Been training with us for a couple of days now, so thought I'd start a thread. He seems to have gone under the radar (at least on this forum), but a potential deal could materialise soon - from what I read, he was actually offered a contract by Watford, even when injured, but various circumstances, including a change in manager resulted in his release. Provided he can get back to his previous level, on the face of it, this could be another excellent signing. He'd provide another option and perhaps usurp Magnusson or Flint, though he can also play at right back, which could be the end for Mark Little. We've been a bit spoiled this transfer window, but would be more than happy to see another signing.
Yes - he suffered a knee injury (ligament) that kept him out for a year. I don't know details, but I think Watford were prepared to keep him even despite this, but could be the new manager didn't agree, his recovery didn't go as planned, or maybe he thought he'd struggle to get back into the 1st team and he'd rather move on. I'm sure we'd only offer a contract if we were comfortable that the worst was behind him, in which case he could be a steal. Being a free agent though, he doesn't have to rush into a decision - hopefully all is fine and he enjoys the time he spends with us.
Apparently a very very good player before his injury. What concerns me is why Watford and Leeds both declined to give him a contract. Remember players in the past signed by city who were always injured.
According to Google, both did offer him contracts; the implications are that Watford's offer was 'heavily incentivised and performance based', which maybe rubbed him up the wrong way - similarly, he apparently rejected an offer from Leeds on the basis that they 'used his knee injury against him'. You can't predict these things; there are plenty of examples of players out there who have been out with injuries for a long time and have been able to recover and many others who never looked the same again.
We have to be smart about this - short term contract has been mentioned which is a good start but beyond this we have an issue....too long a contract and we're stuffed if the injury reoccurs, too short a contract and the player may opt to leave if he's back fully fit and has higher aspirations. As we're getting him on a free, at least there's no hefty outlay to be concerned about. Let's trust that Ashton is smart about this. So far he's done what appears to be a cracking job.
He clearly wants to play somewhere and after 2 supposed offers of a contract based on his injury issues it must surely wake him up to the idea that any future employer is concerned about the longer term prospect. As Tampa says a short term contract might fit the bill for both parties and I hope we can offer him a future but by the same token we must protect ourselves and not take on a questionable cause. I will follow this with interest and see where our new management philosophies take us.
Cant see him or anyone else shifting Magnusson, who looks a real piece of work. Flint likewise, so that means he is standing in or playing in a 3 centre back system I mean, its a system that would work, with Magnusson ideal as sweeper behind twin centre backs. It does lesson our options in front of course, but makes us very hard to beat. Incidentally its the same system I thought we should have played in the summer, with Stones as sweeper and Vardy hitting on the break, but that is sad a history now
That's an interesting idea - Bryan and Matthews in the wing-back positions, a central 3 of O'Neil, Pack and Tomlin and Abraham and Kodjia up front...
or O'Neil, Smith and Tommo, with O'Dowda and Abraham OR Kodjia up front Christmas tree style aka Euro96 O'Dowda gives us penetration and pace, and he is getting hard to replace
