Agree with pretty much all of this.
But does it do us well to be so defined by Rodgers' system? What I mean is, is there no room at the club for a 'pure goalscorer'. There are times, occasions in specific matches, where you really just need a goal.
Utd have kept hold of the 'limited' Hernandez for that very reason.
The game may have evolved past the 90's forward, but goals never go out of fashion. Occasionally, you just need one.
I said in the post-Reading round table thread that I don't like Rodgers' system too much. I even called for a 85% Rodgers 15% compromise. But it doesn't change the fact that Rodgers does believe in it and as long as he does it's much more vital to refine and polish those already in the team than to alter it on the hopes that a kid can repeat his actions from the reserves.
There are much bigger concerns than finding a poacher. Something like the fact that in the calendar year 2012 Steven Gerrard has featured in 33 games (30 starts and 3 substitute appearances) and only scored from open play in 5 of them [Brighton and Everton in March and then Gomel in August and finally Man Utd and Norwich in September]. From his debut goal in '99 to Hodgson's last game on Jan 5th 2011 Gerrard was averaging 10.5 goals a year from open play. If he does not score again then even with his Everton hat-trick he drops down to a meager 4.5 goals per year. His lowest goal return from open play since 2002. His penalty conversion is a pointless fact with the vendetta going on against Suarez.
On top of that from last season Carroll (9), Bellamy (9), Maxi (6) and Kuyt (5) contributed a somewhat limited but still better than nothing 29 goals and they haven't been properly replaced. If you take into account the season before that Kuyt (15), Maxi (10), Torres (9), Ngog (8!) and Meireles (5) scored 47 goals.
So to sum it up. In the past 2 season we've lost players responsible for a total number of 76 goals and not replaced them at all. Add to that Gerrard's worst open play goal return in over a decade and Suarez's wasteful finishing. I then ask those who seem to have more faith in Morgan than I do. Can you honestly see him as being that creative spark that's required to help this team get 75+ goals in the next season and a half? Suso influences play in a whole new dimension, he has great distribution, movement and hold up play. Sterling can take on players, beat them for pace and is starting to establish a goal threat.
Maybe I just suffer from serial pessimism but I just don't see it. In a team that is desperate for goals from elsewhere, especially from midfielders, center backs and the occasional fullback thunderbolt I simply fail to see the potential impact Morgan can have. If the squad is in a coma, Morgan is a new pair of shoes. Squeaky clean and fresh but ultimately futile until you get back on your feet.
As for Hernandez there's a world of difference. I'm a big admirer of Hernandez. It's not something I like to admit publically because he is someone who chooses to refer to himself as 'Chicarito' but he is still quite good. His movement is outstanding, deceptively good considering how awkward he often looks seconds before recieving the ball. For someone who can't jump and is too petite to win a 50/50 he scores an unbelievable amount of headers. If we had him, I'd have him starting. But that's because his movement is superb and he is very clinical. He's also got a monumental advantage over Morgan in terms of experience. Hernandez had 5 years of training and playing with the first team and a year or two with the national team. He joined the Manc squad on a high having scored against giants France and Argentina at the World Cup; quite a quantum leap from an offside goal against Hearts and a 3 inch tap in against Toronto.
Yet even with all that, and in true nature to my hypothesis about the death of the poacher, Welbeck is almost always preferred to Hernandez, who is reduced to substitute appearances and starting against minnows. Because Welbeck presses, he tracks back, tackles
and offers a presence in the box. Hernandez has a 1/3 ratio despite making most of his games from the bench. Welbeck has less than 1/4 and he is starting games even with RvP and Rooney available [stats from Wiki, can't be arsed for exact detail].
Welbeck contributes more to the overall game of the team and as such he plays more and he plays a bigger part in the squad game. He is trusted with more responsibility because even when he doesn't score you always get a guaranteed input from him.
Can't agree with this at all. I haven't seen a lot of Morgan to make a judgement one way or another, but arguably a poacher is exactly what we need. In any system goalscorers are vital and should be prioritised even if their overall game isn't as refined as other players in the team.
As posted in more detail above I whole heartedly disagree. The squad as a whole needs to start scoring more. We learned that the bitter way from 2007-2009. When Gerrard and Torres weren't playing, we didn't score enough.
To illustrate my point; let's take a look at how some of the top clubs in Europe are doing in terms of goal scoring: Chelsea are the league leaders in In the league their scorers are Torres (4) and then Ivanovic, Lampard and Mata (3), Hazard and Cahill (2) and then Cole and Sturridge (1). So off their 19 league goals on 5 have been scored by what you'd call strikers and a total of 8 players scoring in 8 games. In Spain Barca have the advantage of the best player in the league with Messi scoring 11 times behind him is Villa with 3, Adriano and Puyol 2 and then Tello, Xavi, Puyol, Alba, Pedro 1 each. You could call Messi a striker so with him and Villa that's 14/23 from strikers and a total of 9 players scoring in 8 games. Atletico Madrid have the best center forward in the world in Falcao with 9 yet Arda Turan and Raul Garcia have 2 and an additional 5 players with a goal each. That's 8 players with 18 goals in 8 matches. Underperforming Valencia have Soldado and Feghouli with 3 each and another 5 players chipping in a goal each. 7 players scoring in 8 matches a combined 11 goals. Everyone's closet favourite Malaga have the same situation at hand. Joaquin tops the board with 3. Isco and Saviola have 2 each and an additional 5 come in with a goal each (a recurring theme by now). 12 goals, 8 players, 8 games. In the Serie A Napoli have one of the most desired strikers in the world in Edinson Cavani who leads with 6 followed by Hamsik with 3, Pandev with 2 and three players with a goal each. 14 goals from 6 players in 8 games. League leaders Juventus setting a new record with a whopping 12 players scoring in the first 8 games (no player with more than 7 games nota bene). Pirlo and Giovinco lead with 3. Vidal, Vucinic and Quagliarella follow with 2 and an incredible 7 players follow with a goal each. As previously stated 12 players share those 19 goals in the opening 8 matches. Borussia Dortmund, who tonight beat the mighty Real Madrid, have 9 players scoring in the opening 8 matches a total number of 18 goals. With Reus leading on 4, Kuba and Lewandowski at 3 each, Götze and Perisic on 2 and 4 players chipping in with a goal each. (Seemingly) Unstoppable Bayern München reign supreme with an incredible 25 goals in their opening 8 games this season, coming from 7 players. Mandzukic with 7, Müller at 6, Schweinsteiger, Luis Gustavo and Toni Kroos follow with 3, Ribery 2 and Rafinha is the only ace of the league campaign.
Now we finally get to Liverpool. Luis Suarez has 5, Steven Gerrard has 2 with Sahin, Skrtel and Sterling getting an additional 1 goal each. Simply for the sake of reasoning, let's hypothesize that Morgan would've featured in all 8 league games so far, chipping in with a pan-European excellence ratio of a goal every 2 games. That would push him to a respectable 4 goals in the league. Raising Liverpool's total from 10 goals to 14 in 8 games and the number of goal scorers from 5 to 6. Bringing the total number of goals scored in the league to the joint 7th with Swansea and 1 ahead of the then joint 9th Southampton and Arsenal. Now let's further hypothesize that Morgan had a 1.0 shots to goal ratio. Meaning that his previous 4 goals came from a total number of 4 shots. Now assuming that Morgan had played, scored a goal every 2 games with a 100% shot conversion rate this would thusly raise Liverpool's 10 goals in 148 shot attempts to 14 goals in 152 shot attempts. Which in pure raw statistics takes Liverpool conversion rate from 1 goal every 14.8 shots (a conversion rate of 6.8%) now entering in Morgan's poacher impact this raises Liverpool's goal return to 1 goal every 10.9 shots (conversion rate of 9.1%). Whichever way you look at it, is still an abysmal goal return considering chances created and shots taken. Now let's ramp things up further adding a whopping 100% to Morgan's hypothesized goal return to a 1 goal per game and his goal conversion rate remaining the same meaning 8 goals in 8 shots. This would mean that Liverpool's 10 goals in 148 shots rises to a respectable 18, that still took a less impressive 156 shots to score. Taking all that into account, Morgan's superhuman impact on the squad, scoring a goal in every one of the 8 matches so far from as many shots. This boosts Liverpool's shots required to score a goal to 1 goal per 8.67 shot attempts (conversion rate of 11.5%).
Now this is all ifs and buts. The number of shots taken are total attempted, not on goal. But as I've clearly demonstrated even if we had a poacher. He had scored a goal every single league match and only taken 1 shot to do it each and every time. Our goal return would still be an optimum 8.67 shots required for every goal and a conversion rate of 11.5%
So I repeat yet again. Liverpool's problems are far, far, far greater than can be solved by any single poacher of world class quality and thusly I have very modest expectations of the impact of a completely unproven teenager.
