+- COYR NOTTINGHAM FOREST FORUM (https://coyrforestforum.co.uk)
+-- Forum: NOTTINGHAM FOREST - A REBEL CLUB IN A REBEL CITY (https://coyrforestforum.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Nottingham Forest Down Memory Lane (https://coyrforestforum.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=17)
+--- Thread: Benny Osborn (/showthread.php?tid=322)
RE: Osborn Off? - Alf - 25-10-2019
Whilst I get that Benny's deal was good for him & the club from a strictly financial POV, I think Modesto's dropped a bit of a clanger here.
Not only do I reckon Carva & Lolley benefitted more from having a busy bloke like Benny in the side, but I also think he's a far better week-in week-out wide option than Ameobi, and that his work rate would be something Lamouchi would love. However on the flipside, I also think we'd have to be careful not to have too many lightweights play in the same team, so whilst I see Benny as a miss, I think it's a minor miss.
What I do think though, is that selling him for 3m, and trading that for Jenks at 2m + Muric's wages has left us weaker as a squad, with no financial benefit gained from it either. Yes we needed another RB, but we could have also just not loaned out Richardson, and either kept Benny or put a 3m + Yacob + Pants bid in for Grosicki.
RE: Osborn Off? - wassy04 - 25-10-2019
(25-10-2019, 10:20 AM)Username Wrote: I think he would only have enhanced the issues on Wednesday, Hull flooded the spaces and he is naturally a player that stops and plays it back to rebuild again, wouldn’t have made any positive difference.
We would be better off with another fit right back and Cash in Midfield.
Nah Cash is a very average midfielder, he’s found a niche running from deep as a right back but he’s still not a great crosser.
Hull beat us by inviting us to push our fullbacks and hitting us in behind them. It was a calculated gamble that paid off
RE: Osborn Off? - Username - 25-10-2019
(25-10-2019, 06:34 PM)wassy04 Wrote:(25-10-2019, 10:20 AM)Username Wrote: I think he would only have enhanced the issues on Wednesday, Hull flooded the spaces and he is naturally a player that stops and plays it back to rebuild again, wouldn’t have made any positive difference.
We would be better off with another fit right back and Cash in Midfield.
Nah Cash is a very average midfielder, he’s found a niche running from deep as a right back but he’s still not a great crosser.
Hull beat us by inviting us to push our fullbacks and hitting us in behind them. It was a calculated gamble that paid off
I’m not saying Cash is the answer but he would have done a better job in midfield on Wednesday than Benny IMO.
most people were saying Cash was a less than average right back three months ago, how’s that looking now?
RE: Osborn Off? - Sabricadabra - 26-10-2019
(25-10-2019, 06:12 PM)Alf Wrote: Whilst I get that Benny's deal was good for him & the club from a strictly financial POV, I think Modesto's dropped a bit of a clanger here.
Not only do I reckon Carva & Lolley benefitted more from having a busy bloke like Benny in the side, but I also think he's a far better week-in week-out wide option than Ameobi, and that his work rate would be something Lamouchi would love. However on the flipside, I also think we'd have to be careful not to have too many lightweights play in the same team, so whilst I see Benny as a miss, I think it's a minor miss.
What I do think though, is that selling him for 3m, and trading that for Jenks at 2m + Muric's wages has left us weaker as a squad, with no financial benefit gained from it either. Yes we needed another RB, but we could have also just not loaned out Richardson, and either kept Benny or put a 3m + Yacob + Pants bid in for Grosicki.
I’d forgotten about him. Not a loss now we have two left backs, and whilst he would do ok left midfield he wouldn’t offer much that we don’t have already. We spent the money from Osborn on Ameobi and Adomah who are better options in that position. Win-win sale.
RE: Osborn Off? - Alf - 26-10-2019
(26-10-2019, 08:28 AM)Sabricadabra Wrote:(25-10-2019, 06:12 PM)Alf Wrote: Whilst I get that Benny's deal was good for him & the club from a strictly financial POV, I think Modesto's dropped a bit of a clanger here.
Not only do I reckon Carva & Lolley benefitted more from having a busy bloke like Benny in the side, but I also think he's a far better week-in week-out wide option than Ameobi, and that his work rate would be something Lamouchi would love. However on the flipside, I also think we'd have to be careful not to have too many lightweights play in the same team, so whilst I see Benny as a miss, I think it's a minor miss.
What I do think though, is that selling him for 3m, and trading that for Jenks at 2m + Muric's wages has left us weaker as a squad, with no financial benefit gained from it either. Yes we needed another RB, but we could have also just not loaned out Richardson, and either kept Benny or put a 3m + Yacob + Pants bid in for Grosicki.
I’d forgotten about him. Not a loss now we have two left backs, and whilst he would do ok left midfield he wouldn’t offer much that we don’t have already. We spent the money from Osborn on Ameobi and Adomah who are better options in that position. Win-win sale.
I'd sooner have Benny than Ameobi 100%. Adomah? I think he's a good freebie & a decent signing, but considering Benny's age & versatility, I'd probably still sooner have Benny here.
We've played Robinson LB + Ribero LM a few times already. If we're doing that instead of Adomah & Ameiobi playing there, to me that says Lamouchi wants a more defensive leftsided option than those pair, and Benny is definitely that. Ribero at LB & Benny LM would suit us better with the right midfield alongside it, and I think it would suit Lamouchi more too.
RE: Osborn Off? - Mad Mel - 26-10-2019
(25-10-2019, 06:12 PM)Alf Wrote: Whilst I get that Benny's deal was good for him & the club from a strictly financial POV, I think Modesto's dropped a bit of a clanger here.
Not only do I reckon Carva & Lolley benefitted more from having a busy bloke like Benny in the side, but I also think he's a far better week-in week-out wide option than Ameobi, and that his work rate would be something Lamouchi would love. However on the flipside, I also think we'd have to be careful not to have too many lightweights play in the same team, so whilst I see Benny as a miss, I think it's a minor miss.
What I do think though, is that selling him for 3m, and trading that for Jenks at 2m + Muric's wages has left us weaker as a squad, with no financial benefit gained from it either. Yes we needed another RB, but we could have also just not loaned out Richardson, and either kept Benny or put a 3m + Yacob + Pants bid in for Grosicki.
Surely it wasn't Modesto's decision to sell Benny? His job is to recruit players not to sell them under the managers nose. Surely Lamouchi had the final say.
RE: Osborn Off? - Alf - 26-10-2019
(26-10-2019, 11:12 AM)Robbos Desert Boots Wrote:(25-10-2019, 06:12 PM)Alf Wrote: Whilst I get that Benny's deal was good for him & the club from a strictly financial POV, I think Modesto's dropped a bit of a clanger here.
Not only do I reckon Carva & Lolley benefitted more from having a busy bloke like Benny in the side, but I also think he's a far better week-in week-out wide option than Ameobi, and that his work rate would be something Lamouchi would love. However on the flipside, I also think we'd have to be careful not to have too many lightweights play in the same team, so whilst I see Benny as a miss, I think it's a minor miss.
What I do think though, is that selling him for 3m, and trading that for Jenks at 2m + Muric's wages has left us weaker as a squad, with no financial benefit gained from it either. Yes we needed another RB, but we could have also just not loaned out Richardson, and either kept Benny or put a 3m + Yacob + Pants bid in for Grosicki.
Surely it wasn't Modesto's decision to sell Benny? His job is to recruit players not to sell them under the managers nose. Surely Lamouchi had the final say.
I didn't think Mouch has much say in it at all tbh. He's already stated that he wanted another striker here, yet Walker went out on loan & he didn't get one, and regards Benny he also said[i] "Of course I would like to see him stay. [color=#141414][size=small]He likes the club and I like what I saw tonight. In three weeks here, I have only seen positives with him.
Personally mate, between whispers of Warburton's target's "not being ambitious enough" (hello McGinn & James), AK's bizarre Dec wranglings, MON not getting to spend 1 single bean despite a statement to the contrary before his arrival, and the dealings since Mouch arrives here & quotes as above, I think we're very much run by fantasy football manager types who like to meddle massively and are our main Achilles heel. They're not awful, they just need to improve for the club to step up to the next level.
RE: Osborn Off? - wassy04 - 26-10-2019
(25-10-2019, 10:33 PM)Username Wrote:(25-10-2019, 06:34 PM)wassy04 Wrote:(25-10-2019, 10:20 AM)Username Wrote: I think he would only have enhanced the issues on Wednesday, Hull flooded the spaces and he is naturally a player that stops and plays it back to rebuild again, wouldn’t have made any positive difference.
We would be better off with another fit right back and Cash in Midfield.
Nah Cash is a very average midfielder, he’s found a niche running from deep as a right back but he’s still not a great crosser.
Hull beat us by inviting us to push our fullbacks and hitting us in behind them. It was a calculated gamble that paid off
I’m not saying Cash is the answer but he would have done a better job in midfield on Wednesday than Benny IMO.
most people were saying Cash was a less than average right back three months ago, how’s that looking now?
Fair point but we have seen him play right wing for a long time (as opposed to RB where he’d rarely played). Cash is currently our best attacking player from RB so no need to change there
RE: Benny Osborn - the jock - 26-10-2019
Osborn not in squad again today for Sheffield utd
RE: Osborn Off? - Sabricadabra - 26-10-2019
(26-10-2019, 11:12 AM)Robbos Desert Boots Wrote:(25-10-2019, 06:12 PM)Alf Wrote: Whilst I get that Benny's deal was good for him & the club from a strictly financial POV, I think Modesto's dropped a bit of a clanger here.
Not only do I reckon Carva & Lolley benefitted more from having a busy bloke like Benny in the side, but I also think he's a far better week-in week-out wide option than Ameobi, and that his work rate would be something Lamouchi would love. However on the flipside, I also think we'd have to be careful not to have too many lightweights play in the same team, so whilst I see Benny as a miss, I think it's a minor miss.
What I do think though, is that selling him for 3m, and trading that for Jenks at 2m + Muric's wages has left us weaker as a squad, with no financial benefit gained from it either. Yes we needed another RB, but we could have also just not loaned out Richardson, and either kept Benny or put a 3m + Yacob + Pants bid in for Grosicki.
Surely it wasn't Modesto's decision to sell Benny? His job is to recruit players not to sell them under the managers nose. Surely Lamouchi had the final say.
The player would have also had a big say. Which player wouldn’t want to play in the EPL? Not to mention the big wage rise.
RE: Benny Osborn - the jock - 26-10-2019
Osborn wanted out . Simple as .he did for quite some time
RE: Benny Osborn - Username - 14-01-2020
Has anyone read / seen the latest Osborn interview?
I haven’t but he is getting some stick from Forest fans on social media for it.