At this point I'd prefer to despite my reservations about him long term but breaking news, TheMagicFoolBus is not actually running Chelsea (despite it being an extremely apt nickname for our ownership)
Is Scott McTominay a better footballer than Conor Gallagher?
- Thread starter Fortitude
- Start date
I literally said I don't really rate him and that he's a shit passer? He's just very obviously better than McTominay is all.
I don't see a lot of difference. Similar category of footballer. Both lacking technically both can go box to box with a good engine and score a goal. I think Gallagher has played in more suitable roles to showcase what ability he has whereas McTominay has spent a career in a double pivot which wasn't very functional or the best use of the limited skills he has.
For a top club they can hang around a squad but at no point will they ever convince that they have what it takes to be regular first teamers. More realistically, they should be at the likes of Palace and West Ham. It's various shades of the same relative mediocrity for me.
Gallagher worth a bit more due to age, that's just common sense. Age dictates there may be a bit more to come.
For a top club they can hang around a squad but at no point will they ever convince that they have what it takes to be regular first teamers. More realistically, they should be at the likes of Palace and West Ham. It's various shades of the same relative mediocrity for me.
Gallagher worth a bit more due to age, that's just common sense. Age dictates there may be a bit more to come.
It is but you're getting rid because he hasn't performed.
One has been a consistent feature in a side that’s been in and around the top 4 for many seasons.
The other has played an OK season for Crystal Palace, and — when he had his chance to step up — failed to make an impact for a side that struggled to secure a spot in the upper part of the bottom half of the PL.
It’s not much of discussion, to be honest. But fair dues to the Chelsea fans who are lashing themselves to this particular mast!
The other has played an OK season for Crystal Palace, and — when he had his chance to step up — failed to make an impact for a side that struggled to secure a spot in the upper part of the bottom half of the PL.
It’s not much of discussion, to be honest. But fair dues to the Chelsea fans who are lashing themselves to this particular mast!
I think Gallagher is technically a marginally better footballer, more creative with much better feet, better eye for goal though McT isn't bad in that department.
McT more dominant physically, better in the air, definitely better defensively.
Both work hard, press moderately well and cover ground well.
I'd rather have Gallagher as he may not be top level but he looks for the ball and moves it around well, higher ceiling for me. Wouldn't *want* either very desperately though.
McT just a great squad player, not a starter for a top 4 club. Jurys out on whether Gallagher is either but he is 3 1/2 years younger and would still be a better squad option imo.
Not overly similar players though so comparison a bit pointless.
McT more dominant physically, better in the air, definitely better defensively.
Both work hard, press moderately well and cover ground well.
I'd rather have Gallagher as he may not be top level but he looks for the ball and moves it around well, higher ceiling for me. Wouldn't *want* either very desperately though.
McT just a great squad player, not a starter for a top 4 club. Jurys out on whether Gallagher is either but he is 3 1/2 years younger and would still be a better squad option imo.
Not overly similar players though so comparison a bit pointless.
I dont think it'd be a bad idea considering how few options you have to be honest.
But imagine you kept him and played him as a sitting dm and how good he'd look - thats mctominay. The role and position you'd play Gallagher is McTominay's best position, you'd lose some passing ability and gain really strong aerial ability and physical presence - its not a bad trade off.
Who the hell cares what Gallagher is worth. We need so sell bang average players if we are ever to come out of mediocrity. We are perpetual bad sellers. So the amount doesn't really matter.
Gallagher strikes me as someone who would have been very well suited to the premier league 20 years ago as a wide midfielder in a 4-4-2. It might just be the hair, but he reminds me of Beckham without the world class right foot.
Currently, there is probably not much between Conor and Scott (apart from them being very different players), but Conor is younger, has more potential and resale value.
Currently, there is probably not much between Conor and Scott (apart from them being very different players), but Conor is younger, has more potential and resale value.
A mid table club probably is more willing to spend 40m on an attacking player like Gallagher. West ham has 100m to spend so they can use the fund to bring in at least 3 players to improve the squad.
I wish Manchester United fans did as good a job of backing their own players.
Similar level players. Similar strengths, similar weaknesses
Never seen Gallagher do anything worthy of note, he’s just had good PR over the last few years. I’m no McTominay lover but I can’t see how he’s not at least on par with him if not better.
You also said he'd fit perfectly in a Liverpool side
You can't have it both ways. Personally think both are about the same level of player with different things they can offer to a mid table side. McTominay is a bit more versatile while Gallagher probably more suited to a certain defined role in the modern game as a forward pressing 8.
Looked it up, that’s not true but ok.
Are we really putting 8 goals up here like it’s something? Did last year not happen?
I’m at a loss as to what Gallagher brings to a side of his best asset is just an ok 8 goals. I do t even know what the argument is supposed to be
There's a fine line between backing your own players and pure delusion on a player's capabilities and performances
Also the other way. Delusion making you think they're worse than they are, usually because of meme narratives entering into the public consciousness.
We’ll just agree to disagree. Say what you want about Scott but I can name you fanatic games he’s had against City (multiple times) Liverpool, PSG, he was the best player on the pitch when Barca beat us 1-0 at OT. He and Fred were the go to names to shut better teams down and back then everybody knew what kind of game it would end up being because they were good at what they were sent out to do.
He has a lot more behind them than had a good 3 months on loan away to Palace (which I simply can’t understand) and even then he finished the season with 2 goals in last 25 games or something stupidly mediocre but we’re both stuck in our viewpoints.
Yes but in a different role, Id say they could be about equal in quality.
Scott could become really good imo - he could be much better if he was appreciated more and got regular game time, but it’s a bit hard to say where he would fit in the best as he’s a bit defensive and a bit attacking
Scott could become really good imo - he could be much better if he was appreciated more and got regular game time, but it’s a bit hard to say where he would fit in the best as he’s a bit defensive and a bit attacking
Sure, but it's also much easier for a supporter to strictly see the good in a player than it is the bad often times because all of us wish for everyone that comes in to succeed and bring the club glory.
He'd fit in best about 20 years ago when 442 was still the go to formation and "box to box" mids were still a thing. He just can't operate that great with how little space is in the modern game.
It is true, 3 assists in 144 PL matches for McTominay.
Yes, 8 goals in a season is very good for a midfielder, it's more than "something". Beeing dangerous in front of goal is actually something that is often mentioned as a strong point for McTominay, and his best season was 4 goals. In the 20/21 season, when everyone was raving about Bruno's goals, he scored 9 non-penalty goals as an attacking mid. 8 goals is very, very good.
I wish you’d present your points objectively instead of trying to win through with things that make what you’re saying incredulous. In what universe is 8 goals, from midfield, for a low-end club, ‘just OK’? It’s an exceptional tally at that level, it’s even a good tally for a top 3-6 club, backed by how few central midfielders get near that amount, even attacking midfielders are doing well with 8 non PK goals, so I can’t believe you’re not being disingenuous when you present that - alongside a 22-year old not getting coaching or guidance in a season far more experienced and regarded players wilted in - as your arguments against.
McTominay was robbed of crucial development time during a shambolic run of coaches and squads as well as managerial mishaps; it is always a valid point to make for younger players and I don’t believe you don’t know that.
Also, how can you be at a loss to what he was providing Palace? Do you have posts from the time to back that; do you really believe it or are you saying it for impact?
It’s odd to denigrate a young midfielder for thriving in a set up that got the best out of him and even for falling back into the pack at a relatively massive club where bigger names fell from a loftier regard than he did last season.
We can espouse and opine on both, to the positive and negative, but to try and disregard wholly just comes across as intentional bad faith presentation.
It's the opposite actually. He's the biggest benefactor of that shambolic run of coaches.
He was a below average talent, who we overinvested in and has improved onto become a very average player.
It’s not the opposite, even if he benefitted. He lost years of development. Crucial years that he’ll never get back.
Fair summary.
Going to go out on a limb here but I reckon he's a midfielder?
Does what?
Yes he is! There is a proper player in there. Henderson level player waiting to be unlocked
Fair enough. I haven’t seen that from him.
In the discussion of McTominay vs Gallagher though, I took a look at their metrics from Gallagher’s season at Palace vs McTominay from that same season and this season just finished. Seems to me that they have different strengths and weaknesses. McTominay is the better defensive player by some distance, while Gallagher is the better attacking player. No surprises there given profile of player they are.
I didn’t think Gallagher was the better player based on the eye test, and for me those stats support it. In fact, McTominay matches up pretty well with in some attacking metrics while dominating all the defensive metrics, albeit smaller sample size from last season. They compliment each other pretty well actually.
He's still here atm and to be fair isn't the worst midfielder we've had in the last 5-10 years.
Although I don't think he's a better footballer than Gallagher. I didn't even think they were similar players.
For a certain subset of our supporters, aside from the obvious ones (Martinez and Casemiro, sometimes Varane, Shaw, Bruno and Rashford on a good day), our players are all shit and barely above Championship quality and should just be given away for next to nothing. Then they'll turn around and yell about the club not being able to get decent fees for our deadwood like all the others do.
I also don't think he's bad, just not good enough for a club like Man United.
No, but Gallagher also doesnt look as good as he did at Palace. I think he's still a bit better and with time on his side being younger too. But Gallagher's limited technical ability and not being able to put the ball in the net like at Palace mean he isnt that far ahead of McTom
Yes, a Liverpool side where the technical deficiencies of their midfielders have been extremely well documented? He'd bring more to the table for that side than Henderson, who's fallen off a cliff to the extent that they are having to move TAA into midfield thus nullifying a huge advantage they'd had previouslyYou also said he'd fit perfectly in a Liverpool side
You can't have it both ways. Personally think both are about the same level of player with different things they can offer to a mid table side. McTominay is a bit more versatile while Gallagher probably more suited to a certain defined role in the modern game as a forward pressing 8.
Well, we saw him most of last year as a 6 and he still managed a goal or assist every 400 minutes ish? Again, I'm hardly what you could consider a Gallagher fan but I think even used there despite his inability to pass he's a better option
Not surprising to see as you say. But to make a case for Gallagher he did play some games as an am at Palace which would affect his defensive stats.Fair enough. I haven’t seen that from him.
In the discussion of McTominay vs Gallagher though, I took a look at their metrics from Gallagher’s season at Palace vs McTominay from that same season and this season just finished. Seems to me that they have different strengths and weaknesses. McTominay is the better defensive player by some distance, while Gallagher is the better attacking player. No surprises there given profile of player they are.
I didn’t think Gallagher was the better player based on the eye test, and for me those stats support it. In fact, McTominay matches up pretty well with in some attacking metrics while dominating all the defensive metrics, albeit smaller sample size from last season. They compliment each other pretty well actually.
The only time you've beaten us with 'McFred' both starting was in the league cup when we had two teenagers with less than 100 minutes of senior football combined playing.
Again, I think he's perfectly serviceable for a team that wants to sit behind the ball and just ingore the inconvenient fact that midfielders are allowed to pass. If it were 25 years ago he'd be genuinely valuable - but it just isn't. There isn't a top manager working today who wants a player like McTominay in their team - apart from maybe Antonio Conte.
Gallagher played as a 10 for most of that year for Palace - he was the guy leading the press up the field.Fair enough. I haven’t seen that from him.
In the discussion of McTominay vs Gallagher though, I took a look at their metrics from Gallagher’s season at Palace vs McTominay from that same season and this season just finished. Seems to me that they have different strengths and weaknesses. McTominay is the better defensive player by some distance, while Gallagher is the better attacking player. No surprises there given profile of player they are.
I didn’t think Gallagher was the better player based on the eye test, and for me those stats support it. In fact, McTominay matches up pretty well with in some attacking metrics while dominating all the defensive metrics, albeit smaller sample size from last season. They compliment each other pretty well actually.
Would be curious to see how they compare based on last season where Gallagher actually played in midfield regularly.