We shelled out nearly £11m for 2 strikers in July that we have yet to see 90 mins of football between them. Why? Why buy 2 players then refuse point blank to play them? If they are not ready then why the **** did we buy them in the first place? We are not Man Utd or Chelsea, able to buy emerging young talent and keep them for 1 or 2 years before they can develop. We are Sunderland and we were desperate for a goalscorer back in January to replace Bent. We simply havent replaced him yet and now we have to replace Gyan as well. Its all very well having a long term plan if you have a long term future but Brcue hasn't. He didn't back in July when we bought them. We all knew and even the manager, chairman and owner knew we needed at least 1 and probable 2 strikers to support the loss of Wellbeck and to play alongside Gyan. When Gyan ran away to bankroll-land, we needed THREE strikers. What we have now though is a pigs ear of a transfer policy that has brought in 2 lads that he wont play and a midfielder/winger that the manager is desperately trying to convince us all is a striker after all. He isn't. Bruce should have used the money he had to make 1 or 2 striking purchases that could play NOW in the team and its all just evidence that the useless twat just isn't up for the job. Wickham and Ji HAVE to be played now and we need to see what they are made of. Bruce may well only have another 2 games at the club so for him, he simply has to get one or both of them on the field alongside Bendtner, or he will suffer another 2 defeats in the next 2 games and seal his own fate along with it.
Good points again. The key issue for me is that we are not a club who can afford to shell out £10m + on 2 players as "ones for the future" If they are good enough footballers, they're old enough to play as the old saying goes.
People in my office becomming bored with my endless cycle of exactly this point cest.... the whole striker situation is baffling
My concern is that the club have decided to decline the opportunity of bringing in proven quality since the introduction of the finanical fair play rules. Instead they have a long-term plan where Bruce will remain as the manager indefinately irrespective of relegation and a return to yoyo status. They may have chosen to try and buy the best young talent they can find and then hope to nurture that talent with the long-term vision of having the best young players 3-4 years time. If thats the case and Bruce is given that amount of time, the next 5 years could and imo will see a serious and possibly longterm decline in the fortunes of SAFC. After what the fans witnessed during the 15 and 19 point seasons, another extended period of time with a manager as incompetent as Bruce at the helm may well sicken a lot of fans to the extent that they no longer care about SAFC anymore. Some may call these fans part-timers, but every club has them and every club would prefer a full stadium even if 10,000-15,000 are part timers.
I too found myself asking why we have bought strikers and not playing them...However, you lost me with your follow up comments regarding keeping Bruce regardless of results...I think Bruce will be judged on results, and his position is hanging by a thread at present.
Seems like Bruce spent his cash on two "players for the future". He's even stated plenty of times that Wickham ain't ready yet. It's a bit ****ing bonkers really considering that the only recognised striker at that point was Gyan, and now he's off. If it wasn't for Bendtner, oh goodness.
