[Archived] Jordan Rhodes

[AggyBlue]

It was a good and relevant discussion Aggy when first muted about 12 months ago. Me and those around me had been talking about it way before it was ever mentioned on here. Seems now you are either a Rhodes hater or lover and the discussion has subsequently been lost in the discussing!

I fully understand why. It was an eye opener to sign a player that probably cost more than the rest of the squad put together.

[Majiball]

I blame comprehensive education personally. Everybody knew it wouldn't work at the time. When you look at oureducational standings in the world it's introduction has done a great and irreperable disservice to this country

Most common topic of conversation at Uni's amongst the faculty these days is, what are they being taught before us? At this point as always I will have to point out for the 'others' that that is no reflection on either pupils or teachers as they do not set the curriculum, more a reflection on those in power dumming down the nation.

[glen9mullan]

On 31st July, Andy Cryer reported that we'd already made enquiries about Rhodes before the Fleetwood friendly and Best's injury: http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/9846021.Rovers_target_two_as_Best_ruled_out_for_six_months/ On 3rd August, we then signed Etuhu, who you've name as one of the signings criticised before you recommended Rhodes to Singh:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19114011 So maybe you want to revise your version of events?

The meeting took place the day of Danny Murphy's press conference , at this point Etuhu's pending arrival was already known, not publicly I may add

Both Cryer and Nixon originally rubbished the link via twitter , throughout the transfer both also stated it wouldn't happen and the chase was indeed over as rovers had moved on to other targets .

Rovers initial enquiries were knocked back as quick as they went in .

Best injury was indeed the catalyst for rovers to raise their bids .

On another note this transfer would not have been £8 million had 2 agents not been used to broker the deal .

On scouting , it's common knowledge that Rhodes was scouted by half the league including Rovers whose scouting system is very good . However during the dark Kean/Anderson days , scouting was often ignored as agents brokered rovers deals . I'm sure Rovers would of used all their scouting network information before brokering this deal

However back to the point , the main point of the post was the Manager is now picking the targets based in scouting and tried and tested methods. Meaning should Rhodes be sold , then it would be Bowyer who chooses the replacements based on football rather than an agent someone else.

The post was also to show how far the club has moved on from just 12 months ago when it was open season at Rovers on the amount of influence the owners were actually having on the running of the club

[Amo]

I remember when Rhodes came on the radar ,rovers had done their summer shopping .

The AG met with Singh , and tore shreads of their summer business which had seen the likes of Murphy , Etuhu , Gomes and god knows how many Portuguese come through the door .

I remember clearly the conversations that Championship football is not child's play and with the departure of Yakubu the team lacked any threat in attack or a man capable of scoring 20 goals plus .

It was at this point we suggested Jordan Rhodes , who Singh had never heard of , in fact he wasn't sure what country Hudderfield was in .

Following the Fleetwood friendly , When Best got injured , the chase for Rhodes started , which at many times would of ended had encouragement to sign him not been forthcoming . Huddersfield turned bid after bid down , Kean was trying to get Cox, DJ and Chopra in as alternatives , I remember telling Singh dig in on Rhodes as Rovers would get their man the closer the window came to closing .

Venky's had no plan to spend any money on a striker , but would of took a short term fix on the previous mentioned . Our transfer budget was spent , however they made an exception on Rhodes as he was sold to them on , he is a minimum 20 goal a season player , young enough to make a profit on should Rovers fail to get promotion. £8 million was never part of the plan , as £4 million was the figure banded around in football circles , however when the crunch came , with other clubs also after him, Huddersfield held all the keys and Rovers had to offer more than Premiership clubs were willing to pay to get their man .( there was serious premiership interest)

I think beyond reasonable doubt , he has more than justified the additional spend with his scoring exploits and Rovers if they chose to sell would at least get their money back .

The moral of this story is Rovers were so dis functional the only thing they got right was to chase a player recommended by supporters rather than stupid greedy agents.

Should Rhodes now be sold at least the manager is choosing the targets based on football

What a bloody farce.

Was the Rhodes recommendation a committee decision? Did all 8000 members agree to it?

[Majiball]

The meeting took place the day of Danny Murphy's press conference , at this point Etuhu's pending arrival was already known, not publicly I may add

Both Cryer and Nixon originally rubbished the link via twitter , throughout the transfer both also stated it wouldn't happen and the chase was indeed over as rovers had moved on to other targets .

Rovers initial enquiries were knocked back as quick as they went in .

Best injury was indeed the catalyst for rovers to raise their bids .

On another note had this transfer would not have been £8 million had 2 agents not been used to broker the deal .

On scouting , it's common knowledge that Rhodes was scouted by half the league including Rovers whose scouting system is very good . However during the dark Kean/Anderson days , scouting was often ignored as agents brokered rovers deals .

However back to the point , the main point of the post was the Manager is now picking the targets based in scouting and tried and tested methods. Meaning should Rhodes be sold , then it would be Bowyer who chooses the replacements based on football rather than an agent someone else.

The post was also to show how far the club has moved on from just 12 months ago when it was open season at Rovers on the amount of influence the owners were actually having on the running of the club

Whilst it's nice to know that things are better, stability will never fully return to the club until clarity over our future is given by the Loons.

Perhaps some weight could be given to attaining that answer as it would make a big difference collectively to the club.

[den]

75 posts, isn't that a bit excessive to illustrate your opinion.

I post one after every six of yours, I guess that's how many it takes to wear me down before I feel the need to respond.

Can you quote me the post where I've told you to 'shut the feck up'

Lines one and three in the quotes

Bloody hell Aggy, you fell for that. 1-0 to the denmeister.

[AggyBlue]

Lines one and three in the quotes

Bloody hell Aggy, you fell for that. 1-0 to the denmeister.

It's not easy working and posting on here as well. I'm bound to miss things.

Better to miss things on here than cost the company millions though

I'm not replying to you on the Rhodes issue again.

[den]

Thank god.

[dave birch]

Scores goals, that'll do me.

[ABBEY]

Me too Dave... The one and only thing the chicken cluckers have got correct

[LDRover]

He does miss some chances though....and I don't like his running style.

Sounds a bit effeminate in interviews as well.

[RevidgeBlue]

I don't think I can ever remember a player who has been so successful for the Club get so much stick off certain fans.

The most prolific striker in English professional football in a relatively poor side. "Yes" they cry. "But he's not as good as Shearer/Rush" etc. (Who would cost 80m today)

As he runs his socks off on the pitch and appears to be a model professional off it the only explanation can be that the critics don't like to think that the owners could have got anything right so they continue to chip away at him as he continues to keep knocking in their goals, are in their element when he goes a couple without scoring, and in a new low started on at him again this week after he was rested for a game.

Like Den has said many times, this really should be my last word on the subject as there's nothing more to be said .other than what's above. However I'm sure it won't be long before something else outrageously unfair is said about the lad which requires a response in the interests of balance.

[darrenrover]

Laughable really but believable non the less.

Whilst all on the field and immediate management (GB) appear to be heading in the right direction, I can't help but think that as a consequence of what still remains behind the scenes, you can't help but think there's a catastrophe waiting to happen.

I think Theno best summed up Rhodes when he said "Champions League in the box, Conference outside". That said an £8 million fee for a Championship side was ludicrous but we all know that.

I can't help but think though that if we provide him with even more goalscoring opportunities than we have to date, who better to put the ball in the net? After all that's what the games all about.

[Tom]

This will be bumped tomorrow at about 5 with either a sarcy 'he's crap isn't he' or 'poor today'

And on we go

[riverside returns]

I agree Darren, provide more opportunities by creating openings and the enigma that is Rhodes, will score more. It is a skill that cannot be taught. Think about the skills of yhe last JR to grace out forward line and recall Sunderland. Now that would have been 1-0 with Rhodes there.

[tomphil]

I agree Darren, provide more opportunities by creating openings and the enigma that is Rhodes, will score more. It is a skill that cannot be taught. Think about the skills of yhe last JR to grace out forward line and recall Sunderland. Now that would have been 1-0 with Rhodes there.

Great post ! There it is in a nutshell a hardworking physical striker who peeled away down the flanks at times, was a handful for defenders. The kind of guy a few on here crave instead of the highest goalscorer in 2013 in the country because er... he'll bring more to the team. His type will also only score a spoonful of goals per season even if given bag fulls of chances. If you want all that plus the goals then your looking for an Alan Shearer clone. It ain't happening so live in the real world and be thankful we actually have an 'enigma'.

[Stuart]

....and I don't like his running style.

Sounds a bit effeminate in interviews as well.

That's what I like about LD. Cut through all the crap and gets right to the important stuff.

[onlyonejackwalker]

Great post ! There it is in a nutshell a hardworking physical striker who peeled away down the flanks at times, was a handful for defenders. The kind of guy a few on here crave instead of the highest goalscorer in 2013 in the country because er... he'll bring more to the team. His type will also only score a spoonful of goals per season even if given bag fulls of chances. If you want all that plus the goals then your looking for an Alan Shearer clone. It ain't happening so live in the real world and be thankful we actually have an 'enigma'.

I dont think the discussion is about anyone craving a low priced striker who rarely scores instead of having Rhodes.

I may be wrong, but as far as I can tell the discussion revolves around whether the 8 million waxed on Rhodes could have been better spent on a number of players to improve our squad. Anything from 4 to about 12 of them.

People's inability to read and debate sensibly, whilst pedantically point scoring, whilst failing to recognise there is alway an alternative viewpoint is a tad frustrating as it stymies discussion.

[den]

This will be bumped tomorrow at about 5 with either a sarcy 'he's crap isn't he' or 'poor today'

And on we go

That's assuming he's selected Tom.

What would you do, drop Gestede after we showed against City that team play counts for everything, leave Rhodes out - or change a successful team and formation in order to play Rhodes alongside Gestede?

What would I do? Not easy, but probably start with the same side that started against City.

[tomphil]

I dont think the discussion is about anyone craving a low priced striker who rarely scores instead of having Rhodes.

I may be wrong, but as far as I can tell the discussion revolves around whether the 8 million waxed on Rhodes could have been better spent on a number of players to improve our squad. Anything from 4 to about 12 of them.

People's inability to read and debate sensibly, whilst pedantically point scoring, whilst failing to recognise there is alway an alternative viewpoint is a tad frustrating as it stymies discussion.

Every angle has been covered i think but again like i posted before and like Glen Mullan posted there WASN'T a choice between spending 8 mill on Rhodes or the team. He was a one off big signing that they'd been convinced to sanction because he was proven and a fairly safe investment. This 8 million which could have been splashed around the team is MYTHICAL. So it's a pointless debate anyway.

[RevidgeBlue]

Lol. Or alternatively put do you drop the guy who's scored 43 goals in 60 odd games for us in favour of the guy who's 25 and scored 20 or so career goals?

Ooo den, you are a card.

Every angle has been covered i think but again like i posted before and like Glen Mullan posted there WASN'T a choice between spending 8 mill on Rhodes or the team. He was a one off big signing that they'd been convinced to sanction because he was proven and a fairly safe investment. This 8 million which could have been splashed around the team is MYTHICAL. So it's a pointless debate anyway.

Rhodes was brought in to replace the injured Best. The spending that was done overall over the course of the season was done to try and secure promotion and should have been sufficient had it been spent wisely on the other players.

[darrenrover]

I dont think the discussion is about anyone craving a low priced striker who rarely scores instead of having Rhodes.

I may be wrong, but as far as I can tell the discussion revolves around whether the 8 million waxed on Rhodes could have been better spent on a number of players to improve our squad. Anything from 4 to about 12 of them.

People's inability to read and debate sensibly, whilst pedantically point scoring, whilst failing to recognise there is alway an alternative viewpoint is a tad frustrating as it stymies discussion.

The Rhodes 'debate' on this particular thread has taken so many twists and turns it's difficult to determine what we are actually debating.

[Tom]

That's assuming he's selected Tom.

What would you do, drop Gestede after we showed against City that team play counts for everything, leave Rhodes out - or change a successful team and formation in order to play Rhodes alongside Gestede?

What would I do? Not easy, but probably start with the same side that started against City.

Personally I would drop Williamson and bring in Rhodes

Against city being cautious was the right approach, against teams like Doncaster we need to attack them

[den]

Every angle has been covered i think but again like i posted before and like Glen Mullan posted there WASN'T a choice between spending 8 mill on Rhodes or the team. He was a one off big signing that they'd been convinced to sanction because he was proven and a fairly safe investment. This 8 million which could have been splashed around the team is MYTHICAL. So it's a pointless debate anyway.

Hmmm.

[Gav]

The Rhodes 'debate' on this particular thread has taken so many twists and turns it's difficult to determine what we are actually debating.

No debate to be had, Rhodes is the best striker outside the premiership and we're bloody lucky to have him.