For what it's worth, I agree to a certain extent with Joe and Dan. People point to Pelle's record at Feyenoord, but the cold facts are there; his goalscoring record outside of De Kuip is poor. He's very nearly hitting 29, and hasn't scored goals in what many would deem a "top tier" league before. But if it was the standard of defending, then maybe he'd have hit tonnes in for AZ Alkmaar. But for some reason, he didn't. Under Koeman, he built his attack round Pelle, and he scored bucketfuls... Much like Lambert. Pelle could well be as close to signing Lambert in terms of height, style of play etc without actually signing Lambert. We may lose Lambert's superb passing ability and vision... but what I've read, Pelle is very mobile for someone 6'4. For £6.4m, it's worth the risk provided he's not the only signing in that area of the team.
While I don't look at it quite so optimistically, building our team around Pelle would be a disaster, so if that's a necessity for him to do well then definitely don't sign me up for it. Even the biggest defenders of Pelle suren't wouldn't want attacks built around him.
It does suggest we'll be playing a version of hoofball. I don't think any of us are really expecting the same pretty football like last season though.
Koeman doesn't play hoofball. I don't know why it's presumed that you can't have a big man up front or utilise an aerial threat without playing hoofball. Dutch football is traditionally based on good passing/ball-retention and strong wing-play.
i don't understand it. it's as if pochettino invented pretty football to some people. we had a bunch of players who played pretty football for 6 years. each manager has put their own twist on it, pochettino's was the press.
Feyenoord wasn't adverse to a good bit of hoofball with Pelle as their centrepiece. Seems to be part of the reason some of their fans are okay with him leaving...they're hopeful that the team can go back to playing football again.
if anyone is worried about the pretty football going i'd say losing lallana and possibly Schneiderlin was more of an issue than having a big striker we can go route one to when we need it. Hopefully Tadic resolves the first part of that.
It's not about pretty football to me - it's just that it would be incredibly one-dimensional and as a result, easy to defend. If he was just a small part of a big team plan, then it wouldn't be so bad, except I don't feel he's good enough to thrive in that role.
Cue the article espousing the qualities of Pelle which I can't be bothered to find. I have a feeling that he will do ok, but what do I know. It's all conjecture, despite the poorer league he's been scoring in. I don't mind if we mix it up a bit if it plays to our strengths. I'd be surprised if we went all long ball though.
I hope by selling 3(or 4) big players we have more of a squad that can change styles when needed. Instead of having a first team that can only do one thing.
This, mostly, but I also think that there was/is significant value in the notion of having a style that you play from the youth level up through the first team...and having that style endure changes in managers, etc.
well none of our players last season were good enough to be in a two dimensional attack, so at least we're not trading down.
Some OTT worries here. Pelle is coming in because he is loyal to Koeman and he works as a cog in Koeman's system. That doesn't make us one dimensional. That doesn't really mean much at all. Be patient. See what happens.
Gallagher might be tall, but he's about as good a candidate as Michael Owen for the role of target man.
