ardiles&villa
Well-Known Member
- Jul 14, 2013
- 1,988
- 5,481
Would he be as effective when in a team that doesn’t play counter attack? I’m not surw
Pedro Neto
- Thread starter Archibald&Crooks
- Start date
This is a very good point and it highlights a flaw in using yesterday's game as an example against our current options and for Neto.
Let Son and Neto switch teams in yesterday's game, and the exact same outcome as we saw would still be very plausible.
Not saying Neto wouldn't improve us by the way, I think he's fantastic. Just pointing out that he wouldn't be able to do most of the things that impressed us yesterday, if he played the same game in our colours.
ardiles&villa
Well-Known Member
- Jul 14, 2013
- 1,988
- 5,481
Exactly
I mean the fact that he’s is technically a better dribbler than anyone we have at present would point in the direction he would.
Nick-TopSpursMan
Well-Known Member
- Aug 4, 2005
- 4,132
- 19,836
Disagree. Neto is capable of doing all the things Son, Werner and Johnson can do off the ball on the counter but the difference is he’s better on the ball.
He can take people on from a standing start, play quick 1-2s, drive to the byline on both sides etc. So even with them stuck behind the ball, Neto would have unsettled them more.
Dribblers are so important against low blocks. They disrupt low blocks and create space around the pitch for teammates. If a dribbler beats someone, it causes panic among the opposition and opens up a gap.
Because we don’t really have anyone who can dribble, we can only disrupt opponents with perfectly timed passing sequences and quick combos, which relies on perfection too often imo. This is why the best teams always have dribblers. Guardiola has spoken about this before.
Neto is far more aggressive than any of our players on the ball. Deki is easily the best technical attacker we have but he lacks explosiveness and pace. Neto would be our most complete attacker in possession because he’s capable of running in-behind, playing quick combos but also taking people on 1v1.
Having him yesterday would have helped us a lot.
west indie
Well-Known Member
- Dec 5, 2006
- 626
- 510
Need to be sounding out, both Neto and Nico Williams for either wing in the summer, to help elevate the way we play
Agree fully with every single point here.
But it doesn't really address the point I made, which was that using his performance yesterday as an example of why we should get him is flawed. Because what he did good yesterday is what our options generally can do as well. He did not look dangerous to me when our defense was organised.
I'm sure you're right that he would be more effective than our current options against a low block though. Dribbling and pace is certainly not a bad combination in those situations, but personally I haven't seen enough of him in those scenarios. (Can't be that common playing for Wolves?) But again, I don't doubt you on that point.
If you're going that route Chiesa's contract ends 2025 (next year), plays on the left and Neto can play on the right? Two talented, tricky, creative and forward thinking players who can take their opponents on and create space for others. Maybe sell GLC, move Deki to 10 competition with Madders, sell Gil and Solomon, buy Werner? Chiesa/Werner - Son/Rich - Neto/Johnson
Completely unrealistic and would leave the rest if the squad in need again but wild idea time is here
King of the Lane
Well-Known Member
- Dec 3, 2010
- 4,123
- 23,681
Would personally love this. I definitely think we need 2 WFs in the summer as its currently our weakest area.
Ghost Hardware
Well-Known Member
- Aug 31, 2012
- 18,329
- 63,034
Huge fan of Chiesa and I agree he would fit the system excellently. I think there is a very high chance he leaves this summer. Like you point out his contract is running low and thus far all Juve’s offers have been bellow what Chiesa is looking for. It’s pretty much a repeat of the Dybala situation, Juve just don’t have the money and they won’t want him going on a free so they will probably put him up for sale in the summer.
I think what also makes things easier for Juve is that they have Yildiz who is making waves for Juve and plays in pretty much the same position. Even yesterday against Verona Yildiz was picked ahead of Chiesa which felt to me like a conscious move with one eye on next season. Up until now Yildiz had been filling in for Chiesa when he had been injured or lacking fitness but apparently he was fully fit for the match.
This leads on to the biggest issue for me. Chiesa is a phenomenal player and one who would suit us perfectly plus he’s also a natural on ether wing. Like you point out him and Neto would be an excellent pair in theory. This season he has really started to look like him old self. BUT all that being said he has still been picking up numerous minor injuries and setbacks all season. Even tho when fit he has been unplayable at times he has consistently been in and out of the team.
As a player I would take him in a heartbeat as I think he would be an upgrade on what we have. The problem for me comes with his fitness. I have no idea if he is going to continue getting these knocks for the rest of of his career, if it looks likely then unfortunately we should probably pass. If however the medical department were convinced he could move past them then yes I’d take him as with one year left and Juve in financial difficulties I can’t see him cost too much.
Ghost Hardware
Well-Known Member
- Aug 31, 2012
- 18,329
- 63,034
I know this is an aggregator account but it was said in a Q&A with the athletic that I think you can only access if your a member so figured it would be okay to post it
theathletic.com
Ask Ornstein Q&A: Our football insider answers your questions
This is your weekly opportunity to ask David Ornstein anything you want about the world of football
theathletic.com
King of the Lane
Well-Known Member
- Dec 3, 2010
- 4,123
- 23,681
I know its Ornstein saying it but I cant see £80m being the fee. All other reports had said around £60m which seems more realistic.
If it turns out to be true then that is us out of the race for him.
If it turns out to be true then that is us out of the race for him.
ultimateloner
Well-Known Member
- Jan 25, 2004
- 4,569
- 2,203
even 60m is too expensive IMO. not enough goals + assists to justify that price tag.
Nine while nine
Undead
- Jan 28, 2011
- 5,693
- 79,407
Maybe the £60m quoted is just the transfer fee, and the other £20m consists of agents' fees, signing-on fees etc.
In other words, the Neto cost will be £60m, but the grosso cost is £80m.
Nick-TopSpursMan
Well-Known Member
- Aug 4, 2005
- 4,132
- 19,836
I still think he ends up going for £60-65m.
Here is an interesting choice really. Williams release clause £43m paid in 1 lump sum. Or Neto for £65m paid in 3/4 instalments.
I wonder which deal the club would prefer if we wanted one of them.
Here is an interesting choice really. Williams release clause £43m paid in 1 lump sum. Or Neto for £65m paid in 3/4 instalments.
I wonder which deal the club would prefer if we wanted one of them.
dirtyh
One Skin, two skin.....
- Jun 24, 2011
- 8,692
- 25,283
good shout, probably £10m for wolves and £70m for mendes
What Lies Beneath
Expectation is the root of all heartache
- Jul 29, 2011
- 1,189
- 60,181
Update : club are showing keen interest about this deal in the summer and are becoming more encouraged . Have to move early on it when season closes work will start now . But Neto is slowly becoming a no 1 target currently .
ButchCassidy
Well-Known Member
- Jul 12, 2012
- 3,986
- 15,846
People always bring up the lump sum thing like it’s a restriction but surely the club could agree on a payment plan for a slightly higher fee with a bank or third party? Or in turn, with Bilbao themselves? They can’t usually spend much on transfers anyway due to their Basque policy.
