16 minutes ago, AllBoro10 said:

Think it did rise to around that figure yeah. But i was and still am hoping to be able to spend that amount this summer on a striker 

I can't see it but you never know

4 minutes ago, Tarmo Kink Army said:

Hardly ever good 😭😭😭 this has to be bait at this point

Yep, hardly ever good.  His actual performances were generally not that good but he scored some goals.  Try separating the two things because a striker scoring some goals doesn't automatically mean that they played well.  He scored twice against Deportivo but barely had a kick otherwise.  If you've got a team that can carry that type of player then it's fine but we don't.  We needed more from our striker last season, and we will need more from them this season as well.

5 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

Yep, hardly ever good.  His actual performances were generally not that good but he scored some goals.  Try separating the two things because a striker scoring some goals doesn't automatically mean that they played well.  He scored twice against Deportivo but barely had a kick otherwise.  If you've got a team that can carry that type of player then it's fine but we don't.  We needed more from our striker last season, and we will need more from them this season as well.

I wouldn't mind Conway playing in rotation with Whittaker as the "goal-scorer" #10 position but I agree we need someone different up top.

Frustratingly, somebody like Kieffer Moore (who Wrexham got for peanuts) would have been perfect in that role and I think we should be looking to bring in a big centre forward who can hold up play and bring players in a lot better than Conway, who basically can't do either of those things.

55 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

I meant specific to football mate.  I thought I'd seen somewhere that you couldn't actually have purely incentive based contracts.  Could be an FA thing or I'm completely getting it wrong.

They always have a weekly wage. Not that it has to be much tho. 

29 minutes ago, Redcar Rioja said:

I think that was exemplified in Saturdays game against Swansea when for me it was even more obvious. 

He made almost double the passes Burgzorg did, and only a few less then Whittaker. It’s hard to get involved in the game when the two players playing behind you are doing absolutely nothing all game and feeding off absolute scraps.

I'm not reading too much into Conway's performance on Saturday. He was very quiet, but obviously scored two goals the week before when we actually got the ball to him in the box. We probably do need someone else at least as an option in that role, someone more physical. But there can't be many better options for a second choice striker than Conway in the league.

1 hour ago, Changing Times said:

I meant specific to football mate.  I thought I'd seen somewhere that you couldn't actually have purely incentive based contracts.  Could be an FA thing or I'm completely getting it wrong.

Maybe it's not totally zero but something like 500 a week/month then incentives for appearances, scoring, etc

46 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

No he didn't do well.  You see this is where I think people are getting it wrong.  They are looking at his goal totals rather than looking at his and our performances that came with them.  He scored some goals, those goals didn't lead to us winning much.  Now I'm guessing everyone will point to the defence as the reason for that but it was also because the attack didn't function properly with him leading the line.  It didn't function at all on Saturday but people are placing the blame for that on Whittaker and Burzorg.  Conway is a player who offers next to nothing when you have the ball.  He works hard enough without the ball but with the ball you just don't get that much from him, and that in turn makes the whole team less than it should be.  I think he'd make a fine player in a two where he wouldn't have to do as much but as a one he just seems to be lacking the general/overall game.  He's someone that could tap in 15 a season for you just like the goals he got in the friendly against Deportivo.  But the rest of that game he offered nothing, and partly because of that our attack stutters.  He can't hold the ball up, he can't really run in behind, he isn't skillful so that he gets on the ball and drive forward with it, and he doesn't really drop deep and link play.  He's a hard working finisher, and I really don't see how this team is going to be good enough to carry that and end up with 70+ points.

As much as I love Conway's personality and work rate - this post is absolutely spot on. He offers next to no threat as a lone forward. 

7 minutes ago, Tom said:

I'm not reading too much into Conway's performance on Saturday. He was very quiet, but obviously scored two goals the week before when we actually got the ball to him in the box. We probably do need someone else at least as an option in that role, someone more physical. But there can't be many worse options for a second choice striker than Conway in the league.

Conway didn't see enough of the ball simple as that, not his fault.

Good player 👍 

The long balls from the back whilst clearing our lines didn't give Conway a chance against 2 CB's who bossed him all game, Forss coming on was the first time I noticed hold up play. So for me Conway needs help either 2 up top or Conway playing from behind. Bamford doesn't solve this problem but he'd be a good option if fit to mix things up.

6 minutes ago, BoroSmoggie said:

He made almost double the passes Burgzorg did, and only a few less then Whittaker. It’s hard to get involved in the game when the two players playing behind you are doing absolutely nothing all game and feeding off absolute scraps.

Maybe that's his problem, if he's making all those passes then he's not getting shots off on target. All three of them, Conway, Whittaker and Burgzorg just don't function together as a unit. I recall a Burgzorg run into the box that led to them conceding a corner and again Burgzorg timed another run perfectly but Whittaker didn't read it. I honestly can't remember an incident of note involving Conway on Saturday that had me out of my seat. I'd say he's more of a fox in the box and without service he adds very little else compared to say ELL who scrapped, won duels and had pace to break away and added all round more benefit to the team.

His penalty misses last season arguably cost Carrick his job. He is young and can improve but I'm not sure where he best fits into an Edwards side, maybe instead of Burgzorg or Whittaker playing off a main Striker but he isn't it unfortunately.

 

IF we get another forward to be either 1st or 2nd choice then I’ve got no objection with getting a 3rd choice player like Bamford or Ings.

Youll find it hard to get a player of their quality to come and be happy as a 3rd choice, as they know at their age and fitness they won’t be playing week-in week-out.

38 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

As I pointed out with the stats the other day, even when we had Doak available, and we were actually playing better and getting results, there was a clear drop off between Lath up front and Conway up front.  Before Xmas, while Doak was still playing, we averaged 1.45 points per game with Conway up top, and over 2 points per game with Lath.  The latter gives you a shot at promotion, the former doesn't.  We were a better team when he didn't play last season.

That doesn’t mean he’s not a good player, it just means Latte Lath is superior, which is pretty obvious considering we sold him for a like £22m

What's the crack then is Bamford actually signing or have we all just had a mad hour where weee all convinced he is and then never speak of it again?

 

 

Edited August 11, 2025Aug 11 by AllBoro10

4 minutes ago, AllBoro10 said:

What's the crack then is Bamford actually signing or have we all just had a mad hour where weee all convinced he is and then never speak of it again?

 

 

You heard the same we did. Its not like there would be a solid update 3 hours later