Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
StanSP

Said Benrahma

By StanSP, in Transfer Talk

Recommended Posts

murphy

murphy

Posted
Posted
47 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Club size is nowhere near as important as it once was. What matters in the modern era is playing in the highest division where there's the most revenue and where you can attract the best players to see if you can join the top table.

 

So whilst some of you all spaff your kegs about Leeds, Newcastle, Everton, West Ham and Sunderland being bigger clubs than ours what really counts is in the last 20+ years we've 2 cups and a Premier League title in the bag whilst all them lot haven't won a single trophy (Everton won the FA Cup in '95).

 

We also in the last 4-5 years where the current profile of clubs is really most important have produced the greatest sporting story ever told. We then nearly backed it up this season with breaking apart the top 4 again, we should have and it hurts like hell but even with that capitulation we are still streets ahead of these bigger sized clubs. 

 

I know who I'd rather be right now.

I agree with you, I'd rather be a Leicester fan than a fan of any of those clubs but that's not the question.  The question is relative size of the clubs.

 

1 hour ago, Spudulike said:

Interesting comparison with Sunderland who have only won one major trophy (FACup 1973) since WWII. Whereas LCFC have 3 League Cups and 1 Premier League. 

 

In modern times (ie Premier League) Sunderland sit in 16th place in the all time table. LCFC are currently 14th.

 

I don't think having a stadium with more seats makes Sunderland  'bigger' club. 

But in the all time top division league table (inc. PL) Sunderland are 10th, Leicester are 25th.  They have six league titles.

 

https://www.worldfootball.net/alltime_table/eng-premier-league/

 

These things are established over decades and very difficult to break through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sacreblueits442

sacreblueits442

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, murphy said:

Clubs have periods of success and failure.  

 

It doesn't feel like it right now, but we are in a period of great success by our own standards.  We have grown as a club but these things take time, it doesn't happen overnight.  

 

In forty years of supporting Leicester, we have always been a Southampton or Norwich sized club.   Leeds are bigger, Sunderland are bigger, it doesn't matter how crap they are right now, this has been established over decades.  

 

In essence, @peach0000 is right.

..are we quantifying the size of a stadium against success!!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ric Flair

Ric Flair

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, murphy said:

I agree with you, I'd rather be a Leicester fan than a fan of any of those clubs but that's not the question.  The question is relative size of the clubs.

 

But in the all time top division league table (inc. PL) Sunderland are 10th, Leicester are 25th.  They have six league titles.

 

https://www.worldfootball.net/alltime_table/eng-premier-league/

 

These things are established over decades and very difficult to break through.

I just don't think size of a club makes much difference if there's fcuk all success to show for it in the last quarter of a century. Leeds are a weird one as their 90's achievements were very good but then the last 20 years they've been a disgrace. Being a big club with a history at some point starts to count for very little. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Adster

Adster

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, shade said:

who cares about who's bigger, who's better?

Children on FoxesTalk obviously care.....

 

It's literally a dead argument. Go to Twitter guys if you want to argue about x club is bigger than y club. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
murphy

murphy

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, Adster said:

Children on FoxesTalk obviously care.....

 

It's literally a dead argument. Go to Twitter guys if you want to argue about x club is bigger than y club. 

It 'literally' isn't, hence the last few posts, albeit in the wrong thread and for that reason I will leave it here.

 

I think it is interesting to compare what makes a big club, what are the criteria and where do we sit in that mix and it is relevant for all kinds of reasons, not least attracting and keeping players.

 

You don't care, fine.  No need to come out with silly insults and put downs and failing to notice the irony in doing so.  I mean, that would be childish wouldn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest An Sionnach

Guest An Sionnach

Posted
Posted

Let's get back to Benrahma , compare him to Mahrez, shorter but stronger and more aggressive which to me is a big advantage. Doesn't have Mahrez's moments of genius but is very skillful and looks like a team player not a prima donna. If we can get him and a new big striker for what we would get for Chilwell , I would call that good business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
honeybradger

honeybradger

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

Let's get back to Benrahma , compare him to Mahrez, shorter but stronger and more aggressive which to me is a big advantage. Doesn't have Mahrez's moments of genius but is very skillful and looks like a team player not a prima donna. If we can get him and a new big striker for what we would get for Chilwell , I would call that good business.

I dont think benrahma is comparable to mahrez, when mahrez was benrahma's age he was winning the league with us. Benrahma is also a lot less technically gifted than mahrez and isnt a very good finisher. If we want mahrez 2.0 i dont think benrahma is the answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fightforever

Fightforever

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, honeybradger said:

I dont think benrahma is comparable to mahrez, when mahrez was benrahma's age he was winning the league with us. Benrahma is also a lot less technically gifted than mahrez and isnt a very good finisher. If we want mahrez 2.0 i dont think benrahma is the answer.

 Mahrez is nigh on impossible for us to replace when he could be bothered he was unplayable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest An Sionnach

Guest An Sionnach

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, honeybradger said:

I dont think benrahma is comparable to mahrez, when mahrez was benrahma's age he was winning the league with us. Benrahma is also a lot less technically gifted than mahrez and isnt a very good finisher. If we want mahrez 2.0 i dont think benrahma is the answer.

He is scoring a goal every three games for Brentford , which although in a lower standard is useful , but I don' t see him as a principle striker more of a wide creator . If we find the new big striker we certainly need , he could set up him as well as Vardy and Barnes . He attacks his man with skill and aggression , something we lack at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vulpine Victor

Vulpine Victor

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, murphy said:

Clubs have periods of success and failure.  

 

It doesn't feel like it right now, but we are in a period of great success by our own standards.  We have grown as a club but these things take time, it doesn't happen overnight.  

 

In forty years of supporting Leicester, we have always been a Southampton or Norwich sized club.   Leeds are bigger, Sunderland are bigger, it doesn't matter how crap they are right now, this has been established over decades.  

 

In essence, @peach0000 is right.

No, not at all. Going on historical records of the top division in English football the following have been the top team,

Sheffield Wednesday. 4 times

Portsmouth and Huddersfield 3 times

 Blackburn Rovers and Huddersfield twice.

 

Categorically none of them are close to us at present. History is history, what is important is the present and the future.Comparisons with other clubs are a waste of time, we should concentrate on being as successful as we can and not bother about comparisons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
honeybradger

honeybradger

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Fightforever said:

 Mahrez is nigh on impossible for us to replace when he could be bothered he was unplayable. 

I dont think benrahma is even close to mahrez though. He's a lot more comparable to barnes and i think barnes is better and 2 years younger than him. There's too much hype around this guy imo, it's setting him up to fail if he comes here as i dont think he will reach our fans' expectations of him.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fightforever

Fightforever

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, honeybradger said:

I dont think benrahma is even close to mahrez though. He's a lot more comparable to barnes and i think barnes is better and 2 years younger than him. There's too much hype around this guy imo, it's setting him up to fail if he comes here as i dont think he will reach our fans' expectations of him.

Aggreed plus I want to steer clear of the algerian fan boys.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sacreblueits442

sacreblueits442

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, honeybradger said:

I dont think benrahma is even close to mahrez though. He's a lot more comparable to barnes and i think barnes is better and 2 years younger than him. There's too much hype around this guy imo, it's setting him up to fail if he comes here as i dont think he will reach our fans' expectations of him.

...Benrahmas' versatility gives us so many options!!!

He can play on both wings and for me is better at number 10. Mahrez will always be a yardstick to measure future acquisitions by, he should not be the cudgel used to beat incoming players with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Adster

Adster

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, murphy said:

It 'literally' isn't, hence the last few posts, albeit in the wrong thread and for that reason I will leave it here.

 

I think it is interesting to compare what makes a big club, what are the criteria and where do we sit in that mix and it is relevant for all kinds of reasons, not least attracting and keeping players.

 

You don't care, fine.  No need to come out with silly insults and put downs and failing to notice the irony in doing so.  I mean, that would be childish wouldn't it?

It "literally" is, as there is no winner or loser and blind fans will argue untill the very end. Very childish indeed.

 

Have a nice weekend! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
murphy

murphy

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Adster said:

It "literally" is, as there is no winner or loser and blind fans will argue untill the very end. Very childish indeed.

 

Have a nice weekend! 

No it's a point of view.  An opinion.  That doesn't make it a dead argument. 

 

You should take a trip to the politics thread and tell everyone not to bother.  It's just a dead argument.

 

Good luck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AS78UK

AS78UK

Posted
Posted

Are we actually linked to him?  We are joint 5th favourites to sign him according to sky.  Think we are getting a little excited at the prospect, but sadly don't think he is heading anywhere near this direction.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Basildon Fox

Basildon Fox

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, honeybradger said:

I dont think benrahma is even close to mahrez though. He's a lot more comparable to barnes and i think barnes is better and 2 years younger than him. There's too much hype around this guy imo, it's setting him up to fail if he comes here as i dont think he will reach our fans' expectations of him.

I think he is exactly how Mahrez was when we signed him. Have a look at his stats in the Championship this seson. He has imense skills and the only problem that Brentford fans have with him is that he is too greedy and tries to do it all himself. 

 

He is the type of player that gets you off your seat, where there is an anticipation of what he will do when he gets the ball. Sometimes greatness, sometimes frustration but I do not get that feeling with any of our current wingers. 

 

If we have the chance to get him we have to imo go for it. He has a big future at the top level. Not being quite as good as Mahrez is not such a bad thing. Very few are and they cost much more than we can afford. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
honeybradger

honeybradger

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

I think he is exactly how Mahrez was when we signed him. Have a look at his stats in the Championship this seson. He has imense skills and the only problem that Brentford fans have with him is that he is too greedy and tries to do it all himself. 

 

He is the type of player that gets you off your seat, where there is an anticipation of what he will do when he gets the ball. Sometimes greatness, sometimes frustration but I do not get that feeling with any of our current wingers. 

 

If we have the chance to get him we have to imo go for it. He has a big future at the top level. Not being quite as good as Mahrez is not such a bad thing. Very few are and they cost much more than we can afford. 

He is 25 at the start of next season and has 17 goals 9 assists in 43 appearances. Last year barnes had 9 goals 6 assists in 26 appearances in the championship. When mahrez was benrahma's age he had 17 goals 11 assists in the PL and was PFA player of the year. Dont get me wrong benrahma is a good winger but he's not the player to take a team who is aspiring to break into the top 6 to the next level, and with him and potentially barnes on the other wing we're going to need 10+ quality chances a game to score as neither of them can finish. 

 

For me he would do well to perform at a midtable club before he makes it at a club with our aspirations, there's a massive difference between being quality for a top 3 championship club and a top 8 PL club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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