Moderators Zico Posted June 13, 2011 Moderators Share Posted June 13, 2011 I'd pay ?20M for him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rembrandt Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 sturridge will be 12 million plus, with little chance of a later profit for that reason, i think we're out if it's a permanent deal I'm with you on that, Cas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burndens Bogs Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Who said straight swap for Cahill? that would be a good deal for us imo - but i can't see Cahill going to Chels.In fact the more i think about it, i can't see Sturridge signing for us either. So for that reason.........i am out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Zico Posted June 13, 2011 Moderators Share Posted June 13, 2011 Who said straight swap for Cahill? that would be a good deal for us imo - but i can't see Cahill going to Chels.In fact the more i think about it, i can't see Sturridge signing for us either. So for that reason.........i am out. suggestions from respected members of the press are Cahill will go to City and Arsenal are lining up their options on this understanding, i.e. Samba Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traf Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 suggestions from respected members of the press are Cahill will go to City and Arsenal are lining up their options on this understanding, i.e. Samba I was understanding Arsenal wanted Cahill & Samba. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Carlos Posted June 13, 2011 Moderators Share Posted June 13, 2011 If Blackburn had ?30 worth of central defenders, how come they were still shit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traf Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 If Blackburn had ?30 worth of central defenders, how come they were still shit? Because you inadvertently described them at their true value! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tylswhite Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 If Blackburn had ?30 worth of central defenders, how come they were still shit? They were playing Jones in midfield for some strange reason! That Samba is gash though, i dont see what the fuss is with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ph31 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 If we could afford ?20m I'd pay it. In a season or 2 he'll be worth silly money and we'll be looking at a tidy profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traf Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 If we could afford ?20m I'd pay it. In a season or 2 he'll be worth silly money and we'll be looking at a tidy profit. ?20m is already silly money. Silly money we don't have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 the rich are getting richer/more indebted the best we can do is a loan deal/crumbs off the more indebebted mens table Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SalfordOriginal Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 Loan only for me.... I need to see him have at least one full season in football before even considering the figures being quoted! Even with inflation he is not in the same bracket as Anelka was when we signed him (well other than his selfish attitude that is ) Still unproven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smithills_gent Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 A class player, the best striker we have had since Anelka.?20 million is too much though, i'd go to ?17 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burndenpaddock Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Loan only for me.... I need to see him have at least one full season in football before even considering the figures being quoted! Even with inflation he is not in the same bracket as Anelka was when we signed him (well other than his selfish attitude that is ) Still unproven Agree with that. Great player and will go on to better things, scored some important goals for us. But for me he disrupted the team when he came in. We were cruising before christmas and had 29 points by the end of December, 16 points for the rest of the season, plus a good cup run without him. I'd like to see him do a full season somewhere else before spending that sort of money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tylswhite Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Agree with that. Great player and will go on to better things, scored some important goals for us. But for me he disrupted the team when he came in. We were cruising before christmas and had 29 points by the end of December, 16 points for the rest of the season, plus a good cup run without him. I'd like to see him do a full season somewhere else before spending that sort of money When he came to us we were on a cracking run of 7 matches without a win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mounts Kipper Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 I think it depends what we have as our transfer budget and what we can bring in, it looks like Habsi going for 4-5 million and cahill for 17 million thats 22 million, I would hope we can throw in 5-8 million so that should be around 30 million to spend, therefore I would use half that for Sturridge with the knowledge that we can easily recoup that money and more if we sign him, would be a big suprise if Chelsea let him go and an even bigger suprise if he signed for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traf Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 When he came to us we were on a cracking run of 7 matches without a win. And we finished the season (with him) ....how? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Supporter HomerJay Posted June 16, 2011 Site Supporter Share Posted June 16, 2011 ive been thinking the same for a while traf. its always a difficult comparison, but how were results with and without sturridge? note, i cant be arsed looking myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Zico Posted June 16, 2011 Moderators Share Posted June 16, 2011 ive been thinking the same for a while traf. its always a difficult comparison, but how were results with and without sturridge? note, i cant be arsed looking myself. I'm not looking but there's other factors with Sturridge we had Elmander playing on the wing and losing the shape of the team to a degree his goal to game ratio is all we should judge him on that and his strops on that basis, I'd drop the bid and pay ?19M for him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayjayoghani Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 its always a difficult comparison, but how were results with and without sturridge? Note this depends entirely on Enzo Gambaro's current workload Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enzo gambaro Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 Note this depends entirely on Enzo Gambaro's current workload I'm at home. Therefore iamout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Casino Posted June 16, 2011 Moderators Share Posted June 16, 2011 our results away from home were better with petrov work that one out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jules_darby Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 our results away from home were better with petrov work that one out That may have been to do with the timing of the games though and the general form of the team anyway, during those times, rather than due to Petrov himself. Example - West Ham away - we won and he played. However, he did very little during the game If your team is playing well, he's a great outlet and threat However, if your team isn't playing well, he goes missing What I';m trying to say is that for me he's the type of player that enhances the goodness or badness of the team's form, rather than one that can or tries to change it. If that makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayjayoghani Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 What I';m trying to say is that for me he's the type of player that enhances the goodness or badness of the team's form, rather than one that can or tries to change it. If that makes sense. or in short, he's symptom rather than cause Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enzo gambaro Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 our results away from home were better with petrov work that one out Two wins and five draws isn't much to divvy up, is it? In the event, we drew three more games with Petrov than without him. Brill. As for Sturridge, after he arrived we were P14 W5 D1 L6 F18 A14 P16 He didn't play in two of those - we lost both, didn't score, and shipped four goals. Before he arrived we were P24 W7 D9 L10 F34 A42 P31. So we were 1.33 points and 1.50 goals per game with him. 1.19 points and 1.31 goals without him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts