Hojlund is getting hooked earlier and earlier in favour of a 17-year old who is not ready to start matches yet. We're playing with fire trying to find the balance of just how much football to give an undercooked player who isn't getting an organic promotion to first team football, but is rather being thrust into the spotlight out of sheer necessity. It could be the making of him, but it could also break him, as if we haven't become experts at that as a club.
This thread presumes Obi will continue to get game time, but as a sub, in the meantime, we still need a viable #9, even a makeshift one. Some managers will conjure out of thin air, playing someone who isn't a striker by trade in the role, other managers will literally abandon the #9 altogether and solve the problem that way. My question is to do with the former: as the title says, who would you place upfront to start games whilst keeping the status quo of Obi tagging in?
Persevering with Hojlund genuinely seems to be doing more harm than good; he desperately needs time out of the team and away from the spotlight, imo.
This thread presumes Obi will continue to get game time, but as a sub, in the meantime, we still need a viable #9, even a makeshift one. Some managers will conjure out of thin air, playing someone who isn't a striker by trade in the role, other managers will literally abandon the #9 altogether and solve the problem that way. My question is to do with the former: as the title says, who would you place upfront to start games whilst keeping the status quo of Obi tagging in?
Persevering with Hojlund genuinely seems to be doing more harm than good; he desperately needs time out of the team and away from the spotlight, imo.