• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Adama Traore

How can you not want this transfer? Cheap, already a cult pantomime figure, unique skill set, just a sub, and if 2 men - Conte and Paratici - want him, surely we want them to have this extra 'tool' too :) No doubt he's flawed, but if he was technically brilliant he'd be 100m. I wanted to see what Poch could do with him as a teenager, now, I be interested to see if Conte can deploy and pull out the ability. No guarantees, and he'll always be mecurial, but it would be interesting at the least, right?
No.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk
 
Didn't we think Spence was wanted by Conte too?

Suffice to say that if Conte did no want him then maybe that is more the reason we should only buy first team players that Conte wants while he is here. If Conte actually did not want Spence that is more the reason we should only buy Troare if he required by the manager
 
Suffice to say that if Conte did no want him then maybe that is more the reason we should only buy first team players that Conte wants while he is here. If Conte actually did not want Spence that is more the reason we should only buy Troare if he required by the manager

Conte has a veto of any signings for the first team. If conte didn't want him we wouldn't have signed him.
 
Conte has a veto of any signings for the first team. If conte didn't want him we wouldn't have signed him.

There is more too it than that though, Spence is a club signing based on a long term vision and was made by Fab who is incharge off all football operations and calls, these signings happen all round the country by clubs looking at long term prospects with or without the managers full consent but them accepting that vision. Conte talks about that this week
 
There is more too it than that though, Spence is a club signing based on a long term vision and was made by Fab who is incharge off all football operations and calls, these signings happen all round the country by clubs looking at long term prospects with or without the managers full consent but them accepting that vision. Conte talks about that this week

He also said he said ok to the signing. He gave his consent.
 
He also said he said ok to the signing. He gave his consent.

But in the context of the topic he gave consent to the clubs longer term plans than him being a specific personal target. It happens alot and clubs have to work on more than one set of ideas and I am pleased we are again

On Traore, he is dog awful
 
But in the context of the topic he gave consent to the clubs longer term plans than him being a specific personal target. It happens alot and clubs have to work on more than one set of ideas and I am pleased we are again

On Traore, he is dog awful

Yes but that is not the same as the club buying players the manager doesn't want. Which some have been arguing online.
 
Say what you like about this guy, and many have!, but he'd have been ideal for the Forest game. 1 up after 5 mins, we spent the game trying to break, but lacking a bit of punch to accelerate away from their understaffed defense.

I actually think we had enough to win quite comfortably, but never got fully free when on the break. A few lose touches and we didn't make the most of literally a dozen or more promising breaks. That is where Traore would have been helpful. On the break, he would have had the power and dribbling to get through their open defense. Stretch them and create space.

No I wouldn't spend much on Traore. He has to be a punt. But in games like yesterday's, he'd help drive through them in a way we couldn't.
 
Say what you like about this guy, and many have!, but he'd have been ideal for the Forest game. 1 up after 5 mins, we spent the game trying to break, but lacking a bit of punch to accelerate away from their understaffed defense.

I actually think we had enough to win quite comfortably, but never got fully free when on the break. A few lose touches and we didn't make the most of literally a dozen or more promising breaks. That is where Traore would have been helpful. On the break, he would have had the power and dribbling to get through their open defense. Stretch them and create space.

No I wouldn't spend much on Traore. He has to be a punt. But in games like yesterday's, he'd help drive through them in a way we couldn't.

worryingly I think this is a a deal we will do, but… we did exactly what your describing yesterday quite a lot of times, and last ditch defending along with delays in shooting hurt us more
 
worryingly I think this is a a deal we will do, but… we did exactly what your describing yesterday quite a lot of times, and last ditch defending along with delays in shooting hurt us more

That is the point, Traore wouldn't allow last-ditch defending. He'd just power away, create space...then spaff his pass :) He can actually pass and shoot relatively well, the key is slowing down a little first.

Was interesting to see Spence come on and play in Kulus position, a couple of time he used his pace to threaten a break.

We could have won by 5 yesterday, break after break after break. All half openings: Kane 4-5 openings, Son 2-3, Kulu 2-3, Richarlson 1, Spence 1 etc. Yet we couldn't quite get away from them, lacked a little something. Pace. Disruption. And precision in attack.
 
That is the point, Traore wouldn't allow last-ditch defending. He'd just power away, create space...then spaff his pass :) He can actually pass and shoot relatively well, the key is slowing down a little first.

Was interesting to see Spence come on and play in Kulus position, a couple of time he used his pace to threaten a break.

We could have won by 5 yesterday, break after break after break. All half openings: Kane 4-5 openings, Son 2-3, Kulu 2-3, Richarlson 1, Spence 1 etc. Yet we couldn't quite get away from them, lacked a little something. Pace. Disruption. And precision in attack.
But still won
 
Say what you like about this guy, and many have!, but he'd have been ideal for the Forest game. 1 up after 5 mins, we spent the game trying to break, but lacking a bit of punch to accelerate away from their understaffed defense.

I actually think we had enough to win quite comfortably, but never got fully free when on the break. A few lose touches and we didn't make the most of literally a dozen or more promising breaks. That is where Traore would have been helpful. On the break, he would have had the power and dribbling to get through their open defense. Stretch them and create space.

No I wouldn't spend much on Traore. He has to be a punt. But in games like yesterday's, he'd help drive through them in a way we couldn't.
True. But who to shift out? Moura?

Sent from my SM-S908E using Fapatalk
 
Barcelona and their transfer strategy of "buy every single player" didn't even want this guy. I don't deny he has a certain skillset and has given our defenders trouble in the past, but he's only played 30 minutes for Wolves so far this season. I get that Wolves have good options up front but if he's not starting for them... who knows, maybe he could be amazing as a RWB...
 
Barcelona and their transfer strategy of "buy every single player" didn't even want this guy. I don't deny he has a certain skillset and has given our defenders trouble in the past, but he's only played 30 minutes for Wolves so far this season. I get that Wolves have good options up front but if he's not starting for them... who knows, maybe he could be amazing as a RWB...

After Kula not starting for Juventus I have learnt not to judge a player just because they warm the bench at another club.
 
Back