What's new

Troy Deeney

Neon_Knight_

Well-Known Member
Jul 20, 2011
3,975
6,608
Step 1 - Build a £1 billion world class stadium

Step 2 - Sack a great manager

Step 3 - Sign Troy Deeney
I wanted Poch to be given time to rebuild, but I still think this would be more accurate:

Step 1 - Build a £1 billion world class stadium

Step 2 - Replace a manager that transformed the club, but is now struggling to inspire the team and has never won a trophy, with one of the most proven and successful managers ever who has averaged a trophy per season over a 20 year period.

Step 3 - Allow the new manager to sign players that he believes will add balance to the squad (I've seen nothing to suggest Mourinho wants Deeney, Wilson or any other striker...only media speculation).
 

wizgell

Park Laner
Aug 11, 2004
5,373
1,722
Remember when Abramovich told Mourinho there was no money to spend and he took Sidwell and Ben Haim to Chelsea?

Deeney wouldn't be too far off the type of player he signs when he doesn't have money available
 

Neon_Knight_

Well-Known Member
Jul 20, 2011
3,975
6,608
Troy Deeney isn't good enough for a relegated Watford and like 80% of you in this thread wouldn't mind it if we signed him? Wtf is going on? Did SC admins send out some awesome experimental narcotics to the members and mine got lost in the mail?
Haha the issue is that we're all struggling to come up with realistic alternatives. Deeney was top scorer (and captain) for a team that got relegated. Wilson was also top scorer for a team that got relegated...but scored fewer goals than Deeney.
 

ilikeost

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2012
5,382
12,072
Love these other options. Here’s the issue, every other player mentioned in this thread (perhaps save Callum Wilson) is going to cost 25-30M+.

In my dreams, Uncle Joe is going to sell a painting and put the $ into the club to buy a striker, but it ain’t gonna happen.

so, if you want to spend 30M+ at striker, who else are you selling w/o replacing, or what other position are you not strengthening?

I don’t think anybody here “wants” Deeney, but if the choice is either Deeney or no cover for Kane, the decision is very simple and the guy would do a job. We don’t play beautiful football anymore. Occupy centerhalves and play the ball to Son/Lucas/Dele.
If the choice is Deeney or no one my pick is no one. But I also completely refuse to accept the notion that it's Deeney or nothing.
 

ReadieSpur

Well-Known Member
Jan 24, 2011
823
2,594
I've wanted Deeney for a while now. He'd be perfect to put on to shithouse the opposition. He'd have a similar role in the squad to Llorente. He's also cheap, so we can spend what little money we do have on a CDM or RB.
 

Neon_Knight_

Well-Known Member
Jul 20, 2011
3,975
6,608
If we look at what our rivals have as back-up strikers, as a comparison:
Man City - Jesus - anyone who thinks we can pull off a signing anywhere near as good as him is deluded.
Liverpool - Origi - a couple of key goals in big games seem to have made everyone overlook how average he is - only 19 goals in 91 PL games!
Chelsea - Abraham is a good young player who's had half a good season then a cold spell, while Batshuayi offers very little (Giroud is currently 1st choice)
Man United - Several flexible players who can play multiple attacking roles (main striker, second striker, AM or winger). No clear CF, so their back-ups are similar to us playing Son or Moura upfront. We'd need to spend big money to sign someone of the same quality, which isn't realistic this window, and they'd want to be guaranteed regular starts in other attacking positions when Kane is playing.
Leicester - They'd be completely screwed if Vardy picked up a serious injury.
Arsenal - Like Man Utd, they have flexible players who primarily play out wide / off Aubameyang but can also play as a no.9. If Lacazette play as the 9, they don't have a great back-up out wide.

Playing Son / Moura down the middle and starting Bergwijn / Lamella out wide is roughly on a par with what some of our rivals do when their first choice striker is missing. Where our rivals have a better back-up, it wouldn't be realistic for us to sign anyone who matches that player (transfer fee, wages, playing time etc.).

I think we should be doing everything we can to maximise the chances of Parrott (and any other youth team talents) to reach PL level, as that's the best way to fill the back-up positions without having unhappy / demotivated players on the bench.
 

emiley heskey

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2020
1,121
1,832
If we look at what our rivals have as back-up strikers, as a comparison:
Man City - Jesus - anyone who thinks we can pull off a signing anywhere near as good as him is deluded.
Liverpool - Origi - a couple of key goals in big games seem to have made everyone overlook how average he is - only 19 goals in 91 PL games!
Chelsea - Abraham is a good young player who's had half a good season then a cold spell, while Batshuayi offers very little (Giroud is currently 1st choice)
Man United - Several flexible players who can play multiple attacking roles (main striker, second striker, AM or winger). No clear CF, so their back-ups are similar to us playing Son or Moura upfront. We'd need to spend big money to sign someone of the same quality, which isn't realistic this window, and they'd want to be guaranteed regular starts in other attacking positions when Kane is playing.
Leicester - They'd be completely screwed if Vardy picked up a serious injury.
Arsenal - Like Man Utd, they have flexible players who primarily play out wide / off Aubameyang but can also play as a no.9. If Lacazette play as the 9, they don't have a great back-up out wide.

Playing Son / Moura down the middle and starting Bergwijn / Lamella out wide is roughly on a par with what some of our rivals do when their first choice striker is missing. Where our rivals have a better back-up, it wouldn't be realistic for us to sign anyone who matches that player (transfer fee, wages, playing time etc.).

I think we should be doing everything we can to maximise the chances of Parrott (and any other youth team talents) to reach PL level, as that's the best way to fill the back-up positions without having unhappy / demotivated players on the bench.

Leicester got ihenacho, ayoze perez ..

Utd still has ighalo
 

Neon_Knight_

Well-Known Member
Jul 20, 2011
3,975
6,608
Leicester got ihenacho, ayoze perez ..

Utd still has ighalo
I forgot about Ighalo...0 goals in 11 PL games though :/

Ihenachio and Perez both scored fewer goals than Deeney and Wilson last season (and at a lower rate per game).

This only adds weight to my claim that it's not realistic for us to sign someone who is "top-quality" or significantly better than Deeney or Wilson.
 

yido_number1

He'll always be magic
Jun 8, 2004
8,646
16,809
Wouldn't be 100% against this if there aren't better options out there. At least he hates Arsenal and could probably play in a two with Kane like he did with Ighalo. Sure we can do better but not the worst signing if we made it.
 

Neon_Knight_

Well-Known Member
Jul 20, 2011
3,975
6,608
Is he good enough to play if Kane gets injured?

It's a no from me.
I think he'd be good enough to be an option on the bench for when Son / Moura proves ineffective playing upfront (like how Llorente was used). I'd also say he'd be good enough to come off the bench in the 85th minute when we're struggling to break a team down, even when Kane is fit.
 

Neon_Knight_

Well-Known Member
Jul 20, 2011
3,975
6,608
Arsenal is linked with coutinho and willian and we are linked with deeney and wilson ... Lol
Neither of which are a back-up striker and both of which are considered surplus to requirements by their manager. The media will be trying to come up with viable replacements to Ozil (that's £350k p.w. wages to play with!), who improve their starting XI and will start regularly. For us they are trying to come up with viable back-ups to Kane, who will have to settle for bench-warming.

See if you can name one striker of comparable quality to Coutinho and Willian who is surplus to requirements at their current club...I can't think of one. Then filter out those who wouldn't be content as a bench-warmer and those who don't fit our wage structure...even harder. Even the media, which makes a fortune out of making up rumours, knows readers would find linking Spurs with top-quality strikers too ridiculous.
 

mr ashley

Well-Known Member
Jan 27, 2011
3,127
8,524
Love these other options. Here’s the issue, every other player mentioned in this thread (perhaps save Callum Wilson) is going to cost 25-30M+.

In my dreams, Uncle Joe is going to sell a painting and put the $ into the club to buy a striker, but it ain’t gonna happen.

so, if you want to spend 30M+ at striker, who else are you selling w/o replacing, or what other position are you not strengthening?

I don’t think anybody here “wants” Deeney, but if the choice is either Deeney or no cover for Kane, the decision is very simple and the guy would do a job. We don’t play beautiful football anymore. Occupy centerhalves and play the ball to Son/Lucas/Dele.
Vital to remember the January window ITK as part of the timeline in this. Remember we turned down other strikers (risking a squad with no strikers, whilst still in two cups and a need to claw back ground in the PL), because we were told there was a better option lined up in the summer.
Now, of course, Covid hit ( everyone- not just us, mind you).
Does that mean our prime target isn’t available anymore? The guess was it was osimhen, although that seems less likely seeing how his move to Napoli played out.
We’re now supposedly raiding the bargain bins for players now, regardless of how plausible or useful they would even be.
I think there is a large middle ground of players that are somewhere in between the osimhen deal and a Deeney loan in terms of cost and performance that we are potentially looking at.
Hopefully there’s a Son -style deal that is being worked on under the radar.
 
Top