The Goalscoring Myth: A 20 goal striker is not a "must" for success

[swansnews]

The Goalscoring Myth: A 20 goal striker is not a "must" for success

Last season's Championship was a strange one in the goalscoring charts as it was the first time in more than fifteen years that the leading scorer at this level

jackarmy.net

 

[Dr. Winston]

It's not just last season. For the most part only a handful strikers ever go past the 20 goal mark, and it's far from certain that the team with the most prolific striker goes up. Blackburn have been oddly successful at finding 20+ goal strikers, but it's not done them much good.

One striker getting betweeen 10-15 is fine, provided another three or four players come close to double figures. If we achieve that, we won't be far off.

 

[Darran]

It's not just last season. For the most part only a handful strikers ever go past the 20 goal mark,

Trundle did.

 

[exiledclaseboy]

Trundle did.

Consistently

 

[Manselton Jack]

Not at Championship level

 

[Menston4128]

The bottom line is we need to have a positive goal difference and if possible scoring 60+ goals.

Who scores them not so important.

 

[Ringwood]

We don't have a prolific goal scorer or free scoring midfield. Also with Darling gone there is a lot of responsibility on the new signings.

 

[Swans Jack]

Strange as this sounds. Yes of course, goals wins games, but I would be about getting our defense sorted ASAP. I fear we are going to leak goals if Santos and Cabango is out for a while. Get that right and the rest will come together. Dare I say, build from the back

 

[SeaJack]

A healthy sprinkling of quality from back to front would be the ideal situation in order to solidify the team.

However, the lack of a Piroe type frontman was almost the undoing of us last season.

No cutting edge means that we’re unable to get the edge over our opponents in those all important tight matches.

Add in a decent striker and we could well see us nick 3 points more often than not, where it looked for all the world like we’d get a draw or lose by the odd goal.

 

[Dr. Winston]

However, the lack of a Piroe type frontman was almost the undoing of us last season.

Wasting seven months hoping that Luke Williams wouldn't turn out to be Russy Mk II was the undoing of us last season. Martin had Piroe and got nowhere. It's highly likely the same thing would have happened for Williams.

 

[SeaJack]

Granted that the mediocre managers in the dugout, had also played a part in the mediocrity that emanated from the team on many an occasion during the Martin/Duff/Williams seasons.

However, I do feel that the lack of a quality striker to successfully spearhead our attack, did make a significant difference to the league position that we found ourselves in last season.

With Williams, the goals were not forthcoming enough to prevent us from circling the drain during his final days at the helm.

Sheehan did a good job of shoring up the defence, which kept us from circling the drain, but without the likes of a Piroe in the team, he wasn’t able to catapult us into a playoff position.

Both managers, I feel, could have done with that all important striker that would have helped both of them immensely in their respective ways.

As it stands I fear that, should we revert to relying too heavily on Cullen, Vipotnik, and even Wales quite possibly over the course of the upcoming season, then the owners are underestimating the importance of that position once again.

 

[Baron Goblet]

Three strikers. Should be enough. Until January.

 

[SeaJack]

The big question is, will The Powers that Be put their hands in their pockets, or sit on those hands come January, if we learn that the strike force we have isn’t up to the task?

Last seasons’s January window suggests that they may well be reluctant to roll the dice on a relatively expensive January signing due to the inflated costs of players during that window.