I think you're beyond me Dave.. not sure I would have had him as "most the time he was poor" .. but I get your drift
does sound a good fit. Also like the fact he is a one club player. Suggests long term loyalty and dedication and he can get the academy prospects a chance to shine
I think Mane's potential (though who knows if he ever reaches it) is miles higher than Redmond's. IMO, he's about as exciting a player as there is tools-wise. But that's okay. If Redmond just turns into a pretty decent striker who pairs up with Austin/Long well, or a winger on a level with Tadic then we'll have found ourselves a bargain, and the team should do well. He may never be as good as Mane COULD be, but he could easily be better than Mane actually was with us.
I think you're right, LTL. I don't get why he decided to move (apart from the big pay rise), though I still say it's because in Liverpool he wouldn't have to find change to cross the river (unless he went on the ferry ..... cue Gerry and the Pacemakers ...... )
When people are talking about a Mane replacement, they mean a replacement for his production; for all of his inconsistencies, he was an extremely productive and dynamic player. So having Redmond groomed to be a 'new' Mane in terms of excitement at some point down the road isn't really ideal, because we're rather short of match-winners in present day. Luckily, it doesn't appear that anyone at the team is thinking along these lines, either, given that all signs seem to suggest that we're seeking a player who provides the elements that Mane did.
Don't spread this around ... but I think we might be buying players with potential at low prices (or developing them through the youth system), turning them into good players, convincing a richer club they are world beaters, selling them for a LOT of money and then looking innocent when they don't seem to be as good as was thought at their new club ... and then doing it all over again Meantime Shane and Davo are playing best football of their careers and yet no rich clubs show any interest and maybe Redmond will do the same and then we'll see if he's a keeper or a sell-on.
Now with bullet points! - We need a player who brings the things Mane brought, namely the ability to unlock defenses and fashion chances in congested spaces. - It's unfair to expect that Redmond will be that player, at least this season. - They are rather different in any instance...if we revert back to a 4-3-3, "fast Tadic" is probably a better comparison with Redmond's current skillset than Mane. - It's good to have young players like Redmond who can be useful now and develop into better later, but that doesn't remove the necessity of having players who can provide those qualities in '16/'17. - All indications are that Les agrees (per Guan's comments on the team recognizing that our attack needs to be improved), and that such a player or players will be inbound.
Again, who is saying Redmond is Mane's direct replacement?? You keep saying it's unfair to expect that. Who is expecting that?
Ok. If you read more than that post from LTL you'll see he isn't expecting it. That I believe is pointing out the similarity in the two at the time of their signings for Saints.
But the "guy we haven't replaced (apparently)" would rather much seem like a suggestion that the notion that we hadn't replaced Mane is dubious. Whereas, it would appear, we're all in agreement that we haven't replaced him, need to replace him, and will in fact replace him...?
May replace him. I'm ok even if we don't "replace" him. We may take a different type of player. When players leave, sometimes a slightly different type of player comes in. Has happened before.
Is that youth signings and first team signings, or our current youth players with first team signings?
Sure. But we need to replace his production, and we seem to all be in agreement that we shouldn't expect Redmond to do that straightaway, nor are there obvious candidates in the squad to do so. Hence, we should expect that a player will come in with that role in the first team in mind. A replacement, if you will.
