- Mar 29, 2005
- 7,431
- 14,156
He's a bit of a 90's type of footballer. Ironically exactly the sort of player Conte needed; a creative attacking midfield hook/10/trequartista/whatever.
Also the player Conte turned down
He's a bit of a 90's type of footballer. Ironically exactly the sort of player Conte needed; a creative attacking midfield hook/10/trequartista/whatever.
Hence ironic.Also the player Conte turned down
Might be unfair of me. In Maddison I thought we were getting a Modric / Eriksen type, someone that could dictate the pace of the whole match. But he's not that player. I get he's having to play a different way under Ange but at Leicester he averaged a goal every 4 games, he's only scored 4 goals in total for us.Weird comment for a player who has 2 assists in 3 matches.
Personally I think he has started the season a lot better than he ended the last one.
But odegaard has started poorly too… Maddison has more goal contributions… and odegaard has missed two sitters. Odegaard has also only really been a big goal threat in 1 season so far.Might be unfair of me. In Maddison I thought we were getting a Modric / Eriksen type, someone that could dictate the pace of the whole match. But he's not that player. I get he's having to play a different way under Ange but at Leicester he averaged a goal every 4 games, he's only scored 4 goals in total for us.
Even with a 'good' start to the season I just dont think his performances are good enough. Again might be unfair but he's not at the level of Odegaard or De Bruyne, heck i even think Bruno Fernandes is a better player. Happy to be proven wrong though.
But odegaard has started poorly too… Maddison has more goal contributions… and odegaard has missed two sitters. Odegaard has also only really been a big goal threat in 1 season so far.
Now I think ode is better than maddison but maddison is doing what ode is this season so far but better but ode has a way better engine. I’m not sure why Maddisons fitness is poor
Lol his name is long and annoying to type“Ode”