gmvillan - 26/1/2018 13:30
Let's just look at it from a purely footballing standpoint and ignore the discipline issues for a minute...
If you look at his goalscoring record then it stacks up statistically. However, when you remove free-kicks and penalties it's decidedly average. Given that we have Snodgrass and Hourihane that take a good free-kick I can't see him getting many chances from dead ball situations.
Positionally he's what we might call a "tweener." He doesn't have the vision or the guile of a true "number 10" and neither the size and/or pace of a number 9. He's not going to get in-behind/off the shoulder with pace, and he certainly won't be holding off defenders and bringing others into the game with his back-to-goal.
In a 4-3-3 he'd be useless in a wide position (and would probably sulk) and beyond useless as a centre-forward.
In a 4-4-2 (or 4-4-1-1 if you prefer) he MIGHT do a job playing behind the main striker, but would he be a better option than Grealish, (or Onomah, Hourihane, Lansbury)? And would he work back and chase down opponents (something that Mr Grealish has been doing very well recently and hey presto his performances have improved)
In a 4-2-3-1 see above.
In a 3-5-2, maybe as the second striker, but let's face it, 3-5-2 hasn't worked for us since Sir Brian used it to extend the career of God. And would any manager change their system that drastically for Ross McCormack?
I think the most damning indictment of him overall as a footballer is that he hasn't been able to get a sniff of a squad place for a poor Scotland team.
In my opinion he was a bad buy for the club. It's almost like we looked at the previous season's scoring charts and said "we'll have him" with no thought to whether he is a truly productive player in a proper team.
So, there you have it, my very non-biased football analysis of Ross McCormack! :3: :6: :8: