Nick Powell

Status
Not open for further replies.
finneh said:
I think it was "rising to £6m", so probably only £3-4m up front.

It still seems like a strange policy for a club our size. Say the success rate of such a signing would be 1/10 and he did only cost £3m, I still don't see the economic advantage of not just waiting until he's more proven.

I understand potentially special talents like Ronaldo, Nani & Anderson, as you either get them early or they might end up at another top team and out of our grasp. But talents like Zaha and Powell it would make more sense to wait until they were a least a bit proven, rather than have a blunder-bus approach.
Click to expand...

Didn't City want Powell around the same as well? We seem to rush into deals when we hear of other clubs becoming interested, so that might be why we've not waited for him to step up at that level. We did the same with Henriquez, as a number of clubs started to take notice of him. Fergie also said he wanted to wait a year for Phil Jones but Liverpool were starting to look at him that summer too. Possibly a similar case with Zaha as well, as Arsenal looked to be favourites to sign him.
 
OnlyTwoDaSilvas said:
Didn't City want Powell around the same as well? We seem to rush into deals when we hear of other clubs becoming interested, so that might be why we've not waited for him to step up at that level. We did the same with Henriquez, as a number of clubs started to take notice of him. Fergie also said he wanted to wait a year for Phil Jones but Liverpool were starting to look at him that summer too. Possibly a similar case with Zaha as well, as Arsenal looked to be favourites to sign him.
Click to expand...

Liverpool wanted Powell too. I recently read Michael Calvin's book "The Nowhere Men" which is about scouts and there is an extract in it which mentioned that Comolli and Mel Johnson (their scout in the south of England) were having a look at Powell and were really interested but then heard we already had the deal done.
 
Redo91 said:
Liverpool wanted Powell too. I recently read Michael Calvin's book "The Nowhere Men" which is about scouts and there is an extract in it which mentioned that Comolli and Mel Johnson (their scout in the south of England) were having a look at Powell and were really interested but then heard we already had the deal done.
Click to expand...
Have you read that book? Had a look on Amazon, but wasn't sure whether it was as interesting as it sounded, so didn't buy it.
 
He is returning from a 6 month layoff tbf and for a team like Leicester they seem to put extra emphasis on workman types.

Would not read that much into it yet frankly though a good Pl loan is always tough to find.
 
finneh said:
I think it was "rising to £6m", so probably only £3-4m up front.

It still seems like a strange policy for a club our size. Say the success rate of such a signing would be 1/10 and he did only cost £3m, I still don't see the economic advantage of not just waiting until he's more proven.

I understand potentially special talents like Ronaldo, Nani & Anderson, as you either get them early or they might end up at another top team and out of our grasp. But talents like Zaha and Powell it would make more sense to wait until they were a least a bit proven, rather than have a blunder-bus approach.
Click to expand...

Sir Alex quite clearly rated him very highly. Labelling him as a Scholes heir and then also called him a certainty along with Januzaj to make it.

He had City Liverpool Arsenal and Everton all chasing him as well amongst others. Hardly a Obertan/Bellion type punt or somthing.
 
Haven't seen his supposed great talent. Seems to be capable off great moments from the bit I've seen. I've heard that he could be our next scholes. Not sure if saf said it himself.

Also, people go overboard in their analysis over our decision to loan a player wherever we loan them. In the end, if the player is good enough for Untied, they should be able to be prove their worth in smaller sides. And my guess is, that the players who go on to great things, tend to Do just that.
 
Jammydodger7 said:
I thininwe're particularly bad at choosing clubs to loan players to!
Click to expand...

Yeah i think Powell forced this loan as well to a Pl club in his own words.

It was too late to integrate as well. Oddly enough both him and Michael Keane wld hv featured more for us than their loaned clubs.

See Giusseppe Rossi for example or even zaha after paying hefty loan fee last season. These struggling clubs have less incentive to blood in inconsistent youngsters.
 
FromTheBench said:
Yeah i think Powell forced this loan as well to a Pl club in his own words.

It was too late to integrate as well. Oddly enough both him and Michael Keane wld hv featured more for us than their loaned clubs.

See Giusseppe Rossi for example or even zaha after paying hefty loan fee last season. These struggling clubs have less incentive to blood in inconsistent youngsters.
Click to expand...

They've a massive incentive to blood inconsistent youngsters who are better than the youngsters that already play for the club. Which is a category you'd hope that players on United's books fit into. It's not as though teams like Leicester are made up out of 11 ruthlessly consistent 25-30 year olds.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
They've a massive incentive to blood inconsistent youngsters who are better than the youngsters that already play for the club. Which is a category you'd hope that players on United's books fit into. It's not as though teams like Leicester are made up out of 11 ruthlessly consistent 25-30 year olds.
Click to expand...

True. But it's debatable how much better he is than their youngsters.
He may have stood out at 17, but the guys in his age group have caught up. He's not really a 'stand out' 20 year old.

I agree, though, that if the youngster has genuine quality to add to the first team - there's great incentive.
Someone like Powell, who (a) isn't that special, and (b) may not be that bothered/motivated - not so much incentive. I think he'll get a little run, fail to impress, come off the bench a few more times, and then come back.

Nothing wrong with loans. It's just that sometimes the players aren't actually that good. If we sent them a 17/18 year old Wilshere, he'd be playing no doubt, despite their situation.
 
Speak said:
True. But it's debatable how much better he is than their youngsters.
He may have stood out at 17, but the guys in his age group have caught up. He's not really a 'stand out' 20 year old.

I agree, though, that if the youngster has genuine quality to add to the first team - there's great incentive.
Someone like Powell, who (a) isn't that special, and (b) may not be that bothered/motivated - not so much incentive. I think he'll get a little run, fail to impress, come off the bench a few more times, and then come back.

Nothing wrong with loans. It's just that sometimes the players aren't actually that good. If we sent them a 17/18 year old Wilshere, he'd be playing no doubt, despite their situation.
Click to expand...

Which was, basically, the point I was making.
 
FromTheBench said:
Yeah i think Powell forced this loan as well to a Pl club in his own words.

It was too late to integrate as well. Oddly enough both him and Michael Keane wld hv featured more for us than their loaned clubs.

See Giusseppe Rossi for example or even zaha after paying hefty loan fee last season. These struggling clubs have less incentive to blood in inconsistent youngsters.
Click to expand...

They had Owen and Martins. Not really a lack of incentive, more a case of simply having better players. It's almost all about quality. If the young guy is going to do the job better, he'll get games.

It was unlikely Rossi would do the job better, so it's United's job to find him a club where he'll be valued more. Newcastle may have promised us/him more game time, but it's every club for themselves.
 
Personally I don't think it's as simple as saying that players will make it if they're good enough. Sometimes they need a bit of luck and (the right sort) games at the right state of their development to turn that potential into ability. There are lots of examples of talented youngsters not getting the games their ability alone would suggest they should. I don't think they can all be put down to players having poor attitudes or whatever. So often these clubs will go with the player for right now just to survive even if they might be harming the long term potential of another player.

How all of that relates Powell I don't know. He always looked a prospect to me with a good footballing brain but perhaps that's as good as it'll get for him.
 
Brophs said:
Personally I don't think it's as simple as saying that players will make it if they're good enough. Sometimes they need a bit of luck and (the right sort) games at the right state of their development to turn that potential into ability. There are lots of examples of talented youngsters not getting the games their ability alone would suggest they should. I don't think they can all be put down to players having poor attitudes or whatever. So often these clubs will go with the player for right now just to survive even if they might be harming the long term potential of another player.

How all of that relates Powell I don't know. He always looked a prospect to me with a good footballing brain but perhaps that's as good as it'll get for him.
Click to expand...

I was going to say something along those lines but then drew blank when it came to examples. When you look at players who are currently playing for the best clubs around, every one of them that went on loan had no problem getting games. Even those a tier below (e.g. Tom Cleverley) played more often than not. Conversely, there's a long list of players we all thought should have got more games on loan but ended up simply not being as good as we thought they were.

Although it's definitely possible I've forgotten someone....

EDIT: Guiseppe Rossi, there's one I've forgotten.
 
Lampard got nine games in half a season at Swansea as a 17 year old. Not sure of the ins and outs of that loan though.

His loan was surely a loan to get him ready for the big time. The intention was always to get him involved when he returned. A loan with an end result.
Same can be said of Wilshere's, Evans', Beckham's, Welbecks', Cleverley's, Sturridge's...
Powell's just seems like a loan because... well... what else?

There's a strong correlation between how well a player does on loan as a youngster and how well they end up doing later on.
In some cases there's a link, and the loan itself is the cause of them not doing well. But I'd say most times it's simply the player not being as good as previously hoped.

Some may say it's foolish to make predictions like this - but Powell and Zaha will not be here in three years. Powell will end up playing a good chunk in the Championship and Zaha will be lucky to play for a top-half Premier League team.
 
Last edited:
The point would also stand if there are very talented players who should have made it, who had the quality to make it, but their progress stalled because of a loan move. It is possible there are players who would have made it if they never went out on loan, but didnt. You cant measure that hypothetical, obviously.
 
Mind you, I'm conscious that I'm almost arguing that there's no such thing as a loan move that's detrimental to a players career, in terms of timing or choice of club. Which is crazy. I just think that the type of elite talents who will make it at the very highest level will come good eventually, regardless.
 
This is Powell the 20 year old we are talking about right? I'm sure there's a lot of people here who would've sold Bale to Championship Birmingham back in 09'. I'm not saying he's Bale but give the kid a chance for Christ sake.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
They've a massive incentive to blood inconsistent youngsters who are better than the youngsters that already play for the club. Which is a category you'd hope that players on United's books fit into. It's not as though teams like Leicester are made up out of 11 ruthlessly consistent 25-30 year olds.
Click to expand...

Nugent and vardy are getting into the team ahead of him right now. Debateable whether they are better right now overall but certainly not in potential. But since they play the hard working consistent get in your face style they get in or are the safer bets. On the other hand they have little incentive to take a risk and invest in Powells potential.

Same with Michael Keane or Chalobah at burnley. Those that are integrated into the team but mediocre and experienced starting.
 
Some clubs have a genuine need for the loan players and would give them a go. Others just want to add bodies in the team to improve their strength in depth. Also managers tend to have a different approach to the game to the one players may be used to at their parent club/somewhere else. If the performance conducted while in loan truly reflect what the player can or cannot do then Giuseppe Rossi would be shit (Newcastle) and Foster (West Brom) would be the next Buffon.

There's little incentive especially with clubs in the EPL to give youths a real go. These clubs can buy or develop some decent players themselves and has no need to risk losing points to train someone else kids. I always believed that the loaned clubs should be obliged or given some sort of incentive to play the player. The former doesn't really work as there's alot of ways how to work around forcing clubs to play players for X amount of games (example get them on the pitch when the game was ending). The latter can be further explored. The contropartita system once utilized in Italy was a good idea. Unfortunately it wasn't really liked by FIFA and the Serie A was forced to stop it
 
FromTheBench said:
Nugent and vardy are getting into the team ahead of him right now. Debateable whether they are better right now overall but certainly not in potential. But since they play the hard working consistent get in your face style they get in or are the safer bets. On the other hand they have little incentive to take a risk and invest in Powells potential.

Same with Michael Keane or Chalobah at burnley. Those that are integrated into the team but mediocre and experienced starting.
Click to expand...
Nugent has scored quite a few goals for them in his time there. Vardy has been playing as a winger/wide foward and has more pace. Then you have Ulloa. Their midfielders are better (and more natural midfielders).
They would play Powell if he was better, but he isn't.

You call it a 'risk', but I don't see how playing a very talented youngster (up front especially) is riskier than playing an older but inferior player. The problem is - he's not overly talented (my opinion) and not better than their others (probably not even as good).
 
Last edited:
Speak said:
They had Owen and Martins. Not really a lack of incentive, more a case of simply having better players. It's almost all about quality. If the young guy is going to do the job better, he'll get games.

It was unlikely Rossi would do the job better, so it's United's job to find him a club where he'll be valued more. Newcastle may have promised us/him more game time, but it's every club for themselves.
Click to expand...

Giuseppe Rossi was much better then brochure man and Martins. We're talking here of a striker who went on scoring 9 goals in 20 matches in Parma before becoming a goal machine in Villarreal.
 
devilish said:
Giuseppe Rossi was much better then brochure man and Martins. We're talking here of a striker who went on scoring 9 goals in 20 matches in Parma before becoming a goal machine in Villarreal.
Click to expand...

I agree, Roeder never gave him a proper chance regardless of who was in front of him in the pecking order.
 
devilish said:
Giuseppe Rossi was much better then brochure man and Martins. We're talking here of a striker who went on scoring 9 goals in 20 matches in Parma before becoming a goal machine in Villarreal.
Click to expand...
Don't know if he was much better than Martins, to be honest.
Just found out Owen was injured actually.

I'm guessing they used Martins up top on his own, or with a big man. Rossi played 11 games in half a season, which I don't think is too bad. He wasn't brought in as a first choice striker, but he got games he wouldn't have at United.
And I don't think he was better than Martins at the time.
 
Last edited:
Pogue Mahone said:
I'm sure Zaha and Powell were both perceived to be just as "potentially special" as Nani, Anderson and Ronaldo. Obviously, it's an inexact science.
Click to expand...

Possibly, although I'd say the latter 3 were known on a world stage by the time we bought them. Powell and Zaha probably weren't known outside of England.
 
Adebesi said:
IN which case the loan system has done its job by weeding out someone who wasnt good enough for United.
Click to expand...
The loan system is currently showing Nani as a player bang in form and capable of playing for our first team. Put him back in our team and he'll mostly likely go back to his inconsistent ways.
 
Speak said:
I'm guessing they used Martins up top on his own, or with a big man. Rossi played 11 games in half a season, which I don't think is too bad. He wasn't brought in as a first choice striker, but he got games he wouldn't have at United.
And I don't think he was better than Martins at the time.
Click to expand...

8 of those appearances were late second half subs.
 
Speak said:
Don't know if he was much better than Martins, to be honest.
Just found out Owen was injured actually.

I'm guessing they used Martins up top on his own, or with a big man. Rossi played 11 games in half a season, which I don't think is too bad. He wasn't brought in as a first choice striker, but he got games he wouldn't have at United.
And I don't think he was better than Martins at the time.
Click to expand...

The few games I saw of Rossi at Newcastle they put him up top on his own and hoofed balls up to him all day - complete waste of his abilities and a waste of his time too. Roeder was one of the poorest managers I've ever seen in the Premier League.
 
Speak said:
Have you read that book? Had a look on Amazon, but wasn't sure whether it was as interesting as it sounded, so didn't buy it.
Click to expand...

Ya I thought it was a good read. A large part of it focused on the conflict between "old school" scouts and then the new generation of analysts that have degrees but don't have a background in football. He generally focused on a few particular scouts and their clubs (Liverpool, Brentford, Everton and Arsenal all have at least one chapter focusing on them and their scouts) but it still gives a good insight into what goes on behind the scenes. Was interesting to hear stories about how the likes of Sterling, Butland and Wilshere were spotted. I'd recommend it anyhow although I agree it isn't quiet as interesting as it sounds on Amazon.
 
Speak said:
Don't know if he was much better than Martins, to be honest.
Just found out Owen was injured actually.

I'm guessing they used Martins up top on his own, or with a big man. Rossi played 11 games in half a season, which I don't think is too bad. He wasn't brought in as a first choice striker, but he got games he wouldn't have at United.
And I don't think he was better than Martins at the time.
Click to expand...

I can assure that no one in Italy would prefer Obafemi Martins to Giuseppe Rossi. The former was a quick little player with the finishing skills of Danny Welbeck. The latter was superior to him in every way possible apart from experience and pace.

Nevertheless why would Newcastle opt for a loan player who would feck off back to Manchester at the slightest hint of doing well instead of one of their own? What's the point for them? Hence why many clubs sees the loaning system as a way to add strength in depth to their squad.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
I'm sure Zaha and Powell were both perceived to be just as "potentially special" as Nani, Anderson and Ronaldo. Obviously, it's an inexact science.
Click to expand...

To be fair neither Zaha or Powell humiliated a United player the way Ronaldo did with OShea or were being tracked by half of the top European clubs. Some were born to be good while others were born to be world beaters. Even the class of 92 had Nicky Butt and Philip Neville alongside Giggs and Scholes
 
Zaha had too many flaws in his game to be considered some exceptional talent. His first touch is inconsistent, his dribbling isn't exactly based on great control, his passing isn't exactly promising, etc... He's fast, strong, and has quick feet which can sometimes get him past players. If you just compare Zaha last year to Ronaldo at 18, you can see the huge difference in their games besides both being fast wingers with quick feet. Ronaldo's touch was better, and had great technique for shooting the ball. His ball control when dribbling was better as well. Age was a factor too. A 2 year difference despite both being raw gave Ronaldo an extra 2 years to iron out his problems.
 
If we're setting Ronaldo as the bar for all the young players we sign on the basis of their potential we're not going to do much business, are we?

I don't really see the problem wiith regularly spending reasonable sums of money on young players who might develop into something special. They all develop at different rates and there's no guarantees that any of them will ever fulfil whatever potential the scouts see in them. However, I'd imagine that a lot of thought goes into each signing and there are valid reasons behind all of them.

Regarding Nick Powell, when you see a teenager scoring goals like this it's not hard to work out what brought him to our attention.



The fact he's gone on to be prolific at Wigan, while still in his teens, shows that he's definitely got something about him. Might not be good enough for United but these things hinge on fine margins.
 
At 4m he was a no risk option. Even if he never plays another game for us we could still end up making a profit on him.
 
XdanielredX said:
Why is everyone talking now as if Powell is just a no hoper at United?

Has he done terrible on loan or something (haven't followed his loan that much)?
Click to expand...
He just hasn't played at all. Not really his fault and doesn't necessarily mean anything, a lot of loans pan out this way. I still really like him as a player and he had such a good loan before that I've still got plenty of time for him
 
XdanielredX said:
Why is everyone talking now as if Powell is just a no hoper at United?

Has he done terrible on loan or something (haven't followed his loan that much)?
Click to expand...

His loan at Wigan started well with loads of goals, but by the end was a bit of a disaster. He lost all form, and then his attitude went to shit. He ended up being dropped and publicly scolded for lack of effort.

For me, though, it's basically just that he has never actually looked like a United-quality player when you watch him on the pitch. Yes, when on form he's capable of scoring lots of goals at lower levels, but then every other Championship side has a player who scores a lot of goals, it doesn't make them United quality. He's not actually a striker - the likes of Wilson and Keane in our U21s are already better-looking prospects as strikers - but he's not mobile or good enough on the ball to be a midfielder for us either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.