cubaricho Posted Tuesday at 15:02 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:02 Everyone spent days last week/end bitching about Eddie’s Brexit Mags and Bowen gets mentioned and suddenly it’s an incredible transfer strategy? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezzle Posted Tuesday at 15:02 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:02 2 minutes ago, TRon said: Italian football seems to be stuck in the previous century. Their league doesn't seem to be very multicultural, or if it is, it's not reflected in their national team. That doesn't necessarily make it poorer, but the national side isn't great at the moment, so can only imagine the Italian league isn't all that either. That shit league has 8/9 teams in Europe next year so can't be all bad Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufc123 Posted Tuesday at 15:13 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:13 10 minutes ago, cubaricho said: Everyone spent days last week/end bitching about Eddie’s Brexit Mags and Bowen gets mentioned and suddenly it’s an incredible transfer strategy? Think its about quality. Bowen is one of the best RW attackers in the league. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagten Posted Tuesday at 15:18 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:18 1 minute ago, nufc123 said: Think its about quality. Bowen is one of the best RW attackers in the league. He's really a striker fwiw. He gives a lot of good goalscoring but not much else. He only made like 500 passes for West Ham in open play last season or something, despite playing 33.5 90s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubaricho Posted Tuesday at 15:18 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:18 3 minutes ago, nufc123 said: Think its about quality. Bowen is one of the best RW attackers in the league. I would personally say that’s debatable but even if it is true, it’ll only be for another season or two. In this hypothetical we will have paid the British premium everyone complains about and only for a season or two. It’s not an incredibly smart way to spend money which is what we need to do right now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted Tuesday at 15:21 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:21 18 minutes ago, cubaricho said: Everyone spent days last week/end bitching about Eddie’s Brexit Mags and Bowen gets mentioned and suddenly it’s an incredible transfer strategy? You are 100% for highlighting the hypocrisy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sibierski Posted Tuesday at 15:21 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:21 Bowen is a transfer that should’ve been made few seasons ago. No point signing him now, better signing someone else long term. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufc123 Posted Tuesday at 15:21 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:21 2 minutes ago, cubaricho said: I would personally say that’s debatable but even if it is true, it’ll only be for another season or two. In this hypothetical we will have paid the British premium everyone complains about and only for a season or two. It’s not an incredibly smart way to spend money which is what we need to do right now. Hes way too expensive I agree. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufc123 Posted Tuesday at 15:23 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:23 4 minutes ago, Jagten said: He's really a striker fwiw. He gives a lot of good goalscoring but not much else. He only made like 500 passes for West Ham in open play last season or something, despite playing 33.5 90s. Got his limitations for sure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted Tuesday at 15:23 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:23 17 minutes ago, Fezzle said: That shit league has 8/9 teams in Europe next year so can't be all bad I wouldn't describe it as a shit league, but I don't think it stacks up so well against the Premier. My impression is they have two to three very good clubs and the rest are not so competitive. That's just an impression though, I don't claim any expertise on the Italian league, I don't really follow it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitley mag Posted Tuesday at 15:24 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:24 17 minutes ago, cubaricho said: Everyone spent days last week/end bitching about Eddie’s Brexit Mags and Bowen gets mentioned and suddenly it’s an incredible transfer strategy? Its all a bit tongue in cheek though isn’t it, but it’s undeniable if we splurged 60 million on Bowen it’s because the manager wants PL experience and a sure thing. If Chelsea get Nico Williams for 45 million who is much younger and has sell on value I know who I’d be thinking got the best deal. Similar with Kudus last summer, compared to Barnes who we’d struggle to make our money back on, West Ham clearly got the better value deal by showing a bit more imagination and taking a chance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted Tuesday at 15:25 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:25 5 minutes ago, Jagten said: He's really a striker fwiw. He gives a lot of good goalscoring but not much else. He only made like 500 passes for West Ham in open play last season or something, despite playing 33.5 90s. Ties in somewhat with what I was saying about him having great end product, but not sure about the rest of his game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decky Posted Tuesday at 15:25 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:25 I can't believe people would prefer we didn't go for Bowen. He'd be unbelievable under Howe. He's 27, right in his prime. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sibierski Posted Tuesday at 15:27 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:27 If you are getting 15+ prem goals each season, sure, but he’s played through middle for some of that and having Barnes cut in on one side, and Bowen in similar vein on other is too similar if both were on pitch same time. Think we’ve seen the peak output for Bowen, and I would prefer a RW that can be more creative in tight spaces. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubaricho Posted Tuesday at 15:29 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:29 1 minute ago, Sibierski said: Think we’ve seen the peak output for Bowen, and I would prefer a RW that can be more creative in tight spaces. I agree with this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upthemags Posted Tuesday at 15:31 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:31 6 minutes ago, Whitley mag said: Its all a bit tongue in cheek though isn’t it, but it’s undeniable if we splurged 60 million on Bowen it’s because the manager wants PL experience and a sure thing. If Chelsea get Nico Williams for 45 million who is much younger and has sell on value I know who I’d be thinking got the best deal. Similar with Kudus last summer, compared to Barnes who we’d struggle to make our money back on, West Ham clearly got the better value deal by showing a bit more imagination and taking a chance. Spot on Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted Tuesday at 15:36 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:36 8 minutes ago, Whitley mag said: Its all a bit tongue in cheek though isn’t it, but it’s undeniable if we splurged 60 million on Bowen it’s because the manager wants PL experience and a sure thing. If Chelsea get Nico Williams for 45 million who is much younger and has sell on value I know who I’d be thinking got the best deal. Similar with Kudus last summer, compared to Barnes who we’d struggle to make our money back on, West Ham clearly got the better value deal by showing a bit more imagination and taking a chance. Can't really argue with this although I trusted Howe's judgement at the time. I still think Barnes is a good player, but we did pay a premium because we overvalued his experience in the PL. That fee would have made more sense if he was 24 and not 26. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decky Posted Tuesday at 15:39 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:39 Barnes had a difficult first season because of his injury. Lets see how he gets on this coming season because he's a good player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted Tuesday at 15:42 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:42 16 minutes ago, Whitley mag said: Its all a bit tongue in cheek though isn’t it, but it’s undeniable if we splurged 60 million on Bowen it’s because the manager wants PL experience and a sure thing. If Chelsea get Nico Williams for 45 million who is much younger and has sell on value I know who I’d be thinking got the best deal. Similar with Kudus last summer, compared to Barnes who we’d struggle to make our money back on, West Ham clearly got the better value deal by showing a bit more imagination and taking a chance. Served Keegan well. We'd not have signed Peacock, Barton, Ginola, Ferdinand or Batty. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbandit Posted Tuesday at 15:58 Share Posted Tuesday at 15:58 18 minutes ago, Decky said: Barnes had a difficult first season because of his injury. Lets see how he gets on this coming season because he's a good player. I really like him, I just wish he played naturally on the right, would totally sort out one of our major problems Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted Tuesday at 16:12 Share Posted Tuesday at 16:12 2 hours ago, nufc123 said: The whole world said we overpayed for Gordon, Tonali and Isak. No they didn’t. I certainly didn’t think so either. The time to of bought Bowen was when he was waiting at Ferryhill services for our call and we changed our mind allowing him to go to West Ham. The improvement he’d give us RW wouldn’t be big enough to justify the figures now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted Tuesday at 16:14 Share Posted Tuesday at 16:14 1 minute ago, LFEE said: No they didn’t. I certainly didn’t think so either. The time to of bought Bowen was when he was waiting at Ferryhill services for our call and we changed our mind allowing him to go to West Ham. The improvement he’d give us RW wouldn’t be big enough to justify the figures now. The improvement he would give us on RW would be huge, he’s a million times better than Miggy and Murphy. I get the reservations about spending that much on him though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted Tuesday at 16:15 Share Posted Tuesday at 16:15 2 minutes ago, LFEE said: No they didn’t. I certainly didn’t think so either. The time to of bought Bowen was when he was waiting at Ferryhill services for our call and we changed our mind allowing him to go to West Ham. The improvement he’d give us RW wouldn’t be big enough to justify the figures now. I don't think there's many better in his position in the league. Think he'd improve most teams in the top 8 other than City and Arsenal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufc123 Posted Tuesday at 16:17 Share Posted Tuesday at 16:17 3 minutes ago, LFEE said: No they didn’t. There was a lot of talk about Gordon. Balague said the same thing about Isak. Tonali maybe not so much. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted Tuesday at 16:18 Share Posted Tuesday at 16:18 7 hours ago, SUPERTOON said: So are we thinking if no one leaves by Sunday then we will face a points deduction next season ? No. I’m thinking that the club have claimed to be skint in every single transfer window since PIF bought it. 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