Transfer Window Thread

[Dithering Dougie]

Cahill had a bit more ability and it was an entirely different set up. The role of our number 10 now has changed and naismith isnt suited

He's not doing bad then scoring 17 goals in the last two seasons if he doesn't suit the team, most support strikers would love those type of figures.

 

[AaronTheBlue]

Cahill averaged 8 goals a season, Naismith with a crap start and being played out of position in his first season averages 7 while being used as a sub a lot more.

There's very little difference between the two, right down to their arial ability and wind up antics. The only difference is Naismith has been prolific against the RS and told everyone how much he loves the club.

Naismith has scored four, five and six in the league.

The only time cahill scored less than six, is when he was in his last season, and when he got injured and only played 18 games.

Even in all competitions cahill still outscores Naismith.

And as someone said before, different way of playing completely.

 

[marty mcfly]

Cahill averaged 8 goals a season, Naismith with a crap start and being played out of position in his first season averages 7 while being used as a sub a lot more.

There's very little difference between the two, right down to their arial ability and wind up antics. The only difference is Naismith has been prolific against the RS and told everyone how much he loves the club.

Cahill wouldn't be good enough for us today either.

 

[ftk43]

Cahill averaged 8 goals a season, Naismith with a crap start and being played out of position in his first season averages 7 while being used as a sub a lot more.

There's very little difference between the two, right down to their arial ability and wind up antics. The only difference is Naismith has been prolific against the RS and told everyone how much he loves the club.

Cahill could also pass to our own players, not just score.

 

[Kiwi]

No need for name calling. We'll see in 49 days then. Vault me.

Will happily take you up on an avatar bet mate.
The loser wears this until January 1st.

You're betting we won't sign an attacking midfield player of any significance yes?

 

[marty mcfly]

Will happily take you up on an avatar bet mate.
The loser wears this until January 1st.

You're betting we won't sign an attacking midfield player of any significance yes?

No way.

 

[Furey1878]

I agree we would need new striker but it's only after CB and creative CM.
1.CB
2.#10
3.striker/keeper

So it's not exactly a priority.

It'll be hard finding a player who is equally adept at saving shots as he is scoring them...

 

[BlueToff]

Cahill wouldn't be good enough for us today either.

Surely this is a wind up? Different systems obviously, but Cahill in his prime would walk straight into the team.

 

[Dithering Dougie]

Naismith has scored four, five and six in the league.

The only time cahill scored less than six, is when he was in his last season, and when he got injured and only played 18 games.

Even in all competitions cahill still outscores Naismith.

And as someone said before, different way of playing completely.

Cahill scored 5-6 in his second and third season, identical to Naismith's figures and started a lot more games being used as our focal point in attack. Let's not try kid people here they perform a similar role and do it equally well, there's no point in shipping out good players that score goals when we're short of good players who score goals.

 

[Dithering Dougie]

Cahill wouldn't be good enough for us today either.

Don't be daft, like we can turn our nose up at a good player who's a regualr goals scorer.

 

[sageyefc]

He's not doing bad then scoring 17 goals in the last two seasons if he doesn't suit the team, most support strikers would love those type of figures.

Good figures thats why we should try to cash in, he does slot but his play is to the detriment of the team. He can barely pass a ball

 

[AaronTheBlue]

Cahill scored 5-6 in his second and third season, identical to Naismith's figures and started a lot more games being used as our focal point in attack. Let's not try kid people here they perform a similar role and do it equally well, there's no point in shipping out good players that score goals when we're short of good players who score goals.

in his third season he played 18 games in the league, naismith played 30.

Cahill could also, pass, he was much better technically (even though he wasn't that good technically in the first place)

and the fact he could score any type of goal where as naismith can only score one.

If you actually think Naismith is any where near close to Cahill in terms of ability you need your head testing.

Naismith is Cahill lite.

 

[Kiwi]

It'll be hard finding a player who is equally adept at saving shots as he is scoring them...

Thought that Boruc fellow used to play outfield before hopping in goal

 

[Eggs]

That doesn't mean much. The vast majority of them won't make it and you win things by having the best "team".

What you need to find is one diamond to make it hopefully every season. Not a youth team of really good players.

.....Youth Cups are sometimes won with a diamond, I think Gascoigne won it and Rooney nearly did. Saying that you do get the odd team that produces a group who are very successful, Man Utd an obvious example but even our team with Osman in had a few who came through.

It's all so difficult to predict, it's so hard to bring one through each year but like the 61 bus sometimes a few come along at the same time. I'm not saying this is the case now but RM might believe we have a couple of diamonds.

 

[sageyefc]

Surely this is a wind up? Different systems obviously, but Cahill in his prime would walk straight into the team.

TBH he wouldnt, at least in the style we try to play now, not good enough with the ball at his feet, maybe if he switched and played more forward