• 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

Nico Zaniolo

I was a big supporter of Lamela from the start and expected more goals from him. I loved his tenacity and work rate. I loved that he would get in opponents faces and wind them up. He was injury prone though and never consistent enough to be guaranteed a regular starting spot but if zaniolo can be all that, be more consistent and achieve more then he’s definitely worth getting.
 
Finney Is Back said:
From the bits and pieces I have seen of Zaniolo he seems FAR stronger than Lamela, faster than Lamela, less one footed than Lamela (though to be fair there I doubt there is a player in World football who isn't) and much better at receiving the ball even though closely marked than Lamela was.

I don't think that we will sign Zaniolo as he is something of a gamble transfer due to the huge potential that he has if he is properly over his injuries. Roma will therefore want a big fee for him in case he does fulfil that clear potential but buying clubs will be reluctant to pay the fee because of his injury record. If we were to sign him though I can see why Conte would think he was a good fit for the squad as he could give competition to Kulusevski, play as a withdrawn forward on occasions we wanted to play 2 (or 1 and a half) up front and he also has the potential to become a central midfield player who could play in a two.
Click to expand...

Agree with all of that.

I do think Kulusevski looks like he'll be really important for us this season. If he's not playing we'll lack his ability to link play, be creative and operate in deeper areas. He's also formed good partnerships with both Doherty and Emerson.

I don't Richarlison and Moura offer a lot of that. Our attacking may become a bit too predictable and unbalanced without Kulusevski. Who is himself a young player, some inconsistency may be incoming.

Can definitely see us targeting another player more in his mould, would nicely more or less complete our attacking options and perhaps even add competition.

If Zaniolo is worth what he'll cost, if he's worth the gamble with his injury record and if we'll be willing to pay that much for another player that won't be an automatic starter I'm not sure. But definitely would be happy if we did sign him.

Seems like a real talent, hasn't fully come good yet in terms of end product. If Conte and Paratici think we're the right place for him to fulfill his potential I definitely won't be second guessing that.
 
El Guepardo said:
I was a big supporter of Lamela from the start and expected more goals from him. I loved his tenacity and work rate. I loved that he would get in opponents faces and wind them up. He was injury prone though and never consistent enough to be guaranteed a regular starting spot but if zaniolo can be all that, be more consistent and achieve more then he’s definitely worth getting.
Click to expand...
He's nothing like Lamela, apart from the skill. More Ginola than Lamela.
 
Would definitely prefer that we focus on Zaniolo than on Trossard. He’s more of a fit for what we need I think. Plus I prefer him as a player anyway.
 
El Guepardo said:
Would definitely prefer that we focus on Zaniolo than on Trossard. He’s more of a fit for what we need I think. Plus I prefer him as a player anyway.
Click to expand...

i like the way zaniolo plays from deeper midfield than trossard, where i think we need reinforcements, but its his seemingly frequent injuries that puts me off.
 
Yep just what we need, another player with more minutes in the treatment room than on the pitch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DTA
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back