Ngog

[Craig_H]

He posts on there too?

:wavingfistsmiley:

[MrMichael]

Hahaha.



21,657

[wiw]

BURN

[Red_Polo]

38483 posts.

Thirty eight THOUSAND four hundred and eighty three posts.

I'm not sure what to think of Ngog. Quite a few think he's a decent talent and even Craig rates him. I just have this admittedly terribly pessimistic voice in my head telling me that he is not good enough and not likely ever to be. Convince me otherwise good folk!

[SK]

I'm not sure what to think of Ngog. Quite a few think he's a decent talent and even Craig rates him. I just have this admittedly terribly pessimistic voice in my head telling me that he is not good enough and not likely ever to be. Convince me otherwise good folk!

let me put it this way - if he'd been bought by wenger at arsenal, and would have played 5 games and scored 2 goals for them, we'd all be ranting how rafa never sees such talent and wenger always does..

[Mostar]

let me put it this way - if he'd been bought by wenger at arsenal, and would have played 5 games and scored 2 goals for them, we'd all be ranting how rafa never sees such talent and wenger always does..

I concur.

His talent is undisputable but it is a lack of playing time that prevents him from developing further.

He needs to play more games or he should be send out to "minors" on a year loan.

[Red_Polo]

let me put it this way - if he'd been bought by wenger at arsenal, and would have played 5 games and scored 2 goals for them, we'd all be ranting how rafa never sees such talent and wenger always does..

I'm not sure I would be. Someone like Macheda has performed better as well as bagging some crucial goals, but I'm not ****ting myself thinking them lot have some 'wonderkid'. So I just don't see anything to get me excited about Ngog, at the moment I think of him as no more than potentially a decent squad player who we could sell at profit.

[Mostar]

I'm not sure I would be. Someone like Macheda has performed better as well as bagging some crucial goals, but I'm not ****ting myself thinking them lot have some 'wonderkid'. So I just don't see anything to get me excited about Ngog, at the moment I think of him as no more than potentially a decent squad player who we could sell at profit.

It is difficult to get excited about him as he played what 14 games on and off all season..

I personally see a lot potential in him and imo he needs to get one whole year of playing time "under his belt" before any conclusions could be made.

[RedSince1964]

It is difficult to get excited about him as he played what 14 games on and off all season..

I personally see a lot potential in him and imo he needs to get one whole year of playing time "under his belt" before any conclusions could be made.

[dww]

I'm not sure I would be. Someone like Macheda has performed better as well as bagging some crucial goals, but I'm not ****ting myself thinking them lot have some 'wonderkid'. So I just don't see anything to get me excited about Ngog, at the moment I think of him as no more than potentially a decent squad player who we could sell at profit.

I think he has potential to be the ideal backup to Torres. He has the pace and certainly at under 21 level he appears to have the movement too. I liked the look of his finishing in preseason and he has done whenever put in the reserves and not let us down at first team level either. If he can gain a bit of strength I think added composure will come with it and while he might not be a superstar he will fit our system perfectly and we got him at the right age for him to be willing to accept bench time for a while.

[SK]

I'm not sure I would be. Someone like Macheda has performed better as well as bagging some crucial goals, but I'm not ****ting myself thinking them lot have some 'wonderkid'. So I just don't see anything to get me excited about Ngog, at the moment I think of him as no more than potentially a decent squad player who we could sell at profit.

well macheda scored two, probably, their most important goal last season, but when he's played from the start, he was very poor, but he is only 17/18(?) so has time to ajust to the level. n'gog on the other hand has looked better with more apperances under his belt, and i'm confident he'll end up being a useful player for us.

[BG1973]

I'd say that's just a trifle unfortunate for a centre-forward.

quite..

my problem is this:

the standard we require is top drawer so i look at top drawer players when they were N'gog's age and he doesn't come close.

I maybe simplifying things but for some players it's that simple. Sure he'll tuck away a few tap in's but that's not enough.

[memzey]

I've got a feeling N'gog is going to be quite a player for us. He has all the attributes but just needs to fill out a little more so he can compete physically with EPL centre halves.

When Anelka first broke through for Arsenal he played a few games one season, looked handy and scored a couple of goals which gave him a good introduction. The next season Ian Wright was injured for months but Anelka stepped up and I think they won the double that year (not sure?) with Nicky boy scoring a hatful. Obviously it's hoping a lot for DN' to have the same sort of impact but I see a really good player with a very bright future in there. If he just gets on the burgers and bulks up a little in the summer, he could certainly be adequate cover for Torres (as long as he's not out for long periods of time - heaven forbid).

[Parm]

I dont think that the lad should be loaned out and should be the apprentice to Torres

[Neil Young]

Is it me, or is there some really ****ly researched articles flying around at the moment?

All traditional media operations have been hit hard by the fact they haven't really worked out how to monetise digital content with consequent effects on their income. At the same time, more content needs to be produced to cover the full range of traditional and digital media, minute-by-minute deadlines, etc.

As a result media organisations have been cutting reporting (and other) jobs so that more agency copy is passed off as proprietorial content while fewer journos are required to pump out more stuff. So less is checked while more spurious stories are sourced from wherever, including fan sites and dodgy sources. They're desperate for copy so happily listen to any old ****e pumped out by any vested interest, especially, at this time of year, agents.

Rather than checking stories, media organisations now seem to work on the principle that if a rival 'credible' news organisation has published a story then they have checked it. Quite often though, under the pressure of deadlines, completely inaccurate stories (whether deliberately fabricated or simply the result of genuine misunderstanding or mistakes) slip through one news source's sub-editors and checkers so that then everyone from the BBC to The S*n repeats it.

It's no wonder standards, never really very high at the best of times, have fallen as fast and almost as far as public respect for MPs.