Kevin Doyle

Chucky the tree

Lemlin wrote: »

He's made 98 appearances in 4 seasons at this stage. Wenger should have coped on and sold him long ago.

As I've said, what proven PL striker do you think Arsenal could sign rather than Doyle? They don't come cheap and are hard to find.

Proven at not scoring goals you mean? Well I wouldn't waste my money on buying a premiership striker, most of them aren't good enough so I'd look abroad.

applehunter

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Proven at not scoring goals you mean? Well I wouldn't waste my money on buying a premiership striker, most of them aren't good enough so I'd look abroad.

Did Kevin bully you in school or what?

Chucky the tree

applehunter wrote: »

Did Kevin bully you in school or what?

No, I just don't think 14 goals in 60 appearances constitutes a good record.

noodler

Chucky the tree wrote: »

No, I just don't think 14 goals in 60 appearances constitutes a good record.

I'd have said 1 in 4 for a side on the fringes of relegation is reasonable.

Honestly, I doubt he is happy with that return either but thats why I would love to see him at a Villa or Everton.

Chucky the tree

noodler wrote: »

I'd have said 1 in 4 for a side on the fringes of relegation is reasonable.

Honestly, I doubt he is happy with that return either but thats why I would love to see him at a Villa or Everton.

Not sure about Villa, Bent and Agbonlaor are there and I don't thik Doyle would get ahead of them. Wouldn't be a bad buy for Everton, or possibly Newcastle.

noodler

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Not sure about Villa, Bent and Agbonlaor are there and I don't thik Doyle would get ahead of them. Wouldn't be a bad buy for Everton, or possibly Newcastle.

Good point re: Villa, I think I forgot about Bent, he seems to work better on his own but I do think Doyle would be a better complement to either than they are to each other.

If Everton ever spend money then he would be a useful signing!

If I were Wolves I just wouldn't let him go though.

weldoninhio

applehunter wrote: »

Did Kevin bully you in school or what?

Why buy the apprentice when you could get the master?? Looking for a non-scoring, tough, hold the ball up, lead the line forward??? Why not buy Kevin Davies?? A lot cheaper than Doyle for the exact same product!

If he's a success, then in a year or two, see if Doyle is still doing it and sign him up??

henke

I think Arsenal could do worse than to sign Doyle. I believe he would be a good addition and in a better team I believe his goal tally would greatly improve.

A lot of people on here are saying he is too expensive at £12m and while I do agree is he actually expensive at that price in the current market. eg. Andy Carroll £35m, Henderson £20m, Jones £16m, Torres £50m and what price tag is on Tevez now.

At £12m Doyle would cost little more than 20% of Torres cost. Do people feel he is only 20% the player of Torres? Or less? Or more?

Anyway I don't actually believe the story to be true but would love to see Doyle a better club than Wolves.

noodler

weldoninhio wrote: »

Why buy the apprentice when you could get the master?? Looking for a non-scoring, tough, hold the ball up, lead the line forward??? Why not buy Kevin Davies?? A lot cheaper than Doyle for the exact same product!

If he's a success, then in a year or two, see if Doyle is still doing it and sign him up??

Wow.

I disagree with alot of your simplistic post.

tolosenc

Have heard rumours linking Arsenal to Karim Benzema. They ain't gonna take both...

Pro. F

Deleted User wrote: »

They won the league with a far tougher side than the have now. Totally different set of players and mentality with that side. The current crew have no bottle a lot of skill but cant handle the likes of Stoke and Bolton away.

Doyle is excellent at what he does and deserves the chance at a top club.

They had mentally tougher midfielders, a much better organised defence, much more height in the team and more pace up front. They still played the same style of short passing football and they had Henry and Bergkamp as strikers - as far away from the Kevin Doyle type as you could get. The plebs were still keen to say that they weren't direct enough back then, but of course it was bollocks. Their problem now is not a lack of directness, it is the very poor defence and (much less importantly) the lack of bottle and lack of quality cover. If their defence worked properly then that would immediately improve results and build confidence in the team.

Doyle is a striker. He is not going to help them win the ball and put a foot on it in midfield when the opposition are trying to rough them up. He is not going to help shore up their defence. His close control is nothing special, so if he did go into the team then the one thing they have going for them now - very good short passing and ability to keep possession - would be harmed and he would add very little useful to them in return. His ability to fight for the ball from poor passes is not going to help a team that doesn't suffer from poor passing.

It doesn't matter if you think Doyle deserves his shot at a top team, he is clearly not a good fit for Arsenal.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

There isn't just two ways of playing football. Tippy-tappy and lumping it forward.

There are many ways of playing football and to win trophies and, indeed, games, most teams need to be able to play more than 1 way. Adaptive style is required by most.

Arsenal's biggest problem over the last few seasons, imo, is that they seem to know only one way of playing football. It is wonderful to watch at times, but it has been shown that it can be shut down. When the tippy-tappy game isn't working for them Arsenal have not shown that they have a workable plan B or C. If Plan A isn't working.... keep trying Plan A. Their dedication to playing 'the right way' can be said to be admirable, but it can also be said to be foolhardy.

I'm not saying Doyle is the missing piece for Arsenal, or that he should be a priority signing - but having someone who will battle hard, win aerial duels, work the channels and be a direct option would be a benefit to Arsenal. If they got him for a low price (unlikely) and he understood he would be a back up player, they could do a lot worse than sign him. They could, of course, do better too.

I completely disagree that their biggest problem has been an inability to change footballing styles. You cannot be a top team chasing for the title and live with a joke of a defence like they have been trying to do. That is clearly their biggest problem imo.

And, I don't think that an inability to change style has been the problem for their attack either. It's the inability to change formation and personnel that's the real problem. They don't have enough quality in reserve to, for example, exploit tired legs towards the end of a game or cover for when their star striker is out. They can't mix it up and defeat the opposition's defensive plans because whenever they go to look for a change they have back up players who are either permanently out of form or just not good enough.

When you're looking to improve I think you should make sure to first not undermine the strengths you already have. You think they need more of an aerial threat? Cool, Wenger goes and gets a striker who is good in the air. But, importantly, one who also has the technique to fit in with the rest of the team strategy. Chamakh could have been that player, but he hasn't worked out so far. Wenger is well able to go and find another striker who combines the skill on the ball with the threat in the air if he thinks Chamakh won't work out. Doyle does not have the required skill on the ball for Arsenal and he's not even that good in the air. Certainly not as good in the air as people have been fooling themselves on this thread.

Pro. F

flahavaj wrote: »

I was harking back to the days of Overmars et al rather than the Invincibles. Arguably the better team IMHO.

Overmars played on the left and cut in onto his stronger right a lot. He was two footed, but he still cut in a lot iirc. As far as I remember Wenger has always liked his wingers to play narrow.

I agree with your other point that the previous teams were tougher than the current one.

dreamers75

Arsenal fans are a tad pretentious on this forum.

Soon to be grouped with Newcastle as a team that expects success but is ****.

flahavaj

Pro. F wrote: »

Overmars played on the left and cut in onto his stronger right a lot. He was two footed, but he still cut in a lot iirc. As far as I remember Wenger has always liked his wingers to play narrow.

Aye, they were still more of a 4-4-2 than the system he plays now though.

shano_88

dreamers75 wrote: »

Arsenal fans are a tad pretentious on this forum.

Soon to be grouped with Newcastle as a team that expects success but is ****.

1/10

flahavaj

dreamers75 wrote: »

Arsenal fans are a tad pretentious on this forum.

Soon to be grouped with Newcastle as a team that expects success but is ****.

You have still to explain the near-illegible rubbish contained in your last post in this thread....

Jim

I'm pretty sure Wolves will hang on to him as much as they can. Top player and is loved by the fans.

Last season he deserved a better team, but Wolves really started to gel as a team toward the end of the season. I have high(ish) hopes for next season and I'm reasonably optimistic they wont be edging on relegation like this season.

Pro. F

flahavaj wrote: »

Aye, they were still more of a 4-4-2 than the system he plays now though.

Yeah, I think he's taking his own idea too far when he's trying to play Rosicky/Arshavin on the wing.

dreamers75

flahavaj wrote: »

You have still to explain the near-illegible rubbish contained in your last post in this thread....

Which part ?

Arsenal need a player that will die for the cause? or Arsenal need another 12 year old french lad that will **** off the at the chance of winning something and more money?

Nasri is the perfect example of Arsenal, they an academy/feeder club for the bigger clubs and god bless them for it.

Kinda sad arsenal fans havent realised it. Crackin buisness model tho, steal other clubs kids then sell them on.

flahavaj

dreamers75 wrote: »

Which part ?

Arsenal need a player that will die for the cause? or Arsenal need another 12 year old french lad that will **** off the at the chance of winning something and more money?

Nasri is the perfect example of Arsenal, they an academy/feeder club for the bigger clubs and god bless them for it.

Kinda sad arsenal fans havent realised it. Crackin buisness model tho, steal other clubs kids then sell them on.

There was some drivel about them lumping the ball forward or something that smelt particularly bad of pure bullsh*t.

LuckyLloyd

Arsenal currently have the small heart. They need to bring in players with a big heart. Kevin Doyle has the big heart.

Yes, that is very simplistic, and if they can get a better player with a big heart for the same money then obviously that would be better business. But there is a terrible amount of faffing about in this thread from Arsenal fans. Their squad and transfer policy over the past two years is a ****ing disgrace in many respects. I commend them for their patience and the utility they derive from style over winning come season's end - but they need to improve their squad options and they need to start signing a different brand of footballer.

Anyway, we've wasted a lot of typing on a transfer that is incredibly unlikely to happen.

Iron Hide

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

No, if Van Persie is fit he'd be riding the bench. But when VP isn't (which is a decent amount of time) I think he'd be a better alternative than what is currently in the squad.

Much as there is bias on one side because he is Irish, there is bias on the other because of default perceptions of 'top four quality' or other such mythical rubbish. Objectively speaking, I think Doyle is a better player than Bendtner or Chamakh (or N'Gog, or Sturridge or Owen or Macheda, etc).

The question is whether Doyle is as good a striker as can be signed with the funds available to Arsenal.

Dragging up a two day old post here but this i think is the point.

Most of the posts regarding Doyle to Arsenal are either "good enough for top 4 team" or " not good enough for top 4 team" where the issue is simply what money does Wenger have and what can he get for it.

If the figures are to be believed and Gervinho has transferred to the gunners for circa £12m, then Doyle for the same money would be an interesting comparison of "bang for your buck", as i reckon few of us have seen much of Gervinho apart from last yrs WC.

Take for example Owen Hargreaves, no matter how poorly or well he played in the 40 odd matches he featured in for Man united, realistically it still boils down to 40 games in 4 years for a £17m fee, he cost about £400k per game not including wages.

Its not really about hunting out a 25 goal a season striker for £5m or a surprise find like Chicharito, but finding the right man for the money, even if the price seems to be huge. Chelsea's £50m fee for Torres is an example of spending money almost for the sake of it, in comparison to Barcelona spending not much less than that on David Villa, i know who id rather have!

With transfer fees reaching the silliness of the early 2000s and wages reaching crazy heights, its all about value for money. Wenger needs to put the £12m he's prepared to spend on Doyle out on his desk and think about what type of player Arsenal needs and who he can purchase for that same amount. And if the name that keeps cropping up is Kevin Doyle then thats who he should sign!

gracehopper

I really think Doyle would be fantastic for Arsenal. His workrate plus around 15 goals a year would be his contribution but i reckon it is what he does for the likes of Wilshire, Nasri and Walcott that will be most obvious. He'll bring people in around him and will stop other teams from squeezing arsenal in midfield. Arsenal lack a player who is physical and will pressure the centre halves and Doyle has shown that he is a real handful. He's had great battles with vidic and terry and wolves beat both United and Chelsea at home last year. He is also an intelligent lad so would be suited to adapt to the wenger mentality.

The other thing is Arsenal create a lot more opportunities than Wolves or Reading so who knows what his goals and assist tally could be like in a good team.

gosplan

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

But there is a terrible amount of faffing about in this thread from Arsenal fans. Their squad and transfer policy over the past two years is a ****ing disgrace in many respects.

To be sure it has been. I think it's been the long term backlash from the invincibles. Wenger thought he himself was invincible and that he could go on building new championship winning squads at a net profit. The board were obviously happy to believe this too, especially given the move to the Grove.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I commend them for their patience and the utility they derive from style over winning come season's end - but they need to improve their squad options and they need to start signing a different brand of footballer.

I'd rather a trophy to the style to honest. At times I love the delicate football we play but the flipside to it (Newcastle, Spurs etc) is frankly embarassing and if we deserve plaudits for the excellent football then we deserve criticism for weakness. I'm in full agreement that Arsenal need a different style of footballer, more squad and formation options, and I'd put mentality and agression before almost anything at the moment.

But, the idea that a search for players with a certain mentality and aggression automatically leads you to Kevin Doyle is laughable. Not only because they need these characteristics in midfield and defence, not up front, but also because there are many players that would give you the same qualities.

People have been saying that we Arsenal lot are being pretentious here - For myself, I don't think that's true, I think I'm realistic as to what Arsenal need in terms of players. Scott Parker, for example, is probably is a level below the current Arsenal midfield in technical ability but I'd take him in a heartbeat because you know the guy's at least going to throw himself around the midfield tackling all day long and getting in peoples faces. Vieira's past it at this stage but I've said in the Arsenal forum that I'd love the guy back to stick on for Walcott/Arshavin for the final 20 minutes or so if we're protecting a lead. Arsenal don't need to sign the most technically gifted players in the world right now, they need experience, agression, and graft. But that doesn't mean that it would be a good idea to sign an average enough premiership striker, allbeit with an excellent workrate.

The thread has drifted back and forth from 'Doyle is better than Bendtner' to 'Arsenal need players that will die for the cause' to 'Andy Carroll cost 35 million', none of which is a valid reason for Wenger to sign Kevin Doyle. Would he contribute to the squad? To be honest I think Doyle would contribute to any squad. Does that mean Arsenal should sign him - NO!



FWIW - Somewhere in the middle it was suggested that the solution to Arsenal's trophy drought was to just stick Doyle in beside RVP if Fabregas leaves. And it's Arsenal fans who are being pretentious?

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Anyway, we've wasted a lot of typing

What's new

homerjay2005

m hearing theres a big interest in doyle from a top european club, the mirror are running with it as a lead story tomorrow morning....

sounds interesting anyway.

chelseavera

dreamers75 wrote: »

Arsenal fans are a tad pretentious on this forum.

Soon to be grouped with Newcastle as a team that expects success but is ****.

Like Arsenal fans are not usually pretentious!!????

KaiserGunner

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Arsenal currently have the small heart. They need to bring in players with a big heart. Kevin Doyle has the big heart.

Their squad and transfer policy over the past two years is a ****ing disgrace in many respects.

Now I dont necessarily disagree with your point there and I definitely think that Wenger could have done a better job in the transfer market the last few years. But it also could have been a lot worse. Im assuming that ya think Liverpools transfer policy has also been a disgrace the past two or three seasons as well? Or Tottenham? The two of these clubs have spent more than Arsenal in the last few seasons but are currently in a worse situation (i.e not in the champions league) than Arsenal.

I obviously want Wenger to strengthen the Arsenal squad and get the club back to winning ways but I also can see how difficult of a job it is for Wenger when ya look at the financial competition that he is up against. For example City spent £27 million or so on Dzeko and so far he hasnt be a great success for that outlay of money. City, Chelsea etc can afford to take the risks of spending huge amounts on players whereas Arsenal cant afford to splash out £30 - £40 million on a player and then the player flops. That would be more damaging to Arsenal than to Chelsea or City, who can just take the loss and splurge some more money on another big name.

Chucky the tree

Just in terms of comparing Arsenal now to before, here's some of the players from the Invicible year

Campbell - One of the best centre back the premiserhip has ever seen.
Ashley Cole - One of the best left backs the premiership has ever seen.
Viera - One of the best midfielders the premiership has ever seen.
Bergkamp - One of the best forwards the premiership has ever seen
Henry - One of the best strikers the premiership has ever seen.

Then add in players with the likes of Lauren, Lehman, Toure, Gilberto, Pires, Lljunberg and you've got an amazing team. Fabregas is the only current Arsenal player who can be considered with the likes of Henry etc, Wilshere has potential but that's it. Even guys like Lauren,Pires, Ljunberg, Gilberto are on a higher level then most of the current Arsenal team. And that's the problem Arsenal have. It really has nothing to do with not having a an average footballer but excellent grafter like Doyle on the bench to provide a different opiton. There starting 11 simply isn't good enough to compete with United, Chelsea, and now City.

LuckyLloyd

The point is that he built that Invincibles team by being willing to go out and get older players, and willing to invest to fill gaps in the squad.

The current policy relies on an obsession with young, technical players. Their squad cannot compete, because the people making purchase decisions have not taken the necessary strides to fill the yawning talent gaps (to not secure their goalkeeping situation before last season was shocking imo).

Chucky the tree

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The point is that he built that Invincibles team by being willing to go out and get older players, and willing to invest to fill gaps in the squad.

The current policy relies on an obsession with young, technical players. Their squad cannot compete, because the people making purchase decisions have not taken the necessary strides to fill the yawning talent gaps (to not secure their goalkeeping situation before last season was shocking imo).

I agree, but I disagree on Doyle filling a talent gap or there need for different options. Having someone like Doyle and basically asking there defenders hoof theb all up to him is crazy and completely by-passess the talents of someone like Nasri, Wilshere and Fabregas.(obviously 2 of those could be gone). I'd much rather bring on someone who will help compliment those players skills, who can use his pace to make good runs, or can use his excellent first touch/control to create space. Doyle can't do any of those thngs imo, change is needed but I think change just for the sake of it isn't.

homerjay2005

he wont turn down arsenal or juve if they follow up on their interest in him, which is confirmed, but chances are they wont and he will take up the offer of a new contract at wolves...