- Jan 30, 2011
- 106
- 248
Agree with this. It’s the difference between city signing Haaland and going up levels to win the treble versus Chelsea having exciting wingers but no one to finish and regressing despite their spending. I appreciate chelsea we’re in transition perhaps, but it matters.Some people will try and spin this in a positive way. But it’s really not that much money in todays market, and I think this is a massive step backwards for the club.
Some people don’t remember what it was like not having a top striker at the club. Until Kane came along we hadn’t had a regular 20 goal a year striker at the club for donkeys years. Not having a reliable goal scorer up front can make teams very inconsistent. It’s why Strikers always go for the top money and earn the top wages. We will struggle to attract a replacement that will reliably replace those goals.
It’s all good and well thinking an attacking team will make up for that, but it doesn’t. I know from experience that it didn’t under Jol, and it didn’t under Redknapp. Neither manager had a truly reliable goalscorer, and neither were able to have the team consistently performing at the top of the league. That’s despite having some truly brilliant attacking talent from midfield that often chipped in with goals. That’s never enough.