Vince™

He's one of the most complete strikers you can find in the world but he lacks consistent finishing, which some will say is a striker's primary responsibility. So, should Chelsea bank on him finding that last missing bit on the pitch or off the bench?

The way I see it, he's not even the type of striker that will come in from the bench and make an impact because usually when you are chasing the game, you need some who is physical enough, good in aerial duels to win headers or first balls in and outside the box or protect it.

So, that brings me to this question; if we sign a physical striker who can also dominate the box, an imposing striker like Osimhen or Delap or Duran, would Jackson be useful as a backup? I will say 'NO'.

So, what should we do? Should we keep losing points playing him as a 9 while waiting for him to improve or buy someone and make him useless off the bench like Nkunku or play him on the wing, and so on?

I will take the last option. We have space on the left wing, he should be moved to the left to compete with Sancho. We need two strikers with different skill set. A Gyokeres as starter and a Delap as a sub or an Isak as a starter and Delap as a sub.

In some games, you need to be more direct to win or towards the end of the game when you are chasing the game. A Jackson or Nkunku will do nothing as subs. Those subs suits the likes of Woods, Delap, Calvert-Lewin, Mateta and so on. Strikers who can win first balls.

So, it's not an easy puzzle to solve. I don't know what the club wants to do but surely Jackson as a sub is going to be another Nkunku situation. He can be a sub as 10 or on the wing but not to lead the line when you are chasing a game and looking for goals.