|
Post by londonterrier23 on Sept 20, 2013 16:00:46 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by 3Pipe on Sept 20, 2013 16:08:57 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by Colt Seavers on Sept 20, 2013 16:16:18 GMT 1
Lets clarify this - people would vote for a player who stated he didnt want to play for Town no more over a player who has said he likes playing for Town - the question is who would i pick in my Town team - Duh the guy who wants to play for em as opposded to the wanna be FRISP Grasping the concept isn't your strongest subject is it?
|
|
|
Post by mykindatown on Sept 20, 2013 20:24:25 GMT 1
I get it loud n clear
The stated question is ~ Who would you prefer in the Town starting 11, James Vaughan or Jordan Rhodes?
I personally would never pick a player who openly admitted he wanted a transfer away from Town and didnt want to play for the club
if you believe the question shoukld be who do you think is the better striker then have that debate
|
|
|
Post by softboy on Sept 20, 2013 21:55:46 GMT 1
If Vaughan cost 600k & Rhodes was sold for £8m is he therefore 14 times better than Vaughan - of course he is! Otherwise people would not be critising DH for selling JR.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2013 10:07:41 GMT 1
If Vaughan cost 600k & Rhodes was sold for £8m is he therefore 14 times better than Vaughan - of course he is! Otherwise people would not be critising DH for selling JR. That makes perfect sense.... not. Soft-in-the-head-boy strikes again
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2013 10:12:49 GMT 1
If Premiership managers/coaches/scouts thought Rhodes could do it at that level, wouldn't someone have bought him by now? They've been looking at him long enough. And surely (let's say) £10 million is a fair price for the 20 goals many of you are convinced he'd get. What do you think is stopping them? Personally, I don't think his all round game is good enough for that level and he wouldn't get the space there to score the goals he does in the Championship. I think he would struggle... and I also think most Premiership managers agree with me. There, I've said it now. But surely that is why these clubs pay fortunes out for countless backroom staff with differing job titles. A footballer isn't born over night, nor is footballing ability genetic(Alan Carr for example). Some have a natural gift others have to work that little bit harder. What Rhodes has, is a natural ability to regularly find the back of the net. If his overall game isn't up to scratch(which is up for debate) the at 23, someone should be coaching him towards getting there. The FA work of the 4 corner model. Technical, Psychological, Social and Physical, from Mini Soccer right up to the Pro game. When trying to create the perfect footballer, they look at these attributes and work on them in reverse order. No good working on your strengths, that will just be enhanced with time, but work on your weakness. This can be translated into anything in life. Why am i not a wealthy business man, i know, because i am bloody useless with money, i have no discipline, that will be Psychological then. So just to bring it back on track, if Vaughan is better than Rhodes, all round, then why would Norwich let us have him for 600k, that alone tells me, that if premier chiefs don't think Rhodes has an all round game when he would have cost 8m they certainly don't think James Vaughan does and he was less of a risk factor at a 10th of the price. It's purely down to his injury record, nothing to do with his ability. Had Vaughan stayed relatively injury free during his time at Carrow road, there's absolutely no chance anyone would have got him for 600k.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Sept 21, 2013 10:23:09 GMT 1
If he hadn't had his injuries he would never have been at Palace or Norwich.
|
|
|
Post by Essex Terrier on Sept 21, 2013 21:08:37 GMT 1
Interesting comment on BFRC board today - "We should also not be afraid to take Rhodes off as he might as well not have bothered turning up today." seems a similar theme to some that were on here a few years ago and similar to opinions posted on this thread earlier.
Best goal scorer Town have had but not a team player?
Still have him back any day!
|
|
|
Post by ACW on Sept 21, 2013 23:34:24 GMT 1
Looking at the two players in isolation - i.e. forgetting the transfer fees, reasons for leaving, etc - it would be a difficult decision, but I would probably go for Rhodes as I think he is the more natural goal scorer. I think Vaughan offers more to the team in general play, but Rhodes is a goal machine. And he's proved it playing for teams that don't create loads of chances. His goal return for Blackburn, playing in a struggling team, was phenomenal last season.
It'll be interesting to see how the two of them compare at the end of this season - assuming neither has any lengthy injury lay off.
|
|