[Archived] Jordan Rhodes

[Leonard Venkhater]

  Don't think it is as black and white as that - the weak parts of his game have huge impact on the team as a whole - so it is impossible to say how it would have impacted us this or last season. We can never give him pace - but I am amazed that we can't coach him to hold the ball up better - at the end of the day he isn't small (6ft+) - why he can't be coached to be something like Kevin Davies (but with goals) is beyond me.

Nail on the head...which is why it doesn't automatically follow that we would be in League 1 without his goals etc.His finishing is very special though!

[DE.]

Considering the players we had at our disposal last season, which ones do people think would have stepped up to replace the goals Rhodes provided? Not saying this in a "you're wrong" kind of way, genuinely curious as to how people think we would have played differently and which players would have provided the assists & goals necessary to stay up.

[thenodrog]

you are pushing on a locked and bolted door there DMTP.

btw So Stuart, is that a 'Yes' you were a 'Jon Stead should play' devotee in that first season after Hughes had benched him?

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

Considering the players we had at our disposal last season, which ones do people think would have stepped up to replace the goals Rhodes provided? Not saying this in a "you're wrong" kind of way, genuinely curious as to how people think we would have played differently and which players would have provided the assists & goals necessary to stay up.

Firstly we wouldn't have needed to necessarily have replaced all his goals in one player - I think Cardiff showed that.

Those that could have chipped in with goals - Pedersen, King, Gomes, Goodwillie, Jones, Kazim-Richards, Dunn (to name a few - would need to check the full squad listing really as there has been so much change). Plus - we would have spent some of that £8m on another striker - maybe not as prolific.

Bottom line - we don't know whether they would have chipped in or not - but then again just taking away Rhodes goals and looking at the balance is far too simplistic.

[Al]

:lol: Sorry, I thought you said midfield talent!

Bit harsh comparing Rhodes to Stead by threat. Although both did save us from relegation virtually single handedly.

Keep clutching at that straw, Gordon. You and I both know that without Rhodes - in the absence of any real other talent any further forward than Hanley - we would be a League Ine team by now.

"You will however come to agree that I am right in the fullness of time Stuart" More unbelievable arrogance from Thenodrog. My BP is much more in control since he went on ignore.

[DE.]

Firstly we wouldn't have needed to necessarily have replaced all his goals in one player - I think Cardiff showed that.

Those that could have chipped in with goals - Pedersen, King, Gomes, Goodwillie, Jones, Kazim-Richards, Dunn (to name a few - would need to check the full squad listing really as there has been so much change). Plus - we would have spent some of that £8m on another striker - maybe not as prolific.

Bottom line - we don't know whether they would have chipped in or not - but then again just taking away Rhodes goals and looking at the balance is far too simplistic.

It's safe to say Pedersen (1 goal in 12/13 season), King (3 goals in his entire professional career), Goodwillie, Jones (was only here five minutes?!), and Dunn (injured for 90% of every season) would not have made any significant contribution. Kazim-Richards does not have a prolific goalscoring record and relying on a 36 year old Nuno Gomes to roll back the years would have been risky in the extreme. I don't think you can assume we would have spent much of the £8M on a striker either, by all accounts Rhodes was very much a Shebby project and had he not been attained we would have bought somebody at a significantly lower price. I would suggest that whomever came in would have had to have dealt with the same tactical restrictions that Rhodes faced last season and it's very unlikely they would have gotten even half of Rhodes' end of season tally.

I agree that just taking away Jordan's goals and saying "we'd have been relegated" is too simplistic purely on its own merits, but analyse the situation and I see no reason to assume the team would have scored significantly more goals in Rhodes' absence or that we'd have brought in a striker capable of producing something out of nothing, which we have frequently asked Rhodes to do over the course of his career here to date. To suddenly expect players who have never been prolific to suddenly start banging in goals under the likes of Kean, Berg, Appleton and Bowyer is questionable logic, imo.

[Majiball]

It's safe to say Pedersen (1 goal in 12/13 season), King (3 goals in his entire professional career), Goodwillie, Jones (was only here five minutes?!), and Dunn (injured for 90% of every season) would not have made any significant contribution. Kazim-Richards does not have a prolific goalscoring record and relying on a 36 year old Nuno Gomes to roll back the years would have been risky in the extreme. I don't think you can assume we would have spent much of the £8M on a striker either, by all accounts Rhodes was very much a Shebby project and had he not been attained we would have bought somebody at a significantly lower price. I would suggest that whomever came in would have had to have dealt with the same tactical restrictions that Rhodes faced last season and it's very unlikely they would have gotten even half of Rhodes' end of season tally.

I agree that just taking away Jordan's goals and saying "we'd have been relegated" is too simplistic purely on its own merits, but analyse the situation and I see no reason to assume the team would have scored significantly more goals in Rhodes' absence or that we'd have brought in a striker capable of producing something out of nothing, which we have frequently asked Rhodes to do over the course of his career here to date. To suddenly expect players who have never been prolific to suddenly start banging in goals under the likes of Kean, Berg, Appleton and Bowyer is questionable logic, imo.

When Shearer got injured did we stop scoring? When United sold Ronaldo did they stop scoring? When huddersfield sold Rhodes did they not score? others would have stepped in and scored as everything would have changed. No one is saying they will become prolific overnight but they would more likely weigh in with one or two more over the season. It's too simplistic to just say they wouldn't do it as the variables involved in just one match are massive, let only over a season. Just as Burnley sold whatever he was called, two strikers stepped up and scored goals and now they sit 2nd in the league. just look at Ings career to date, 3 goals last season, 3 the season before and this year? 19

http://espnfc.com/player/_/id/141706/danny-ings?cc=5739

Proof positive that your logic is flawed as if them down the road can do it, so can we.

[tomphil]

Also a reason Rhodes is a constant starter is probably down to the fact of how he plays. He doesn't put it about so he's not prone to frequent spells out like some. If he's started bustling about like a peak Kevin Davies then missed week after week with knocks all the time we'd have a problem. He's not small but just not that kind of player and never will be.

[Al]

When Shearer got injured did we stop scoring? When United sold Ronaldo did they stop scoring? When huddersfield sold Rhodes did they not score? others would have stepped in and scored as everything would have changed. No one is saying they will become prolific overnight but they would more likely weigh in with one or two more over the season. It's too simplistic to just say they wouldn't do it as the variables involved in just one match are massive, let only over a season. Just as Burnley sold whatever he was called, two strikers stepped up and scored goals and now they sit 2nd in the league. just look at Ings career to date, 3 goals last season, 3 the season before and this year? 19

http://espnfc.com/player/_/id/141706/danny-ings?cc=5739

Proof positive that your logic is flawed as if them down the road can do it, so can we.

Sorry but there is no proof positive in there. Far too simplistic. Rovers and United had class teams anyway. There is no evidence that any of the remaining Rovers team of today would suddenly become prolific goal scorers. Too many posters claim proof when there is none in evidence.

[Stuart]

Have to laugh at the idea that Rhodes has a negative impact on the rest of the team. (Yet Lowe doesn't). Priceless.

Let's put it another way...

If we lose Jordan Rhodes next season, we will need to buy a goalscorer.

Thoughts?

[Majiball]

Sorry but there is no proof positive in there. Far too simplistic. Rovers and United had class teams anyway. There is no evidence that any of the remaining Rovers team of today would suddenly become prolific goal scorers. Too many posters claim proof when there is none in evidence.

I never claimed prolific did I? i claimed two or three more goals a season from others. I even then used something of substance, or examples of what has happened at other clubs. Or facts. I'll notice not one person who argues against the point has used any of those. Logic is not a matter of opinion, if it's happened before it can happen again. Logic then dictates that if it has happened elsewhere then the potential exists for it to happen here. There's my proof, where's yours as all I see is opinion and that's not logic or proof.

Grass is blue, the moon is made of cheese, I wrote it, so it must be true. Please present some examples of what you are claiming at other clubs and through history, rather than hollow words and perhaps for a change this debate may reach a conclusion.

humans are obsessed with making things more complicated than they are, simplicity is best.

“If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself.”

― Albert Einstein

[DE.]

Have to laugh at the idea that Rhodes has a negative impact on the rest of the team. (Yet Lowe doesn't). Priceless.

Let's put it another way...

If we lose Jordan Rhodes next season, we will need to buy a goalscorer.

Thoughts?

To be fair I can understand the viewpoint that playing to Rhodes strengths could weaken the rest of the team, as we would be relying on him to be the sole provider of all goals thus limiting the rest of the team to providing for him as opposed to scoring.

But generally we do not play to his strengths at all. Quite the opposite, we often hoof it up as if we expect him to be Kevin Davies. The fact he manages to score so many goals regardless of that is a credit to him. It's true that when he isn't able to carve chances for himself he doesn't do a whole lot to help the team, but it must be assumed that Bowyer believes a goalscorer of Rhodes' calibre is vital to put into the team regardless of tactics because he doesn't believe the others have it in them to score enough goals to win us matches. I can very much see his point in that regard.

[onlyonejackwalker]

Robbo is too fat and lets too many in from long range. Neither Henley or Kane can defend. Hanley is too rash and hot headed, Dann was too soft in the tackle and in the air to play centre half. Spurr is too slow against the quickest wingers, whilst Williamson and Lowe are amongst the worst players we've ever had. Marshall, Taylor, King, Conway are either too slow, or no end product, whilst Dunn is a wheelchair case. Best is a chivvy tit, Goodwillie enjoys his night outs, whilst DJ enjoys online betting. Gestede doesn't score enough, Judge, Marrow, Dabo and anyone Portugese can't play. Etuhu is 6 foot 2 and came by plane as the song goes. Bowyer is tactically inept, Shaw awaiting his pay off, Shebby, dear old Shebby, a total clown.

Basically anything goes with any of them.

Don't blame my Rhodes, my Jordan, Jordan Rhodes, I just don't think you understand.....

You know the rest.

[thenodrog]

......... I see no reason to assume the team would have scored significantly more goals in Rhodes' absence or that we'd have brought in a striker capable of producing something out of nothing,

imo I'd wager we'd have let fewer in.

Robbo is too fat and lets too many in from long range. Neither Henley or Kane can defend. Hanley is too rash and hot headed, Dann was too soft in the tackle and in the air to play centre half. Spurr is too slow against the quickest wingers, whilst Williamson and Lowe are amongst the worst players we've ever had. Marshall, Taylor, King, Conway are either too slow, or no end product, whilst Dunn is a wheelchair case. Best is a chivvy tit, Goodwillie enjoys his night outs, whilst DJ enjoys online betting. Gestede doesn't score enough, Judge, Marrow, Dabo and anyone Portugese can't play. Etuhu is 6 foot 2 and came by plane as the song goes. Bowyer is tactically inept, Shaw awaiting his pay off, Shebby, dear old Shebby, a total clown.

Basically anything goes with any of them.

Don't blame my Rhodes, my Jordan, Jordan Rhodes, I just don't think you understand.....

You know the rest.

You are under 35 right?

[DE.]

imo I'd wager we'd have let fewer in.

Possible Gord but you know the saying, goals win games...

[Stuart]

Without Rhodes' goals, we would be 15 points worse off. That's 20th position on 34 points, and 5 points off the bottom three. In all likelihood looking down rather than up.

We used to call Brad Friedel a legend for having that kind of contribution to a season yet because Rhodes can't be more like Jason Roberts he is slagged off by his club's own fans.

We used to have CKR to stick the ball to and Rhodes to put the ball in the onion bag. Then we didn't replace Kazim and fans slate Rhodes despite him still somehow almost inexplicably managing to keep finding the net regularly in an otherwise poor team.

No doubt someone will pick up a stray phrase out of my post and say "gotcha" but this clearly isn't about Rhodes anymore for some people, as the facts speak for themselves. This is about people sticking to an entrenched view just to avoid some perceived loss of face - amidst a faceless messageboard.

For all his weaknesses, he still scores goals. Yet for some reason that sticks in the craw for some folk.

"If he doesn't score goals he doesn't contribute".

The trouble with that argument is that he does score goals.

[Majiball]

People are too quick to group everyone on here, haters and lovers, forgetting the individual and what they have actually posted.

[Stuart]

No-one has slagged Rhodes off that I can remember, critiqued yes, but never slagged. People are too quick to group everyone on here, haters and lovers, forgetting the individual and what they have actually posted.

Replaced 'slagged' in my post with 'criticised' and I stand by my comments.

[Amo]

The trouble with that argument is that he does score goals.

Yeah but he can't handle the basics. Oh wait.

[Proudtobeblue&white]

JR likes Conway, perhaps it will gel. Maybe JR will go on a run of scoring (even more than he does already!), we might win Saturday, a fairy godmother might wave her magic wand and make the Loons disappear, we sneak in the play offs when the Dingles go bust and get 10 points deducted, GB becomes a tactical genius and brings Lowey on as an impact Rb.

I love this board. I still like Jordan!

[K-Hod]

Robbo is too fat and lets too many in from long range. Neither Henley or Kane can defend. Hanley is too rash and hot headed, Dann was too soft in the tackle and in the air to play centre half. Spurr is too slow against the quickest wingers, whilst Williamson and Lowe are amongst the worst players we've ever had. Marshall, Taylor, King, Conway are either too slow, or no end product, whilst Dunn is a wheelchair case. Best is a chivvy tit, Goodwillie enjoys his night outs, whilst DJ enjoys online betting. Gestede doesn't score enough, Judge, Marrow, Dabo and anyone Portugese can't play. Etuhu is 6 foot 2 and came by plane as the song goes. Bowyer is tactically inept, Shaw awaiting his pay off, Shebby, dear old Shebby, a total clown.

Basically anything goes with any of them.

Don't blame my Rhodes, my Jordan, Jordan Rhodes, I just don't think you understand.....

You know the rest.

As much as your views on the other players are pretty much right, your assessment of Marshall, Taylor and Conway is incredibly harsh!

[patrickvalery]

I really don't understand why there is so much disagreement on this subject. When you have a player who is exceptional at one particular part of the game, you do your utmost to ensure he does it as often as possible and try to improve the other areas of his game. There aren't many strikers who have the natural instinct which Rhodes has. You don't just fritter that away. It makes no sense to do so. Yes he needs to up his work rate and ball rentention and i'm sure that is something he is working on. There isn't a single player in our side who doesn't have to do the same - ie, work on their weaker points. If he didn't cost so much it really wouldn't be a point of discussion.

We can all list aspects we expect from players in every position. For example, a goalkeeper i expect to boss his penalty area, communicate with his back four (be their eyes) and stop the vast majority of shots from distance etc... I don't understand what is wrong with having a striker who scores copious amounts of goals? Its first on the list for what i want from a centre forward. The real issue should be why do we more often than not play to his weaknesses rather than his strengths? In my humble opinion its because some of the personnel further back aren't brave enough in possession. Lumping a ball forward or behind the oppo fullbacks is the easy option and passing the buck. It's these players who deserve the criticsm.

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

 

Have to laugh at the idea that Rhodes has a negative impact on the rest of the team. (Yet Lowe doesn't). Priceless.

Let's put it another way...

If we lose Jordan Rhodes next season, we will need to buy a goalscorer.

Thoughts?

Who mentioned Lowe ? Rhodes inability to hold the ball up means the ball constantly keeps coming back at a hard worked defence - his lack of pace means that teams can play a high line knowing that he isn't going to out run the defence. If you can't see that you will aways struggle to understand that there are merits to the argument that many are making. As I have always said I am on the fence - but I do think Bowyer does occasionally need to mix up his strikers (and drop Rhodes to the bench) as the opposition dictates.

[JamieUK]

When Shearer got injured did we stop scoring? When United sold Ronaldo did they stop scoring? When huddersfield sold Rhodes did they not score? others would have stepped in and scored as everything would have changed. No one is saying they will become prolific overnight but they would more likely weigh in with one or two more over the season. It's too simplistic to just say they wouldn't do it as the variables involved in just one match are massive, let only over a season. Just as Burnley sold whatever he was called, two strikers stepped up and scored goals and now they sit 2nd in the league. just look at Ings career to date, 3 goals last season, 3 the season before and this year? 19

http://espnfc.com/player/_/id/141706/danny-ings?cc=5739

Proof positive that your logic is flawed as if them down the road can do it, so can we.

An example on the other side of the scale would be Tottenham and Gareth Bale. Last year they had a player capable of winning matches by himself. Sold for £80m, a large no of supposedly brilliant players brought in and they've not performed as well as the previous season.

We will be a weaker team should Rhodes leave this summer, even if the money recouped was spent on 3/4 new players. I'm definitely of the belief the team should be built around him - Surely we would have a better chance of promotion with a 25+ goal a year striker in the side?

[Majiball]

An example on the other side of the scale would be Tottenham and Gareth Bale. Last year they had a player capable of winning matches by himself. Sold for £80m, a large no of supposedly brilliant players brought in and they've not performed as well as the previous season.

We will be a weaker team should Rhodes leave this summer, even if the money recouped was spent on 3/4 new players. I'm definitely of the belief the team should be built around him - Surely we would have a better chance of promotion with a 25+ goal a year striker in the side?

Thank you.

Indeed a case can be made for both sides and examples presented for both, it could go either way so the debate is circular. When looking at spurs I think the main issue was too many new players at once. Like you say we could get 3-4 decent players, they signed 7 1st team players. I also believe spurs have a coach and DoF set-up? I guess really it comes down to one thing really do you think we would sign 3-4 players who would make us a better team. How has GB done so far in the market in relation to our aim, promotion. The other side is can he or will he be able to build a team to play to his strengths and get the best out of him? It's a gamble either way for me if being honest.