We shouldn’t sign Twine

[NcnsBcfc]

I do wonder whether we are seeing a 80% fit Twine at the moment?

A few times he's got into shooting positions and not been able to either generate the power/accuracy that he has demonstrated in his career. 

Obviously had his injury issues at Burnley as well and although only still 24, he does look a player who is "prone" to Injuries unfortunately.

That said, teams are aware of Twine and having him on the pitch opens up space for other City players. So from a team perspective having him back has been a positive (results wise of course over the last few weeks).

When talking of transfer fees, McCrorie's fee at the moment looks a bit heavy based on the skillset he has demonstrated so far.

Let's see what a pre season does for him, but unless we are able to get him for £2.5-3m I would pass. We would also need to bring in a number of players next season to allow us not to rely on a "fragile" player.

[LondonBristolian]

6 hours ago, marcofisher said:

I expect Burnley to come down and probably look to get value from him on the pitch rather than sell him.

The only thing is that he’s maybe not done what they hoped he would with either Hull or with us. I wonder if that will shift their expectations of what impact he could have for them next season.

[And Its Smith]

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

FWIW I’ve not looked at any stats for Twine, what I’ve seen with my eyes is enough.  I think suggesting Twine is behind our results, and him being out behind the losses is a big reach (my opinion).  Against Leicester he wasn’t on the pitch when we scored for example.  I’m not convinced his inability to retain the ball under challenge is much to do with a makeshift defence.  I’m not sure what the reason was for his other peripheral performances have been.

Who knows, maybe he has a storming final 3 games, but I’ve been hugely underwhelmed so far.  

Sorry to be so down on this one.  I was really excited to see him in a City shirt having thought we missed out on him previously.

I agree to a very small extent….But It cost us to find out.  I don’t expect recruitment to nail it every time, but I’d hope it wouldn’t always take a loan (with loan fee and wages) to find out.  Ditto Mebude.

I still think we will try to get him too.  I bloody hope not though.

They’d have to give us some £millions too imho!

I’d rather spend a bit to find out if we should spend a lot

[TDarwall]

I'm a no at this stage - just not seen enough from him. I often complain that we don't seem as athletic/dynamic as other teams, with only Pring, Knight & Sykes being strong in that area. Twine is another who is neither quick nor powerful.

I do wonder if he is one of those that looks great at the lower leagues where its easier go find space but just doesn't have ebought about him to have a massive impact at this level. 

[Back of the Dolman]

27 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

FWIW I’ve not looked at any stats for Twine, what I’ve seen with my eyes is enough.  I think suggesting Twine is behind our results, and him being out behind the losses is a big reach (my opinion).  Against Leicester he wasn’t on the pitch when we scored for example.  I’m not convinced his inability to retain the ball under challenge is much to do with a makeshift defence.  I’m not sure what the reason was for his other peripheral performances have been.

Who knows, maybe he has a storming final 3 games, but I’ve been hugely underwhelmed so far.  

Sorry to be so down on this one.  I was really excited to see him in a City shirt having thought we missed out on him previously.

I agree to a very small extent….But It cost us to find out.  I don’t expect recruitment to nail it every time, but I’d hope it wouldn’t always take a loan (with loan fee and wages) to find out.  Ditto Mebude.

I still think we will try to get him too.  I bloody hope not though.

They’d have to give us some £millions too imho!

I think Tommy would do well there with the number of chances they’re likely to create next season if they do come down 

[The Constant Rabbit]

Yes - if we can arrange a performance based deal.

1.5 mil

 

500K upfront + 2 further installments on agreed milestones.

[BCFC31]

On 13/04/2024 at 21:00, GBF said:

Based on what I have seen but particularly today and assuming a transfer fee and higher than average wages in our squad I don’t think we should sign Twine. Today was the game he should have made a difference and he was one of our poorer players. This maybe unfair on him as he is returning from injury but I don’t think he is any more creative or better than the the existing alternatives in our squad

 

What annoys me is burnley are trying to inflict their blunder onto us by asking for the same free they paid mk dons for him yet its clear he is just an average championship player anyone who pays anywhere near the asking price of 5m for him is insane 

Edited April 14 by BCFC31

[Major Isewater]

I haven’t seen him but I am not convinced.

 

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

19 hours ago, redkev said:

Talking of players we should sign I’m not sure what deal he’s on and has taken a while to settle due to injury etc I have been very impressed with Haydn Roberts class act from what I’ve seen recently, him & Tanner ( who I have criticised) have been excellent as has Dickie 

 

19 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Roberts and Tanner both contracted to 2026, no option mentioned at signing

 

Haydon Roberts has been outstanding in some games.  He's got an eye for turning defensive play into offensive play which is a massive asset.  And he's got a wicked pass on him.  He really makes me want us to play a back three so we can accommodate all our decent CB.  But I also like a good back four setup as well.

I think Naismith can push into midfield but he's got frustrating availability. He's got so many good attacking attributes, but he's fragile now which is unlucky.

[supercidered]

On 13/04/2024 at 23:31, Nescot said:

Twine is worth every penny anything 4mil or under sign.

Such a shame there isn't a Bellend emoji.

[Back of the Dolman]

6 minutes ago, Lorenzos Only Goal said:

 

 

Haydon Roberts has been outstanding in some games.  He's got an eye for turning defensive play into offensive play which is a massive asset.  And he's got a wicked pass on him.  He really makes me want us to play a back three so we can accommodate all our decent CB.  But I also like a good back four setup as well.

I think Naismith can push into midfield but he's got frustrating availability. He's got so many good attacking attributes, but he's fragile now which is unlucky.

I’d say there’s potential for Roberts to push into that Naismith role you suggest.

He's comfortable on the ball and can see a pass but he also has the ability to shield the defence with his defensive abilities 

[Clutton Caveman]

On 13/04/2024 at 21:43, GrahamC said:

Clearly there will be a “transfer fee” Burnley paid £4m for him, they aren’t giving him away.

I think he’s done ok but certainly wouldn’t pay anything like the amount that’s being quoted.

Let’s see how the summer unfolds, my guess is he’ll start next season as our player, time will tell.

 

Spends too much energy moaning to the ref for my liking

[mozo]

9 minutes ago, Lorenzos Only Goal said:

 

 

Haydon Roberts has been outstanding in some games.  He's got an eye for turning defensive play into offensive play which is a massive asset.  And he's got a wicked pass on him.  He really makes me want us to play a back three so we can accommodate all our decent CB.  But I also like a good back four setup as well.

I think Naismith can push into midfield but he's got frustrating availability. He's got so many good attacking attributes, but he's fragile now which is unlucky.

Last year, I though Pring looked like a future Premier League player, now it's Roberts who looks more likely of the two. It'll be interesting to see how they both get on next season (if they stay).

[Back of the Dolman]

Just now, mozo said:

Last year, I though Pring looked like a future Premier League player, now it's Roberts who looks more likely of the two. It'll be interesting to see how they both get on next season (if they stay).

A hybrid of the two would be a tasty player 

[Clutton Caveman]

15 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

I’d rather spend a bit to find out if we should spend a lot

We need strikers, nothing should remove that focus

[supercidered]

1 minute ago, Back of the Dolman said:

A hybrid of the two would be a tasty player 

They would be a very weird looking player.

[Back of the Dolman]

2 minutes ago, supercidered said:

They would be a very weird looking player.

I’d only considered the footballing ability

[And Its Smith]

15 minutes ago, Clutton Caveman said:

We need strikers, nothing should remove that focus

We don’t JUST need strikers. We need people to get the ball to those strikers in advanced positions as well

[Davefevs]

35 minutes ago, Lorenzos Only Goal said:

 

 

Haydon Roberts has been outstanding in some games.  He's got an eye for turning defensive play into offensive play which is a massive asset.  And he's got a wicked pass on him.  He really makes me want us to play a back three so we can accommodate all our decent CB.  But I also like a good back four setup as well.

I think Naismith can push into midfield but he's got frustrating availability. He's got so many good attacking attributes, but he's fragile now which is unlucky.

He’s got a lot of similar traits to Jay Dasilva on the ball, but is a foot taller, and can kick it more than 20 yards!

I enjoy watching him play, like I did Dasilva.

[Silvio Dante]

What’s interesting about the Twine discussion is that it’s not really split on “factions” - whether people are more pro LM or LM doubters, this thread has mainly the same conclusion - that he’s not really worth the likely fee and, other than Lez doing his normal stuff, pretty much everyone is on a scale of doubting the signing to straight out not wanting to do it.

There is no question LM knows more about Twine than any of us, and he may see him as a puzzle piece that is only fully effective with the rest of the puzzle, but it’d be an odd scenario when we’ve all seen him that the majority of this thread is totally wrong.

 

[BigTone]

14 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

What’s interesting about the Twine discussion is that it’s not really split on “factions” - whether people are more pro LM or LM doubters, this thread has mainly the same conclusion - that he’s not really worth the likely fee and, other than Lez doing his normal stuff, pretty much everyone is on a scale of doubting the signing to straight out not wanting to do it.

There is no question LM knows more about Twine than any of us, and he may see him as a puzzle piece that is only fully effective with the rest of the puzzle, but it’d be an odd scenario when we’ve all seen him that the majority of this thread is totally wrong.

 

Puzzling really

[mozo]

21 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

What’s interesting about the Twine discussion is that it’s not really split on “factions” - whether people are more pro LM or LM doubters, this thread has mainly the same conclusion - that he’s not really worth the likely fee and, other than Lez doing his normal stuff, pretty much everyone is on a scale of doubting the signing to straight out not wanting to do it.

There is no question LM knows more about Twine than any of us, and he may see him as a puzzle piece that is only fully effective with the rest of the puzzle, but it’d be an odd scenario when we’ve all seen him that the majority of this thread is totally wrong.

 

There is also that possibility that Twine hasn't reproduced what he does on the training pitch when he's in the game  

Based on performances I'd say no to signing him, but bringing unknowables into account, I'll remain agnostic. 

[Davefevs]

32 minutes ago, mozo said:

There is also that possibility that Twine hasn't reproduced what he does on the training pitch when he's in the game  

Based on performances I'd say no to signing him, but bringing unknowables into account, I'll remain agnostic. 

Premier League on the training pitches…..

[SecretSam]

TBH, with Burnley near certainties for relegation to the Championship, I'd imagine he'll be playing for them next season, so this is all a bit academic.

However, if not Twine, then whom, as a playmaker of this ilk?

Edited April 15 by SecretSam
more thinking

[TDarwall]

12 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Premier League on the training pitches…..

Best 7 aside player in the world......

[Supersonic Robin]

On 14/04/2024 at 00:37, Swede said:

Actually today, in a tight game you could see a value. He popped up many times in good positions, in between the lines. These fine margins could be the difference between winning and losing. This is what I think Manning sees. He's a very intelligent player always thinking on the front foot. Unfortunately for him I don't think he affects enough of what we need in a game. This is down to his slight physique & perceived lack of pace. So he's never going to out pace or out muscle a defender.

He is never worth £4M, I would say more like less than half of that.

Agree, Twine is clearly a good player, but doesn't seem a great fit for us in some ways.

In terms of pressing and defending, he leaves a a lot to be desired. That's okay if you're getting a goal or assist every other game, but Twine isn't. In general, Twine hasn't quite been the huge outlet of threat and creativity that I'd hoped.

A good player? Yes. A player I'd spend £4m on? No.

 

On 13/04/2024 at 23:31, Nescot said:

Twine is worth every penny anything 4mil or under sign.

On 14/04/2024 at 11:42, Jeez said:

Everyone is crying out for progress but at same time lots are poo pooing a player like Twine who is arguably the minimum level throughout the squad / 1st 11 you need you win promotion.

Are these views based on what we expected of him, or his actual performances for us?

Don't get me wrong, he's a decent player, but I wonder if the fact "it's Twine" is making people see his performances through rose-tinted glasses.

[Cityboy1954]

On 14/04/2024 at 12:16, Davefevs said:

I don’t think Hull were hugely impressed, hence why they looked to strengthen if there was a chance for Burnley to recall him.  I think at this level from watching him at Burnley, Hull and more closely with us, he’s a player that is more suited to a “team” with better players around him than himself.  I don’t see him being able to lift Bristol City.

So, imho, it’s about fit (not fitness!) with Bristol City, and I don’t think he’s a great fit.  He’s too lightweight for what we need.  Going OTT he’s too much of a luxury for his set-pieces.  And in Bird, TGH and even Roberts, the difference he’d make on set-pieces doesn’t warrant signing him.  We should not be building a team around one player!  That is foolhardy.  Nor one player, still unproven, who’ll be 25 by the time the season starts.

So I wouldn’t sign him, whatever the fee is, because of the above and the wages will be top end too.

Is he?  He’s been on the periphery in pretty much every game.

I would’ve loved us to sign Twine 3 years ago for near bugger-all as a punt.  But I don’t want us to pay £x million for a player who looks like he doesn’t fit.  If there is one positive from this loan, it’s that it’s told us who we don’t want.

That is down to the imagination of the Recruitment process.  We attracted Dickie, Knight, Bird, Roberts, etc, so it’s not Mission Impossible to sign players better than we have.

I agree not for me not impressed with McCrorrie for what we paid i dont know what he offes not as good as Tanner at fullback and not quick enough to bomb down the wings .panic buy .

[Davefevs]

37 minutes ago, Cityboy1954 said:

I agree not for me not impressed with McCrorrie for what we paid i dont know what he offes not as good as Tanner at fullback and not quick enough to bomb down the wings .panic buy .

McCrorie was clearly not a panic buy, we scouted him for a good while, and his game is more a buccaneering RB, one to offer something different to Tanner.  He’s come back from a near-career threatening injury, and there are gonna be bumps in the road.  It’s not unusual for a player to come back in part way through a season and perform inconsistently like this.  As a bare minimum he needs preseason.

[Galley is our king]

8 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

I haven’t seen him but I am not convinced.

 

I have and you are right not to be convinced...

[Nuno Gomes]

When my son was being coached as an attacking midfielder a lot was said about ‘affecting the game’.  What I have seen in the home games he has played he has done too little to justify the perceived fee/wage tag.  Far too lightweight and disappears for too much of the game.  It’s a no from me.