Victor Osimhen | out of options | goes to Gala on loan

Rojofiam said:
Makes no sense to have 3 strikers for 1 position when none of them are going to be content with sitting on the bench. Also, Hojlund and Osimhen are too similar profiles. Another reason why it would be an illogical move.
Click to expand...
I think Zirkzee will get games playing anywhere along the front 3, so really it’s two 9s for one position. Plus Hojlund has proven to be slightly injury prone so far.

Also competition at top clubs isn’t a bad thing. We had Andy Cole and Ole as options for centre forward (not second striker) in 2001 - we still bought Ruud.
 
didz said:
He's an effective poacher precisely because he's easy to create chances for, same as Haaland. Your post betrays a failure to recognise the value of a striker who can consistently get on the end of chances, be they crosses, balls behind the line, cutbacks, whatever.

Notice that I said "at his peak he's more or less a goal a game striker." This is factually correct, as in his best season he averaged a goal every 99 minutes.

When Napoli were actually good, he very much did perform in the CL. Oddly enough the team didn't do so well when Spaletti left and took his winnings formula with him. That's going to affect your star striker, but Osimhen still scored in the knockouts against Barcelona anyway during - again - a season in which he was struggling.

But look, if you want to believe that Nicolas Jackson is a better player than Osimhen then that's up to you. But using comments from four years ago when the player was 21 and in a new country, downplaying an entire nation's footballing credentials, and demonstrating a clear lack of appreciation as to how goalscorers actually go about scoring goals, are all extremely poor ways to argue your case.
Click to expand...
By that logic, then Immobile - the Dortmund reject and Bundesliga failure - is also a goal a game striker. And Lukaku, Dzeko, Belotti etc. But how often do we see this peak? And what guarantees is there he will do it in Premier League? Doing well in Serie A doesn't mean you can translate it to other leagues, and especially Premier League.

Besides, he misses 1/3 of the season every year, so what does it matter?

I don't think Nicolas Jackson is better as a striker, I think he is a better fit for Chelsea and a better footballer and can potentially explode into a much better player once he refines his finishing and other traits.

You don't even know what comments I'm talking about. You're just blindly following what the other poster said because it suits your case, and you're one to talk about poor way of arguing my case..?
The comments are from november 2022 which is Osimhen's third season for Napoli. The way you're going on about how he scores goals, you'd think he was scoring like Haaland, but the fact is - whether you like it or not - he has only scored more than 15 league goals once. Ever. In Serie A.
 
Cassidy said:
Hojlund might be better. Osimhen is also still developing. We’ll also sign another striker in Jan or next summer by the way. We are still tracking Sesko
Click to expand...
He's nearly 26, he's in his peak years.
 
Cassidy said:
Hojlund might be better. Osimhen is also still developing. We’ll also sign another striker in Jan or next summer by the way. We are still tracking Sesko
Click to expand...
2 man midfield said:
I think Zirkzee will get games playing anywhere along the front 3, so really it’s two 9s for one position. Plus Hojlund has proven to be slightly injury prone so far.

Also competition at top clubs isn’t a bad thing. We had Andy Cole and Ole as options for centre forward (not second striker) in 2001 - we still bought Ruud.
Click to expand...

I don't think a third striker is needed at this point. If we go on to sign one, it should be an older player who's content with being a rotational option, like Joselu was at Madrid last season. Three very good young players for one position won't work out, it's 99% guaranteed IMO. I'm also skeptical about Zirkzee's versatility, as he hasn't really played on the wings in his career yet. And I doubt Bruno or an in-form Hojlund would be dropped by ETH, and rightly so.

Also, Hojlund has just had one season where he sustained few injuries as well, but he's extremely promising, and Zirkzee has only had two games. There's not enough data overall on our current striker situation yet IMO.

Will Zirkzee take well to being benched, if Hojlund comes back into the team, and starts scoring goals regularly? I doubt it.

How would it affect Hojlund if the opposite happened, and he couldn't force his way back into the team because Zirkzee was in great form?

It's also a big difference that United used to play with 2 strikers in the XI 20+ years ago under Ferguson. You could have 3 or 4 quality options in that case, but for just 1 position, you can't have three out and out number nines, all young and very good, all needing a lot of playtime. And like I said, Zirkzee's versatility is going to be heavily limited by Bruno IMO. He's a world class #10, always available, and is our captain. He's not getting dropped. There will almost certainly be a period this season when Zirkzee doesn't really start for weeks, because Hojlund hits form.
 
Rojofiam said:
I don't think a third striker is needed at this point. If we go on to sign one, it should be an older player who's content with being a rotational option, like Joselu was at Madrid last season. Three very good young players for one position won't work out, it's 99% guaranteed IMO. I'm also skeptical about Zirkzee's versatility, as he hasn't really played on the wings in his career yet. And I doubt Bruno or an in-form Hojlund would be dropped by ETH, and rightly so.

Also, Hojlund has just had one season where he sustained few injuries as well, but he's extremely promising, and Zirkzee has only had two games. There's not enough data overall on our current striker situation yet IMO.

Will Zirkzee take well to being benched, if Hojlund comes back into the team, and starts scoring goals regularly? I doubt it.

How would it affect Hojlund if the opposite happened, and he couldn't force his way back into the team because Zirkzee was in great form?

It's also a big difference that United used to play with 2 strikers in the XI 20+ years ago under Ferguson. You could have 3 or 4 quality options in that case, but for just 1 position, you can't have three out and out number nines, all young and very good, all needing a lot of playtime. And like I said, Zirkzee's versatility is going to be heavily limited by Bruno IMO. He's a world class #10, always available, and is our captain. He's not getting dropped. There will almost certainly be a period this season when Zirkzee doesn't really feature for weeks, because Hojlund hits form.
Click to expand...
Hojlund was injured when we bought him, got injured mid-season, and is now injured this season. I don’t think you can say it’s just a blip, and although he might grow out of it, it seems clear he can’t be relied upon week in, week out. United of all clubs should understand the need to plan around injuries.

Also signing competition can give you unexpected results, and as long as the team benefits does it matter who sits out? We only signed Evra in 2005 because Heinze picked up an injury - but he turned out to be even better and Heinze was sold not long after. If we’d have allowed ourselves to stagnate and think “well we’ve got Silvestre who can play there until Heinze returns, let’s not rock the boat in case he leaves” we’d have never seen Evra put on a United shirt and become a club legend.

And while yes we did play with 2 strikers 20 years ago, I made sure to clarify that it was the number 9 position we had Ole and Cole for, not second striker which is where Yorke, Teddy, Cantona, Scholes etc would all play. We still had 2 strikers for one position, and signed a third in Ruud - who again went onto be legendary.

I’m not saying Osimhen would go on to achieve the status of Evra or Ruud, but just saying that Ferguson didn’t allow us to think ‘they’re good enough for now’ - he was always looking to upgrade. And the players could either relish the challenge or move on. Some did, but the team was better off for this mindset.
 
TheReligion said:
Why were Chelsea trying to sign Osimhen in this case? Surely it makes no sense. Let Jackson get minutes and grow.
Click to expand...

Because we wanted 2 strikers and a different profile of striker to Jackson hence the links to Duran, Samu and Osimhen.
 
jakko said:
No he didn't and that still doesn't mean he never wanted to come to Chelsea either.
Click to expand...
He didnt sign for you after you club sent delegates to Napoli for 3 days. He wanted a UCL level club. That doesnt change because Obi Mikel convinced you all
 
Grand Vizier said:
By that logic, then Immobile - the Dortmund reject and Bundesliga failure - is also a goal a game striker. And Lukaku, Dzeko, Belotti etc. But how often do we see this peak? And what guarantees is there he will do it in Premier League? Doing well in Serie A doesn't mean you can translate it to other leagues, and especially Premier League.

Besides, he misses 1/3 of the season every year, so what does it matter?

I don't think Nicolas Jackson is better as a striker, I think he is a better fit for Chelsea and a better footballer and can potentially explode into a much better player once he refines his finishing and other traits.

You don't even know what comments I'm talking about. You're just blindly following what the other poster said because it suits your case, and you're one to talk about poor way of arguing my case..?
The comments are from november 2022 which is Osimhen's third season for Napoli. The way you're going on about how he scores goals, you'd think he was scoring like Haaland, but the fact is - whether you like it or not - he has only scored more than 15 league goals once. Ever. In Serie A.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should read back through the thread because it doesn't seem as if you've at all grasped why I posted the reply I did in the first place, but rather jumped in to make some odd, barely relevant point.

If you want to try to convince somebody that Jackson is a better player than Osimhen, I suggest you try someone else. Perhaps a Chelsea fan dismissive of all football outside the Premier League who hasn't watched either player?

Good luck on the hunt.
 
Cassidy said:
He didnt sign for you after you club sent delegates to Napoli for 3 days. He wanted a UCL level club. That doesnt change because Obi Mikel convinced you all
Click to expand...

Because he didn't want to take a wage cut, nothing to to with us not being in the CL.
 
I would 100% be looking at this player in the next window or as soon as we're able to.

Having too many players for one position is not really a good enough argument in my eyes, considering so many of our players spend time out being injured. There are not many of our players who I would consider to be doing such a good job that they are unworthy of being dropped or rotated. Every single spot is up for grabs and every single position must be earned. You want to keep the spot, you perform and you earn it to deserve it.

Hojlund is currently out injured. We could use Osimhen right now.
When Hojlund, Osimhen and Zirkzee are all fit and available, we play the one who is most in form and the most likely to get us goals. It is highly unlikely that all three will be in form at the same time.
Competition is good and healthy at a football club. Competition for Hojlund's position will force him to have to work harder to maintain his spot. If he can't deal with competition and isn't able to raise his game, then is he actually good enough for a Premier League club that is trying to redevelop themselves into title contenders anyway?
If Hojlund raises his game and Osimhen turns out to not be useful after all, we move him on when the time is right.

Putting all of our eggs in the Hojlund basket is folly.
 
Cassidy said:
He didnt sign for you after you club sent delegates to Napoli for 3 days. He wanted a UCL level club. That doesnt change because Obi Mikel convinced you all
Click to expand...

Chelsea is UCL club. Conference league is also CL.
 
Cassidy said:
So you’re saying a striker does not develop post 25?
Click to expand...
Yes but not a large amount. They usually have a good amount of experience, in this case a lot, and they are physically fully developed. New trainers with a new team can help, but he won't improve much. He will start to physically decline in around 2 years most likely.
 
Superunknown said:
I would 100% be looking at this player in the next window or as soon as we're able to.

Having too many players for one position is not really a good enough argument in my eyes, considering so many of our players spend time out being injured. There are not many of our players who I would consider to be doing such a good job that they are unworthy of being dropped or rotated. Every single spot is up for grabs and every single position must be earned. You want to keep the spot, you perform and you earn it to deserve it.

Hojlund is currently out injured. We could use Osimhen right now.
When Hojlund, Osimhen and Zirkzee are all fit and available, we play the one who is most in form and the most likely to get us goals. It is highly unlikely that all three will be in form at the same time.
Competition is good and healthy at a football club. Competition for Hojlund's position will force him to have to work harder to maintain his spot. If he can't deal with competition and isn't able to raise his game, then is he actually good enough for a Premier League club that is trying to redevelop themselves into title contenders anyway?
If Hojlund raises his game and Osimhen turns out to not be useful after all, we move him on when the time is right.

Putting all of our eggs in the Hojlund basket is folly.
Click to expand...

Odd way to end the post when you’ve already mentioned us sharing our eggs between Højlund & Zirkzee.

For what it’s worth, we aren’t bringing in a player on 300 k /week to give “competition for places”.
 
Hammondo said:
Yes but not a large amount. They usually have a good amount of experience, in this case a lot, and they are physically fully developed. New trainers with a new team can help, but he won't improve much. He will start to physically decline in around 2 years most likely.
Click to expand...
You didnt watch Drobga enough
Ruud came to United I think at 24
Lewandowski improved alot post 25 as well

Thats just off the top of my head

As for Osimhen hes only really spent the last 3 seasons at a topish club. I think he has quite a bit of development to go in my opinuon.
 
didz said:
Maybe you should read back through the thread because it doesn't seem as if you've at all grasped why I posted the reply I did in the first place, but rather jumped in to make some odd, barely relevant point.

If you want to try to convince somebody that Jackson is a better player than Osimhen, I suggest you try someone else. Perhaps a Chelsea fan dismissive of all football outside the Premier League who hasn't watched either player?

Good luck on the hunt.
Click to expand...
You replied to a post that asked why Chelsea were in for him. My point is that they don't need him because they have a better fit in Jackson who align perfectly with Palmer, Madueke and the others, because he is without a doubt a better pure footballer than Osimhen who relies on service and doesn't set up chances himself. Not every team needs a poacher or a focal point, not sure why you believe that. City scored just as many goals without Haaland.

Ah yes, the old "your opinion is different than me so you don't watch football outside of England". Classic. If you're judging footballers purely based on their goals scored, then Haaland is much better than R9 and Immobile is better than Agüero. Yeah, I don't think so. Chelsea have no need for Osimhen when they already have Jackson who is a better fit for their team. It's funny you mention him as a goal scorer and someone clinical when Osimhen misses more than Jackson, and Jackson also converts more shots on target than Osimhen. The reason people don't mention that is because they don't know how much he misses, because they don't watch him.
 
Grand Vizier said:
You replied to a post that asked why Chelsea were in for him. My point is that they don't need him because they have a better fit in Jackson who align perfectly with Palmer, Madueke and the others, because he is without a doubt a better pure footballer than Osimhen who relies on service and doesn't set up chances himself. Not every team needs a poacher or a focal point, not sure why you believe that. City scored just as many goals without Haaland.

Ah yes, the old "your opinion is different than me so you don't watch football outside of England". Classic. If you're judging footballers purely based on their goals scored, then Haaland is much better than R9 and Immobile is better than Agüero. Yeah, I don't think so. Chelsea have no need for Osimhen when they already have Jackson who is a better fit for their team. It's funny you mention him as a goal scorer and someone clinical when Osimhen misses more than Jackson, and Jackson also converts more shots on target than Osimhen. The reason people don't mention that is because they don't know how much he misses, because they don't watch him.
Click to expand...
Good for you. There's a rather important match on at the minute so I won't be arguing with you further.

Not that I'd consider your points if there wasn't, since your misrepresentation of mine doesn't warrant any courtesy. Goodbye.
 
Superunknown said:
I would 100% be looking at this player in the next window or as soon as we're able to.

Having too many players for one position is not really a good enough argument in my eyes, considering so many of our players spend time out being injured. There are not many of our players who I would consider to be doing such a good job that they are unworthy of being dropped or rotated. Every single spot is up for grabs and every single position must be earned. You want to keep the spot, you perform and you earn it to deserve it.

Hojlund is currently out injured. We could use Osimhen right now.
When Hojlund, Osimhen and Zirkzee are all fit and available, we play the one who is most in form and the most likely to get us goals. It is highly unlikely that all three will be in form at the same time.
Competition is good and healthy at a football club. Competition for Hojlund's position will force him to have to work harder to maintain his spot. If he can't deal with competition and isn't able to raise his game, then is he actually good enough for a Premier League club that is trying to redevelop themselves into title contenders anyway?
If Hojlund raises his game and Osimhen turns out to not be useful after all, we move him on when the time is right.

Putting all of our eggs in the Hojlund basket is folly.
Click to expand...

Can't see this ever being a realistic option, jeez apparently he is going to Galatasaray on loan
 
Galatasaray :lol: probably his level to be fair. Not convinced by him at all
 
Shame to see the Chelsea move break down. If only to have missed the inevitable “I’m sorry, Nic Jackson. I am Boehly!” content.
 
And De Laurentis wanted 150million about 15 months ago :lol: love this.
 
Wouldn’t want this guy here. Enough players who are not good at taking the ball in and playing.
 
What in the actual feck?! Napoli really screwed this one up with their crazy demands. Realistically he was a £60 to £70 million player but they were looking for an insane figure.
 
Giggsy13 said:
What in the actual feck?! Napoli really screwed this one up with their crazy demands. Realistically he was a £60 to £70 million player but they were looking for an insane figure.
Click to expand...
They got the insane figure, but the player didn't want to go to Saudi last year
 
You must log in or register to reply here.