Morgan Rogers
- Thread starter WillowsOrchid
- Start date
Norman_Conquest
Well-known member
Sorry, I am on about the months when he first came here and prior to him leaving. I feel a lot of us thought he would go on to better things at the time you mention.
Exactly. I don't think even newy would've predicted a transfer to Villa in a deal worth upto £16m on 1st January 2024!
newyddion
Well-known member
I thought after seeing the first two friendlies in pre season that we had one hell of a player on our hands. Lots of folks were criticizing him on the wrong things early door.. similar to how they did with Tavernier. I think a few were still holding on to their 'opinions' when Villa came in for him for big money.
Next up: Micah Hamilton.. the premier league quality central midfielder
Theyalwaysletyoudown
Active member
The "last few months" of all the... 5 months he actually played for us?
Frozen Horse
Well-known member
Well there's a lesson for us all: no need to have an opinion on any player in the first dozen or so matches he plays.
WilliamMunny
Well-known member
Exactly this. Some folks put far too much emphasis on a player's weaknesses and overlook their strengths and potential. It was clear early on that Rogers had a very high ceiling but some people were happy to write him off before the end of August.
Micah Hamilton also has a very high ceiling. It doesn't mean he will necessarily reach those heights but he has the potential to be an England international and Champions League player.
newyddion
Well-known member
Same with Chuba Akpom.. I made my views clear after the Auxerre friendly.. I said he would score a bolt load that season.
I was of the opinion that he was letting his career happen to him and not taking control.. sounds like he thought the very same and put in the extra work behind the scenes.
Humpty
Well-known member
There's a little bit of that. No one could've predicted his rise during the first 3 months or so. He looked like a fish out of water and understandably so given the circumstances. I'd say his potential really started to come to the fore around December time.
Norman_Conquest
Well-known member
That is exactly what I've been trying to say.bly so given the circumstances. I'd say his potential really started to come to the fore around December time.
BoroMart
Well-known member
I don't think he did look a fish out of water. He looked like someone shoe horned in as a CF, when he was a 10 or winger. struggled back to goal, but playing a little off the striker he immediately started creating chances.
Colgates_shaving_foam
Well-known member
I think people could see how good he was going to become.Those with x-ray eyes..
I’m not having that.
I agree Morgan was still learning his trade and showed glimpses of his talent but as said above, his decision making was what was letting him down. No one would have predicted his rise.
It was obvious. The way he travelled with the ball set him apart from the massive majority of players. He was like the best kid in the school playground who the others really struggled to take the ball off.
Humpty
Well-known member
I actually sat pitch side during one of the first few games of the season i forget which one. I hate sitting pitch side because of the view but i got a really good look at Rogers and there spells of the game where he couldn't even control the ball properly. He was shoe horned into a 9 and 10 interchangeable role along side Crooks and neither were effective but Crooks seemed to link up play better. There is no doubt that he struggled in the first few months of the season. There were no signs there for me at that point.
Diego
Well-known member
I knew straight after that unbelievable run against Coventry on the first game of the season we had a potential star on our hands.
TheWolfman
Well-known member
Exactly his control was one of the big things that made him look completely out of his depth. He would do something good and then struggle with the basics. He only really started to perform in the cup against lower league teams.
He obviously grew into a good player in very short space of time but to say he was always gonna be great from the start i just couldnt see it.
I criticised him in the first 3 or 4 games but was just commenting on what i saw probably taught me to give players a little more time or maybe not Im currently slagging hamilton off in the hope it turns out the same way.
BoroMart
Well-known member
I looked at his vision, and his ability to create a chance. What he could do, not what he wasn't doing. His control at times was excellent and others, not so good. But I put a lot of that down to playing at 9, back to goal, he struggled physically with the CB pressuring him from behind. His control was much better when he dropped deeper and turned and faced the defenders.
I saw a lot of quality in him. I think people made snap judgements based on a couple of poor performances in the opening games and pre-season played out of position. People then ignored the good and focused on the bad because it backed up their initial assessment. People still stand by that today, rather than go back and look at the good he did do, rather than admit they got it wrong.
Redwurzel
Well-known member
I thought Bernie Slaven was no good enough for his first 5 months at the Club. He looked too lightweight, too slow, unpolished.
But bit by bit he learnt how to play to his strengths in Division 2 (Championship) and adapt and become more polished, Dropping a division maybe helped him too and he came back in 1987 as a much better player than in 1985 and more dangerous.
I think fans need to be careful with early comments, many players need 12 months to bed in, certainly a few months when they are young or new to that division in particular.
Rogers didn't seem to have much impact in his first few games and then lost his place to LL who looked much more likely to score. Coburn and Crooks were starting also ahead of Rogers and you could see they caused more problems for defenders, until Coburn was injured.
Even when Rogers was sold I thought it was not a Premier League player, but Villa had bought him for longer development. To his credit he is proving me wrong.
But bit by bit he learnt how to play to his strengths in Division 2 (Championship) and adapt and become more polished, Dropping a division maybe helped him too and he came back in 1987 as a much better player than in 1985 and more dangerous.
I think fans need to be careful with early comments, many players need 12 months to bed in, certainly a few months when they are young or new to that division in particular.
Rogers didn't seem to have much impact in his first few games and then lost his place to LL who looked much more likely to score. Coburn and Crooks were starting also ahead of Rogers and you could see they caused more problems for defenders, until Coburn was injured.
Even when Rogers was sold I thought it was not a Premier League player, but Villa had bought him for longer development. To his credit he is proving me wrong.
Muttley
Well-known member
I think it's as simple as mindset. Some people see weaknesses, some see strengths. Rodgers was making mistakes in early games for us, missing simple passes making positional errors, etc. what we was also doing was superb defence splitting passes that were going unread, lovely touches in control and showing signs of a "good football brain", reading the game in front of him.
Both are valid observations, you just have to be aware of your own bias.
Both are valid observations, you just have to be aware of your own bias.
Simply red
Well-known member
I knew he would be a star when I saw him playing for Lincoln on loan from City . Gary Gill was made aware of him then , the rest is history .