Spurs eye up Danny

[Zappa 0]

Aye, well if he goes he goes, let's just wait and see

Exactly, we just don't know. What we do know though, is that transfer rumours coming out of the Sun are normally cold rather than hot. :devil:

[Zappa 0]

FWIW, I'd much rather see us selling McCulloch, Miller or Lafferty in January. Any combination of the three would also be acceptable.

[Zappa 0]

FWIW, I'd much rather see us selling McCulloch, Miller or Lafferty in January. Any combination of the three would also be acceptable.

I don't know who you are, but you're talking rubbish Sir!!

[pete 2,499]

Funny season has started. Selling our top earners would make more sense. To be fair to Fleck it is far easier as a defender to break through than an attacker. As a defender the whole game is in front of you as an attacker you have to make the play and have mostly your back to goal. There are a number of players i would sell a number of players before i even thought of Wilson. Sorry Nacho i love you but it is time to go.

[johnnyk 158]

Nacho wouldn't be at the top of my list to go just yet.

 

Miller, McCulloch, Beasley, Davis, Mendes and if he's gonna keep playing Whittaker at RB and Laffery at LM then them as well.

All non triers for me and there must be better out there for less money and wages!!!

 

I would hope Danny would stay for a few years yet as he will hopefully get european football up here every season and will not get a game down there for years IMO.

 

�£2m what a joke price anyway

Edited November 14, 2009 by johnnyk

[Super_Ally 0]

Did Arsenal not pay 12 million for an unproven Walcott ? And 5 million for an unproven Ramsey ?

 

As I an says though, the reality is that we will see offers of this magnitude for more experienced players and, as they are higher earners, it is likely that even with bank pressure even the bank would want to get a "double whammy" by getting a fee AND reducing wages.

 

I dont see us getting an astronomical fee (I was just pointing out a couple of instances where it has happened - but the reality is those two played in England and there is always a premium for playes in England) and given we wont get an astronomical fee surely even the bank see the validity of keeping this young, very talented player at the club in the medium term because his value is only likely to head north of where it is and the risk is minimal given his low wages at present.

 

THat's an awful long way of saying yeh I agree SA.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Shroomz there may be a difference between needing to sell and actually doing it, but your arguement with Ian was "what if we only receive an offer for Wilson". Well that argument is only valid if we need to sell. If we don't then only receiving a bid for Wilson is irrelevant and hence we don't need to accept any derisory bid that we receive for him.

[Totti 0]

Not good news. In our darkest hour, a 17 year old strolling into the central defence with all the confidence of a Baresi or Maldini gives some sort of optimism. He hasn't put a foot wrong.

 

These types of stories are to be expected though. We've effectively told everyone that all our players are up for sale so its going to attract lots of derisory offers which hopefully wont be accepted (dependent on the player).

[Totti 0]

Nacho wouldn't be at the top of my list to go just yet.

 

Miller, McCulloch, Beasley, Davis, Mendes and if he's gonna keep playing Whittaker at RB and Laffery at LM then them as well.

All non triers for me and there must be better out there for less money and wages!!!

 

I would hope Danny would stay for a few years yet as he will hopefully get european football up here every season and will not get a game down there for years IMO.

 

�£2m what a joke price anyway

I wouldn't get rid of Davis and Mendes. I think they're being brought down by poor team mates. Miller, definitely, never wanted him in the first place. McCulloch I'd personally pay to see removed from the club and there's little point in keeping Beasley if he's never going to feature. Whittaker blows hot and cold but in an attacking sense is one of our more creative players. Lafferty? Well the slight problem there is I don't think many clubs would want him and we'd struggle to recoup half of what we paid. Being played out of position out on the left doesn't help (thanks Walter) but he just doesn't look a good player at all. The money spent on players like Lafferty, Miller, McCulloch etc could have signed some really good players or stayed in the bank to avoid this situation.

[craig 5,199]

Not good news. In our darkest hour, a 17 year old strolling into the central defence with all the confidence of a Baresi or Maldini gives some sort of optimism. He hasn't put a foot wrong.

 

I would agree with this. Somehow this young lad has come into our team and seems to have, to an extent, softened the blow of the whirlwind around us right now. BAD BAD business if we sold him in January.

 

These types of stories are to be expected though. We've effectively told everyone that all our players are up for sale so its going to attract lots of derisory offers which hopefully wont be accepted (dependent on the player).

 

Again, agreed. When you make it widely known that your squad is up for sale then you are inviting other clubs to cherry pick your best player and also your promising youngsters, often at fire-sale prices.

[Totti 0]

We've portrayed ourselves far too much as a selling club in recent years. Even if we are, you don't tell everyone that. I remember we once even told the media how much Daniel Cousin's minimum fee release clause was! We may as well have said 'Hey everyone, our main striker is available for �£3m.'

 

A club thats clearly skint and looking to sell isn't going to get high bids for their players.