You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Alvarez replacement thread
- Thread starter It'sBlue93:20
- Start date
Gabriel
Well-Known Member
So basically any old geysir…According to the Daily Mail (I know) City are looking at a player from FC Copenhagen. An Icelandic guy, Orri Oskarsson. Or possibly Magnus Magnusson.
Cobwebcat
Well-Known Member
I trust Pep to make the most of the players we have got. I’d rather have him use a false nine or adapt a player for a striker for a few games (wasn’t Foden our top scorer behind Haaland?) than buy a short term fix we struggle to move on at a later date. Last time Haaland was injured we hardly collapsed, we just adapted until his return and some posters said we actually looked better (I disagree, we just won differently)
I’ve no problem if City feel they can’t wait for Echeverri (can play a nine and gets lots of goals from midfield) or need someone now but likewise I don’t think we would struggle greatly if we didn’t.
PSR punishes you more for bad signings if you get it wrong.
I’ve no problem if City feel they can’t wait for Echeverri (can play a nine and gets lots of goals from midfield) or need someone now but likewise I don’t think we would struggle greatly if we didn’t.
PSR punishes you more for bad signings if you get it wrong.
Centurions
Well-Known Member
He's headed for Girona (if true) is he not?According to the Daily Mail (I know) City are looking at a player from FC Copenhagen. An Icelandic guy, Orri Oskarsson. Or possibly Magnus Magnusson.
I'm saying Alvarez is a legit 9 and a great second option to have behind Haaland. The fact that he is good enough to lead the line in 90+% of the world's clubs is the reason he chose to leave. The fact that he has left doesn't mean we don't need a second 9. The notion that we have a world class back up to Haaland or no one at all is ridiculous.Alvarez was not a 10 much less did he struggle as one. I'd've preferred he stayed as a 9 vs what we have at present. Im not bought in to the fallacy of playing a false nine. .. some appear to be but they avoid admitting it'd be played as the only option in absence of a back up.
In summary, I am in total agreement with you that we should bring in a second 9 for the squad who can do a professional job when Haaland is not available...
Last time Haaland got hurt we had Julian Alvarez to step in...I trust Pep to make the most of the players we have got. I’d rather have him use a false nine or adapt a player for a striker for a few games (wasn’t Foden our top scorer behind Haaland?) than buy a short term fix we struggle to move on at a later date. Last time Haaland was injured we hardly collapsed, we just adapted until his return and some posters said we actually looked better (I disagree, we just won differently)
I’ve no problem if City feel they can’t wait for Echeverri (can play a nine and gets lots of goals from midfield) or need someone now but likewise I don’t think we would struggle greatly if we didn’t.
PSR punishes you more for bad signings if you get it wrong.
Cobwebcat
Well-Known Member
and Foden still outscored him and isn’t needed on the wing now.Last time Haaland got hurt we had Julian Alvarez to step in...
I got crucified on here about a month ago for even suggesting that...imagine what a radical idea it was to keep a youngster around whose been at the club for half his life as insurance at a position for which we have no true back up. WTF was I thinking? I didn't even say it was a must do, just something to consider...Said this in another thread but it's a non starter... shouldn't have sold Delap. Ahh well!
Did you check the numbers Alvarez put up in the 9 when Haaland was out? WTF does Foden adding goals as an AM have to do with that?and Foden still outscored him and isn’t needed on the wing now.
decmancity
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2010
- Messages
- 12,962
Nowhere near good enough, thats why he was sold. Pretty simple.I got crucified on here about a month ago for even suggesting that...imagine what a radical idea it was to keep a youngster around whose been at the club for half his life as insurance at a position for which we have no true back up. WTF was I thinking? I didn't even say it was a must do, just something to consider...