Conor Gallagher

[SpartanSpur]

For those of you respectfully putting up arguments Gallagher v Biss, Kulu, Devine (especially) along with Donley are missing the point hugely Gallagher is not a 6! Don’t tell me he is.

Devine will be here next season. If we are saying he has a higher ceiling than Devine, I will not even bother to argue that. Donley I said will soon be there. And I tell you now, Gallagher potential wise don’t match him. Conclusion splash out 45-55 million on him, then watch how many of our top academy players will want out, they are not stupid. We don’t have a 6 coming through good enough, and that’s what we need.

If we can get a quality 6 then I'd certainly be all for that. I just wouldn't be averse to Gallagher arriving either, as we need a quality alternative for Sarr in the 8 role and I think Conor would be great there. That said if Bentancur didn't have to play 6 he could potentially be great in the 8 position, if Ange sees it this way.

Devine and Donley are more of a fit for the Maddison/Lo Celso role IMHO.

Hopefully there are some #6 names the club is looking strongly at because there is limited links out there. Vermeeren probably the strongest but as a buy-and-loan-back, which I guess would be great business if PEH failed to get a move.

 

[0-Tibsy-0]

Where has the trend for positions to be defined by numbers come from?

It used to just be the 'Number 9' which was a teams top CF.

I'ts very odd.

 

[neilp]

Where has the trend for positions to be defined by numbers come from?

It used to just be the 'Number 9' which was a teams top CF.

I'ts very odd.

I agree, it started to go wrong when they introduced false number 9’s

 

[Rob]

Where has the trend for positions to be defined by numbers come from?

It used to just be the 'Number 9' which was a teams top CF.

I'ts very odd.

Do you really want us to go all Regista and Trequartista?

 

[robotsonic]

Where has the trend for positions to be defined by numbers come from?

It used to just be the 'Number 9' which was a teams top CF.

I'ts very odd.

Imported with steadily increasing US interest, imo. Along with the phrase "generational talent", which can also get in the bin,

 

[George94]

Where has the trend for positions to be defined by numbers come from?

It used to just be the 'Number 9' which was a teams top CF.

I'ts very odd.

I thought it's a fairly common way of defining the roles of a midfield 3...also a lot quicker than writing

Deep lying playmaking anchor man
Box to box engine
Advanced roaming playmaker

 

[For the love of Spurs]

Gallagher is a top level 8, him and Sarr fix that position for years to come, he has the energy to prevent us dropping which is what we seem to do in a number of matches.

I would take Gallagher all day long unless we plan to use Bentancur as an 8, then obviously we need a 6 to compete with Bissouma which is a different profile.

 

[SpartanSpur]

Where has the trend for positions to be defined by numbers come from?

It used to just be the 'Number 9' which was a teams top CF.

I'ts very odd.

Just makes things easier to understand with modern tactics and the more specified roles for each position. Natural evolution from CM/CM to AM/DM to 6/8/10.

It's particularly relevant for Ange's setup. You could simplify and say we play a 4-3-3 or a 4-2-3-1 but the roles are very specific.

6 - Deepest midfielder - Has to be comfortable receiving the ball under pressure and progressing it up the pitch. Has to screen for danger if the opposition plays through our press and snuff it out.
8 - Box to box - All rounder. High energy role. Important part of the press and has to make contributions in both boxes (i.e. late runs into the box and tracking players back)
10 - More advanced creator - Looks to receive the ball in behind the opposition press/between the lines and create chances for the forwards. Leads the press with the striker.

Back in the 4-4-2 days it was much simpler. Oftentimes the midfield two were all rounders, even when there was one more attacking/defensive than the other.

 

[JonnySpurs]

Whether you rate Gallagher or not (I do, FWIW) we have some issues to iron out in our midfield first IMO:

1. Is Bentancur best for us in the 6 or the 8 role?
2. Is Lo Celso reliable enough to keep and would he even sign a contract extension? (has 18 months left IIRC)
3. Is Kulu going to become a regular in CAM?

We can categorise our CMs into three groups pretty easily. 6, 8 and 10 positions, with some being interchangeable to other positions e.g. Lolo (6 or 8) Gio (8 or 10) and Kulu (10 or RW).

6: Bissouma, Bentancur, Skipp
8: Sarr, Lo Celso, Hojbjerg (Devine)
10: Maddison, Kulusevski (Donley)

Outliers: Skipp, Hojbjerg - For me neither of these 2 fit what we need from our 6 or 8 roles and should therefore be moved on. Skipp seems to want to stay but he could easily play CDM/CM for a lower/mid-table Prem team.

I think Bentancur is the key to our midfield. If Lolo is going to be a 6, along with Biss, then we don't need to worry about adding another 6 and going for Gallagher makes sense, particularly if we feel Lo Celso is likely to leave in the future. If Lolo is more likely to be an 8, then we really don't need Gallagher when we already have him, Sarr and Lo Celso (if he stays), not to mention Devine coming through. I personally like him in either position and I believe a really good number 6 is harder to find that a good number 8.

If I had to choose right now, I would want us to sell Hojbjerg (which seems likely) and Skipp (less likely) and add Gallagher because he very much plays in a way that is similar to Sarr, albeit a little more refined I feel. He's high energy, box to box. He showed at Palace that he can score goals from midfield and at Chelsea this season has done a bit of everything, including being creative.

Next season we should be in Europe and will need strong depth. We will have that with this midfield:

6: Bissouma, Bentancur
8: Gallagher, Sarr, Lo Celso (Devine)
10: Maddison, Kulusevski (Donley)

 

[For the love of Spurs]

Where has the trend for positions to be defined by numbers come from?

It used to just be the 'Number 9' which was a teams top CF.

I'ts very odd.

Makes it quick to define when referring to a modern 4-3-3 system.

6: deep lying play maker and holder (Bissouma/Bentancur)
8: Box to box energy (Sarr/Bentancur/Skipp/Hojbjerg/Lo Celso?)
10: roaming playmaker (Maddison/Lo Celso/Kuluveski)

see @George94 & @SpartanSpur posts as well

Depending on what Ange uses Bentancur for either 6 or 8 means we have to buy an additional player. If he uses him as 6 we need another 8 (like Gallagher), if he see's him as a box to box then we need another 6 ideally.

 

[vegassd]

Is Johnson in our starting 11 with everyone fit? For me, it's not yet.

Definitely an argument could be made either way there - but my point was mainly about being able to do Gallagher this January in particular, since it would probably rely on PEH leaving and how much of a revelation Sarr has been.

Johnson was done at the end of summer and at a time when we didn't really know how well the squad might perform under Ange. It was easier to do a bunch of ins and outs I think.

Personally I would quite like Gallagher in our squad, and I can definitely see why Ange would have identified him early on as a top target. But with how good Sarr has been for us I don't think Gallagher would be as much of a difference maker for the remainder of the season for the fat wad of cash he would cost. I think that is the point H88 was making and I agree with it.

The situation could be very different in the summer. The futures of PEH and Skipp (and possibly even GLC) will be easier to resolve, and hopefully the squad will finally be in a position where we only need to make a few tweaks each year. I think it makes more sense to spend a load on Gallagher if/when that happens.

 

[marion52]

I guess Ange doesn’t really know his ‘best’ team yet as he’s never had everyone fit.
Plus does it matter as the way we play we always need good subs for the last 20/30 minutes to save burn out. If we make Europe next season he’ll need the squad as the more options the better.
Really think everyone will get plenty of pitch time

 

[talkshowhost86]

45-55m really isn't a daft amount for a player of Gallagher's quality and premiership experience, particularly if you consider the additional benefits of having another homegrown option.

The question is whether it's an area we want to spend that much on.

For me it's a key area of the team and I think we have 3 great players and then 3 who aren't good enough.

I'd quite happily sell Hojberg, Skipp and GLC and use whatever we get (plus some petty cash) to bring in one high quality alternative.

I'd personally be delighted with Gallagher but equally happy if our team identifies a better value option elsewhere.

 

[RuskyM]

The insistence on rigid positions (he's a 6, he's an 8) seems strange when you see the fluid movement of Porro, Udogie, Bentancur, Sarr etc.

 

[talkshowhost86]

The insistence on rigid positions (he's a 6, he's an 8) seems strange when you see the fluid movement of Porro, Udogie, Bentancur, Sarr etc.

And on how the likes of Man City play.

Someone who can cover a number of different roles within the 90 minutes let alone from game-to-game is crucial in modern football.

I think that's something Gallagher could really offer us.

 

[Ghost Hardware]

He WAS a top target before he arrived so that very well may have changed with the performances of Sarr etc. I'm not saying he still isn't a top target but I think the need for him isn't as great. And my valuation is just that, it's what I would be happy to pay for him, not necessarily his market value.

This is an intriguing point. Our interest in Gallagher certainly predates both Bentancur being fit and Sarr developing how he has. Ange whilst probably having a rough idea of both he wouldn't have know exactly what ether could do within his system. I would be curious to know how he feels now and if he still wants Gallagher as much as he did when he joined. Considering press reports and ITK he's obviously still on the list but if Ange is still desperate for him is another question.

Im still very much of the belief that we don't need to be spending 45/50 mil on him and think it would be more sensible to bring in a younger player who's ready to take the step up. Its a shame we didn't get Scott as many wanted but there are other talents out there , both HG and non HG, who could make the same step up who would not cost 50 mil.

 

[For the love of Spurs]

The insistence on rigid positions (he's a 6, he's an 8) seems strange when you see the fluid movement of Porro, Udogie, Bentancur, Sarr etc.

We are obviously fluid as that is how we like to play but players still need to suit their roles. Can’t imagine Bissouma playing in Maddison’s position would be as good or vice verse. The team does have structure even if there is flexibility within it.

We might be lucky that we have some players like Bentancur who are rounded enough to play multiple positions but not every player is like that.

 

[delpiero]

I think a specialist 6 is more important as Bentancur can play the 8 almost as well as Sarr. At least he could prior to the injury.

6 - Bissouma - New 6 - Bentancur
8 - Sarr - Bentancur - Donley
10 - Maddison - Kulu - Donley

That would be the PEH upgrade, see how Devine does or if there are any other academy kids to come in or if we need to purchase a Skipp/GLC upgrade in the summer.

 

[dvdhopeful]

Chelsea need to pick up the phone and call think they might get twitchy as the days go ahead towards the deadline. We have set our stool with this and they know we can do this deal !

Sounds like bullshit mate

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

The insistence on rigid positions (he's a 6, he's an 8) seems strange when you see the fluid movement of Porro, Udogie, Bentancur, Sarr etc.

Its more about the roles than the positioning on the pitch.

Sarr is great as an 8, but he would not do nearly as well if he had to play the more defensive role, or the more creative role. Similarly, Maddison would struggle if he had to play the defensive role.

Bentancur is probably the only CM we have that could competently play all 3 roles - but that is rare. I think Sarr is another year or so away from being able to play the defensive role at a high level.

Ideally, I think we do want CMs who could play either as a 6/8 or as an 8/10. Bentancur can play the 6/8, Gallagher could be an 8/10, Lo Celso, if we keep him could be an 8/10.

But, it's important that the CM has balance - it won't work if the combination of players is too defensive, or too creative.