Striking options.

[BeardedSaXon]

Its no where near 1 in 3 its more like nearly 1 in 6,which for a striker,clearly isn't good enough to start any match.

Bearing in mind he got quite a few of his goals from the bench,bringing him on for Higdon when he looks knackered sounds like a decent idea

Ah...forgot about sub appearances. Don't get me wrong, my statement isn't that he should start. Just that he might be an option to bring on with 20 mins to play

 

[itsinyerblood]

I’d been saying in the previous two seasons when others were writing Ched off as slow and shit, that he would come good, he wasn’t a player that played with his back to goal and it wasn’t a coincidence or luck that he came good, it was about putting the ball where he wanted it and he would do the rest.
Yeah I’m sure that 35 goal strikers aren’t two a penny, they’re a rare commodity. 20 goal strikers are perhaps more available, but you really have to find the one that suits your side better as they’re perhaps less likely to take their chances.
I again don’t think it’s a price tag thing, its about a manager finding the player that suits him. Is Wilson a better player than say, Stevie May, McNulty, Higdon or as I mentioned on my other thread, Shane Long.
For what its worth, I believe that Clough is extremely well placed to get the best out of Higdon, the way we played last season was crying out for a striker of the potential of Higdon. We didn’t really show it too much on Saturday, but if the wingers and fullbacks are getting around the back of defences and whipping the ball in where Higdon wants the ball then he looks an instinctive player to either provide the touch to a team mate or slot home himself. The emphasis there is on the ball going where Higdon wants it. That’s the easy part, ask him where he wants it.
The other area to exploit from last season is the main strikers hold up play, not punching long balls into his head 40 yards from goal, but putting the ball to him, getting it to stick and then playing in the likes of the wingers or Attacking midfielders.
I’m afraid I haven’t seen enough of McNulty to see how he will fit in. So at present I’m favouring a 4-5-1 to 4-3-3 formation. The 4-4-2 change to accommodate McNulty on Saturday didn’t really work, but I’m sure with time it could.

This is tiresome, I'm agreeing with you Swizzler

Of course if we can pick up a relative bargain then brilliant, but to paraphrase NC's own comments, forwards are the costliest part of the equation for a very good reason. I wasn't suggesting we need to pay millions, but even 20 goal a season players are thin on the ground so let's hope that Higdon (whatever his fee was?) comes good. Can't comment about the respective views on Evans, it's after the Lord Mayor's party so to speak, and really it's the present that concerns me. If we do re-sign him, and if he does recapture at least some of his previous form, then we could be formidable up front. But I think there's a lot of water to go under the bridge before any of this happens, so I'm not holding my breath in anticipation.

The question you raise about whether X is better than Y is part conjecture part bias, unless we're talking about proven strikers who deliver season in season out.. I've got faith in Clough to be able to work out who plays best and where. Looking at the revival of Murphy and Flynn shows what he's capable of, plus the way he's quickly assessed who's worth keeping or moving on. Sure, he'll make mistakes, but it's what he delivers longterm that matters, not the occasional error of judgement.

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

Porter averages 5 league goals a season.

As a goal threat he's practically non existant.

 

[grafikhaus]

Ched and Higdon will be fine....

...and then we'll sell 'em!

 

[SwissBlade]

Porter averages 5 league goals a season.

As a goal threat he's practically non existant.

I'd pretty much agree and his record speaks for itself. He simply doesn't get enough goals. But like Baxter I see that he has a role up front. I'm probably being harsh on Baxter as it's not his natural position, last season I liked the way that Jose played though. His movement was good and he took players out of the central positions to allow runners such as Murphy and Scoogs to nip through (similar to how Elliot got his goal against us). Not only this but he also drops deep during attacks again, allowing space for Flynn and Murphy to cut inside and go themselves. The problem with this is obvious though that we often don't have the man in the middle.

Porter is different, he should be a goalscorer but he's just not intelligent enough as a footballer to make the right runs into the danger zones. On the occasions he does, his finishing is poor.

I think where porter comes in is that players can play off him, miller had some success with porter and perhaps at times we could expect McNulty and Porter to link up late in games.

Personally I (or at least like to) see Jose playing a deeper role this season and competing with Scoogs for that attacking midfield slot, so it really gives us Higdon, McNulty and Porter as the strikers.

 

[blade too long]

what about

 

[sitwell]

We had a striker score 35 goals 2 years ago. We didn't go up.

 

[wizadry]

We had a striker score 35 goals 2 years ago. We didn't go up.

I think we all know that was a freak occurrence.

 

[sitwell]

Real Madrid had a striker score 31 in 30 last year ,finished 3rd.

 

[wizadry]

Real Madrid had a striker score 31 in 30 last year ,finished 3rd.

I'll tell you what then,we will just keep Chris Porter as our top goalscorer and fuck all the decent ones off,ffs

They didn't win Champions league either did they

 

[sitwell]

Whats Porter got to do with it ? ,the point was having a high scoring player does not guarantee success ,same as a low scoring one does not guarantee failure.

ffs - here you can have that back, I don't need it.

 

[wizadry]

Whats Porter got to do with it ? ,the point was having a high scoring player does not guarantee success ,same as a low scoring one does not guarantee failure.

ffs - here you can have that back, I don't need it.

You gave two examples of where a goalscorer didn't get success as such.Now if i was to get you some examples of where a goalscorer has got someone success,or saved someone from relegation,(which i'm not going to do by the way because i can't be arsed),i think i could dwarf the examples of goalscorers where the cub hasn't achieved anything.

As for the ffs i'll keep it

 

[alcoblade]

I’d been saying in the previous two seasons when others were writing Ched off as slow and shit, that he would come good

It is true, you did. But to give the full picture, when he was accused of being shit, he was shit. For a long period. And if he wasn't so shit, we wouldn't have been relegated.

To add insult to injury, he came good for a period, then fucked up (literally) again and cost us once more.

We're now in our 4th season in the 3rd division. It's really a broken clock analogy.

UTB