Keifer Moore £1.8m

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?


If we're in for Moore then would it be a permanent because if it's a loan then is that it then with Thomas coming too?

There's no actual link to us just speculation from the article that we're the type of PL club that would be in for him. Can't see it myself, thought Hecky wanted pace and athleticism, Moore is an out an out unit and more like Gary Madine. I loved Madine with United but I thought we'd be more likely for an attacking mid than spending money on a target man.
 
If Moore comes in I will be a bit deflated, I thought we were done signing carthorses of the stature of Darious Henderson, Higdon, James Hanson etc …
 
It’s interesting that everyone assumes Moore will be the backup, I think Hecky could be thinking starter with McBurnie as backup
 
designedbyross said:
£1.8m is the title of the thread from 2020 by the way, no mention of fee this time around, I’m not against the signing but I really hope it’s not our 2nd loan spot.
Click to expand...

Exactly my thoughts.
Great option to have but doesn't lift the ceiling of thus squad. That's what those loans are supposed to do.
 
N
NateDogg said:
I don't want him but you'd rather be entertaining and lose? This season we just have to finish 17th. If we play absolutely shit every game and achieve that would you not take it?
Click to expand...
personally, no. Just doesn’t do it for me that type of footie.

Feel like we moved away from that since wilder and would hate for us to go back to that stereotypical industrial style. Instead I want to see us build to compete technically, and with flair and excitement.

If we want to attract better talent then moore style hoof and hope will alineate us long-term from picking up flair/creative players who are the difference at this level. I would rather go down with our heads held high than spend a season smacking it long with no guarantee of success.
 
Harry's Game said:
If Moore comes in I will be a bit deflated, I thought we were done signing carthorses of the stature of Darious Henderson, Higdon, James Hanson etc …
Click to expand...

I don’t see an issue with his stature, Moore is a very decent centre forward. He’s a far better footballer than any of the others you mention. He’s a full international who’s performed pretty well in a few international tournaments.

It’s not like we’d be relying on him to single handedly keep us up. We’ve just signed Archer who was plenty on here’s first choice forward. Moore and Traore as sub options behind McBurnie and Archer looks pretty good to me.
 
SUFCinks said:
N

personally, no. Just doesn’t do it for me that type of footie.

Feel like we moved away from that since wilder and would hate for us to go back to that stereotypical industrial style. Instead I want to see us build to compete technically, and with flair and excitement.

If we want to attract better talent then moore style hoof and hope will alineate us long-term from picking up flair/creative players who are the difference at this level. I would rather go down with our heads held high than spend a season smacking it long with no guarantee of success.
Click to expand...
Whilst an extreme example Manchester City have a lump upfront who isn't a flair player or really even involved until in the box but is a physical powerhouse. Room for both.
 
Latters said:
I don’t see an issue with his stature, Moore is a very decent centre forward. He’s a far better footballer than any of the others you mention. He’s a full international who’s performed pretty well in a few international tournaments.

It’s not like we’d be relying on him to single handedly keep us up. We’ve just signed Archer who was plenty on here’s first choice forward. Moore and Traore as sub options behind McBurnie and Archer looks pretty good to me.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t matter who we sign, if we don’t get a couple of AM we’re not creating fuck all for them.
 

We were looking forward to Return of the Mac but it's actually Return of the Hoof 😉
 
Berkshire Blade said:
Whilst an extreme example Manchester City have a lump upfront who isn't a flair player or really even involved until in the box but is a physical powerhouse. Room for both.
Click to expand...
I know the angle you are coming from but not sure it adds up. The only similarity is that haaland & Moore are strong & tall. In every other comparison there is sadly no further likeness that can be made between Man City - Haaland and Sheff U - Keifer Moore.
 
SUFCinks said:
I know the angle you are coming from but not sure it adds up. The only similarity is that haaland & Moore are strong & tall. In every other comparison there is sadly no further likeness that can be made between Man City - Haaland and Sheff U - Keifer Moore.
Click to expand...
Strong and tall is a option we don't really have. MCburnie isn't that In a traditional sense. I am not against having it as a option whatsoever
 
SUFCinks said:
N

personally, no. Just doesn’t do it for me that type of footie.

Feel like we moved away from that since wilder and would hate for us to go back to that stereotypical industrial style. Instead I want to see us build to compete technically, and with flair and excitement.

If we want to attract better talent then moore style hoof and hope will alineate us long-term from picking up flair/creative players who are the difference at this level. I would rather go down with our heads held high than spend a season smacking it long with no guarantee of success.
Click to expand...
Did / do Bournemouth play “industrial style…hoof and hope” ?
 
Moan? Nope-I saw Longhorn said:
Did / do Bournemouth play “industrial style…hoof and hope” ?
Click to expand...
when Moore plays they launch balls into the box. They also have a squad full of more technically gifted players which means he gets limited game time so 95% of the time they don’t play an industrial style. He’s used as a last resort option. I get it in that scenario.

We have Mcburbie who does a similar job with better feet. I doubt Hecky wants another ‘target man’ in the squad.
He’s not a very saleable asset, he limits our play, he doesn’t add much more than what we have already, reduces our wage and transfer budget for talented players.

I know some folk don’t mind some hoof but if we want to build long term then we need to have more ability in the squad. If we want prem ambitions then Moore is a very short sighted approach IMO.
 
I've always been in favour of a big man option and liked that we brought Hanson and Madine in, who both made impacts.

If we could afford to bring Moore in as an almost special team player, I wouldn't be too against it.

However, we're not in that position and I think the PL is a different animal to the leagues below in this regard.

The club has thankfully gone down a different route in recent times, trying to build a proper sustainable football philosophy from the Academy upwards.

No playing the percentages shite.

Remember going to a forum years ago where Blackwell and Robinson were talking about their trip to Sao Paolo. All they were impressed by was how big the Brazilian players were.

Kiefer Moore is a step backwards imho in our current situation.
 
I really wouldn't mind this signing - takes some of the burden off McB and allows us to get Osula out on loan (we're going to hinder his development if he keeps having to step in in the Prem at this stage).
 
SUFCinks said:
when Moore plays they launch balls into the box. They also have a squad full of more technically gifted players which means he gets limited game time so 95% of the time they don’t play an industrial style. He’s used as a last resort option. I get it in that scenario.

We have Mcburbie who does a similar job with better feet. I doubt Hecky wants another ‘target man’ in the squad.
He’s not a very saleable asset, he limits our play, he doesn’t add much more than what we have already, reduces our wage and transfer budget for talented players.

I know some folk don’t mind some hoof but if we want to build long term then we need to have more ability in the squad. If we want prem ambitions then Moore is a very short sighted approach IMO.
Click to expand...

I don’t think it’s such a bad idea to have two target men in the squad when one of them seems to spend as much time on the treatment table as he does on the pitch?

He may well have just been unlucky to date, but his constant injury niggles have been going on for some 3 seasons or so now.

I suppose the question would be, is there room for two target men in the 25 man squad?
 
Blade58 said:
I don’t think it’s such a bad idea to have two target men in the squad when one of them seems to spend as much time on the treatment table as he does on the pitch?

He may well have just been unlucky to date, but his constant injury niggles have been going on for some 3 seasons or so now.

I suppose the question would be, is there room for two target men in the 25 man squad?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that McB is a traditional target man .... he could probably play off Moore, as could Archer or Traore

UTB & FTP
 
Blade58 said:
I don’t think it’s such a bad idea to have two target men in the squad when one of them seems to spend as much time on the treatment table as he does on the pitch?

He may well have just been unlucky to date, but his constant injury niggles have been going on for some 3 seasons or so now.

I suppose the question would be, is there room for two target men in the 25 man squad?
Click to expand...
And for me its the last bit (and style of play) that i would have an issue with. I think it would be wasteful.
 
As I've said on another thread, beggars can't be choosers.

Moore won't be out of his depth, and all the while we're unable to sign an established forward for upwards of £30mil considering Moore, at a reasonable fee of course, seems eminently sensible.

If he contributes to us staying in the Prem then it's small beer for huge returns.
 

Loans should be based on the following (probably in order);

- What they provide you for the term of the deal, a stop gap, without caring about their value and age. Plenty of top teams use these types of loans to fill gaps in their squad. You see a lot of teams with good academies doing these moves to protect the growth of their youth. The player being signed for a year won't get in the way of the progress of their youth as said loan player will be gone next year.

- A loan with potential of a buy, testing yourself with the player, vice versa, performance dictates the purchase option.

- The chance to see a future star play for you that you otherwise wouldn't have a chance of seeing play permanently for United, but they develop with us, make mistakes with us, probably grow throughout their loan.

Most fans seem to look negatively at the first option. Our accademy seems to be developing some top talent that we can use the odd stop gap loan player to our benefit while we loan our own youth out. Keiffer Moore as an example will only deteriorate season on season now but this season he will ensure we don't get bullied upfront allowing us to progress up the pitch. We need to fight for everything this season, make sure the youth is protected (on new contracts) then have the next plan of evolution for season 2 if we can stop up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom