Brewster

[AnstonBlade1]

Brewsters crap and should be released. End of discussion, shouldn’t even be a debate whether he gets a new contract or not.
He’s been the worst signing in our history.

 

[bertieblade]

Brewsters crap and should be released. End of discussion, shouldn’t even be a debate whether he gets a new contract or not.
He’s been the worst signing in our history.

But that is past tense
What does he bring to the table now
I would suggest that he is playing better than any of our other forwards

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

Brewster missed half of the 2023-24 season with injury. He started three matches total. He combined played minutes totalling up to fewer than four matches.

I wouldn’t even massively stick up for whether Brewster could’ve done better previously because clearly he could’ve done. But presenting these stats like you have done is a bit off IMO.

Saying he only started three matches and ignoring the other 200+ minutes he played as a substitute is a bit off IMO.

 

[GrunkyPeep]

Saying he only started three matches and ignoring the other 200+ minutes he played as a substitute is a bit off IMO.

Your maths is wrong.

Removing the games he started leaves you with 110 minutes. 11 mins per game on average for games he hasn't started.

Not exactly a huge amount of time for a striker in a team producing sod all changes (his xG across all those sub appearances is 0.1)

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

Your maths is wrong.

Removing the games he started leaves you with 110 minutes. 11 mins per game on average for games he hasn't started.

Not exactly a huge amount of time for a striker in a team producing sod all changes (his xG across all those sub appearances is 0.1)

Your maths is wrong.

Of the games he came on as a substitute he played 19 minutes against West Ham, 20 minutes against Fulham, 44 minutes against Man Utd, 26 minutes against Man City and 37 minutes against Tottenham.

That's 146 minutes already without including the other five games he played as a substitute.

 

[TJ blade]

Brewsters crap and should be released. End of discussion, shouldn’t even be a debate whether he gets a new contract or not.
He’s been the worst signing in our history.

I'll dispute worst signing, because over the years we've signed some right shit! What I will give you is costly! Maybe not his fault that, but it's quite evident his signing hasn't worked. I cannot for the life of me see why we're offering him another contract! Bottom line is Wilder signed him and he's still trying to justify doing so

 

[mattbianco1]

McGoldrick scored 8 in 2020-21.

Brereton Diaz and McBurnie scored 6 each in 2023-24.

Brewster scored 0 in both.

McGoldrick started 28 games in 2020-21 - Brewster started 12

BBD started 14 and McBurnie started 15 in 2023-24 - Brewster started 3

Minutes on the Pitch

2020-21
McGoldrick = 2,402
Brewster = 1,122

2023-24
BBD = 1,110
McBurnie = 1,285
Brewster = 340

 

[GrunkyPeep]

Your maths is wrong.

Of the games he came on as a substitute he played 19 minutes against West Ham, 20 minutes against Fulham, 44 minutes against Man Utd, 26 minutes against Man City and 37 minutes against Tottenham.

That's 146 minutes already without including the other five games he played as a substitute.

Please include the other games, I'd like to know if that number is above or below 200.

(Apologies if I jumped the gun in calling your maths wrong, the site I'm using gives different numbers for how much he's played so my figures might be wrong based on where I was finding them)

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

McGoldrick started 28 games in 2020-21 - Brewster started 12

BBD started 14 and McBurnie started 15 in 2023-24 - Brewster started 3

Minutes on the Pitch

2020-21
McGoldrick = 2,402
Brewster = 1,122

2023-24
BBD = 1,110
McBurnie = 1,285
Brewster = 340

And why did McGoldrick, Brereton Diaz and McBurnie all play more minutes than Brewster?

If he can't play because he's injured, coming back from an injury or not fit then he's no good to us.

I don't understand why the injury problems and lack of minutes are constantly put forward as an excuse when it's a perfectly justifiable reason why we need to get rid of him.

 

[mattbianco1]

Even his stats this season are skewed. It shows that he's played 25 games. But he's only played 961 minutes. That's just over 10 full games.

It's damn near impossible to get any scoring rhythm when the game time is so inconsistent.

Wilder pissed me off though twice. He dropped him the following game after both his goals - why? Strikers thrive off confidence.

 

[mattbianco1]

And why did McGoldrick, Brereton Diaz and McBurnie all play more minutes than Brewster?

If he can't play because he's injured, coming back from an injury or not fit then he's no good to us.

I don't understand why the injury problems and lack of minutes are constantly put forward as an excuse when it's a perfectly justifiable reason why we need to get rid of him.

Why are people so quick to slag him?
He's missed games due to injuries. They're not his fault, but part and parcel of the game.

If he'd missed games due to long term suspensions - Suarez, Suffo, Di Canio etc. then fine, throw everything at the guy. But all i've seen from Brewster is a lad that's been unlucky with injuries and has always had the right attitude.

Jack Wilshere, Owen Hargreaves and Michael Owen all had injury troubles in their careers. Wilshere in particular was similar to Brewster. He'd come back then soon after would end up out again.

Nobody has anything bad to say about Jack O'Connell. And i'll save you your time with your - "yeah but he gave us loads before getting injured, 'what's Brewster given us'" response... Again - Brewster's injuries aren't his fault, and neither was Jack O'Connell's

If Brewster reads this forum, he'd be forgiven for just wanting to sack it off and retire, such is the hatred thrown at him

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

Wilder pissed me off though twice. He dropped him the following game after both his goals - why?

Because Moore, Campbell, Rak-Sakyi, Brereton Diaz and Cannon are all better than him.

 

[Nicolaus_Copernicus]

Money is a finite resource and I just try and view things very basically:

1.) I want us to get promoted this season.

2.) I want us to remain in the PL for as long as possible.

Does granting new deals to RND, JLT and Brewster improve the chances of either and or both of these things occurring? No.

Therefore spend the money on things/players that do.

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

Why are people so quick to slag him?
He's missed games due to injuries. They're not his fault, but part and parcel of the game.

If he'd missed games due to long term suspensions - Suarez, Suffo, Di Canio etc. then fine, throw everything at the guy. But all i've seen from Brewster is a lad that's been unlucky with injuries and has always had the right attitude.

Jack Wilshere, Owen Hargreaves and Michael Owen all had injury troubles in their careers. Wilshere in particular was similar to Brewster. He'd come back then soon after would end up out again.

Nobody has anything bad to say about Jack O'Connell. And i'll save you your time with your - "yeah but he gave us loads before getting injured, 'what's Brewster given us'" response... Again - Brewster's injuries aren't his fault, and neither was Jack O'Connell's

Ah, the old slagging him excuse again.

I'm not slagging him, I just don't think he's good enough to play for a top end Championship/Premier League club.

Why am I not allowed to voice that opinion?

And then we get the, 'injuries aren't his fault' claptrap again.

Who has ever said that it was his fault he got injured?

Nobody.

 

[mattbianco1]

Because Moore, Campbell, Rak-Sakyi, Brereton Diaz and Cannon are all better than him.

After he scored at Millwall, the following game was Plymouth. Ryan One started ahead of him. BBD & Cannon weren't here. Campbell was injured and Moore was on the bench alongside him

After he scored at Swansea, Cannon started the next game v Hull with BBD making his full debut too. We lost 3-0

 

[mattbianco1]

And then we get the, 'injuries aren't his fault' claptrap again.

Who has ever said that it was his fault he got injured?

Even if you don't say they're his fault, you're denying they've had an affect on his career.

Pick a lane

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

Even if you don't say they're his fault, you're denying they've had an affect on his career.

No, I'm not.

I've just explained that if he's constantly injured then he's no good to us.

It can't be used as an excuse.

 

[LondonBlade89]

Saying he only started three matches and ignoring the other 200+ minutes he played as a substitute is a bit off IMO.

I mentioned all of the minutes he played, no?

 

[UddersBlade]

But surely he is only one more injury from this conversation being ended? I just can’t understand why we’d want to tie ourselves up in knots and give him a new contract right now. For me he still has not proved his fitness week in week out.

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

I mentioned all of the minutes he played, no?

So again we go back to the question of why he only started three matches last season?

Was it because he was injured/not fit or because he's not good enough to get into the team?

Either way he's no good to us.

 

[GrunkyPeep]

Your maths is wrong.

Of the games he came on as a substitute he played 19 minutes against West Ham, 20 minutes against Fulham, 44 minutes against Man Utd, 26 minutes against Man City and 37 minutes against Tottenham.

That's 146 minutes already without including the other five games he played as a substitute.

Where have you found your information from? I can't find anywhere that lists him playing 44 mins against Man U.

Transfermarkt - 38
Fbref - 39
Flashscore 39

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

Where have you found your information from? I can't find anywhere that lists him playing 44 mins against Man U.

Transfermarkt - 38
Fbref - 39
Flashscore 39

They're not adding on the 6 minutes added time.

 

[GrunkyPeep]

They're not adding on the 6 minutes added time.

Where did you find that information?

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

Where did you find that information?

The Google match report says there was 6 minutes added time.

The ESPN commentary also says the final whistle was blown on 90+6.

 

[Balham]

After he scored at Millwall, the following game was Plymouth. Ryan One started ahead of him. BBD & Cannon weren't here. Campbell was injured and Moore was on the bench alongside him

After he scored at Swansea, Cannon started the next game v Hull with BBD making his full debut too. We lost 3-0

The Plymouth match was 3 days after we beat Millwall and Brewster had only just come back from injury. The Hull game was 3 days after we beat Swansea which in turn was three days after we beat Norwich; Brewster started both the Norwich and Swansea games. Clearly the sports scientists and medical teams were of the opinion that Brewster couldn't start more matches in quick succession. In fact, the Norwich/Swansea games are the only ones Brewster has started in succession this season.

There's an opinion above that Moore is better than Brewster. That's laughable.

 

[LondonBlade89]

So again we go back to the question of why he only started three matches last season?

Was it because he was injured/not fit or because he's not good enough to get into the team?

Either way he's no good to us.

We’re going back to a question I didn’t argue against. I was just making a point re: the stats you used. I didn’t think it would be an especially big deal.

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

There's an opinion above that Moore is better than Brewster. That's laughable.

Go on then, let's hear this.

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

We’re going back to a question I didn’t argue against. I was just making a point re: the stats you used. I didn’t think it would be an especially big deal.

It's not a big deal.

The bottom line is, he didn't play all that much and when he did he didn't do anything.

Which pretty much sums up his entire Blades career thus far.

 

[GrunkyPeep]

The Google match report says there was 6 minutes added time.

The ESPN commentary also says the final whistle was blown on 90+6.

Fair play.

Looks like I was in the wrong then, sorry.

Every database you find gives you minutes played but doesn't include time added on.

Had to look individually at every game for time added on and stick it into a spreadsheet and add it to the time played.

Ballache.

Means he fully played a total of 400 instead of 340 that most places reference.

Why are no stats places properly tracking this?

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

Why are no stats places properly tracking this?

I think you just answered your own question.

It's a ball ache.