[Archived] Jordan Rhodes

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, alcd said:

How does he do it? His record since leaving Norwich 6 years ago is somewhere between dismal (Villa) and unproven (Rovers and Wolves). 

Just when Wednesday fans probably thought it couldn't get any worse .......

He'll probably march in get a reaction for 4 or 5 games, then fall out with the players, stink the place out with their performances, attempt to deflect attention from his own shortcomings by declaring "this Club has to decide which way it wants to go",  demand a £300m war chest before walking out to get his CV in the post when Zidane gets the push from Real Madrid. Leaving the Owls with about seven senior players under contract because there had been a number of players who had needed their situation sorting out.

Happy days.

[Mike E]

I don't understand the lack of feeling towards Rhodes tbh. One of the few players to brighten up the shite we've been served up since 2010.

83 goals in 3.5 seasons!

[Rover_Shaun]

How many goals since we sold him?

[Stuart]

4 minutes ago, Rover_Shaun said:

How many goals since we sold him?

For Rovers? None.

I’m with @Mike E on this one. The irrational ill feeling towards Rhodes is just that, irrational.

Like managers, some players are just a good fit at their club. Rhodes has had some bad advice and since leaving us doesn’t look like he is enjoying his football.

Clean-cut professional and young fans’ role model, who put the ball in the net of an extremely frequent basis. Was frozen out by Lambert because he thought he could use the money better. He never saw that money and fell out with Rovers as well. We’ve fallen like a stone since both left.

[RV Blue]

I just didn't like watching him play. We would probably have scored more than those 83 goals Rhodes scored if we had someone who could play football upfront. We essentially were playing with 10 men in the one in two games when he didn't score and now it seems like the goals have dried up completely, I'm not surprised Wednesday fans don't like him.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

I had a read of the Owls site yesterday. The criticisms of Rhodes are exactly the same criticisms as some of us voiced on this site. Lack of pace, lack of physicality, inability to link up play and lead the line, not a great header of the ball for a tall guy etc.

I dare say the more perceptive 'Boro  fans would say exactly the same thing.

Huddersfield had the best out of him without a doubt. I also think we could have spent the money on a more complete, all round striker. I was shocked the first time I saw him play in the flesh with his lack of pace and strength.

I think the fans at that time were crying out for a hero after all the crap we'd had to endure and he was the nearest thing to a hero.

I could be wrong but I think Lambert was promised the Rhodes money to spend and when that promise went the the same way as all of the other Chicken Choker's promises he decided he couldn't work with the knobheads.

[Rover_Shaun]

2 hours ago, Stuart said:

For Rovers? None.

 

Thanks for clearing that up. ?

Obviously he clicked here but wasn't as good as he thought he was given his record since. Time to consign him to history.

[47er]

We have this same discussion once a year or so. The same contributors take the same stance as they did last time and then the thread splutters out till next year..

2 groups of fans who watched the same player dozens of times but don't agree on anything they saw! Love it!

Its vey reassuring, like Just a Minute or Any Questions.

Its our own soap in fact.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

They're having it now on the Wednesday board and I'll bet it was the same on the 'Boro board when he was there. Funny how fans from three different clubs all see the same issues.

[DE.]

2 hours ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

I could be wrong but I think Lambert was promised the Rhodes money to spend and when that promise went the the same way as all of the other Chicken Choker's promises he decided he couldn't work with the knobheads.

Seems like that was the straw that broke the camel's back for Lambert. Unfortunately the aftermath of that left us a goalscorer short (although Graham did OK), with a totally demotivated manager until the end of the season. Meanwhile Venky's pocketed however many millions from that sale without having to pay any comp to Lambert when he left in the summer.

You'd think they might then pay a little extra for a decent manager like Warnock, but Owen comes in promising to work for a box of doughnuts and before you know it we're on our way out of the Championship.  

[Gav]

I've been watching football for many many years, spoken to thousands of fans from across the footballing spectrum, and I'm struggling to think of one striker that's been so prolific as Jordan Rhodes but slagged of as much?

We know he's got limited ability, but he scored goals and lots of em! Exactly what he was paid to do!

Anyone think of another player that falls into the Rhodes at Ewood catagory or is it a brfcsville Phenomenon?

[JacknOry]

11 minutes ago, Gav said:

I've been watching football for many many years, spoken to thousands of fans from across the footballing spectrum, and I'm struggling to think of one striker that's been so prolific as Jordan Rhodes but slagged of as much?

We know he's got limited ability, but he scored goals and lots of em! Exactly what he was paid to do!

Anyone think of another player that falls into the Rhodes at Ewood catagory or is it a brfcsville Phenomenon?

Take a brief look at the Wednesday forums and he is getting a hell of a lot more stick than he did here. 'Worst signing in their history' territory. At least here he scored goals.

[den]

4 hours ago, RV Blue said:

I just didn't like watching him play. We would probably have scored more than those 83 goals Rhodes scored if we had someone who could play football upfront.[\b] We essentially were playing with 10 men in the one in two games when he didn't score and now it seems like the goals have dried up completely, I'm not surprised Wednesday fans don't like him.

Yes, more than probably. We did score more goals after we sold him. 

[Stuart]

1 hour ago, 47er said:

We have this same discussion once a year or so. The same contributors take the same stance as they did last time and then the thread splutters out till next year..

2 groups of fans who watched the same player dozens of times but don't agree on anything they saw! Love it!

Its vey reassuring, like Just a Minute or Any Questions.

Its our own soap in fact.

I recall very very difficult times with not a lot to shout about and no atmosphere until a goal was scored. We pretty much had one song - that has now been awarded to Graham. The only excitement was when we scored and, invariably, especially in his first season, it was Rhodes that did so. Don’t know about anyone else but I like it when we score goals and am less than enamoured by poor players who do very little (at all) - especially when they are made captain.

It still makes me smile that the aficionados on here seem to think that he didn’t score the right type of goals  and “take the goals out of his game and he is crap” despite him STILL SCORING GOALS.

Then he left and hasn’t scored as many goals - SFW?! We were lucky to have him and now he has left some want to say “see I said he was crap without his goals”.

The reality is that we (Balaji, allegedly) spent £8m on him. If he had joined for £500k he’d have been a cult hero. But the history books will show that he scored shedloads for us and let for more money than we paid for him.

[Stuart]

13 minutes ago, den said:

Yes, more than probably. We did score more goals after we sold him. 

Your hatred of Rhodes must surely run deeper than just the football. Did you lose money betting on him or something?

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

I don't hate anybody who played for us. I've disliked a few of the more recent ones  - Duffy, Murphy, Best etc but not to the point were I lost my sense of perspective I hope. 

I didn't dislike Rhodes , I just saw his signing fee as a lost opportunity that may not come again in my lifetime. As you say if we'd have paid £ 500 k for him he would have been a great signing inspite of his shortcomings. 

I know it's early days yet and we're playing at a lower level but from what I've seen so far I rate Dack as a better all round player and what did we pay for him ?

On another tack - of the players I've disliked over the years it's amazing how many are from the last 7 years.

[Gav]

4 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

I don't hate anybody who played for us. I've disliked a few of the more recent ones  - Duffy, Murphy, Best etc but not to the point were I lost my sense of perspective I hope. 

I didn't dislike Rhodes , I just saw his signing fee as a lost opportunity that may not come again in my lifetime. As you say if we'd have paid £ 500 k for him he would have been a great signing inspite of his shortcomings. 

I know it's early days yet and we're playing at a lower level but from what I've seen so far I rate Dack as a better all round player and what did we pay for him ?

On another tack - of the players I've disliked over the years it's amazing how many are from the last 7 years.

What has the signing fee got to do with Rhodes goals TS? 

Decisions made at the club have nothing to do with a striker that was a consummate professional and scored bags and bags of goals.

I bet PSG fans aren't struggling to enjoy Naymar pulling on the shirt because of the transfer fee, United fans over Pogba? 

Thats a strange argument for me and you're not alone as Stuart mentions above.

 

 

[Stuart]

16 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

I don't hate anybody who played for us. I've disliked a few of the more recent ones  - Duffy, Murphy, Best etc but not to the point were I lost my sense of perspective I hope. 

I didn't dislike Rhodes , I just saw his signing fee as a lost opportunity that may not come again in my lifetime. As you say if we'd have paid £ 500 k for him he would have been a great signing inspite of his shortcomings. 

I know it's early days yet and we're playing at a lower level but from what I've seen so far I rate Dack as a better all round player and what did we pay for him ?

On another tack - of the players I've disliked over the years it's amazing how many are from the last 7 years.

My comment was in response to den, TS... but you’ve kind of proven my point.

Rhodes didn’t choose his price tag but he did give us a return on it.

Personally I didn’t see it as a lost opportunity. I think that this was a point being made by a family member - who subsequently got their money back. We didn’t have £8m to spend. I guess the question is, if you could go back in time and either spend £8m on Rhodes or not spend it at all on anyone, would you take him?

I would, and I honestly think we would have been in the third tier a lot earlier if we hadn’t.

[AllRoverAsia]

1 hour ago, den said:

Yes, more than probably. We did score more goals after we sold him. 

Ok you have said this before. 

Who scored them, how many and over what time frame.

 

[JHRover]

1 hour ago, DE. said:

Seems like that was the straw that broke the camel's back for Lambert. Unfortunately the aftermath of that left us a goalscorer short (although Graham did OK), with a totally demotivated manager until the end of the season. Meanwhile Venky's pocketed however many millions from that sale without having to pay any comp to Lambert when he left in the summer.

You'd think they might then pay a little extra for a decent manager like Warnock, but Owen comes in promising to work for a box of doughnuts and before you know it we're on our way out of the Championship.  

Venkys took us all for fools with the Lambert appointment. Some people prefer to focus on Lambert's failure to get us promoted within 6 months on no money or his ambitious comments in the media as a reason to dislike him but the villains were and are the owners, who at some stage or other lied through their teeth (again).

They slipped up because they got more than they bargained for with Lambert who wasn't prepared to put up with it and didn't need to put up with it, whereas Kean, Bowyer and Coyle would put up with it.

[AllRoverAsia]

I thought the story was that it was Balaji alone who financed  the Rhodes purchase from his hip pocket so somewhat understandably trousered the sale proceeds.

These funds were never in the transfer budget. I have never understood why anyone, Lambert included, thought they would would be reinvested in players.

Lambert had his pre-arranged walkaway card to play when it all went sour.

I cannot recall any other occassion where a manager has handed his notice in but stayed until the end of the season. Odd behaviour, but got him back into the managerial ratrace.

[DE.]

32 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

I thought the story was that it was Balaji alone who financed  the Rhodes purchase from his hip pocket so somewhat understandably trousered the sale proceeds.

These funds were never in the transfer budget. I have never understood why anyone, Lambert included, thought they would would be reinvested in players.

Lambert had his pre-arranged walkaway card to play when it all went sour.

I cannot recall any other occassion where a manager has handed his notice in but stayed until the end of the season. Odd behaviour, but got him back into the managerial ratrace.

It would only be understandable for Balaji to take the money if Lambert hadn't been promised the money to reinvest by Pasha, and reading between the lines that was more or less what he was promised.

As far as his break clause, Venky's almost instantly breaking their promises to Lambert pretty much justifies its existence, doesn't it? Smart move imo, and much better than him treading water for two and a half years collecting a paycheck and parroting lines from Pune in his weekly press conference. 

[den]

2 hours ago, Stuart said:

Your hatred of Rhodes must surely run deeper than just the football. Did you lose money betting on him or something?

Why do you think I hate him Stuart? Because I and every manager worth his salt have a view that says success lies in having a team where everyone contributes and everyone benefits? It’s only if you understand that, that you understand why he’s never attracted a Top club. After all, if the only thing that mattered to a manager was the ability to knock the ball in from 6 yards out, he’d have been in the PL years ago.

[den]

1 hour ago, Gav said:

What has the signing fee got to do with Rhodes goals TS? 

Decisions made at the club have nothing to do with a striker that was a consummate professional and scored bags and bags of goals.

I bet PSG fans aren't struggling to enjoy Naymar pulling on the shirt because of the transfer fee, United fans over Pogba? 

Thats a strange argument for me and you're not alone as Stuart mentions above.

 

 

You don’t see the folly of having £9m riding on the back of one championship player, when the team isn’t good enough and his lack of ability only emphasises that? 

[RoverCanada]

Oddly enough, we seemed to perfectly time our Rhodes transfers. Comes in at his peak for £8m, knocks in goals for fun for 3 seasons, starts to decline a bit but still looks attractive to higher clubs in his 4th season, sell him for ~£9m, and his form  declines precipitously.

Unfortunately, the way he was brought in, he was more like an expensive loan that had to be repaid to one of our owners rather than a purchase/investment. It's fair to bring up the opportunity cost of that £8m plus his £35-40k/week wages, but that money always seemed to be treated weirdly separate.

He was never a complete footballer (hence why it was always lower-tier PL clubs sniffing), but I'll always have fond memories of his contributions. We may not have gotten  promoted with him (which if you look back, I'd put more on the weird lack of goals from our MFs and DFs outside of Rhodes and Gestede), but I appreciate he probably kept us up on his own in 12/13, and was certainly a top tier Championship striker.