Jump to content
IGNORED

Han-Noah Massengo - SIGNED - 4 Year Deal


Dolman_Stand

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, spudski said:

That's just my preference mate...I don't rate Palmer's all round game. He obviously has talent offensively but his defensive attributes are poor and lazy imo.

Play him with Famara in the side, and you'll get the first half of the Leeds game more often than not.

For me...Palmer needs a whole season of learning how to defend and help the team. Saturday reminded me of when we played with Tomlin. Players sitting deep not trusting some of the defensive duties of others.

At the moment Palmer is an impact sub when looking to open a game imo.

My fear if we play Palmer and Famara in the same starting 11 is that we will struggle.

Agree with all of this. Can't think of anyone I would rather come on to run at tired defenders in our squad but not a starter yet for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this lad turns out to be our only signing before Thursday then I can understand some of the comments around “will he fire us to the Premier League” but if we sign the 3-4 other players we clearly need then it will all be hot air!!

Assuming we get the others the clubs only “crime” is making the signings in the wrong order.....what I mean is had he been the last of four or five signings people would be far more positive.

In simple terms, lets wait a few days and see who else we bring in and don’t knock this signing just yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I'd drop Diedhiou and work out a front 3 from there.

Don't think Pack-Brownhill axis will work either, not vs a lot of good sides who play a bona fide 3. IF this Nketiah deal comes in.

Top of head time but buzzing around as a front 3 could be something like Nketiah-Weimann-Palmer- or maybe even Nketiah central, with Weimann and Eliasson as wide forwards- a lot of choice!

One thing I definitely agree on personally speaking is Palmer-Diedhiou doesn't work. Thought so with Paterson-Diedhiou last season- they're just too different types of player, they do not compliment each other well. Palmer-Weimann or Palmer-Nketiah however- or even Palmer-Weimann and Nketiah 4-3-1-2, I dunno but Diedhiou as the lone strikert with one feeding him or in a 4-2-3-1 is lacking somethiong to me- certainly as a starter.

For the life of me, I really can't work out how Famara fits into our system of Play.

We knock it around, play out from the back, trying to create openings, keeping possession, drawing players...this can go on for long periods of a game...only for it to eventually be pinged wide, and a hopeful ball crossed in for Famara to try and get something on it.

What's the point of all the build up play? May as well play like Warnock if we resort to that.

We play far better without a Famara type. Three offensive players buzzing around the 18 yard box feeding off our build up play. You only had to see the difference as an example on Saturday when Taylor, Weimann and Eliasson did just that.

Moving...working hard, pressing and coming for the ball.

At the moment, imo, we have a defence and midfield playing one game and the frontline playing another.

It really is easy to see. 

Worst thing we ever did was bring Famara in and change our game plan offensively so drastically imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RedM said:

I suppose it’s just going into the unknown a bit for me and not knowing what to expect. The price tag is huge by our standards, and especially so when you consider his age. How many 18 year olds have we ever had playing regularly for us in the first team?

I guess I am a bit wary, can’t think of another word, maybe concerned. We seem to have done a great job assembling Premiership ready footballers over the past coulple of years, but they haven’t gone to the Premier League with us, that’s my point I guess. Webster for example would have been perfect but he couldn’t wait ( I fully understand why he took the opportunity, I’m not debating that).

We have developed decent players for other clubs, yes we have money but we maybe are buying more players to develop and turn for a profit rather than to hang onto and benefit from ourselves. I can’t really explain what I mean but the club seems to be putting more emphasis into this side of the business now. 

From some players point of view it’s a fantastic pathway, not so sure if it’s the best for the club or players that will never have that pathway unless they are promoted with us.

 

 

I know, we were told this was out model and not to get attached to players but enjoy them whilst they are here - but I don't think we really thought at the time what it meant (I mean we didn't really produce/have talent often enough to know what losing it continually would mean). For example , Reid has a great season, and gone - the what if's on him alone, his goals/assists with our solid defence last season would have probably sealed us promotion - but it was not to be. To be flirting nearer the top, and see your better players leave making you think that those you will never grasp those extra points to grab that promotion place. "we just need a couple of quality players and we can do it" then we lose a couple, gain one or two and are back at square one. 

 

It's going to be frustrating, but I guess we were warned, and we just need to strap ourselves in and enjoy the ride.

 

Oh and agree with @spudski about Famara, I don't get it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, spudski said:

. For the life of me, I really can't work out how Famara fits into our system of Play.

We knock it around, play out from the back, trying to create openings, keeping possession, drawing players...this can go on for long periods of a game...only for it to eventually be pinged wide, and a hopeful ball crossed in for Famara to try and get something on it.

What's the point of all the build up play? May as well play like Warnock if we resort to that.

We play far better without a Famara type. Three offensive players buzzing around the 18 yard box feeding off our build up play. You only had to see the difference as an example on Saturday when Taylor, Weimann and Eliasson did just that.

Moving...working hard, pressing and coming for the ball.

At the moment, imo, we have a defence and midfield playing one game and the frontline playing another.

It really is easy to see. 

Worst thing we ever did was bring Famara in and change our game plan offensively so drastically imo.

I stated similar seasons ago. 

One of my observations is also defensive. I like yourself think defending is collective and starts from the front. City also have changed their game defensively to accommodate a player with little pressing ability. On Sunday we could see a payer ambling around showing a lack of desire to get compact.

Far far better players than Famara are more selfless for the team. He limits the potential of the team tactically. There has been a better, more energetic, technical Bristol City waiting to happen for seasons without him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, spudski said:

For the life of me, I really can't work out how Famara fits into our system of Play.

We knock it around, play out from the back, trying to create openings, keeping possession, drawing players...this can go on for long periods of a game...only for it to eventually be pinged wide, and a hopeful ball crossed in for Famara to try and get something on it.

What's the point of all the build up play? May as well play like Warnock if we resort to that.

We play far better without a Famara type. Three offensive players buzzing around the 18 yard box feeding off our build up play. You only had to see the difference as an example on Saturday when Taylor, Weimann and Eliasson did just that.

Moving...working hard, pressing and coming for the ball.

At the moment, imo, we have a defence and midfield playing one game and the frontline playing another.

It really is easy to see. 

Worst thing we ever did was bring Famara in and change our game plan offensively so drastically imo.

Great points. I really did wonder if it was just me and feeling a bit Emperor’s New Clothes’ about Diedhiou at times. If we are going to use Diedhiou game in game out then as you say our build up play is all wrong for him. If we are going to use the players we have got or getting then one up top Diedhiou type isn’t right for our build up and press.

So is it to fit in one player everyone has to change or do we offload that player? Good player but wrong for us right now. I certainly wouldn’t have been heartbroken if Villa had come knocking, but I think we’ve missed that boat now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Fiale said:

 

 

I know, we were told this was out model and not to get attached to players but enjoy them whilst they are here - but I don't think we really thought at the time what it meant (I mean we didn't really produce/have talent often enough to know what losing it continually would mean). For example , Reid has a great season, and gone - the what if's on him alone, his goals/assists with our solid defence last season would have probably sealed us promotion - but it was not to be. To be flirting nearer the top, and see your better players leave making you think that those you will never grasp those extra points to grab that promotion place. "we just need a couple of quality players and we can do it" then we lose a couple, gain one or two and are back at square one. 

 

It's going to be frustrating, but I guess we were warned, and we just need to strap ourselves in and enjoy the ride.

 

Oh and agree with @spudski about Famara, I don't get it. 

Totally agree. Very well put. Frustrated, yup that was probably the word I was looking for. I’m very patient but as people realise this pattern to our seasons I don’t think the fanbase on the whole will be so generous

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Ah thanks Bob.

Wrongly assumed Palmer was one of the 5 included, as an attacking midfielder- will go back and have a listen.

On a side note, I do worry a bit about our squad size or projected one.

Too many options, cost in terms of cash that could be better spent elsewhere- unhappy players? Optimum to me is 24-25.

We will still be able to offload players (loans and sales) after this Thursday deadline as the closing date for Leagues One, Two and National are the end of August (not sure of exact date)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Xiled said:

There are various angles here and we won't know what we're dealing with until Massengo has had time to settle and we know his impact at Championship level.

Looking at the whole situation objectively, if you are a talented 18 year old then this could be a calculated gamble to get the higher prize (Premier League, Ligue 1, Champions League or international football)

The traditional path is to sign for a big club, play in their U21s or U23s and wait for a loan. Then impress at the loan club (for a season) and hope that the parent club feels you've done enough to take you into their first team squad. Typically this doesn't happen so a second and third loan are a possibility.

In our scenario, if Massengo stands out then he can expect that big club to take him into the first team squad from next summer with a £20M+ transfer. We now have a proven track record with Webster and Kelly although Brighton and Bournemouth might not be this 18 year old's dream move.

The other positive from the player's situation is that he knows exactly where he will be playing and has complete control over the club he joins. Loan players do not have this luxury.

If I was advising Massengo, this path makes a lot more sense if he has the talent to back up his price tag. From a parent's point of view, I would rather my 18 year old son was part of a club and its setup than a transient loanee. I hope we can repay that faith by supporting this lad's development.

He was with a big club (ok crap gates I know but)

I think he has his future mapped out and that big club you refer to is already identified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

I stated similar seasons ago. 

One of my observations is also defensive. I like yourself think defending is collective and starts from the front. City also have changed their game defensively to accommodate a player with little pressing ability. On Sunday we could see a payer ambling around showing a lack of desire to get compact.

Far far better players than Famara are more selfless for the team. He limits the potential of the team tactically. There has been a better, more energetic, technical Bristol City waiting to happen for seasons without him. 

He really is holding us back...totally agree.

We see for eyes what's happening, so why does LJ play him?

Are stats showing something we don't see?

Famara made one shot off target all game on Sunday and made two touches in the box all game according to Wyscout stats.

The game breaks down pretty much every time the ball goes near him. If he wins a header it more often than not goes anywhere.

If a ball comes to him...he grapples with the defender. Holding on. He either goes to ground or the ball pings around off him, never fully in control, and eventually loses possession.

The negatives far outway the positives.

It's like watching an Octopus trying to fight it's way out of a paper bag when he's trying to win a ball.

And this has nothing to do with him being isolated.

Look at Bamford playing a similar role...totally different. He had Kalas all over him...did he play like Famara...no.

Famara makes it look like he's being manhandled more than any other player, and it simply isn't so.

Instead of backing into a player, he could learn a lot from Taylor. Who wins space easily so often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

He was with a big club (ok crap gates I know but)

I think he has his future mapped out and that big club you refer to is already identified.

Monaco are certainly bigger than us. But I'm sure I've read that's he is out of favour and not getting picked. He needs that shop window and the prize of a Premier League transfer is more likely than being bit part player for a team that finished near the bottom of Ligue 1 last season. As already said, I think it's a calculated gamble for greater visibility - no doubt Chelsea will be watching as I'm sure every Prem and Championship club will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Xiled said:

Monaco are certainly bigger than us. But I'm sure I've read that's he is out of favour and not getting picked. He needs that shop window and the prize of a Premier League transfer is more likely than being bit part player for a team that finished near the bottom of Ligue 1 last season. As already said, I think it's a calculated gamble for greater visibility - no doubt Chelsea will be watching as I'm sure every Prem and Championship club will be.

Hope we get the best out of him and he plays as soon as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, spudski said:

He really is holding us back...totally agree.

We see for eyes what's happening, so why does LJ play him?

Are stats showing something we don't see?

Famara made one shot off target all game on Sunday and made two touches in the box all game according to Wyscout stats.

The game breaks down pretty much every time the ball goes near him. If he wins a header it more often than not goes anywhere.

If a ball comes to him...he grapples with the defender. Holding on. He either goes to ground or the ball pings around off him, never fully in control, and eventually loses possession.

The negatives far outway the positives.

It's like watching an Octopus trying to fight it's way out of a paper bag when he's trying to win a ball.

And this has nothing to do with him being isolated.

Look at Bamford playing a similar role...totally different. He had Kalas all over him...did he play like Famara...no.

Famara makes it look like he's being manhandled more than any other player, and it simply isn't so.

Instead of backing into a player, he could learn a lot from Taylor. Who wins space easily so often.

It’s hard to get shots on target or touches in the box if you have the ball lumped up to you about 18ft in the air or you get no service whatsoever

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, spudski said:

Yet Taylor and Weimann could when Famara and Palmer went off.

I think the support for Fam comes from a genuine will for him to succeed because he is a well liked trier (I agree with this). The harsh truth is that he is ponderous, only very occasionally has a good first touch, rarely offers by making a good run, such stasis leaving little option but to hit him where he presently resides. When he does go a roamin' it is so often desperately ill-judged to the extent that he is often out of the box when we need him in the box. We have an abundance of tools for 4-3-3 and that is really what we should work with for now - if we want to get goals - plural.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, spudski said:

Yet Taylor and Weimann could when Famara and Palmer went off.

Because we changed formation to two up front, which in turn meant our front man/men were no longer isolated, Jesus spud it’s not like you not to notice this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

We stopped lumping it.

Because Taylor lost his man, made space and came for the ball.

On more than one occasion Moore gesteculated at Famara to come.

He had to go back to the goalkeeper and sideways.

Moore then went on two marauding runs forward when Famara didn't move. And was left with no option to pass to anyone else.

The reason players end up lumping it to Famara, is because other passes get blocked off to other players. Instead of losing possession in our own half or in a dangerous position, the lump the ball to him, in a hope he wins it, or if he doesn't it's in a less dangerous position.

Famaras movement to receive is poor. He sits high on the shoulder of the last player. Rarely moves off that player. Hence always being grappled.

Watch Weimann and Taylor's movement...Famara should be doing that as well.

He's one dimensional... doesn't fit our style and will hold us back.

If we play him and Palmer in the same set up, we'll do worse than last season imo.

He's stopping our progress big time.

Unfortunately it seems LJ and our coaching staff feel the need to play him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, spudski said:

Because Taylor lost his man, made space and came for the ball.

On more than one occasion Moore gesteculated at Famara to come.

He had to go back to the goalkeeper and sideways.

Moore then went on two marauding runs forward when Famara didn't move. And was left with no option to pass to anyone else.

The reason players end up lumping it to Famara, is because other passes get blocked off to other players. Instead of losing possession in our own half or in a dangerous position, the lump the ball to him, in a hope he wins it, or if he doesn't it's in a less dangerous position.

Famaras movement to receive is poor. He sits high on the shoulder of the last player. Rarely moves off that player. Hence always being grappled.

Watch Weimann and Taylor's movement...Famara should be doing that as well.

He's one dimensional... doesn't fit our style and will hold us back.

If we play him and Palmer in the same set up, we'll do worse than last season imo.

He's stopping our progress big time.

Unfortunately it seems LJ and our coaching staff feel the need to play him.

The need to play him is becaus ehe’s Been out top scorer for two seasons despite missing large parts of both those seasons 

Just now, spudski said:

He isolates himself...read my above post.

So he kicks the ball 60 yards too himself? ******* hell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Monkeh said:

The need to play him is becaus ehe’s Been out top scorer for two seasons despite missing large parts of both those seasons 

So he kicks the ball 60 yards too himself? ******* hell

If he moved better we wouldn't need to lump it to him.

It's his lack of movement, that allows the opposition to block pathways to other players, hence being only left with an option to go backwards.

Even LJ has said of the amount of opportunities we create that aren't converted. Stats prove it...as do his movement, lack of and loss of possession.

We play him because LJ feels we lack a physicality without him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, spudski said:

If he moved better we wouldn't need to lump it to him.

It's his lack of movement, that allows the opposition to block pathways to other players, hence being only left with an option to go backwards.

Even LJ has said of the amount of opportunities we create that aren't converted. Stats prove it...as do his movement, lack of and loss of possession.

We play him because LJ feels we lack a physicality without him.

We play him because he’s been our top scorer for 2 years and have lack of depth upfront,

also we lump 60 yard balls not due to lack of movement (watch him he makes plenty of runs)

we lump 60 yard balls to bypass the centre of midfield because that’s where we are weakest,

look at the assists coming out of our centre players between pack and brownhill we struggle to get into double figures 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

We play him because he’s been our top scorer for 2 years and have lack of depth upfront

 

He was our top scorer last year  13 goals, 18th top scorer in the league. The previous year though it was Bobby Reid with 19 goals, 4th highest in the league.

 

 

edit also Famara has only 2 assists in each of those seasons - Bobby Reid got 7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

We play him because he’s been our top scorer for 2 years and have lack of depth upfront,

also we lump 60 yard balls not due to lack of movement (watch him he makes plenty of runs)

we lump 60 yard balls to bypass the centre of midfield because that’s where we are weakest,

look at the assists coming out of our centre players between pack and brownhill we struggle to get into double figures 

We can agree to disagree.

I'm sure our back 4 think ' I know I won't pass to our Midfield because they are weak' ?

I watch Famara...he runs into dead ends. Away from the ball...into a space occupied by the CBs or where the Keeper can recover the ball.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, spudski said:

We can agree to disagree.

I'm sure our back 4 think ' I know I won't pass to our Midfield because they are weak' ?

I watch Famara...he runs into dead ends. Away from the ball...into a space occupied by the CBs or where the Keeper can recover the ball.

 

Half his goals and assists were away from home last year. I simply would not start him at home, as I've said many, many times. To whip the crowd up at home we need to have plenty of movement and options up front (across the line) from the start. This is (in my opinion) why the atmosphere can be so utterly flat after the usual, initial 10 mins of huff and puff. Bring the big man on for the final 15/20.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, spudski said:

He really is holding us back...totally agree.

We see for eyes what's happening, so why does LJ play him?

Are stats showing something we don't see?

Famara made one shot off target all game on Sunday and made two touches in the box all game according to Wyscout stats.

The game breaks down pretty much every time the ball goes near him. If he wins a header it more often than not goes anywhere.

If a ball comes to him...he grapples with the defender. Holding on. He either goes to ground or the ball pings around off him, never fully in control, and eventually loses possession.

The negatives far outway the positives.

It's like watching an Octopus trying to fight it's way out of a paper bag when he's trying to win a ball.

And this has nothing to do with him being isolated.

Look at Bamford playing a similar role...totally different. He had Kalas all over him...did he play like Famara...no.

Famara makes it look like he's being manhandled more than any other player, and it simply isn't so.

Instead of backing into a player, he could learn a lot from Taylor. Who wins space easily so often.

Yes Bamford .. Yes.

At this point in his career that learning is highly doubtful. 

Famaras goals to shots ratio was high. I made a case in 4 -1- 4 -1 last season when the transfer window was shut why playing him could lead to a progression in points. Then I wanted to see him moved on not because he is a bad player but because he does not fit BCFC, or what I think BCFC can be without him.

Not much of a defence of why does LJ play him in the long terms. I do not get it. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, spudski said:

Because Taylor lost his man, made space and came for the ball.

On more than one occasion Moore gesteculated at Famara to come.

He had to go back to the goalkeeper and sideways.

Moore then went on two marauding runs forward when Famara didn't move. And was left with no option to pass to anyone else.

The reason players end up lumping it to Famara, is because other passes get blocked off to other players. Instead of losing possession in our own half or in a dangerous position, the lump the ball to him, in a hope he wins it, or if he doesn't it's in a less dangerous position.

Famaras movement to receive is poor. He sits high on the shoulder of the last player. Rarely moves off that player. Hence always being grappled.

Watch Weimann and Taylor's movement...Famara should be doing that as well.

He's one dimensional... doesn't fit our style and will hold us back.

If we play him and Palmer in the same set up, we'll do worse than last season imo.

He's stopping our progress big time.

Unfortunately it seems LJ and our coaching staff feel the need to play him.

I know exactly what you're saying, and if it was down to me I would happily play two smaller busy forwards. But I do think because so often Fam is isolated with little or no support, because of the way the team is set up, that players just end up lumping it. It's agricultural and thoroughly shite to watch. He and Bobby had a pretty good thing going I seem to remember.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Roger Red Hat said:

I know exactly what you're saying, and if it was down to me I would happily play two smaller busy forwards. But I do think because so often Fam is isolated with little or no support, because of the way the team is set up, that players just end up lumping it. It's agricultural and thoroughly shite to watch. He and Bobby had a pretty good thing going I seem to remember.

Weimann and Palmer - why not?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...