Mr Engvall

[Drew Peacock]

2 hours ago, Port Said Red said:

I am not sure which bit of "one for the future' is the hard bit to take in

The 2.5m late in the window bit.

[JamesBCFC]

3 minutes ago, Drew Peacock said:

The 2.5m late in the window bit.

So, just for factual accuracy, you mean the £1.7 million we spent? Which is peanuts for a striker these days.

[JamesBCFC]

4 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

I'm gonna be brave and possibly alone on this one , but

Im very unsure about Engvall on what I saw against Hull

I think I'm the only one who wasn't very impressed by all I've read - which suggests I'm probably wrong

Dont get me wrong I thought he showed some nice 'touches' , was against Prem defenders and he is only 20 and he did look a 'decent footballer' (Which to be fair as a under 21 Swedish Int he must be)

Certainly wouldn't criticise his performance

What struck me was that to be he looked more of a link up player than a goal threat / goal scorer which is what we desperately need , now or soon to give TA help or a rest, and certainly when TA departs

All this is judged on one appearance of course (Not sure whether anyone seen much more of him ?) so is just that 'initial view'

Predicting ahead a season or to - Hope I'm wrong and he makes a massive impact in the next few years - if he does I think it will be as a second striker 

Guess I'm not raving about him as much as many - hope they're right and I'm wrong 

Just my view based on the limited mins we've seen of him

Not sure I necessarily agree there.

We do need him to contribute with goals, yes. But with our formation it is one that allows goals to come from the 3 behind the striker, as well as the striker- Arsenal (albeit with far higher quality players) are a prime example of this.

Right now everyone is overplaying, trying to pick out Abraham and letting him have the best chances. Even when there's a good chance inside the box, we tend to pass to him, we need others to take shots and score.

[Drew Peacock]

2 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said:

So, just for factual accuracy, you mean the £1.7 million we spent? Which is peanuts for a striker these days.

That will be the one.

I don't think we are quite there for paying that much for the future.

[bristolcitysweden]

5 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

I'm gonna be brave and possibly alone on this one , but

Im very unsure about Engvall on what I saw against Hull

I think I'm the only one who wasn't very impressed by all I've read - which suggests I'm probably wrong

Dont get me wrong I thought he showed some nice 'touches' , was against Prem defenders and he is only 20 and he did look a 'decent footballer' (Which to be fair as a under 21 Swedish Int he must be)

Certainly wouldn't criticise his performance

What struck me was that to be he looked more of a link up player than a goal threat / goal scorer which is what we desperately need , now or soon to give TA help or a rest, and certainly when TA departs

All this is judged on one appearance of course (Not sure whether anyone seen much more of him ?) so is just that 'initial view'

Predicting ahead a season or to - Hope I'm wrong and he makes a massive impact in the next few years - if he does I think it will be as a second striker 

Guess I'm not raving about him as much as many - hope they're right and I'm wrong 

Just my view based on the limited mins we've seen of him

I think you are right in that he is more of a number ten but he is also very direct in creating chances for himself and not so dependent of others

[JamesBCFC]

2 minutes ago, Drew Peacock said:

That will be the one.

I don't think we are quite there for paying that much for the future.

That's the market these days, you want a bright prospect you have to pay. Unless you bring them through the academy or pick them from a lower status one. Little chance that was going to happen when Gustav was at one of the better Swedish sides don't you think?

 

[BobBobSuperBob]

2 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said:

Not sure I necessarily agree there.

We do need him to contribute with goals, yes. But with our formation it is one that allows goals to come from the 3 behind the striker, as well as the striker- Arsenal (albeit with far higher quality players) are a prime example of this.

Right now everyone is overplaying, trying to pick out Abraham and letting him have the best chances. Even when there's a good chance inside the box, we tend to pass to him, we need others to take shots and score.

Of course

Just one problem - that's not happening anywhere near enough ATM (Different discussion of course) but , put it this way - in that formation I don't see Engvall being the main / lone frontman unless we provide lots of goals from the threee behind

Not gonna get too deep into it as it's a real initial hunch view based on one performance - will be interesting how it eventually works out

[1bristolcity]

Don't worry we are gonna unleash the Engvall when he is good and ready, to wreak havoc on defences all around the Country, I just know it.

[BobBobSuperBob]

11 minutes ago, bristolcitysweden said:

I think you are right in that he is more of a number ten but he is also very direct in creating chances for himself and not so dependent of others

Ta BCS - you will know more about him than us and that's good to hear - What sticks in my memory in particular was v Hull he was given the ball with a one on one with a defender and a clear route to goal and from the moment he got the ball he looked unsure and didn't look like he relished the chance to take the defender on and get in on goal whereas with a Glenn Murray / Tammy / Gayle type it's their very first thought

Talking about one game and describing one incident and ridiculous to make a judgement based on this - sometimes you get a hunch on a player , I normally first look for his first touch (Which in Engvalls case looked decent) but the art of being a threat on goal is something else 

[bristolcitysweden]

3 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Ta BCS - you will know more about him than us and that's good to hear - What sticks in my memory in particular was v Hull he was given the ball with a one on one with a defender and a clear route to goal and from the moment he got the ball he looked unsure and didn't look like he relished the chance to take the defender on and get in on goal

Talking about one game and describing one incident and ridiculous to make a judgement based on this - sometimes you get a hunch on a player , I normally first look for his first touch (Which in Engvalls case looked decent) but the art of being a threat on goal is something else 

As always trust will gain confidence. Gustav will be at his best with ball on feet storming forward as number 10

[JamesBCFC]

10 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Of course

Just one problem - that's not happening anywhere near enough ATM (Different discussion of course) but , put it this way - in that formation I don't see Engvall being the main / lone frontman unless we provide lots of goals from the threee behind

Not gonna get too deep into it as it's a real initial hunch view based on one performance - will be interesting how it eventually works out

But I think that's possibly a plan. Giroud (while not being an out and out goalscorer) gets a fair share, but holds it up and lays the ball off. 

Appreciate he is a different style again to Engvall. But he could well do that while playing at the top of the formation. Laying the ball off to the other making runs forward (something they do now, although bar Tomlin they almost always then try and give it to Tammy after).

However, having said all that those players behind all need some shooting practise, as in game the rare occasions they do shoot it ends up blazing over the bar.

[David Brent]

16 minutes ago, Drew Peacock said:

That will be the one.

I don't think we are quite there for paying that much for the future.

Well we've given ourselves an opportunity to do so with the Kodjia money. I'm sure we'd have been happy to have spent more on another too.

[bristolcitysweden]

One reason he has not been played is that we have been running up hill lately and it's then more useful to put on Wilbs going long late on. Should we have been winning Engvall would have been more likely to come on

[JamesBCFC]

2 minutes ago, bristolcitysweden said:

One reason he has not been played is that we have been running up hill lately and it's then more useful to put on Wilbs going long late on. Should we have been winning Engvall would have been more likely to come on

Been thinking the same myself. 

While Engvall isn't the same style as Tammy, Wilbraham is a bigger change in how we play, so a more effective sub to change things up when chasing a game.

[Marina's Rolls Royce]

2 hours ago, Judda said:

I totally get the one for the future thing but my concern is that he was £2m... I thought we'd have given him a few minutes here or there by now?

just out of interest- at what price would he have had to have cost for you not to have that concern?

 

[Phileas Fogg]

2 hours ago, Judda said:

I totally get the one for the future thing but my concern is that he was £2m... I thought we'd have given him a few minutes here or there by now?

The fee isn't that relevant. We are well in profit from this summer and we've clearly invested in a player who we believe will be worth it.

£2m isn't that much money in football anymore really. 

We're so used to having a small club mentality that the fee seems hard to stomach for our fans. 

[Red Thai]

He must still have ongoing, niggly injury problems, or we would have seen a bit more of him?

You only get match fit by playing matches, but that brings the added hazards of tough defenders trying to kick lumps out of you.....ask Tammy!

Probably not a risk worth taking at the moment with him, even for short sub appearances.

Anyone ITK about what his injury troubles are?  or even a guess would be something!

Come on Lee, give us a little bit of info eh?    

 

[ChippenhamRed]

9 hours ago, Bristol Rob said:

So we sign a youngster as a development player, because he cost quite a bit of money he isn't allowed to develop (as the manager has said he needs to), so he is written off.

Typical of some City supporters.

Not our money, not us watching him train, not us having seen him play however many games before signing him and understanding what is being expected.

But of course, some have an opinion based on, err, nothing.

Why he is he now being described as a "development player" and "one for the future"? You've just reframed the situation to suit your argument.

He wasn't announced as a development player, he was announced on deadline day as a "highly rated Swedish international".

LJ's quote at the time:-

“This is another big transfer for us and it’s taken a lot of hard work from a lot of people.

 

“He’s a Swedish international who has excellent finishing ability. I’m sure he will adjust quickly to the pace and tempo of the Sky Bet Championship and when he does he’ll be really dangerous.”

Given that he is one of only 3 strikers on the books I don't think it's at all unreasonable that when a player is announced in such terms, we expect him to feature.

http://mobile.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/2016-17/city-secure-engvall-transfer-3281091.aspx

 

[Eddie Hitler]

13 hours ago, Robbored said:

Styvar was signed based on a goal he scored against Villa in a European fixture on tv.. No-one at City had actually seen play a full game. His signing was another example of how poorly run the club was run back then. He turned out to be utter shite.

Engval on the other hand.....a full Swedish international as Graham has already said. 

Theres no comparison between the two. That's why it's embarrassing.

 

 

 

12 hours ago, Robbored said:

 

And they still signed him?..........

Thankfully the club is not being run like a family corner shop any longer.

Right.

So Gary Johnson is an idiot because he signed a player based upon his scoring a goal on TV and not properly scouting him.

Then when it is pointed out that he and the chief scout, his brother, had in fact properly scouted him prior to signing him he is still an idiot.

Anybody would think you had something against the man.

[Phileas Fogg]

1 hour ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Why he is he now being described as a "development player" and "one for the future"? You've just reframed the situation to suit your argument.

He wasn't announced as a development player, he was announced on deadline day as a "highly rated Swedish international".

LJ's quote at the time:-

“This is another big transfer for us and it’s taken a lot of hard work from a lot of people.

 

“He’s a Swedish international who has excellent finishing ability. I’m sure he will adjust quickly to the pace and tempo of the Sky Bet Championship and when he does he’ll be really dangerous.”

Given that he is one of only 3 strikers on the books I don't think it's at all unreasonable that when a player is announced in such terms, we expect him to feature.

http://mobile.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/2016-17/city-secure-engvall-transfer-3281091.aspx

 

Wouldn't surprise me if he was described like that because we didn't have the big name Kodjia replacement everyone wanted/expected. A bit of appeasement and positive spin. If true, it's backfired because now it's put undue pressure on a young player who may not be ready to take on that mantle.

[ashton_fan]

5 hours ago, Red Thai said:

He must still have ongoing, niggly injury problems, or we would have seen a bit more of him?

You only get match fit by playing matches, but that brings the added hazards of tough defenders trying to kick lumps out of you.....ask Tammy!

Probably not a risk worth taking at the moment with him, even for short sub appearances.

Anyone ITK about what his injury troubles are?  or even a guess would be something!

Come on Lee, give us a little bit of info eh?    

 

LJ has given info at his recent press conference. Engvall is fit but not ready for the Championship yet, needs coaching in certain areas then he'll be used more probably from January. 

[Red Thai]

4 minutes ago, ashton_fan said:

LJ has given info at his recent press conference. Engvall is fit but not ready for the Championship yet, needs coaching in certain areas then he'll be used more probably from January. 

Ah right.

Did he give any indication as to what the injuries were?

 

[ashton_fan]

2 minutes ago, Red Thai said:

Ah right.

Did he give any indication as to what the injuries were?

 

He's fully fit, not injured

[Welcome To The Jungle]

15 hours ago, GrahamC said:

No chance at all.

Our striking options are currently a 19 year old, a 37 year old and him.

January is always a very difficult time to add players, so even if we bring in another one he will stay.

The Styvar comparison is both lazy and embarrassing, one was 27, spoke no English at all and joined us from the Slovakian league. Engvall is only 20, already a full Swedish international and an English speaker.

It is also obviously the case that we have signed him (like Moore, Brownhill, Lucic and O'Dowda) for beyond just this season, rushing to judgement this early in either direction (someone seriously compared him to Denis Bergkamp after the Hull game) does no-one any favours.

 

I compared his style of play to Bergkamp's, not his actual ability. 

[petehinton]

I've heard from a few people that the club went in a bit blind on him. We needed a replacement for Kodjia, or at least needed to sign a striker for appease.

LJ has said that he needs time to bed in and get used to the tempo, yet didn't say that about Magnusson - just played him from minute 1 and has done ever since. Engvall hasn't even come on when we've been winning, even away at Fulham we were 4-0 up and he didn't come off the bench.His highest scoring season is 8.

 I think the club have looked at him and though '****', IMO. To not bring him on/play him at 0-0, 1-0 I can understand, but to not be used when we've been winning comfortably, or even chasing the game is very strange. Has even played an u23 game?

Would love to be proved wrong but I don't think the signs are good.

[BRISTOL86]

11 hours ago, Bristol Rob said:

So we sign a youngster as a development player, because he cost quite a bit of money he isn't allowed to develop (as the manager has said he needs to), so he is written off.

Typical of some City supporters.

Not our money, not us watching him train, not us having seen him play however many games before signing him and understanding what is being expected.

But of course, some have an opinion based on, err, nothing.

It's more the situation that we can't score in a brothel and still one of our only strikers can't even get on the pitch. Surely that strikes you as odd? 

There could be a myriad of completely normal reasons why he isn't featuring but some kind of comment from LJ would put fan concerns at rest. 

If he's not fit, he shouldn't be on the bench. So you can only assume - unless told otherwise - that he is fit and that isn't the reason why he can't get game time.  

[JamesBCFC]

28 minutes ago, petehinton said:

I've heard from a few people that the club went in a bit blind on him. We needed a replacement for Kodjia, or at least needed to sign a striker for appease.

LJ has said that he needs time to bed in and get used to the tempo, yet didn't say that about Magnusson - just played him from minute 1 and has done ever since. Engvall hasn't even come on when we've been winning, even away at Fulham we were 4-0 up and he didn't come off the bench.His highest scoring season is 8.

 I think the club have looked at him and though '****', IMO. To not bring him on/play him at 0-0, 1-0 I can understand, but to not be used when we've been winning comfortably, or even chasing the game is very strange. Has even played an u23 game?

Would love to be proved wrong but I don't think the signs are good.

Magnusson came as a player, 3 years older than Engvall with tonnes more experience, having played outside of his native country for a lot of that and learning at a club with a history of being one of the best in Europe in a defensive sense.

Engvall came as a player, barely 20 and as a fringe player in a weaker division. 

Notice any difference there?

Again highest scoring season is 20, how many seasons has he had in his career, 1-2? How many minutes did he play in those seasons? How many games did he start, was he being played as the goal scorer or the creator? 

Other than Fulham (just after he had played against them in a midweek game in which he was returning from injury) when has he been available and we were winning comfortably?

I don't recall ANY games since then that fit that description. And yes he has played in the u23s/reserves.

[cityloyal473]

23 minutes ago, petehinton said:

I've heard from a few people that the club went in a bit blind on him. We needed a replacement for Kodjia, or at least needed to sign a striker for appease.

LJ has said that he needs time to bed in and get used to the tempo, yet didn't say that about Magnusson - just played him from minute 1 and has done ever since. Engvall hasn't even come on when we've been winning, even away at Fulham we were 4-0 up and he didn't come off the bench.His highest scoring season is 8.

 I think the club have looked at him and though '****', IMO. To not bring him on/play him at 0-0, 1-0 I can understand, but to not be used when we've been winning comfortably, or even chasing the game is very strange. Has even played an u23 game?

Would love to be proved wrong but I don't think the signs are good.

A historically low scoring, untested, not ready for the championship, injured striker - what could possibly go wrong.

[Red Thai]

1 hour ago, ashton_fan said:

He's fully fit, not injured

I did say were, not are.

Apparently, he came here injured,  went away with Sweden and picked up another injury, and is ok now, but not match/ Championship ready.

I was just interested as to what the injuries were. 

 

[chipdawg]

I've said it on one of the many other "Is Engvall a Bust?" threads that I don't think there was originally a plan to sign him in August. He was injured and in the middle of his domestic season, but then Villa came calling for Kodjia and we needed to get another striker in the squad, so we signed the guy we already had a lot of scouting on. So, no; he's probably not ready and I imagine the the club didn't necessarily expect him to be. But the kids played about 80 minutes for us and people are writing him off. Hopefully we'all start turning some of this second half dominance into actual points on the board soon and we can start giving Engvall 10 minutes here and there soon