whelan...so actually if we sign a good partner for Adam then actually we may NOT concede more goals than this season. You dont need 2 defensive mids doing excactly the same job. And I still stand by the idea that Adam could be a very useful player playing behind a front man, his long shots and clever vision could be vital in and around the penalty area...something we havent seen at Stoke in a long long time. oh and re "making up" reasons for a player to suit us...I have often glorified Stoke players to others in order to promote what i would like to see happen. Its human nature bud. Also, as for this debate...i'm certainly NOT glossing over anything. I'm still mystified as to how you cant see his obvious qualities which would surely outweigh a slight lapse defensively. Its hardly like the guys a pussie, he can put in a tackle ffs ;D Let's get one thing straight mate. I DO see his obvious qualities and often they are very, very impressive. Unfortunately when it's time to get the cash out i also see him playing in a team that is built around him and his very high price tag. I just think in our team he wouldn't be very good value for money as he would be expected to do a lot more donkey work in a midfield 4, of which he's not very good at. Yes i would prefer him instead of any of our 3 midfielders and we would be much better to watch but i don't think he's worth 10 million. I just think our team would suit players more in the mould of Parker and Barton rather than Adam. In other words, ones that can defend and attack. If he lost a stone, found a yard of pace, learnt how to tackle and put in more of a shift he'd be well worth 10 million but it's unlikely. I just don't think his attacking abilities are SO good that we can overlook these issues, especially not at that price. When you look at how shit he was for Rangers in a very poor league it adds a bit more doubt and enhances the argument that Blackpool have suited his style of play perfectly. Would we? I'm not so sure.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on May 23, 2011 0:52:38 GMT
No but your forgetting that we would in my opinion score so many more goals WITH him in the team that the fact we would (most likely) concede more would be outweighed by the more goals we score. Suppose we score 20 more goals WITH Adam in the team we might concede 10 more than this season....so what would you rather see? The end product would be beneficial. I dont deny that he is more vulnerable than Whitehead, Whelan and Delap in a defensive sense, but his qualities going forward would improve us. Its also worth noting that if we brought in a very competent "destroyer" such as Palacios then why could we not equal it all out with Adam in the team. A better defender than Delap, and a Adam would be a better attacker than Whelan...so actually if we sign a good partner for Adam then actually we may NOT concede more goals than this season. You dont need 2 defensive mids doing excactly the same job. And I still stand by the idea that Adam could be a very useful player playing behind a front man, his long shots and clever vision could be vital in and around the penalty area...something we havent seen at Stoke in a long long time. oh and re "making up" reasons for a player to suit us...I have often glorified Stoke players to others in order to promote what i would like to see happen. Its human nature bud. Also, as for this debate...i'm certainly NOT glossing over anything. I'm still mystified as to how you cant see his obvious qualities which would surely outweigh a slight lapse defensively. Its hardly like the guys a pussie, he can put in a tackle ffs ;D Let's get one thing straight mate. I DO see his obvious qualities and often they are very, very impressive. Unfortunately when it's time to get the cash out i also see him playing in a team that is built around him and his very high price tag. I just think in our team he wouldn't be very good value for money as he would be expected to do a lot more donkey work in a midfield 4, of which he's not very good at. Yes i would prefer him instead of any of our 3 midfielders and we would be much better to watch but i don't think he's worth 10 million. I just think our team would suit players more in the mould of Parker and Barton rather than Adam. In other words, ones that can defend and attack. If he lost a stone, found a yard of pace, learnt how to tackle and put in more of a shift he'd be well worth 10 million but it's unlikely. I just don't think his attacking abilities are SO good that we can overlook these issues, especially not at that price. When you look at how shit he was for Rangers in a very poor league it adds a bit more doubt and enhances the argument that Blackpool have suited his style of play perfectly. Would we? I'm not so sure. Well...theres one way to find out ey? TP Could surely give him a bit more physical presence, look at how he beefed up the Turk ;D Ah, you seem concerned, particularly about the price...which is another issue altogether, and I agree, this could be an issue. I'd pay £10 million IF we could get a Palacios type player on the cheap. If not then £8 million, same price as Kenwyne i'd settle on.
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on May 23, 2011 1:04:01 GMT
Let's get one thing straight mate. I DO see his obvious qualities and often they are very, very impressive. Unfortunately when it's time to get the cash out i also see him playing in a team that is built around him and his very high price tag. I just think in our team he wouldn't be very good value for money as he would be expected to do a lot more donkey work in a midfield 4, of which he's not very good at. Yes i would prefer him instead of any of our 3 midfielders and we would be much better to watch but i don't think he's worth 10 million. I just think our team would suit players more in the mould of Parker and Barton rather than Adam. In other words, ones that can defend and attack. If he lost a stone, found a yard of pace, learnt how to tackle and put in more of a shift he'd be well worth 10 million but it's unlikely. I just don't think his attacking abilities are SO good that we can overlook these issues, especially not at that price. When you look at how shit he was for Rangers in a very poor league it adds a bit more doubt and enhances the argument that Blackpool have suited his style of play perfectly. Would we? I'm not so sure. Well...theres one way to find out ey? TP Could surely give him a bit more physical presence, look at how he beefed up the Turk ;D Ah, you seem concerned, particularly about the price...which is another issue altogether, and I agree, this could be an issue. I'd pay £10 million IF we could get a Palacios type player on the cheap. If not then £8 million, same price as Kenwyne i'd settle on. The price is always part of the issue for me, they come hand in hand with any transfer unless you hav a bottomless pit of cash. Even if Adam is the slightly better player, 3 million for Barton makes more sense for the team if you can use the other 5-7 million improving the squad elsewhere. If you have a finite amount of resources then the way you improve is by buying players who are better than their market value. Pennant and Etherington are the perfect examples. I just think Adam is overvalued at the moment and would put a huge dent in our budget that he doesn't justify.
|
|
|
Post by Caddick988 on May 23, 2011 1:20:12 GMT
Lets give Blackpool abit more respect shall we. They may have gone down today however there not as bad as people make out. Going forward they are a constant threat, however at the back they are useless.
Personally if we signed Adam (which I believe to be very unlikely) he'd do a fantastic job. Get him to work hard in midfield, help us keep the ball and boss games. He is probably the best dead ball specialist in the Prem so would help with our set pieces which is a major part of our game. Ideally you would want an enforcer next to him, ball winning etc. Parker or Mulumbu.
|
|