• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The all new Striker thread..

Vega said:
As a talking point, strikers that are not getting into other teams sides that could do a job for us but aren't exactly setting the world on fire.

Naismith - Everton
Jonathan Walters - Stoke
Rickie Lambert - West Brom
Click to expand...

Saha? Rasiak?

Pointless and not what we are about now
 
Vega said:
As a talking point, strikers that are not getting into other teams sides that could do a job for us but aren't exactly setting the world on fire.

Naismith - Everton
Jonathan Walters - Stoke
Rickie Lambert - West Brom
Click to expand...

The only one of those which I would consider would be Lambert and only if we couldn't get a long-term CF in. Lambert is 34 in Feb but rather than not have a back-up CF for the rest of the reason, I'd rather we sign someone like him on a 6 or 18 month deal. He might only sit on the bench a lot but no reason he couldn't start in the FA Cup (as long as not cup tied) and perhaps away legs of the EL just to take some weight off of Harry. Poch also knows him and he is a goalscorer
 
Wouldn't mind Naismith, honestly. He's hard-working, he's experienced, he combines physicality with (some) technical ability, he knows the league and hes unlikely to want to start for us if he did sign, given that we're the biggest club he's likely to play for this close to the end of his career (and he's also a genuinely nice and charitable guy, from what I can tell).

However, he seems too short-term for Poch to bother with, even though I suspect airs of that sort will quickly vanish should Kane suffer an injury of any sort.
 
Would really like us to take a punt on this guy.

Would rather a hungry young up and comer with something to prove.....would be a saving on Berahino....think this lad is very gifted....bagged 2 goals yesterday has just had a bad injury though...Bolton certainly need the cash.

Oh and he is a monster for me on Pes 2016....develops like a mofo...so he must be good...:)



So virtually and reality its a no brainer! better than the black box method anyway...:p
 
Last edited:
He's a talented little shrimp. Looks like one of those talented Norwich guys or Jack Grealish or Alex Pritchard.
 
Danishfurniturelover said:
Ighalo at Watford looks a real handful
Click to expand...

They've reiterated that they absolutely won't sell him in January, given that him contributing the goals to keep them up is likely to get them much, much more money than any team could offer for Ighalo.

I think most Prem sides will be thinking in similar terms this January, really. It's too close to call, and everyone wants to be here for next season's cash bonanza: this means that, save for cast-offs and ostracized players (Naismith and Berahino's respectively), most clubs will refuse to do business when it comes to sales.
 
DubaiSpur said:
They've reiterated that they absolutely won't sell him in January, given that him contributing the goals to keep them up is likely to get them much, much more money than any team could offer for Ighalo.

I think most Prem sides will be thinking in similar terms this January, really. It's too close to call, and everyone wants to be here for next season's cash bonanza: this means that, save for cast-offs and ostracized players (Naismith and Berahino's respectively), most clubs will refuse to do business when it comes to sales.
Click to expand...

Seems quite probable to me too. So much money in just staying in the league that unless a club wants to get rid or there are contract issues we really would have to pay huge money for someone currently firing in the PL.
 
braineclipse said:
Seems quite probable to me too. So much money in just staying in the league that unless a club wants to get rid or there are contract issues we really would have to pay huge money for someone currently firing in the PL.
Click to expand...

I agree, it's a waxing trend. And, to be honest, it both delights and worries me.

It delights me because it's a clear sign of the leveling out of squad quality across the division - as PL money finally hits a high where even newly-promoted teams can assemble and keep squads of comparable quality to those of the top sides (the marginal advantage of having more money being eroded by the sheer relative availability of it in the PL compared to other leagues), we should see a far, far more competitive league emerging where upsets are more common and unusual title contenders/CL challengers might emerge with much more regularity.

It also worries me, because our own advantage relative to the rest is also leveling out: we're more likely to be harmed than helped by a steady transfer of power across the league, as opposed to the concentration of it in the top five/six. And the thought of some minnow outside the top four winning the league or qualifying for the CL before we do (think Leicester) is one that simultaneously scares and utterly infuriates me.

Make no mistake, if the PL's exponential revenue growth continues, we'll see a lot less business between PL sides, because they simply won't need to sell their players for financial reasons or player unrest (since the players themselves can in many cases be persuaded to stick around for longer with more TV money thrown their way). Many more 'Berahino' sagas will occur. It could be a new era of equality within top-flight English football, similar to the years prior to the advent of the PL: however, it will also be a case of extreme, almost obscene inequality between the PL and every other league in Europe, weakening those competitions and damaging European club football as a whole. It won't affect he Championship as much IF (big if) teams do as Burnley did, and as Bournemouth are doing: namely, if they conserve the cash gained during their initial year in top flight football and then improve the infrastructure and squad of the club once they go down. In that case, we should see an organic wealth transfer occur between the PL and the Championship that will sustain the unpredictability of the latter competition. But European sides....it's difficult to see anything other than a future of relentless asset stripping by newly rich PL sides for them (as we can already see with teams like Saudi Sportswashing Machine (!) and Crystal Palace hoovering up top players from top teams in Europe).
 
DubaiSpur said:
I agree, it's a waxing trend. And, to be honest, it both delights and worries me.

It delights me because it's a clear sign of the leveling out of squad quality across the division - as PL money finally hits a high where even newly-promoted teams can assemble and keep squads of comparable quality to those of the top sides (the marginal advantage of having more money being eroded by the sheer relative availability of it in the PL compared to other leagues), we should see a far, far more competitive league emerging where upsets are more common and unusual title contenders/CL challengers might emerge with much more regularity.

It also worries me, because our own advantage relative to the rest is also leveling out: we're more likely to be harmed than helped by a steady transfer of power across the league, as opposed to the concentration of it in the top five/six. And the thought of some minnow outside the top four winning the league or qualifying for the CL before we do (think Leicester) is one that simultaneously scares and utterly infuriates me.

Make no mistake, if the PL's exponential revenue growth continues, we'll see a lot less business between PL sides, because they simply won't need to sell their players for financial reasons or player unrest (since the players themselves can in many cases be persuaded to stick around for longer with more TV money thrown their way). Many more 'Berahino' sagas will occur. It could be a new era of equality within top-flight English football, similar to the years prior to the advent of the PL: however, it will also be a case of extreme, almost obscene inequality between the PL and every other league in Europe, weakening those competitions and damaging European club football as a whole. It won't affect he Championship as much IF (big if) teams do as Burnley did, and as Bournemouth are doing: namely, if they conserve the cash gained during their initial year in top flight football and then improve the infrastructure and squad of the club once they go down. In that case, we should see an organic wealth transfer occur between the PL and the Championship that will sustain the unpredictability of the latter competition. But European sides....it's difficult to see anything other than a future of relentless asset stripping by newly rich PL sides for them (as we can already see with teams like Saudi Sportswashing Machine (!) and Crystal Palace hoovering up top players from top teams in Europe).
Click to expand...

I think this highlights the need for continued sensible transfer work with a long term focus from our club.

We cannot beat those richer than us by just buying players. And the edge we can gain by going out and signing another high profile player is becoming marginal compared to a team further down the table that can sign a player fairly close in ability to the one we can sign. And picking up the "best of the rest" players from smaller clubs will become extremely expensive - as all the clubs dealing with Southampton in the last 2-3 windows have experienced.

Our home grown talent and our ability to develop players like Alli and Dier that we sign will be key to our continued success.
 
braineclipse said:
I think this highlights the need for continued sensible transfer work with a long term focus from our club.

We cannot beat those richer than us by just buying players. And the edge we can gain by going out and signing another high profile player is becoming marginal compared to a team further down the table that can sign a player fairly close in ability to the one we can sign. And picking up the "best of the rest" players from smaller clubs will become extremely expensive - as all the clubs dealing with Southampton in the last 2-3 windows have experienced.

Our home grown talent and our ability to develop players like Alli and Dier that we sign will be key to our continued success.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. It's also important to note that the areas where we can spend the money we save by ignoring the possibility of signing high-profile players in favour of developing our own are rapidly shrinking. Previously, money we saved could have been spent on infrastructure: now, we've pretty much reached saturation with the state-of-the-art training complex, youth academy and stadium. We could spend it on wages, I suppose, but I'm dubious about the extent to which we'd puff up our wage bill just to reinvest the money we save from not buying high-profile players (if we do go down that route).

With the new stadium and PL revenue coming in, we'll have a lot of surplus income we'll have to put somewhere. It's also doubly important to note that developing players long-term is also no assurance of success when short-term buying can just as easily propel you into title/CL contention (a la Leicester). It's just that the margins have become smaller all around: in the old days, signing a superstar (like Aguero, for example) would instantly take your team up a few notches, whereas now it seems like the advantage (which does still exist) is more marginal. You can still gain advantages doing it, of course: it's difficult to imagine, for instance, that a team that goes out and suddenly buys Batshuayi, Aubameyang and Lewandowski (to take three illlustrative examples) wouldn't experience a boost in goalscoring after those purchases, whatever the equally frenetic activity of the sides around them. And those advantages are still likely to boost teams like ours up a few notches: it's just that the marginal utility of these buys is now in decline.

It's more complicated than just developing our own players in an age of new-found sporting equality, I suspect. It might come down to eking the marginal value out of the buys we make, however high-profile they may be: while that's hardly a conclusive, philosophical answer, it might possibly be the only firm assertion we can make about this seemingly waxing trend.
 
DubaiSpur said:
Perhaps. It's also important to note that the areas where we can spend the money we save by ignoring the possibility of signing high-profile players in favour of developing our own are rapidly shrinking. Previously, money we saved could have been spent on infrastructure: now, we've pretty much reached saturation with the state-of-the-art training complex, youth academy and stadium. We could spend it on wages, I suppose, but I'm dubious about the extent to which we'd puff up our wage bill just to reinvest the money we save from not buying high-profile players (if we do go down that route).

With the new stadium and PL revenue coming in, we'll have a lot of surplus income we'll have to put somewhere. It's also doubly important to note that developing players long-term is also no assurance of success when short-term buying can just as easily propel you into title/CL contention (a la Leicester). It's just that the margins have become smaller all around: in the old days, signing a superstar (like Aguero, for example) would instantly take your team up a few notches, whereas now it seems like the advantage (which does still exist) is more marginal. You can still gain advantages doing it, of course: it's difficult to imagine, for instance, that a team that goes out and suddenly buys Batshuayi, Aubameyang and Lewandowski (to take three illlustrative examples) wouldn't experience a boost in goalscoring after those purchases, whatever the equally frenetic activity of the sides around them. And those advantages are still likely to boost teams like ours up a few notches: it's just that the marginal utility of these buys is now in decline.

It's more complicated than just developing our own players in an age of new-found sporting equality, I suspect. It might come down to eking the marginal value out of the buys we make, however high-profile they may be: while that's hardly a conclusive, philosophical answer, it might possibly be the only firm assertion we can make about this seemingly waxing trend.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying we shouldn't sign players, or that we shouldn't sign high profile players.

Just saying that the as a foundation our academy and ability to develop players will be key. Add a fantastic high profile signing or two to that once in a while to push us on a level for sure. Like we did with Son.
 
braineclipse said:
I'm not saying we shouldn't sign players, or that we shouldn't sign high profile players.

Just saying that the as a foundation our academy and ability to develop players will be key. Add a fantastic high profile signing or two to that once in a while to push us on a level for sure. Like we did with Son.
Click to expand...

Oh, definitely. I agree on that score.
 
braineclipse said:
I'm not saying we shouldn't sign players, or that we shouldn't sign high profile players.

Just saying that the as a foundation our academy and ability to develop players will be key. Add a fantastic high profile signing or two to that once in a while to push us on a level for sure. Like we did with Son.
Click to expand...
OR you could argue the opposite. We'll be so rich that we won't need to nurture and develop and wait for youngsters. Much like Cheatski and City we will just buy ready made players and the need to grow our own will diminish, which would be a shame.
 
Bullet said:
OR you could argue the opposite. We'll be so rich that we won't need to nurture and develop and wait for youngsters. Much like Cheatski and City we will just buy ready made players and the need to grow our own will diminish, which would be a shame.
Click to expand...

I don't think we will be that rich. And I think that even with money that production line will be a great way to spend some of that money.

City and Chelsea's failure to get a production line going and develop their own players is part of why they are second tier in terms of European football. Even Real Madrid have looked (marginally) better at developing players and both Barca and Bayern are so far ahead City and Chelsea should be ashamed.
 
Bullet said:
OR you could argue the opposite. We'll be so rich that we won't need to nurture and develop and wait for youngsters. Much like Cheatski and City we will just buy ready made players and the need to grow our own will diminish, which would be a shame.
Click to expand...
Unless somebody caps the number of players a club can own then we'll just get outbid by the likes of City & Chelsea creating a loan farm of all the world's talent
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back