Ollie Watkins

[RamboandBruno]

This is an interesting direction of travel on the best team we’ve had for about 25/30 years.

[PaulWinch again]

This is an interesting direction of travel on the best team we’ve had for about 25/30 years.

Indeed, it’s nonsense. Players dip in form - Torres, Rogers are recent examples but they come back because they’re really good.

[Sexual Ealing]

I won't get into an argument. If you're happy with his performances then good luck to you (you'll need it).

[PaulWinch again]

Well that’s a different point isn’t it - he needs to score more, but the team also needs to create chances. It’s not all down to him, and there’s a long stretch of evidence that shows he’s been an exceptionally good player for us. So do we need more this season? Yes, does that mean he’s hopeless and a fraud? No.

[Sexual Ealing]

Who called him hopeless and a fraud? He's a very good mid-table striker. That's it.

[Somniloquism]

I won't get into an argument. If you're happy with his performances then good luck to you (you'll need it).

Why will we need it and not you?

[Sexual Ealing]

I won't get into an argument. If you're happy with his performances then good luck to you (you'll need it).

Why will we need it and not you?

Because I don't expect us to achieve anything with him as our main striker.

[martin o`who??]

Definitely seems to have lost a yard of pace to me. Balls he would have won easily two years ago seem to be too much for him now. A bit worrying because pace has always been a massive part of his game.

[Monty]

Who called him hopeless and a fraud? He's a very good mid-table striker. That's it.

I mean, you know exactly who!

[PaulWinch again]

Well and also he’s been demonstrably better than a mid-table striker too.

[Smirker]

No, I agree fully with that assessment so you can't give me to SE.

Watkins was good enough for mid table/top 7. He isn't good enough if we want to go further.

I thought he was good enough for top 4 being as we got top 4 with him and just missed out again with him playing a role again.

You think he's good enough for top four and your argument is we've finished top four once in five years? 😂

[Sexual Ealing]

Who called him hopeless and a fraud? He's a very good mid-table striker. That's it.

I mean, you know exactly who!

To borrow a phrase from a famously confused Christian, I never said them things.

[Somniloquism]

No, I agree fully with that assessment so you can't give me to SE.

Watkins was good enough for mid table/top 7. He isn't good enough if we want to go further.

I thought he was good enough for top 4 being as we got top 4 with him and just missed out again with him playing a role again.

You think he's good enough for top four and your argument is we've finished top four once in five years? 😂

He was good enough for top four one season. He was good enough for top six last season. This season we won't know until the end. But you state he is only good enough for midtable. He is the 5th best goal scorer in the league since the 2019/20 season so yes, he has done enough for me the past few seasons. If this is the season he doesn't, then so be it. I just won't be celebrating that fact like some on here.

[PaulWinch again]

Indeed, it’s both the disrespect for what he has done and also the delight when he doesn’t score that is frustrating.

[RamboandBruno]

No, I agree fully with that assessment so you can't give me to SE.

Watkins was good enough for mid table/top 7. He isn't good enough if we want to go further.

I thought he was good enough for top 4 being as we got top 4 with him and just missed out again with him playing a role again.

You think he's good enough for top four and your argument is we've finished top four once in five years? 😂

You’ve had other posters doing the hard yards for you today, you could of given yourself the day off the Watkins debate and sat back and enjoyed.