Mr Conway you’re cash cow just netted for Wigan - Best transfer window ever eh ?

I do agree, but would hope we could get better than Eaves!
Certainly not the Austrian fella!

 

I'm not saying Eaves should've been the replacement for Moore but on the basis that Schmidt was I would have to say I'd rather we'd signed Eaves and yes, I think it'd have been worth £6k a week. The absence of a big / target man this season has been a huge factor imo. Whilst I think the plan has been to play out from the back in truth we have little option because if we go long then generally we find the ball coming back at us after opposition centre backs have won it. On multiple occasions earlier in the season in particular we gave the ball away regularly when doing so, resulting directly in conceding goals on some occasions. On others we may not have conceded but the difficulty we very often experienced undermined our overall performance and encouraged the opposition, handing the initiative to them. And of course it also undermined individuals, affecting Andersen's confidence in particular.

Our only option when going long has been Jacob Brown but the success of that has been average at best and really poor against defenders who are strong in the air. I think for example that I read he won 1 out of 11 against Luton the other night? That's not his fault by the way, we've asking him to play a role that he isn't really equipped to do. Having someone to compete physically, particularly in the air with opposition centre backs would give us a plan B and enable us to go long on occasion to mix it up and even if the ball isn't won cleanly gives the opportunity of picking up the bits when they ball drops in the opposition half or midfield. That was the aim when Halme came on as a forward on Tuesday - and it worked, all of a sudden they weren't winning easy ball in their half. Whether it should've been done sooner is a separate conversation. But for me a 10-15 minute cameo illustrated how having a different option can make a difference.

The lack of that option has been an issue all season.

 

Mcgeehan could have done that role. I think he made so many errors earlier on in the season because he was dropping deep to play the ball out from the defenders resulting in losing the ball and opposition goals. As a result he was farmed out on loan. I'd have liked him to be told stay away from our own 18 yard box and play further up the field. That said his finishing was wayward too at times but he id offer some threat and had height.

 

I’d agree is we had bothered to get a reasonable replacement.

 

you could argue patrick shmidt has scored 2 in 22 (eaves 5 in 35 and moore 7 in 32) therefore is a better striker.
If it boils down to wages im sure smidt must be on say £3k per week, so would you rather pay our lad half as much and get him?
A proper target man was the requirement (imho) and yes im sure theres much better than tom eaves but i watched hull the other night and he is twice as effective as "the ghost" (on that and other performances ive seen)....and yea hes young lad etc etc but we sold our leading striker with no half decent replacement...we needed it in the summer, when moore left.

 

How? 1 in 11 versus 1 in 7 and 1 in 5.

 

I think Schmidt will come good if played instead of Woodrow or as a replacement for Woodrow if Woodrow leaves. The lad who should be given a chance is Miller. He has the attributes to play as a target man and has looked assured the tiny bit I've seen of him.

 

they have definitely used the same methodology but have been able to move it further both through investment and from maximising revenue on sales to allow them to refine and target ‘better’ players. If we look at what we got for Pinnock and what they achieved for a player of similar potential in Maupay there the problem lies although I accept Forwards come at additional costs.

 

Every single player we have wants to leave. You manage that.

 

I would argue that neither are the Moore replacement - neither Schmidt or Chaplin are anything like that kind of player. Both would benefit from playing with a Big Man - as would Woodrow. It's an imbalance that we have.

We replaced the keeper and centre halves. We can argue till the cows come home whether said replacements are adequate - but at least they were direct replacements.

We never replaced Moore no matter how you look at it.

Edit: I need a thesaurus. I've typed replaced about 80 times

 

It's the same methodology, just a far bigger budget.

 

In terms of player purchases v player sales income they aren’t making a loss that comes through both investment in Wages and the new stadium. The methodology is very similar stats based research highlighting talent and resale value. They are just a lot better at it than us and have recognised you need to shift targets every window not still fish in the same every decreasing pool. As for Maupay again that just highlights our deficiencies. They sell at the right time we don’t. The 30 million they will get for Benrahma and the similar amount they would get from Watkins if they chose to sell highlights this and would cover pretty much all loses linked to wages.

 

Maybe a better wording would've been "an additional striker" rather than "Moore replacement". Are you suggesting that Schmidt would've signed even if Moore hadn't gone? And that there wasn't a Moore replacement? if so, then the error is in not signing a replacement at all.

And it doesn't change the core point that we've badly missed a different option up-front Loko.

 

Do you mean Benrahma?

 

I agree. He'd certainly have been something different.

 

Yeah sorry typo city

 

The meaning I attached to Moore 'replacement' wasn't that he was the same kind of player. It was more that Schmidt wouldn't have signed if Moore hadn't gone, in which case he is a replacement. Different type of player but nevertheless one bought to replace a player no longer in the squad. I know he wasn't bought to do the same job as Moore and so I'm fully in agreement with you that we never replaced him.

 

Schmidt was signed as back-up to Woodrow. I think that's why Moore left too because he was going to play-off with Woodrow for the central striking birth. That's why we signed Thomas, Wilks and Chaplin to play 4-3-3.