| Why would we sell for less than 15m? 14:10 - Jul 19 with 4192 views | The_Romford_Blue |
Whether he’s worth that or not, it’s extrenely unlikely that 5m/7m will get us a better striker with only 16 days until the season starts.
He’s worth so much more to us than a poxy five million. He’s our main creative threat and top goalscorer.
Selling him would be foolish for that money |  |
| |  |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 19:33 - Jul 19 with 1137 views | jas0999 |
Age. One good season. Evans might want to cash in.
Reality is, if we sell for that money, who can we get to replace? |  | | |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 19:40 - Jul 19 with 1134 views | agentp |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 14:21 - Jul 19 by The_Romford_Blue |
Exactly
The money in this day and age won’t buy us a better striker
We should be asking for double figure fees at the absolute minimum |
Or The money could be used to buy 2 average players scoring 10 each. It doesn't have to be like for like. There are 11 players in the team and sadly all 11 have rarely performed for a while. | |
| |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 23:17 - Jul 19 with 1080 views | tractorboy1978 |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 15:38 - Jul 19 by maccyd9 |
Don't be baffled, I'm just not panicking about what if's.
Nobody knows any potential fee, nobody knows if Hurst will have a replacement lined up, nobody knows if Waghorn can repeat the best season in his career to date, nobody in any scenario will know how it would have gone had the other option been taken.
If we sell him for £7m and we sign some gem's and they score a hatful it will look like good business. If we don't sell, he stays, scores 15 goals but we concede 100 and go down it will look like bad business. What if he get's injured and we get neither the money or the player?
The best deal (before your time) in my years of supporting was when we sold Dyer. We spent that money so wisely and the whole squad improved as a result and it got us up.
It's just my view and can totally see why others wouldn't sell. Sometimes though it's about the bigger picture. |
Two points re the Dyer sale. Firstly we already had a great squad that needed slight refinement, secondly we invested properly in players with calibre - Stewart, McGreal, Wright cost us the best part of £4m combined - that's probably £8m in today's money. We simply won't do that.
Waghorn was so pivotal to everything we did last season - he scored ot assisted almost half our goals. We have very, very little quality throughout the rest of the squad and by Hurst's own admission we are struggling to add to the squad already. I personally think selling would be lunacy, we still haven't replaced Webster. | | | |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 04:59 - Jul 20 with 1030 views | Benters2 |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 15:41 - Jul 19 by The_Romford_Blue |
No.
15m minimum. |
Stick to your guns chap. | | | |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 05:19 - Jul 20 with 1023 views | Benters2 |
Got to keep him Rommers. | | | |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 05:25 - Jul 20 with 1021 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 05:19 - Jul 20 by Benters2 |
Got to keep him Rommers. |
Morning
Yes we have to keep him. He’s our best attacking player. Without him, and with our owners tendency not to spend money, I’d be very very worried for next season. | |
| |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 06:07 - Jul 20 with 1020 views | Benters2 |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 05:25 - Jul 20 by The_Romford_Blue |
Morning
Yes we have to keep him. He’s our best attacking player. Without him, and with our owners tendency not to spend money, I’d be very very worried for next season. |
Morning Chap.
Bloody right we have to keep him,we have managed to keep hold of Bart which is great.
14 days to go before KO its getting very tight for time if he does go,but then look at Murphy he soon left near enough on the last day of the transfer market.  | | | |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 06:13 - Jul 20 with 1016 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 06:07 - Jul 20 by Benters2 |
Morning Chap.
Bloody right we have to keep him,we have managed to keep hold of Bart which is great.
14 days to go before KO its getting very tight for time if he does go,but then look at Murphy he soon left near enough on the last day of the transfer market. |
Yep keeping bart is a major plus.
Losing Waggy would be a similarly big negative though.
Remember with Murph it took a year to replace him (unless you count free agent Leon bloody Best) and he, at the time, was our most important player when he was sold. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 06:35 - Jul 20 with 1009 views | Ely_Blue |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 14:31 - Jul 19 by The_Romford_Blue |
Yes. 15m.
Because that’s enough where we probably could get a replacement of his ilk AND use the remaining money to improve the team (otherwise what’s the point in selling in the first place).
8m will not buy us an equivalent to Waggy.
It just won’t. |
Ive got to agree with you Rommy, if we were in a need to sell situation then the lower levels being spoken about would be acceptable, but as we are not in a must sell situation then if we are going to part with him it should be on our terms and it should be for a fee that is too good to turn down. PH mentions not being held to ransom and that’s what we should do exactly, the line to any prospective suitors should be “you want him that badly then you pay the premium to prise him away from us”. If that value is over and above what the “market value” for him is based on what we paid for him then so be it.
We should only sell on our terms for a fee that would mean we could instantly replace him with some of that fee |  |
| |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 09:16 - Jul 20 with 981 views | tractorshark |
Sadly, it sounds very much like he’s going.
£7.5m sounds a lot but isn’t really for championship clubs nowadays.
I fear this will be a poor deal for us, particularly with the window shutting early.
It would have been easier replacing Bart than Waghorn. | | | |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 12:06 - Jul 20 with 944 views | Benters2 |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 06:13 - Jul 20 by The_Romford_Blue |
Yep keeping bart is a major plus.
Losing Waggy would be a similarly big negative though.
Remember with Murph it took a year to replace him (unless you count free agent Leon bloody Best) and he, at the time, was our most important player when he was sold. |
Yep we need a happy season not another he is building a squad season,only to sell off those that have done well | | | |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 12:12 - Jul 20 with 939 views | Herbivore |
| Why would we sell for less than 15m? on 12:06 - Jul 20 by Benters2 |
Yep we need a happy season not another he is building a squad season,only to sell off those that have done well |
Without wanting to point out the obvious, this is Hurst's first season here so of course it is very much a season of him building the squad. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
