- Aug 30, 2012
- 6,913
- 18,761
I love a potential possibility. ?
With 50% success rate some of the time
I love a potential possibility. ?
With 50% success rate some of the time
Damsgaard looks like a good young talent but comments like this really worry me, he’s become massively hyped up on the back of one or two Euro matches. He’s had one season in a top league (more like two-thirds of a season as he was a substitute as often as not) and he scored two goals and had four assists. Anyone expecting him to come in and “give the goal return that Son does” is going to end up disappointed.Out of all our WF options, only Son delivers goals with any regularity. Lamela, Moura and Bergwijn all needed replacing with a RWF who can give the goal returns that Son does. Moura and Bergwijn have had good pre-seasons, but I would not mind bringing in Damsgaard for one of them.
I agree with your points but his only 21, he wouldn't just be an investment for now, but for the future tooDamsgaard looks like a good young talent but comments like this really worry me, he’s become massively hyped up on the back of one or two Euro matches. He’s had one season in a top league (more like two-thirds of a season as he was a substitute as often as not) and he scored two goals and had four assists. Anyone expecting him to come in and “give the goal return that Son does” is going to end up disappointed.
I guess my point is he isn’t at the level Eriksen was at when he joined us, not yet anyway. Eriksen had just won three consecutive titles with Ajax and was arguably their best player, his numbers were solid and he scored important goals, and he’d been playing for Denmark for almost four years. Damsgaard isn’t there yet in terms of output or consistency. He may well get there and I’m not at all suggesting he’d be a bad signing, but with the hype train around his Euro performances there’s some expecting him to come in and transform our attack when in reality he’s probably at an even earlier stage of development than Gil.You can only compare to the likes of the Eriksen when he arrived not the player he became. Its the potential to be great that Damsgaard offers but I think that's where we are now. We're not going to buy ready made world class talent. We need to build a team of prospects who can develop into world class.
Eh, I'd say its pretty similar. Damsgaard played more games last year than Gil, but 500 less minutes. Gil had one more goal/assist and Damsgaard is playing for the senior level national team while Gil is a sub for the U23's.I guess my point is he isn’t at the level Eriksen was at when he joined us, not yet anyway. Eriksen had just won three consecutive titles with Ajax and was arguably their best player, his numbers were solid and he scored important goals, and he’d been playing for Denmark for almost four years. Damsgaard isn’t there yet in terms of output or consistency. He may well get there and I’m not at all suggesting he’d be a bad signing, but with the hype train around his Euro performances there’s some expecting him to come in and transform our attack when in reality he’s probably at an even earlier stage of development than Gil.
More partial to a imaginable plausibility myself, but each to his own.I love a potential possibility. ?
No chance for 40m - he's a great prospect but realistically he's had 1 good full season.
I think Madueke is better value for money/homegrown and has a similar ceiling.
As we know to our cost the player will have a say.Sampdoria chairman is apparently a Roma fan and wants the player to move there if they sell.
Serie A the one stop shop for football corruption.Sampdoria chairman is apparently a Roma fan and wants the player to move there if they sell.
But is he good enough?I'd rather we go for Madueke.
Will cost less, is homegrown and is left footed playing from the right, where we more urgently need reinforcement.