madras Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 As long as they replace Andy Carroll and improve the squad so that we finish top half/looking to challenge for Europe I don't care how much they spend. The fact that I don't think the above is possible without spending most if not all of the Carroll money is a separate issue. it probably will be spent, just not in up front transfer fees like everybody wants while ignoring wages and other fees. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 As long as they replace Andy Carroll and improve the squad so that we finish top half/looking to challenge for Europe I don't care how much they spend. The fact that I don't think the above is possible without spending most if not all of the Carroll money is a separate issue. it probably will be spent, just not in up front transfer fees like everybody wants while ignoring wages and other fees. They can replace Andy Carroll by paying James Perch? Fucking impressive. Obviously I was on about spending the money on new players, the majority of which would be in transfer fees. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 As long as they replace Andy Carroll and improve the squad so that we finish top half/looking to challenge for Europe I don't care how much they spend. The fact that I don't think the above is possible without spending most if not all of the Carroll money is a separate issue. it probably will be spent, just not in up front transfer fees like everybody wants while ignoring wages and other fees. They can replace Andy Carroll by paying James Perch? f***ing impressive. or demba ba or hopefully use it to improve the starting XI all over not just a straight replacement. if we were breaking even this season before the carroll sale then the carroll money would hopefully be going on improving the team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 As long as they replace Andy Carroll and improve the squad so that we finish top half/looking to challenge for Europe I don't care how much they spend. The fact that I don't think the above is possible without spending most if not all of the Carroll money on transfer fees is a separate issue. So if the squad ends up improved, but we've spent all of the Carroll money, you have an issue with that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 How come all the other clubs who have received large transfer fees recently haven't done the same? How come Liverpool, Villa, Spurs and now Sunderland didn't go for frees and hunt for cheap release clauses? Is Darren Bent playing for free? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanSkÃrare Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 How come all the other clubs who have received large transfer fees recently haven't done the same? How come Liverpool, Villa, Spurs and now Sunderland didn't go for frees and hunt for cheap release clauses? Is Darren Bent playing for free? Good point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 How come all the other clubs who have received large transfer fees recently haven't done the same? How come Liverpool, Villa, Spurs and now Sunderland didn't go for frees and hunt for cheap release clauses? Is Darren Bent playing for free? Sunderland have signed a freebie, a player who was relegated last season, and their "big signing" is a kid to replace their main man. Would you have been happy to have spent £12m on Wickham? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Why do I care how Sunderland, Liverpool or Villa conduct their transfer business opposed to us? Wow they paid a large sum for average dross, I sure am jealous. Wish we would splash out 15m on Gibson. That'd show everyone we mean business. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Also Liverpool tried getting our freebie and didn't Cabaye say they wanted him too? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Darren Bent is average dross? Andy Carroll and Luis Suarez are? Looney tunes. It matters because they are our competitors, which is fairly obvious. It matters if they're strengthening on a basis of quality, while we do so based on who is cheap and available. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Why do I care how Sunderland, Liverpool or Villa conduct their transfer business opposed to us? Wow they paid a large sum for average dross, I sure am jealous. Wish we would splash out 15m on Gibson. That'd show everyone we mean business. Surely the point was more aimed at the concept that transfer monies in aren't ringfenced for spending on new transfers and simply disappear into the club, rather than the quality of the players signed by those clubs who apparently do allocate it for spending. The clubs mentioned have used their transfer income from selling players to buy players, spending most if not all of the same money in the process. Why are we different? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Why do I care how Sunderland, Liverpool or Villa conduct their transfer business opposed to us? Wow they paid a large sum for average dross, I sure am jealous. Wish we would splash out 15m on Gibson. That'd show everyone we mean business. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 How come all the other clubs who have received large transfer fees recently haven't done the same? How come Liverpool, Villa, Spurs and now Sunderland didn't go for frees and hunt for cheap release clauses? Is Darren Bent playing for free? because they have owners who want to keep on throwing money at it. i feel a bit uneasy about crying for more when he's already shelled out over 100mill on top of the purchase price, and yes he did bring some of it on himself but we were sliding backwards fast when he came in. do you think lerner and short will keep on throwing money at it ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanSkÃrare Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Getting what you actually want costs money. We mustn't settle for what's available on the cheap just because we're holding back. The club needs a striker that can fill Carroll's boots. Demba Ba is a terrific complement and a good striker, but someone like Sturridge is needed if we are to kick on and maintain the same kind of quality up front. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Darren Bent is average dross? Andy Carroll and Luis Suarez are? Looney tunes. It matters because they are our competitors, which is fairly obvious. It matters if they're strengthening on a basis of quality, while we do so based on who is cheap and available. It's June 29th. Calm down man. Villa have been established in the top 8 for the last 3-4 years up until last year, and there's no chance Darren Bent would have came here so that's moot. No way Suarez would join a club like us, Carroll was mental money and cost probably double his market value, as did Henderson. Sunderland have replaced their star with a kid who could go either way. Bent & Suarez apart, I'd sooner go down the Ba, Cabaye & Marveaux path than Henderson, Wickham & Carroll. Plus there's two months to go and I'm confident money will be spent in that time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Madras, what are you on about owners 'throwing money at it'? We're talking about the money we got for Carroll. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 How much of the Bent money has been recouped by the sale of Young by the way? Given we are talking about these clubs ambitions based on current spending? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Carroll is way overrated, man. Ill judge them at the end of the window but the Carroll transfer was a laugher. He's never a CL player. His style just doesnt fit in with a team that wants to play the ball on the ground. We made bank by selling him and hopefully we can improve multiple positions by spending that money + improve the cohesiveness of our play as well. For what it's worth, I wouldn't take Carroll back at half the price today. He's just not worth it to a team who wants to play the ball on the ground. He won't last at Liverpool. He'll score goals in his career but not at Liverpool. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Nut we should be going all out to get Sturridge and N'Zogbia, proven quality in this league, and before pre season preferably. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Why do I care how Sunderland, Liverpool or Villa conduct their transfer business opposed to us? Wow they paid a large sum for average dross, I sure am jealous. Wish we would splash out 15m on Gibson. That'd show everyone we mean business. Surely the point was more aimed at the concept that transfer monies in aren't ringfenced for spending on new transfers and simply disappear into the club, rather than the quality of the players signed by those clubs who apparently do allocate it for spending. The clubs mentioned have used their transfer income from selling players to buy players, spending most if not all of the same money in the process. Why are we different? Why are they all the same? Just as answerable We just don't appear to be operating on a model where transfer revenue is kept on its own ledger for future transfers. Is it part of some master self-sufficiency plan? Is it suicidal? both? probably? edit: Totally agree on Sturridge btw - 15m for him is a no-brainer. Slightly more pensive about the Zog. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Madras, what are you on about owners 'throwing money at it'? We're talking about the money we got for Carroll. and all you are talking about is transfer fees as if thats the be all and end all. i'm saying that in my opinion it will be reinvested in the playing side but not necessarily 35mill in transfer fees. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 How come all the other clubs who have received large transfer fees recently haven't done the same? How come Liverpool, Villa, Spurs and now Sunderland didn't go for frees and hunt for cheap release clauses? Is Darren Bent playing for free? Sunderland have signed a freebie, a player who was relegated last season, and their "big signing" is a kid to replace their main man. Would you have been happy to have spent £12m on Wickham? 2 actually. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hughesy Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Most of those clubs named don't actually have a huge net spend at the moment. Arguably Liverpool will by the end of the transfer window. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Nut we should be going all out to get Sturridge and N'Zogbia, proven quality in this league, and before pre season preferably. I think we will go all out for N'Zogbia, not sure if we need to panic on that one just yet because it's not as if he'll need time to adjust to the surroundings, etc. Sturridge depends on the fee but if the price is right, go for him, but again, can't see him going until the new manager has a proper look at him first. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdm Posted June 29, 2011 Share Posted June 29, 2011 Why do people keep mentioning It's June like it means something. We will keep on missing out on players like Sturridge and N'Zogbia coz we are not willing to spend money, not because of the fact we are in June Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now