| SSN saying we're in for Akpom (n/t) 09:45 - Aug 4 with 5888 views | Korrupt |
|  | | |  |
| SSN saying we're in for Akpom (n/t) on 11:42 - Aug 4 with 840 views | Smoresy |
I called for Chuba last summer as the cheaper, original Latte Lath of the Boro. He was a goal-scoring machine in 22/23, had his very own Szmodics year.
It may not prove a successful poach, we may not be able to pull off the poach, but I'd feel more comfortable with him in our squad alongside Hirst and Ali, rather than in Brum's alongside Kyogo and Stansfield. |  | | |
| SSN saying we're in for Akpom (n/t) on 12:04 - Aug 4 with 707 views | only_one_sir_bobby |
| SSN saying we're in for Akpom (n/t) on 11:31 - Aug 4 by JakeITFC |
Was this written by AI? Not a dig, just has that kind of flavour to it. |
I'll take that as a compliment—if it reads that polished, then I’m doing something right! | | | |
| SSN saying we're in for Akpom (n/t) on 12:21 - Aug 4 with 619 views | Trequartista |
This sounds like an ideal signing, but you've got to wonder why we have waited for Birmingham to make a bid before going in for him. Maybe he's only just become available. |  |
| |
| SSN saying we're in for Akpom (n/t) on 12:25 - Aug 4 with 578 views | TRUE_BLUE123 |
| SSN saying we're in for Akpom (n/t) on 10:08 - Aug 4 by CaptMickMills |
Perhaps late move because of Philogene injury?
SS could play left with Akpom No 10? [Post edited 4 Aug 10:10]
|
That is how I see it.
Think Szmodics actually suits us more in that left side role |  |
| |
| SSN saying we're in for Akpom (n/t) on 12:47 - Aug 4 with 466 views | marky7itfc |
|  |
| |
| SSN saying we're in for Akpom (n/t) on 13:00 - Aug 4 with 371 views | glasso |
| SSN saying we're in for Akpom (n/t) on 10:16 - Aug 4 by itfcsuth |
Yeah I think it would be a really good signing.
Would have been preferable to get it done earlier, and have him with us for a preseason, although some plausible reasons that may not have been possible. But it raises questions for me about our late in the day deals, whether our targets are a little out of reach, and we subsequently fall down the list to others late in the window - I don't know.
If that is having a whine, then indeed, I'm having a good old whine. |
Personally, if a target is 'a little out of our reach,' I'd LIKE us to try for them before dropping down the list and going for other options that we want.
That's how Sunderland get Xhaka, for instance. Surprised most people, because I'd have put him as slightly out of their reach. It's probably how we got Hutchinson and (OK, it didn't work out, but...) Phillips.
I'm not saying we should be holding out for Mbappe, but this forum seems to be equal parts people complaining that we're not signing Premier League-ready players, and people complaining that we're trying our luck with people slightly out of our reach.
They're the same thing. | | | |
| SSN saying we're in for Akpom (n/t) on 13:04 - Aug 4 with 320 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| SSN saying we're in for Akpom (n/t) on 09:50 - Aug 4 by itfcsuth |
This sort of late action run around action really makes me scratch my head about the way we are conducting our business.
Akpom has been available all summer, he's a very well known operator in the English game, especially at Championship level, and a decent one.
If we wanted him, why have we waited until Birmingham agree a deal to make a last minute hijack approach.
Good player though, especially at this level, would take him. |
Maybe we enter the fray this week, leave things up in the air until Saturday, then withdraw, meaning he doesn't play against us on Friday?
Disrupt the opposition as much as possible. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
