Hopefully that point they picked up at Birmingham will get them going again.
Got Oxford at home and Norwich and Portsmouth away before Jan 1st so 7 points is possible from those three and that would put them on 31 points with still 23 games left.
In the summer they spend 3.5m on Kelman from Orient who’d scored 20 + goals in league one. Also got in Olaofe who had reasonable scoring record in league one for Stockport so dosen’t say that much for those two if the solution is recalling someone from league two.
I still maintain it is different to Stoke as that was combination of things. They were actually in the bottom three, had just changed managed and their actual strikers at the time were terrible so don’t think that criteria quite applies to Charlton currently unless their ownership has some weird demand they have to get in the top 6 this season.
I think you’re all grabbing at straws, of course he will be recalled. It’s just the same as if Amanchi was scoring for fun at Rochdale, can you imagine the backlash from fans if we missed out on automatic promotion and didn’t recall him? All that matters now is that we get a striker in straight away and don’t faff about until the end of January. But seriously, we really need to stop this thing of relying on loanees every year.
Saw a good point made on X the other day, with the amount of money that is spinning around in the Championship these days, you’d think that a team whos aim is that of potentially looking at surviving, surely they don’t pin their hopes on an academy player who they didn’t seem as first team worthy a few months back, after spending over 6 million quid in the past 12 months on three other strikers.
Fingers crossed we keep him, but I don’t think we have a cat in hells chance to be honest. Can you imagine the ramifications if Charlton were relegated and Kanu stayed with us and scored 20+ goals?
Maybe given they’ve spunked 6 million quid on strikers already to find themselves in the position they are in, with increasing financial losses, they may not want to commit to further expenditure should the worst happen. They are also only fighting against three relegation spots given Wednesday are a given for 24th.
Makes bringing Kanu back, high in confidence a more attractive proposition potentially.
At this moment in time i rate our chances of keeping kanu 50/50 .
But even if we do manage to keep him the club needs to go all out and get another top quality striker in for this division to avoid what happened last season.
It’s much easier to do so when your up there challenging than lingering mid table or lower.
It just costs a few quid . How much do trivela want promotion that is what it will come down to ?.
The last 4 seasons our recruitment have found us DJ, Freddy Draper, Nathan Lowe and now Daniel Kanu with the exception of DJ I wouldn’t say the others come with good goalscoring records behind them, I’d say they know what they’re looking for, bringing in virtually unknowns who’ve done very well.
Why therefore can’t they do the same recruiting but pay for one to be our own, I know we’ve signed Pressley, Amanchi etc but go out and sign a goalscorer, they’ve clearly a knack of finding them so why take the risk and gives 2 year deal with a further year in clubs favour ?
I do think Kanu will be recalled with the situation Charlton find themselves in, I just hope once again it doesn’t de-rail our season, if it does then fans imo have every right to question Trivela.
Simple. A low scoring hard working second striker like Pressley costs under 100k (probably) A Kanu or a Lowe or even an older established lower league goalscorer like Michael Cheek for example would cost 250k to 500k. Plus wages.
Linked last January, available at a reasonable fee I would imagine given the lack of time on his contract and Free this summer I think, we missed a real trick with Regan Linney from Altrincham in my opinion. Easy got him for the alleged Draper money and likely for the Amantchi money.
I understand that and know that’s the reason but can’t for the life of me understand why they don’t take the gamble, they’ve gone to the trouble of identifying them yet always rely on loans.
I don’t disagree in terms of the style we play, however I’m not sure a 34 year old to compliment our current 32, 35 and 38 year old is the solution required.
