Kieffer Moore - Signed for Wigan

[Coppello]

I’d be a little disappointed if this happened as I’ve never really rated him. He has had a good season and did tear us apart at Oakwell last year. 

[bcfc01]

Doesn't fit in with being bold in the transfer market does it..

[Buckeyed]

Rumoured to be for £2m.. I'd be happy enough with that, but not as the main striker acquisition.

[INCRED]

Good plan B option, wins a lot in the air and causes defences problems. For a big CF he is fairly mobile and has a decent first touch

[robin_unreliant]

Maybe if Lee started playing two strikers this might work. Fammy alongside a big striker could work.

If it was either KM or FD as one up top that really wouldn't move us forward imo.

[petehinton]

Would be a good option off the bench. Nothing more. Record in the champ is pretty poor. Would also suggest a striker (Eisa?) is on his way out too. 

[Dastardly and Muttley]

Barnsley fans’ reaction is almost unanimous anger and upset - a good sign!

[chinapig]

Personally, I would prefer a small, mobile striker. Having said that, the last time we played them at Oakwell he caused havoc in our defence.

Not sure how you play him and Fammy in the same side though.

[Son of Fred]

19 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Personally, I would prefer a small, mobile striker. Having said that, the last time we played them at Oakwell he caused havoc in our defence.

Not sure how you play him and Fammy in the same side though.

You don't have to...... competition for Fam' would be good.

[Davefevs]

36 minutes ago, Buckeyed said:

Rumoured to be for £2m.. I'd be happy enough with that, but not as the main striker acquisition.

 

33 minutes ago, INCRED said:

Good plan B option, wins a lot in the air and causes defences problems. For a big CF he is fairly mobile and has a decent first touch

 

31 minutes ago, robin_unreliant said:

Maybe if Lee started playing two strikers this might work. Fammy alongside a big striker could work.

If it was either KM or FD as one up top that really wouldn't move us forward imo.

I echo all your thoughts above....have no problem with £2m(ish) for the type of player he is.

16 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Personally, I would prefer a small, mobile striker. Having said that, the last time we played them at Oakwell he caused havoc in our defence.

Not sure how you play him and Fammy in the same side though.

I want one of those as well....that’s my primary focus.  As you said, he can cause havoc.  He reminds me a bit of Lafferty, tall, but mobile, with physicality.  Eliasson would like him.

[BUTOR]

Underwhelming 

[Davefevs]

One caveat to my earlier post I thought his goals (16) in 17/18 were all for Barnsley in the Champ.  Just looked up and see that 13 of them came for Rotherham in Lg1.  Perhaps I'm a little more cautious on this one now.

[Dastardly and Muttley]

If £2million is true, then great. I’d see it as an almost direct replacement from Djuric, but someone who hopefully can settle better and isn’t injury prone.

I doubt £2mill is true, as Nixon says City will pay “decent dough” - more likely £4-5 mill.

I also doubt Moore is the main striker target and a “finisher” will be in too, but you can’t pick and choose the order in which you get these guys in.

[Loosey Boy]

9 minutes ago, Dastardly and Muttley said:

If £2million is true, then great. I’d see it as an almost direct replacement from Djuric, but someone who hopefully can settle better and isn’t injury prone.

I doubt £2mill is true, as Nixon says City will pay “decent dough” - more likely £4-5 mill.

I also doubt Moore is the main striker target and a “finisher” will be in too, but you can’t pick and choose the order in which you get these guys in.

See it like this - replacement for Duric....another “club in the bag” for us but wouldn’t want us to spend £4-5m in doing so!

If this were to happen, I would still expect us to go for another striker who’s proven in the Championship

[HansMoleman]

Always thought that selling Djuric was poor business

[Pezo]

1 hour ago, bcfc01 said:

Doesn't fit in with being bold in the transfer market does it..

Well I guess it depends on how you have interpreted bold, its certainly bold from a setting expectation and then dashing them perspective. 

[Eastside Moonwalker]

I think its more realistic we end up with someone like KM who will probably be a Matty Taylor replacement than someone like Maupay (who I read yesterday is apparently linked with 15-20m quid moves)

[BCFC Grim]

15 minutes ago, Dastardly and Muttley said:

If £2million is true, then great. I’d see it as an almost direct replacement from Djuric, but someone who hopefully can settle better and isn’t injury prone.

I doubt £2mill is true, as Nixon says City will pay “decent dough” - more likely £4-5 mill.

I also doubt Moore is the main striker target and a “finisher” will be in too, but you can’t pick and choose the order in which you get these guys in.

If we spend that much then we need our heads looking at.

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, robin_unreliant said:

Maybe if Lee started playing two strikers this might work. Fammy alongside a big striker could work.

If it was either KM or FD as one up top that really wouldn't move us forward imo.

A 3-5-2 then- or maybe diamond midfield?

Or might it be going back on possession, becoming more robust yet with fairly formidable counterattacking ala Birmingham at times?

He could be an interesting plan B, but I'm unsure he's what we need at this time. Especially not if we are looking to progress with the possession play style.

[Major Isewater]

Does this mean Kalas isn’t coming back and LJ wants to turn KM into a goalscoring centre back ?

That’s bold .

[chinapig]

32 minutes ago, Bouncearoundtheground said:

Underwhelming 

The first "underwhelming" of the summer is like the first cuckoo of spring.

I suspect the first last year was about McGoldrick. Thankfully he signed for Sheff U so we dodged a bullet. Or not, as the case may be

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

Does this mean Kalas isn’t coming back and LJ wants to turn KM into a goalscoring centre back ?

That’s bold .

We’ve got Diedhiou already!

[chinapig]

4 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

I had a feeling LJ will be after Moore. I still think LJ prefers the target man type to the on the shoulder type.

I just think it doesn't suit some of our other players like Pato. How many times do we see us cross balls into the box and Pato is arriving and either gets completely outmuscled in his aerial challenge, or does a terribly weak header.

There has to be more of a threat when balls go in than just the one target man if that's how we are going to play. It's a big reason why they are there, not just to head the ball in themselves, but to occupy the defenders for the other runners coming in. It's why I felt sorry for Diedhiou in that role, our wide men were not enough of a goal threat to benefit from Diedhiou's presence in the box.

I look at a team like Norwich and think why can't we strive to be like that. They did not need a 6 foot 5 forward to dominate the division, or to chuck on with 20 minutes to go in games when going for a winner. Like Fulham the season before, they would trust in their philosophy - keep playing their football and they will create opportunities.

I guess one example of a good footballing side that successfully uses a slow target man type is Spurs with Llorente. But that is very much a plan B, and a plan B they don't often go to when everyone is fit. Hardly massively successful throughout his time there, but proved to be a good signing overall.

But there are many examples of sides trying to play a passing, attractive game with an immobile target man, and it doesn't very often work imo.

No doubt fans will love Moore though, like they bizarrely loved Matt Smith and Djuric. They do love a big lump up top.

I am somewhat baffled by LJ, who is regarded as a progressive coach, apparently having such a liking for a big man up front.

Still, this is England and the put it in the mixer mentality is hard to shift.

[WAHGS.]

6 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

I had a feeling LJ will be after Moore. I still think LJ prefers the target man type to the on the shoulder type.

I just think it doesn't suit some of our other players like Pato. How many times do we see us cross balls into the box and Pato is arriving and either gets completely outmuscled in his aerial challenge, or does a terribly weak header.

There has to be more of a threat when balls go in than just the one target man if that's how we are going to play. It's a big reason why they are there, not just to head the ball in themselves, but to occupy the defenders for the other runners coming in. It's why I felt sorry for Diedhiou in that role, our wide men were not enough of a goal threat to benefit from Diedhiou's presence in the box.

I look at a team like Norwich and think why can't we strive to be like that. They did not need a 6 foot 5 forward to dominate the division, or to chuck on with 20 minutes to go in games when going for a winner. Like Fulham the season before, they would trust in their philosophy - keep playing their football and they will create opportunities.

I guess one example of a good footballing side that successfully uses a slow target man type is Spurs with Llorente. But that is very much a plan B, and a plan B they don't often go to when everyone is fit. Hardly massively successful throughout his time there, but proved to be a good signing overall.

But there are many examples of sides trying to play a passing, attractive game with an immobile target man, and it doesn't very often work imo.

No doubt fans will love Moore though, like they bizarrely loved Matt Smith and Djuric. They do love a big lump up top.

Bizarrely loved Matt Smith who scored 13 in 20 for us? What’s bizarre about that?

[pnefcok]

We wanted him last summer and he wanted to come, but a mixture of us messing around not wanting to pay much, and Barnsley moving the goalposts, meant that it didn’t happen.

They ended up wanting around £4m towards the end and it will probably take around that now.

[BCFC76]

Was he at Yeovil before? 

[Eddie Notgetinya]

Could be good as the Djuric type option from the bench but what we need is a Bobby Reid type. The simple fact is if we had that last year we would probably of made the playoffs 

[Red Army 75]

wrong thread

[Davefevs]

Simple thing for me is that if we play a big man (or even two), we have to service from wide.  You can play two lumps lower down the leagues and rely on bits and pieces, balls over the top...not in the Champ).

So If we are gonna service from wide we either have to do it from deep...angled balls from Full-Backs / Wing-Backs, or from advanced positions, which brings in the importance of Eliasson.

I wouldn’t say I'm over enamoured with Eliasson in his overall play, but his crossing (from either side) is top, top drawer.  If I was a striker, with anything like reasonable movement (unlike Fam), I’d fancy his service big time.

Ultimately it will be down to his LJ wants to play, but for a bright coach, I do question how his “clubs in the bag” are sometimes the “wrong tools for the job”.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, JonDolman said:

Not bizarre loving him for that, no. I mean bizarre that people kept saying sign him back up when he's clearly not that good at championship level

I know it’s a one off game, but look how effective he was with a clever striker alongside him (Nakhi Wells) at our place this season.  “Just go and stay central Matt, Nakhi will be on a piece of elastic around you, just flick it in his direction....sorted”.

6 goals / 1 assist in 923 mins (10 and a bit games).