Coburn to Millwall

I am somewhat perplexed, he will be ideally suited to playing a different style when and where we need to change things up, we have just lost 2 to 3 inches of height from our forward line, he has proved he can operate successfully at this level. I think the reason we have so many leg injuries must be because we keep shooting ourselves in the friggin foot.
 
viv_andersons_nana said:
Isn’t this kind of the point though? We are supposed to be building a squad. Latte Lath or Conway gets injured and you’re left with one, who you have to just hope doesn’t get injured as well, or if he does you have a player ‘filling in’ for a few weeks.

To be honest I’m a bit sick of this patching stuff up business. We carry too many injuries and we haven’t done enough work on the squad. You can’t be in a position where one injury can really derail your plans. We are light at centre back. We are lacking at left back as we have no idea on Borges and Engel is not the man. Howson is 36 and Barlaser needs upgrading so we’re light there. Coburn’s gone and we’re now light up top. Again.

I can’t get my head around what they’re doing with this tbh.
Click to expand...
It's looking at this both sides isn't it.
If I'm looking at it from Coburn's side. A loan move is better for him if all he's getting is 5 mins here and there.

From the Club's side.

I think we should be going into the season with 3 strikers. It helps keep players fresh, options when things aren't working and protection against injuries. But to make that work, Carrick would need to use his bench a bit more to keep players fit and interested. He doesn't seem to want to do that.
 
A few nights ago some people were saying Coburn wasn’t good enough. Funny old game, football.

For what it’s worth, the club have to balance all aspects of a deal. That includes what’s best for Coburn and his future development, just as much as the club. I’d have been very disappointed with a permanent deal but a loan is best all round IMO.

He will not develop sat on the bench for 80-90 minutes most games. Conway / Lath are decent options up top. Burgzorg has played as a striker before and I actually think I’d prefer him there to the wing if we had to use him.
 
B_G said:
It's looking at this both sides isn't it.
If I'm looking at it from Coburn's side. A loan move is better for him if all he's getting is 5 mins here and there.

From the Club's side.

I think we should be going into the season with 3 strikers. It helps keep players fresh, options when things aren't working and protection against injuries. But to make that work, Carrick would need to use his bench a bit more to keep players fit and interested. He doesn't seem to want to do that.
Click to expand...

Carrick (for some odd reason) likes playing "fluidly" with wingers and attacking midfielders as strikers too... We saw it with Greenwood, Rogers, and Crooks last season.

Fans might not agree with it - but if we are caught short through injury - Burgzorg and Hamilton can both play as a striker in the same way.
 
It’s a good move for Coburn and one I reckon he wanted to make. It shows he want to play regular full games which will be great for him.

Hopefully he makes a success of it.
 
As mentioned above, Josh doesn't fully fit Carrick's style but he proved last year that he can be relatively successful in a Carrick team. He seems to prefer forward players who can play all across the line rather than one out and out striker who holds it up for other players to then join in. Although not successful yet this season, he prefers one touch passing and running in behind to score.
From the club's point of view, it builds up an asset. If Coburn is successful at Millwall, his value is probably higher than what it would be by sitting on our bench for odd 10 minute/15 minute cameo.
Probably the right decision for the long term.
 
Ash88 said:
Carrick (for some odd reason) likes playing "fluidly" with wingers and attacking midfielders as strikers too... We saw it with Greenwood, Rogers, and Crooks last season.

Fans might not agree with it - but if we are caught short through injury - Burgzorg and Hamilton can both play as a striker in the same way.
Click to expand...
It's mad though isn't it.
We were shyte when all those players played up front. Except Crooks. Who actually did a decent job in Carricks first season before we brought in Archer.
But other than the Leicester away game, we were terrible last season when Rogers / Silvera / Greenwood played up front. You would think that would have been a lesson Carrick learned from.

I mean I'm not writing off Burgzorg as a 3rd striker but my preference would be 3 proper strikers and drop a player from the squad from the positions behind the striker if we have to. Especially if Conway is going to be used in the no10.
 
I'm on the fence about this. It certainly looks like his skills don't fit what Carrick ideally wants in a striker. It seems like, from Carrick's point of view, he's in the same category as players like Dijksteel, Barlaser, and McNair. He'll use them but he doesn't see them as genuine first choice contenders.

In that case, from the club's point of view, Coburn's got more chance of developing into a first choice striker elsewhere. If he does well at Millwall we can either sell him for £5m+ next summer or keep him for ourselves if we don't get promoted and we have a change of manager. Plus, next summer, if we don't get promoted it's likely to be all change seeing as we'll probably lose Rav, Latte Lath and Hackney. At that point, Coburn back from a successful loan will be important to us.

Obviously we can get short if ELL gets injured for a lengthy period but we still do have three other players to play his position: Conway, Burgzorg and the Invisible Mr Forss.
 
B_G said:
It's mad though isn't it.
We were shyte when all those players played up front. Except Crooks. Who actually did a decent job in Carricks first season before we brought in Archer.
But other than the Leicester away game, we were terrible last season when Rogers / Silvera / Greenwood played up front. You would think that would have been a lesson Carrick learned from.

I mean I'm not writing off Burgzorg as a 3rd striker but my preference would be 3 proper strikers and drop a player from the squad from the positions behind the striker if we have to. Especially if Conway is going to be used in the no10.
Click to expand...

100% - I'm fully in the camp of we need three strikers. Especially with our ridiculous injury record.

I can slightly (veryyyy slightly) see the other side... Only one of ELL or Conway needs to be 100% fit, and Coburn would spend the entire season on the bench.
Carrick makes his subs too late in my opinion, and how much benefit is Coburn going to get playing 10 minutes every 2-3 games.

The other potential option is... Maybe Forss is closer to being back than we've been told, and with Jones/Hamilton at RW, he's our third striker.... ELL/Forss/Conway.
 
I appreciate he's a local (ISH) and an academy product but I get the impression some on here are blinded by that.

Every time he's played he looks like he's not a good fit in this system. He's off the pace, technically he's not brilliant, he's tall but doesn't really use his height (and nor does our style) and he's not particularly strong either.

He'll be better off at Millwall where their game is more suited to him.

It'd obviously be amazing to have an academy player smash it here à la Downing but he's just not what we need at the moment. The fact that the club are prepared to let him go loan or otherwise tells me they feel the same.

Wish him all the best and that the loan spell does him good.
 
He needs to play, and play a lot, so he needs to go on loan, he won't get game time here in a promotion chasing side. Game time in a non promotion side is kind of pointless, I'd rather roll the dice.

I don't think he's good enough for a promotion side yet, so even if we did end up light on forwards or not near chasing promotion then having him playing won't solve that.

If it gives us a better chance of getting a potentially better striker then I'm all for it, but I'm not sure we 100% need it. This is assuming LL stays, we have Conway, Forss who are better players than Coburn, and Burgzorg would probably score more than Coburn if up front.

I'm not saying Coburn won't make it though, far from that, but we don't have the time to give him the games he needs, if we want promotion.
 
Malaguena said:
With all due respect, maybe that's why Carrick is a football manager and you're not ?
Click to expand...
I take your point but it also implies only professionals can have an opinion on something. Having watched Boro for 33 years, I know that we are playing a risky game going into a run of 4 or 5 months’ football with only two recognised senior strikers on the books. I would say the same about any club doing that.

I think Boro should be strengthening the squad, not weakening it.
 
Josh isn't going to progress as a player sat on the bench, Millwall is a good destination for him, we can always recall him in the next window if we have injures or loss of form.

I think it's the right call by the club and for the player.
 
I think people can forget Forss as a striker. I just don't think Carrick sees him in that position. He played Greenwood up there last season while he played Forss on the right. If he won't play Forss up top in that scenario, I can't see when he will.

Although a poster did correct me recently that he played up front for one game last season. But it was a game we played 3-5-2.

He hasn't played up front in a 4-2-3-1 since November 22. He clearly see Forss as more of a threat in that position. And he's probably right. He totally turned around his form when he moved there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top