[Albion] The Ridiculous Tedious Striker Situation

[Acker79]

But you just said we only did that because the teams like Leicester were in disarray. I see what your saying, but let’s face it- a Striker would make life much more difficult for the opposition defence. Charlton had a great time last night at the back, they enjoyed themselves.

I didn't 'just' say that. I also said we scored against other teams who just attacked more.

What I'm saying is if you sit two banks of four in front of your goal and hold your line, you're golden. A striker (or an available, affordable striker) that can single handedly collect the ball in front of those players, weave his way through, and finish the chance he has single handedly created, doesn't really exist in our market. And that isn't the football we play, or want to play. We play as 'a team', not 'a group of players, and that one £100m star player'.

Our weakness is taking too long to spot an opportunity, and/or execute the play that makes use of the opportunity, to create goal scoring chances against strong defences. When we can create chances (something that is easier to do when the defence is in disarray, or simply bigger gaps there because they're not parking the bus), we don't have a problem scoring. What use is a player who can finish chances, if you're not creating them because you took so long pulling the trigger, your opponents got back into their defensive line and the pass has gone?

 

[Surf's Up]

We are not prepared/able to pay the kind of money an established striker/s would cost and we keep getting our fingers burned (Undav the latest of a long line) as we try to find a rough diamond to polish up - that is what it is.

 

[Tommy11]

I didn't 'just' say that. I also said we scored against other teams who just attacked more.

What I'm saying is if you sit two banks of four in front of your goal and hold your line, you're golden. A striker (or an available, affordable striker) that can single handedly collect the ball in front of those players, weave his way through, and finish the chance he has single handedly created, doesn't really exist in our market. And that isn't the football we play, or want to play. We play as 'a team', not 'a group of players, and that one £100m star player'.

Our weakness is taking too long to spot an opportunity, and/or execute the play that makes use of the opportunity, to create goal scoring chances against strong defences. When we can create chances (something that is easier to do when the defence is in disarray, or simply bigger gaps there because they're not parking the bus), we don't have a problem scoring. What use is a player who can finish chances, if you're not creating them because you took so long pulling the trigger, your opponents got back into their defensive line and the pass has gone?

We’re on a different page here. A good striker causes problems for defenders on his own accord and also can create chances out of nothing. We lost to Villa last month because of one man- Ings. That’s it. They were crap. We need that striker, I’m not talking hundreds of millions too- but more than £6m we paid for Undav that’s a given. Glenn Murray did the above brilliantly, and he is sorely missed.

 

[nickjhs]

But nowhere in any of that do you disprove what I said, which was we don't have to spend 70 million to find a player who would score more than the zero goals our strikers have managed so far.

Talk about moving the goal posts. Sure we can get a player for a few mil who can score at least one goal. But this is not what we are talking about are we. The general push is for an established striker who going by what we are doing at the moment can score in the top six of current PL strikers. Yep you are correct that won't cost us 70 it will cost a shit load more. And as to Trossard not playing as a striker what do you call a player who is positioned in front of the midfield on a regular basis?

 

[Kosh]

All I know is this, on our quest to unearth a bargain, we must be well on our way to burning through 50 million £ on said bargains who sadly will have minimal resale value... how many more 8 million here and 14 million there forwards are we going to get through before we just give up?

It is what it is, complicated I guess.

 

[macbeth]

Talk about moving the goal posts. Sure we can get a player for a few mil who can score at least one goal. But this is not what we are talking about are we. The general push is for an established striker who going by what we are doing at the moment can score in the top six of current PL strikers. Yep you are correct that won't cost us 70 it will cost a shit load more

Specifically I mentioned 12 goals, 10 players scored more than that last season, so no it is not top six of premier league strikers. Okay, look at those players and a lot aren't affordable, but beneath that you have to go to the 26th highest scorer in the league before you're below double figures, therefore we're talking slight margins of one or two goals. so again, not top six current premier league strikers. Watford found Dennis, Norwich found Pukki, West Ham found Bowen, Leicester found Maddison and Brentford found Toney all for below £30M, sometimes well below in certain cases. Appreciate not all of those suit how we play, and not all of them are strikers, but hey, if the club said we want to, for example, move Trossard to the 9 position more often and signed a new 'forward' type player for the left/right wing, I wouldn't complain and neither would you. So yes, the idea that we cannot find a player to get slightly over double figures for less than 70 million is in fact, as I originally said, bollocks.

I also want to (and have) made it clear that I think there's very few in the squad who are not of the required standard, maybe only Undav. And we're doing fine at the moment. But, as I said in a different post (not sure which thread), IF we want to improve, then yes, that type of player within our budget does exist and is out there. Not an easy task to find, but not a Kane/Salah unicorn by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Wardy's twin]

The style of our play w

Kind of hilarious really…….we need to buy a £60m striker so we can beat 18th place in league 1 Charlton

The worrying bit is we failed to break down a poor league 1 team because our team looked all over the place and we didn't have a plan B that changed the style or the urgency. The subs did nothing to change the game play and that is something we have seen a number of times this season - Brentford, Spurs & Villa just fresh legs same style. Regards the £60 million striker, I would play Ferguson who shows a maturity beyond his age and has the physical attributes of a hold up play centre forward.

 

[Springal]

All I know is this, on our quest to unearth a bargain, we must be well on our way to burning through 50 million £ on said bargains who sadly will have minimal resale value... how many more 8 million here and 14 million there forwards are we going to get through before we just give up?

It is what it is, complicated I guess.

Problem is a £40M striker probably wants £100k+ a week, then what do you do with Dunk, Trossard, AleMac etc etc etc …

 

[nickjhs]

To put it all another way we have the joint seventh best scorer so far this year, two of those above him have 3 penalties each, he has none.. And we have 7 teams who have scored more goals than us. I hardly think we have that big of a problem.

 

[Wardy's twin]

good stats - the issue to me is style of play often over cooking it when a simple QUICK pass would be far better. Against Charlton we were far too slow in getting the ball forward and i don't think that seemed to be noticed by the manager....

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

The worrying bit is we failed to break down a poor league 1 team

We broke them down many times, it was the finishing which was the issue. Lalana hit the crossbar, Colwill just over, someone else had a good shot palmed away, Purvs cross for Ferguson to tap in and then there was Solly’s mazy run and woeful finish. I agree last night was disappointing, finishing crap, but we did not fail to break them down in my opinion, we found a way through numerous occasions.

 

[Acker79]

We’re on a different page here. A good striker causes problems for defenders on his own accord and also can create chances out of nothing. We lost to Villa last month because of one man- Ings. That’s it. They were crap. We need that striker, I’m not talking hundreds of millions too- but more than £6m we paid for Undav that’s a given. Glenn Murray did the above brilliantly, and he is sorely missed.

Danny Ings wasn't breaking down two banks of 4 when he scored against us. In fact, our defence kept leaving a giant gap right down the centre that he took advantage of. He has only scored in 4 games this season (early season underperforming Everton, attacking Brentford, Bolton, and attacking us). Which isn't any better than the attacking players we have and the point I've been trying to make.

 

[Wardy's twin]

We broke them down many times, it was the finishing which was the issue. Lalana hit the crossbar, Colwill just over, someone else had a good shot palmed away, Purvs cross for Ferguson to tap in and then there was Solly’s mazy run and woeful finish. I agree last night was disappointing, finishing crap, but we did not fail to break them down in my opinion, we found a way through numerous occasions.

But on most if not all those occasions they had 9 or 10 in the penalty area. No one on ones just balls put into congested areas. Makes finishing harder as less room to see the ball or you have a smaller target to aim at. Totally agree finishing was poor some of that was due to what I described , some were just very tame efforts that were more like back passes. Dunk also had 2 decent opportunities which he couldn't get on target.

 

[nickjhs]

Specifically I mentioned 12 goals, 10 players scored more than that last season, so no it is not top six of premier league strikers. Okay, look at those players and a lot aren't affordable, but beneath that you have to go to the 26th highest scorer in the league before you're below double figures, therefore we're talking slight margins of one or two goals. so again, not top six current premier league strikers. Watford found Dennis, Norwich found Pukki, West Ham found Bowen, Leicester found Maddison and Brentford found Toney all for below £30M, sometimes well below in certain cases. Appreciate not all of those suit how we play, and not all of them are strikers, but hey, if the club said we want to, for example, move Trossard to the 9 position more often and signed a new 'forward' type player for the left/right wing, I wouldn't complain and neither would you. So yes, the idea that we cannot find a player to get slightly over double figures for less than 70 million is in fact, as I originally said, bollocks.

I also want to (and have) made it clear that I think there's very few in the squad who are not of the required standard, maybe only Undav. And we're doing fine at the moment. But, as I said in a different post (not sure which thread), IF we want to improve, then yes, that type of player within our budget does exist and is out there. Not an easy task to find, but not a Kane/Salah unicorn by any stretch of the imagination.

We seem to be talking past each other. We found Trossard, as we have with several players. What people are demanding are bona fide proven strikers that will join the team and make an immediate difference, that type of player WILL cost well in excess of 70m. The reality check will come when the club's start throwing money around for Trossard and we have to let him go. If we cannot hold onto our finds how the heck do people think we will be able to purchase and keep a drop in forward.

 

[OzMike]

Plenty of goals from the midfield, in fact all players are strikers apart from Sanchez !

 

[BadFish]

The club has a plan and a way of doing things, in all positions, we are doing quite well with it too. We can't rip up the blue print for one on field positions without ripping it up for all of them.

Personally I like what we are doing. Although it would be amazing if one of our striker gambles came good.

 

[macbeth]

We seem to be talking past each other. We found Trossard, as we have with several players. What people are demanding are bona fide proven strikers that will join the team and make an immediate difference, that type of player WILL cost well in excess of 70m. The reality check will come when the club's start throwing money around for Trossard and we have to let him go. If we cannot hold onto our finds how the heck do people think we will be able to purchase and keep a drop in forward.

maybe I'm just naïve, but I honestly believe if we had that other 8-12 goal player there would be much less clamour for a top, top striker. to be honest, most people I've seen on here are suggesting the likes of Diaz or Ings, neither whom are that kind of elite player (not to say either of them are suited to us). younger 'murray', or 'murray with a bit more pace' are the terms that get thrown around quite a lot. the whole point of our model kinda requires us to not hold onto our finds, past a certain point. it's part of the whole 'stepping stone' makeup, the trick is making sure we have the right levers to pull when those departures do happen. we've done well with that so far, but that's actually the reason I do think we could pay a decent amount, say 20M-ish for a new attacker. because as useless as trossard was the other night, if we lose him then that's a major goal source gone, and not exactly a plethora of other goalscorers ready to step into his place

 

[nickjhs]

but I honestly believe if we had that other 8-12 goal player there would be much less clamour for a top, top striker.

What's PG on 5 after 14 games, could easily see him doubling that, also if we can keep Trossard, then build the new players around him. Not forgetting Ali Mac. I really don't see why so many are having conniptions over this. As to the 20m thing as a pundit I read said at 20m you don't really know what you are getting. The vital thing is we develop and hold onto our squad. This has been the mantra of TB and GP. RDZ has made it plain that he sees tross as a forward and hopefully our new recruitment team can be as successful as the before without the locadias etc

 

[Uh_huh_him]

yeah all this "we can't spend £70M in fees and £30M in wages" is ridiculous hyperbole. almost as bad as lallana saying a player of welbecks quality would cost £80M. just complete bollocks.

nobody, outside from a select few, is asking for that. since Hughton left we've had a player get into double figures once. ONCE. that will probably change this season, but having someone just to get around 12 goals would be more than enough. end of the day, we're doing more than well enough in the league, and the club are entitled to buy who they want, but if something's gonna hold us back, it's going to be that

The most important point is, our style of play isn't dependent on a proven striker.
Potter had Glenn Murray at his disposal and had no use for him.

The club want to build a squad based on different attributes to the standard, decent strikers and good service.
We aren't just looking for someone who can get on the end of crosses, they have to have more to their game.

This thread comes out time and time again after we've failed to beat a low block.
There is no guarantee the "proven striker" would have actually made any difference in these games.
Shit happens sometimes.

 

[maltaseagull]

Kind of hilarious really…….we need to buy a £60m striker so we can beat 18th place in league 1 Charlton

No. We need to buy 3 so we can beat them on penalties.