Last night QPR signed Chris Willock from Benfica for a fee believed to be in the region of 750,000. Huddersfield Town had been linked with the winger earlier in the transfer window but the deal was alleged to have broken down after failing to agree personal terms with the player.
Chris Willock spent the second half of last season on loan at Huddersfield Town and scored one of the crucial goals in our season-salvaging victory over West Brom in our penultimate game. Here are a few of my thoughts on Town losing out on Willock to a Championship rival.
How did Willock do during his loan spell at Huddersfield Town?
Chris Willock arrived at Huddersfield Town lacking match fitness after his loan at West Brom was prematurely ended because he wasn’t getting any game time. He looked rusty and was limited to cameo appearances from the bench while he regained fitness.
Once he was fully up to speed he started to show some signs of what he was capable of. He’s a winger that likes to take defenders on one-on-one and tends to cut inside to shoot rather than go to the byline to cross.
Willock looked good when he was on the ball and taking on opponents but he had a tendency to drift out of games and he occasionally switched off from his defensive duties too. This was more of an issue in the early games but was still present towards the end of his loan spell.
I can remember two games where Willock showed his potential while he was at Town. First was against Bristol at home, where he scored a great goal and tormented their fullback for long periods. The whole team played well that day but Willock was one of our better players with direct running and good link play.
The other highlight of Willock’s brief spell at Town was when he played his former loan club, West Brom in our penultimate game of the season. It was a big game for both sides, as West Brom needed to win to keep their automatic promotion hopes alive and Town needed points to assure survival. Willock was fired up for the game due to being frozen out while on loan at West Brom and absolutely tore them to shreds in the first half. His goal was fairly scruffy but he could have created a few other goals with the skill and creativity he showed going forward.
Chris Willock’s loan spell at Huddersfield Town was a mixed bag. He showed some signs of genuine talent and his direct running and ability to beat a man was something we didn’t have in the squad. Yet he didn’t produce his best form consistently enough to win over the fans and in many games he faded away to obscurity.
Should Town have signed Willock?
I had a fairly muted reaction when I saw that Huddersfield Town were trying to bring Willock in on a permanent deal, neither elated or gutted. He had shown some great moments but was badly out of form when he arrived and only reached his potential on a few occasions for us.
It’s possible that Willock could have progressed from his start at Town but it would have been a risk after things had not worked out for him at Benfica and then West Brom. If we could have picked him up on the cheap and on low wages then it would have been a decent bit of business. Our inability to agree personal terms suggests that Willock wanted to stay on the large wages he was getting at Benfica (and who can blame him?).
Danny Cowley said that Willock had taken a significant paycut to come to join Town on loan last season, so it stands to reason that wages would be the sticking point.
My opinion is that we didn’t see enough from Willock during his loan spell to justify making him one of our best paid players. We’ve already got too many overpaid flops on our books at there’s a risk Willock could have ended up joining their ranks.
What do Huddersfield Town fans think about this transfer?
I put out a quick Twitter poll last night to see what other Huddersfield Town fans think of missing out of Willock to QPR. Around 60% fee like we should have brought him to Town and 40% aren’t really bothered.
This seems about right, as Willock split opinions between Town fans when he was on loan too. He obviously has potential and is young enough to get better but can be frustrating at times too.
Huddersfield Town fans are crying out for the club to sign attackers at the moment, so in that context 60% wanting Willock to have joined seems fairly low. Particularly given that many fans are keen to second guess every decision the club makes at the moment.
Chris Willock signing for QPR is…
— TerrierSpirit.com (@SpiritTerrier) October 5, 2020
TerrierSpirit.com opinion on Chris Willock joining QPR instead of Town
I hope Chris Willock does well at QPR and am grateful for the help he gave us while on loan last year but I’m not too bothered that he’s signed for a Championship rival.
I think there’s a good chance he’ll get his career back on track at QPR after a disappointing spell at Benfica and failing to become an Arsenal regular prior to his move abroad. However, I think Huddersfield Town have too many players with unfulfilled potential already and we don’t need another project to take on.
While we do desperately need attackers at Town right now, they need to be ready to hit the ground running and contribute straight away. Willock could, with time, tear up the Championship but he didn’t do it consistently enough during his loan spell at Town.
Willock had performed really well in his final home game against West Brom. Whether or not he would have produced on a regular basis is debatable For a young player that is still developing, his wage demands that would have been negotiated with his agent were obviously too excessive. Under these circumstances the right decision has been made.
I agree Steve, if we could get him in on a deal that suited our finances then it would have been worth taking a chance on him. If his demands were more than what we were willing to pay then it’s better to walk away.
A few QPR fans on Twitter have said they won’t be paying him big money either. It may be that he just didn’t fancy life up north and held out for a London club to come along. Can’t see why anyone would choose London over Huddersfield. Did he not see Castle Hill or eat at Marston’s?
I’m one of those who wouldn’t have been overly impressed if he came.
I think your last few sentences sum it up for me perfectly.
Ok he is young, but if he had come it’s just another forward who doesn’t do enough.
We have too many of those already, and I’m relieved because I’m pretty sure we would have been told that he was to be our Grant replacement.
I just didn’t see the powers that be sanctioning another move and having Willock, Mbenza, Dihakaby and splashing a decent amount on someone else.
Given we’ve spent so little in fees so far I think you’re right that Willock would have been our “big” signing, so better to keep our powder dry. I just hope we have decent options lined up for when Grant does leave as many fans are already baying for blood.
In all honesty I’m happy to bring in a young league 1 player who is doing the business already week in week out rather than a kid who can’t get a game.
Couple of million on someone like a new Grant does me fine
I think that Town were right not to follow up the interest in Willock.
He no doubt has a future in the game and we all wish him well.
However the team at the moment needs people who can impose themselves in matches and with the other players. We have too many who turn up and at times seem to lack initiative,drive and in some cases,ability.
Chris Willock, for me, does not provide anything more than we have now.
Completely agree Stephen. I liked him in the few games where he looked up for it but he went missing in too often in games.
Spot on. I agree with all your comments.
He struck me as being our next Tom Ince. But with a few more goals. Really not bothered and think we’ve better at the Club already if CC can keep improving Josh Koroma.
Tom Ince was frustrating when he was at Town. He looked like scoring one goal could set him off and he’d become our star player but he never got to that level.
Agreed about Willock, he wasn’t bad at all but didn’t produce consistently enough to justify paying him the wages he’s alleged to be on.
And now we’ve got a new “Finance Director” but the old one is staying on in a “non-executive” capacity. Presumably neither of these gentlemen are working for nothing so it seems there is money available for management salaries but not for players. It raises a lot of questions how, and on whose behalf, the club is run. From the outside it looks bad.