| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? 12:19 - May 17 with 1603 views | OriginalMarkyP |
If you assume that 2 strikers are coming in, and we've retained Jackson, will we keep Pigott on the wage bill?
I wonder if a deal will be done to move him on and free up more budget?
Nothing against him personally, as he seems a nice lad, but I can't see how Slow Joe fits in with KMcK's pacy style of attacking play. |  |
| |  |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 12:22 - May 17 with 1577 views | Mookamoo |
When are the squad numbers out? Lets see if they swap. |  | | |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 12:22 - May 17 with 1577 views | Radlett_blue |
Pigott is a completely different type of player from Jackson, as you say. The fact Jackson has signed doesn't necessarily mean Pigott is more likely to go, but he hasn't impressed at all even under McKenna & I reckon he will go on a free or be loaned out for a season to free up some wage budget. |  |
| |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 12:26 - May 17 with 1549 views | Veggie |
I wouldn’t say that it means anything g for Pigott, in that he doesn’t really fit McKenna’s system and has been superfluous since he came here really. I feel sorry for him in a way as he clearly can score goals, just not for us it seems. However, I’m not sure he has ever really been given a good run in the team, which can’t have helped his confidence. |  | | |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 12:28 - May 17 with 1527 views | SouperJim |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 12:22 - May 17 by Radlett_blue |
Pigott is a completely different type of player from Jackson, as you say. The fact Jackson has signed doesn't necessarily mean Pigott is more likely to go, but he hasn't impressed at all even under McKenna & I reckon he will go on a free or be loaned out for a season to free up some wage budget. |
I think a loan is possibly more likely as I would imagine he'll be on a decent wage having come in on a free. Unless he's prepared to take a pay cut to get himself a new club of course. |  |
| |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 12:32 - May 17 with 1501 views | STYG |
Piggott seems likely to take the Jackson role last season of a free hit really.
We will probably look to move him on permanently if we can, given he's so far from what McKenna needs, unlike Jackson who at least had some convertible attributes.
If we can't move him on, which seems likely given his wage and years left, presume we recoup what we can by loan fee / wage contribution on the basis that if there are no takers, he's still deemed a talented forward that can compete for a place on the bench to provide a Plan C or D if necessary.
Given the backing he's not one of those we will have to move on to bring others in, but I am sure we will be doing the best we can to recoup on him where possible to have someone else as the backup plan to the backup plan if possible. |  | | |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 12:38 - May 17 with 1474 views | suffolkpoker |
Pigott will move on this window., hopefully a permanent move but worse case a loan. Surely he would be one of the better strikers in league 2, which would still hold a resale value. |  |
| |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 12:42 - May 17 with 1448 views | clive_baker |
Wouldn't say the 2 things are linked per se as it's like comparing apples & cheese. I would imagine if there's interest in Pigott he would be allowed to leave, but that would've likely been true had Jackson signed or not. Finding interest who can also get close to his wages is another thing altogether I would expect. I imagine we'll have to bridge some of the gap if that time does come. |  |
| |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 12:42 - May 17 with 1449 views | STYG |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 12:38 - May 17 by suffolkpoker |
Pigott will move on this window., hopefully a permanent move but worse case a loan. Surely he would be one of the better strikers in league 2, which would still hold a resale value. |
It's not impossible that Ashton manages to convince a mid-sized League One club to pay a fair amount of what we spent on him, given that he's only one season removed from a prolific season.
He's the sort that a Portsmouth or Bolton could potentially take a punt on, but the more likely destinations are presumably Cambridge or Fleetwood or Burton types that won't be paying anywhere near as much in fees.
Unlike Jackson and Norwood, who I'd have been happy to have left at Christmas, Piggott doesn't seem to have anything to offer McKenna's style so seems prudent to move him on when his value is higher now than it will be in a year if his done little else. Equally a loan move to a Charlton etc should he rediscover his form, could be financially better for a sale next summer, but I'd be more inclined to think his prolific season was an exception based on what I have seen, | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 12:50 - May 17 with 1414 views | rickw |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 12:22 - May 17 by Radlett_blue |
Pigott is a completely different type of player from Jackson, as you say. The fact Jackson has signed doesn't necessarily mean Pigott is more likely to go, but he hasn't impressed at all even under McKenna & I reckon he will go on a free or be loaned out for a season to free up some wage budget. |
I think we'll get a fee for him, Ashton has done well in selling players so far who haven't fitted and I think he'll do so again |  |
| |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 12:56 - May 17 with 1381 views | itfcjoe |
I don't think they are linked in reality, we will be hoping we can find a way of getting Pigott out the door without taking too big a loss on the overall deal |  |
| |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 18:27 - May 17 with 1062 views | Wickets |
Well we did have four strikers last season two have gone two remain and that is as things stand . Suppose we will have to see how many strikers KM wants and who he can bring in . I would not completely rule out Joe suddenly starting for find his form from the season before last . |  | | |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 19:17 - May 17 with 978 views | OriginalMarkyP |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 18:27 - May 17 by Wickets |
Well we did have four strikers last season two have gone two remain and that is as things stand . Suppose we will have to see how many strikers KM wants and who he can bring in . I would not completely rule out Joe suddenly starting for find his form from the season before last . |
I think the problem with that is that it requires him playing a role (in a KMcK side) he can't play because he hasn't got the pace. | |
| |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 20:45 - May 17 with 865 views | BloomBlue |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 12:42 - May 17 by STYG |
It's not impossible that Ashton manages to convince a mid-sized League One club to pay a fair amount of what we spent on him, given that he's only one season removed from a prolific season.
He's the sort that a Portsmouth or Bolton could potentially take a punt on, but the more likely destinations are presumably Cambridge or Fleetwood or Burton types that won't be paying anywhere near as much in fees.
Unlike Jackson and Norwood, who I'd have been happy to have left at Christmas, Piggott doesn't seem to have anything to offer McKenna's style so seems prudent to move him on when his value is higher now than it will be in a year if his done little else. Equally a loan move to a Charlton etc should he rediscover his form, could be financially better for a sale next summer, but I'd be more inclined to think his prolific season was an exception based on what I have seen, |
Trouble is can a Cambridge or Fleetwood or Burton type afford his wages? I don't see him wanting to take a big pay cut, so yes the club maybe able to convince another club to loan him and take on some of the wage but wage wise I would assume he's way out of the league of a Cambridge, Fleetwood etc . |  | | |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 20:49 - May 17 with 857 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 20:45 - May 17 by BloomBlue |
Trouble is can a Cambridge or Fleetwood or Burton type afford his wages? I don't see him wanting to take a big pay cut, so yes the club maybe able to convince another club to loan him and take on some of the wage but wage wise I would assume he's way out of the league of a Cambridge, Fleetwood etc . |
I think this sort of thing is what would suit us. Loan him to a mid-table side so that he can do well against everyone except us (as he won't be allowed to play) and we pay a good chunk of his wages as we simply won't be able to get them off our bill without paying him off. |  |
| |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 08:40 - May 18 with 624 views | oldburian |
| What does Jackson's new deal mean for Pigott? on 20:45 - May 17 by BloomBlue |
Trouble is can a Cambridge or Fleetwood or Burton type afford his wages? I don't see him wanting to take a big pay cut, so yes the club maybe able to convince another club to loan him and take on some of the wage but wage wise I would assume he's way out of the league of a Cambridge, Fleetwood etc . |
And that sums it up! If he goes permanently then we will have to give him away with the transfer fee going to the player to compensate for a drop in wages. A loan is the only logical way of reducing the wage bill. Some of you seem to have faith in Ashton to sell him, just remember there are not many Cleggs left doing transfer business, in fact probably none. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
