Why do you think that? Why can't we bring him on any further? He's 21 for crying out loud and has already shown a lot of potential. Bramble, on the other hand, will always be Bramble.
I seriously hope i'm gonna get whooshed here, but i swear you're mixing Taylor up with Ramage.
Taylor loses his man rather alot due to ball watching, and doesn't seem to be able to sort it out. That is why we have signed Gooch, and why we are playing him alongside Bramble.
taylor would, should and must be number one choice CB once we get full backs worthy of the shirt, anything less and we deserve everything we get
name me a better prospect, ENGLISH prospect, for his position at his age...please
Curtis Davies, Micah Richards (whose natural position is centre back) right now, and David Edgar will be better by the time he reaches Taylor's age (yes, I know he is Canadian, but I dont get all this English s***). Another centre back that is better is Daniel Agger.
Taylor is a good 6th to 16th placed club Premiership defender, but no more, and right now, he is only the third best centre back at the club if you look at both current ability and how the players gel together as a unit. At £7.5m+ we could buy an improvement on him.
a) curtis davies has never played consistently and therefore been proven at the highest level
b) micah richards is 3 years younger than him and to my knowledge has played primarily at right back and is actually considered a long term prospect for defensive midfield
c) edgar has played a handfull of games and looks a good prospect agreed, but you can hardly suggest he's currently to be considered a better prospect than taylor
d) agger is obviously not english, but is decent, agreed....albeit even he hasn't convinced for liverpool if you talk to their fans and this is his first full season at the club, a long way to go then....
e) who could we buy for 7.5m, at the same age, who is PROVEN to be better than him then?
a) Davies consistently played well in the Premiership last season in a side that got relegated, and still plays consistently for the U21s. He also plays more U21 games than Taylor.
b) Richards is versatile enough to play in many positions, but he will be a great player whereever he plays, so that makes him a better centre back.
c) During his short stint at centre back, Edgar looked more composed and better in the air than Taylor ever has
d) Agger has displaced Hyypia, and fans now like him afterhe had had a dissappointing start to his Liverpool career. Given Liverpool's good defensive record, he must be doing quite well.
e) Age is irrelevant. Taylor is unlikely to get much better. Players do not significantly improve while at Newcastle United. I'm sure there are over 20 centre backs with more current ability than Taylor who would cost less than the bid I would accept from Chelsea. Taylor is a good player, but he is replaceable. Curtis Davies is one example of a same age player proven to be better.
All just talk though, as there is no way that Chelsea are interested. Taylor is good, but not that good.
Davies doesn't play more U21 games than Taylor, he has 3 caps Taylor has 14(and 3 goals). The last time Davies played he looked like Bramlbe at his worst, did you see the Spain game? It was a disaster for him.
More caps perhaps, but that is because Taylor emerged a couple of years before Davies.
Davies has been around for longer, Taylor has around 50 appearances for us whereas Davies has 62 for West Brom and 56 for Luton. Also he had a full season of football in the premiership, something which Taylor is only getting this season.
Taylor has played 70 games, about two games in three since January 2005 which was the time he emerged, and remember that he spent time out injured last season. Thus, Taylor had emerged in top flight football long before Davies did.
Again, sentiment seems to come ahead of realism.
Also, in answer to Mrmojonson's question regarding how many top level European games has Davies played in, you cant really say that Taylor has played in any top level european games either, or at least he hasn't played any team better than Chelsea, Manyoo, Liverpool or Arsenal. Therefore, both Davies and taylor have played against the same high standard opposition.
a) no-one mentioned "top level" european competition, merely european...so how many has davies played in and proven himself to be good enough to play against the likes of PSV, Fenerbache, Sporting Lisbon or whoever Taylor has played against in the last 2 and a bit years?
by the way i'm not saying davies is better or worse than taylor, i've barely seen davies play - i'm simply questioning your utter conviction he's better than taylor
b) oh and by the way would you sign davies for 8m if we sold taylor for 12m for example? 'cause davies wouldn't get any better at NUFC remember...
a) Taylor has played against Lillestrom, Ventspils, Levadia, Palermo, Fenerbache, Frankfurt, Celta Vigo, Waregem and Alkmaar. He may have played in a couple of others, but no real big European games, as this is his first real European campaign. Hardly a great experience to put him above Davies. Bolton, Everton, Spurs are better than all of these teams, and Davies has played against them too and proven himself.
b) i'd definitely take it, they players currently of equal standing, and I'd say that Davies has it in him to be a better player. Then, there would be £4m to spend on that full-back problem you keep using as an excuse to defend Taylor.
a) ooooooh-kay, i still never implied that taylor had played against the european greats but 5 of the teams you name there i'd consider good european opposition, although not champions league quality...but the fact that he's played against these teams when davies has played against none surely means he's more experienced? no?
again don't get me wrong i'm not suggesting that davies would suddenly turn into me or something if he was put in european games but the FACT is he hasn't played at that level, taylor has - end of
b) can you elaborate on how bolton, everton and spurs are better than alkmaar, palermo, fenerbache, frankfurt please? by the way....
c) and how does davies have potential to improve himself at NUFC but taylor doesn't? surely the club would drag davies down too right? if not why not? taylor is considered one of the brightest prospects in the english game by tony adams who took him to wycombe and is now coaching pompeys (pretty damn good) defence....between you and tony adams i know which opinion i'd trust
a) UEFA cup is not really an experience. He has basically come into European games this season, playing with a team of European experienced players, and played his normal game, and has learnt a few lessons in the process. Davies could have easily done the same in 12 matches given the chance. Therefore, looking at Premiership performances is more of a measure.
b) Bolton > Everton > Newcastle > Spurs > Leverkusen = Fenerbache = Alkmaar.
c) Davies is faster and more composed from what I've seen. Natural ability which means that by the time each player would reach the maximum level of improvement you can reach currently at Newcastle, I'd expect Davies to be better.
i'm siging off from this 'cause whereas i can give davies some credit and see that he might prove himself better than taylor in the long run you can't see that he hasn't done so already and thus we're talking a different language
bye bye
Admitting defeat are we?
Davies has proved himself to have just as much ability as Taylor, who in reality has done little of note yet, and there are people on this forum who know Davies better than I do who can back me up on this.
If you think Taylor has proven himself yet, you need to take off your black and white goggles.
You're talking bullocks. Taylor is older and so has had the opportunity to gain more experience at EVERY level. Davis is still unproven. Try twisting it and turning it how you like, those are the facts and its plain to everyone you're talking crap.
Sorry to have to piss on your chips but I think you will find Taylor is younger than Curtis Davies.
