Unbelievable Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 ESPN UK @ESPNuk Sam Allardyce says West Ham won't be signing Andy Carroll or Dimitar Berbatov. Apparently Carroll isn't interested in West Ham Quelle surprise! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenham Mag Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 http://tyneandwear.sky.com/newcastleunited/article/25416 Start of that video man Jesus wept. 'CARROLLLLL, YOU'D A GEORDIE, HE'S A GEORDIE, GEORDIE!!! GEORDIE BOY!!' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 The path is clear, then. Liverpool will eventually have to give in. Not sure if this is good news or not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Think the current side has outgrown Carroll. In spells we've been a clever side and a pragmatic one. He looks like he'll be a decent PL striker in 2/3 years with a dozen or more England caps and I've no doubts he's going to improve as a player. Feel the timing of this deal is wrong. What? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Wages issue aside, not sure I understand the dilemma for Ashley if he really is that keen to bring Carroll back, and Carroll is willing. It's a loan with an option for a permanent move at the end of the loan period, right? Well, who cares what figure that permanent move is priced at - you don't have to exercise it. Set it at £17m. If he's a rousing success, then he essentially has a release clause only we can exploit. If he flops, we don't buy. Because £17m is far too much for us. We'd have to qualify for the Champions League at least to be able to afford that. What happens if he scores a load but we finish 6th? We have to give him back. What if he's only a moderate success but hints at much more? The same applies. It has to be a fee we're willing and able to pay. Won't we get at least an additional 30 million in TV revenue from next season onwards, like every other Premiership club? Not that I'm advocating a 17 million fee BTW, think that would be excessive, but 12-15 would be reasonable with a season loan to prove himself preceding any possible offer at our discretion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Geordie Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 If he is homesick when he's at Liverpool, then London is definitely a no go. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Think the current side has outgrown Carroll. In spells we've been a clever side and a pragmatic one. He looks like he'll be a decent PL striker in 2/3 years with a dozen or more England caps and I've no doubts he's going to improve as a player. Feel the timing of this deal is wrong. What? Nothing special is he? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiquidAK Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 The rewording of the title. "No, no, 'fat' isn't quite right. 'Obese', yeah, yeah that's better" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 The rewording of the title. "No, no, 'fat' isn't quite right. 'Obese', yeah, yeah that's better" Wasn't offensive enough. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 oh shock horror west hams bid for big name players fails Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beren Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Wages issue aside, not sure I understand the dilemma for Ashley if he really is that keen to bring Carroll back, and Carroll is willing. It's a loan with an option for a permanent move at the end of the loan period, right? Well, who cares what figure that permanent move is priced at - you don't have to exercise it. Set it at £17m. If he's a rousing success, then he essentially has a release clause only we can exploit. If he flops, we don't buy. Because £17m is far too much for us. We'd have to qualify for the Champions League at least to be able to afford that. What happens if he scores a load but we finish 6th? We have to give him back. What if he's only a moderate success but hints at much more? The same applies. It has to be a fee we're willing and able to pay. That's my point though - if he isn't worth £17m to us, or if we can't afford £17m, we don't have to buy - but we get a season out of him. No brainer IMO. Ensures we live within our means. Edit: I mean, by all means - try to get the option price as low as possible (there's no harm!) - but even if it doesn't budge past £17m, I'd still take him on loan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Think the current side has outgrown Carroll. In spells we've been a clever side and a pragmatic one. He looks like he'll be a decent PL striker in 2/3 years with a dozen or more England caps and I've no doubts he's going to improve as a player. Feel the timing of this deal is wrong. What? Nothing special is he? Were you in hibernation during the whole of 2010? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I'd honestly rather see Liv lumbered with him for a whole season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Think the current side has outgrown Carroll. In spells we've been a clever side and a pragmatic one. He looks like he'll be a decent PL striker in 2/3 years with a dozen or more England caps and I've no doubts he's going to improve as a player. Feel the timing of this deal is wrong. What? Nothing special is he? Were you in hibernation during the whole of 2010? Whoosh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMTEX Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 one good year does not a striker make Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Think the current side has outgrown Carroll. In spells we've been a clever side and a pragmatic one. He looks like he'll be a decent PL striker in 2/3 years with a dozen or more England caps and I've no doubts he's going to improve as a player. Feel the timing of this deal is wrong. What? Nothing special is he? Were you in hibernation during the whole of 2010? Whoosh. WTF Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Wages issue aside, not sure I understand the dilemma for Ashley if he really is that keen to bring Carroll back, and Carroll is willing. It's a loan with an option for a permanent move at the end of the loan period, right? Well, who cares what figure that permanent move is priced at - you don't have to exercise it. Set it at £17m. If he's a rousing success, then he essentially has a release clause only we can exploit. If he flops, we don't buy. Because £17m is far too much for us. We'd have to qualify for the Champions League at least to be able to afford that. What happens if he scores a load but we finish 6th? We have to give him back. What if he's only a moderate success but hints at much more? The same applies. It has to be a fee we're willing and able to pay. That's my point though - if he isn't worth £17m to us, or if we can't afford £17m, we don't have to buy - but we get a season out of him. No brainer IMO. Ensures we live within our means. I don't see us ever buying a player for £17m under this regime. But let's say we agree a deal at that and he performs great for us: we just hand him back to a close rival for them to reap the benefits of his rediscovered form going forward? Why in the flying fuck would we want to do that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Obese Troglodyte Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 He's have to be absolutely unbefuckinglievable for it to be worth US paying £17 million. And even then it could probably be better spent. Would be a pointless situation, if he does well all we've done is butter him up for Liverpool. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EthiGeordie Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 http://thewayiseenufc.wordpress.com/2012/07/17/evaluating-andy-carroll-nufc-lfc-football/ Very good read. If we get 25% back I think it shows why this Is an OK deal for us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Some fantastic crystal balls in this thread. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beren Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Wages issue aside, not sure I understand the dilemma for Ashley if he really is that keen to bring Carroll back, and Carroll is willing. It's a loan with an option for a permanent move at the end of the loan period, right? Well, who cares what figure that permanent move is priced at - you don't have to exercise it. Set it at £17m. If he's a rousing success, then he essentially has a release clause only we can exploit. If he flops, we don't buy. Because £17m is far too much for us. We'd have to qualify for the Champions League at least to be able to afford that. What happens if he scores a load but we finish 6th? We have to give him back. What if he's only a moderate success but hints at much more? The same applies. It has to be a fee we're willing and able to pay. That's my point though - if he isn't worth £17m to us, or if we can't afford £17m, we don't have to buy - but we get a season out of him. No brainer IMO. Ensures we live within our means. I don't see us ever buying a player for £17m under this regime. But let's say we agree a deal at that and he performs great for us: we just hand him back to a close rival? Why in the flying fuck would we want to do that? Well, we don't own him - so it's not like the surrender of an asset - it wouldn't be like Man Utd selling Valencia and Rooney to Citeh or anything. It just simply means that we can't meet his market value. BUT that we get a free season out of him. It's a no-risk*, shot-to-nothing. (* - again, excluding wages) And we'll still have whatever money we do have to spend on someone who we can afford. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 However, when someone mentions Carroll, a lot of clichés and club bias comes through. The most common excuse for Carroll not performing, is simply that “Liverpool don’t play his style of football.” Experienced that shit at work today from a Liverpool fan btw. 'He fits your game better' - fuck off, open your eyes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 However, when someone mentions Carroll, a lot of clichés and club bias comes through. The most common excuse for Carroll not performing, is simply that “Liverpool don’t play his style of football.” Experienced that shit at work today from a Liverpool fan btw. 'He fits your game better' - fuck off, open your eyes. Obviously busy living in a cave April 1st 2012. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alberto2005 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Who is Troglodyte? And why is he overweight? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts