| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! 23:27 - Dec 7 with 13671 views | SitfcB |
The answer is on Life’s A Pitch  |  |
| |  |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 23:30 - Dec 7 with 7362 views | PhilTWTD |
I remember at the time, Coventry thought they were going to get him on a free transfer because he was out of contract at Fleetwood and it was understood they couldn't afford to trigger an extension in his deal (I assume he would have got a pay increase, but that's me speculating).
However, to Cov's surprise, they triggered the option, they couldn't afford the fee and he joined us. Just remembered that it was Coventry who wanted him, which would have added a bit of further context to the weekend goal. |  | | |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 01:20 - Dec 8 with 7176 views | BigCommon |
Did I hear right? 60k?... That is an obscene bit of business if true. |  | | |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 07:39 - Dec 8 with 6819 views | textbackup |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 01:20 - Dec 8 by BigCommon |
Did I hear right? 60k?... That is an obscene bit of business if true. |
You’d pay that now just for his headband! |  |
| |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 08:11 - Dec 8 with 6703 views | homer_123 |
Overrated, overpriced whack job |  |
| |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 08:26 - Dec 8 with 6652 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 01:20 - Dec 8 by BigCommon |
Did I hear right? 60k?... That is an obscene bit of business if true. |
Sounds a bit out of whack. |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 08:33 - Dec 8 with 6619 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 01:20 - Dec 8 by BigCommon |
Did I hear right? 60k?... That is an obscene bit of business if true. |
Similar fee to Mings.
Maybe we should only pay fees in the tens of thousands from now on. We seem to have found the sweet spot! |  | | |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 09:08 - Dec 8 with 6506 views | orfordbuoy |
A cup-of-tea wielding Paul Cook acquisition. |  | | |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 09:26 - Dec 8 with 6427 views | positivity |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 08:33 - Dec 8 by ArnoldMoorhen |
Similar fee to Mings.
Maybe we should only pay fees in the tens of thousands from now on. We seem to have found the sweet spot! |
if only we'd added a few extra thousands to the malarczyk fee! | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 09:29 - Dec 8 with 6430 views | itfcjoe |
I was told at the time it was between £100k and £150k, which is probably about right as CEO's like to talk down fees like he did last night!
But I've mentioned before, that I'd say he's our best 'pound for pound' signing we made.....Morsy and Walton fees were similar but they obviously had good Championship wage packets alongside them
Burns has been absolutely fantastic |  |
| |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 09:52 - Dec 8 with 6317 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 09:26 - Dec 8 by positivity |
if only we'd added a few extra thousands to the malarczyk fee! |
Gary Roberts was a fair signing, priced at one secondhand bus and some training footballs, but imagine the player he could have been had we paid in cash!
If my memory of 1970s Topps Bubble Gum cards is not failing me, I think we paid £55,000 for Allan Hunter- the evidence is stacking up! | | | |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 10:11 - Dec 8 with 6247 views | CityBlue |
I pay tribute to some of the less successful managers in my podcast as although they failed to gel the team, they built the foundation that King McKenna has built upon.
Just search YouTube for EFL Championship Terrace Talk
Or listen on any PodCast provider.
https://amzn.eu/d/9YXz8Qt |  |
| |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 10:11 - Dec 8 with 6249 views | davblue |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 09:29 - Dec 8 by itfcjoe |
I was told at the time it was between £100k and £150k, which is probably about right as CEO's like to talk down fees like he did last night!
But I've mentioned before, that I'd say he's our best 'pound for pound' signing we made.....Morsy and Walton fees were similar but they obviously had good Championship wage packets alongside them
Burns has been absolutely fantastic |
'Burns has been absolutely fantastic'
Are you sure on that? Our resident whack a post thinks he's rubbish... |  | | |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 10:18 - Dec 8 with 6190 views | CityBlue |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 09:29 - Dec 8 by itfcjoe |
I was told at the time it was between £100k and £150k, which is probably about right as CEO's like to talk down fees like he did last night!
But I've mentioned before, that I'd say he's our best 'pound for pound' signing we made.....Morsy and Walton fees were similar but they obviously had good Championship wage packets alongside them
Burns has been absolutely fantastic |
Walton's wages are considerably more than Wes is on... | |
| |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 10:27 - Dec 8 with 6126 views | itfcjoe |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 10:18 - Dec 8 by CityBlue |
Walton's wages are considerably more than Wes is on... |
And Morsy, it's why Wes such a good signing or me | |
| |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 10:46 - Dec 8 with 6066 views | _clive_baker_ |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 10:18 - Dec 8 by CityBlue |
Walton's wages are considerably more than Wes is on... |
I'm not sure what Wes Burns is paid, he's signed a new deal since signing so I'm sure it's not bad.
I was told what Pigott earns though, and nearly fell off my chair. |  | | |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 10:48 - Dec 8 with 6049 views | portmanking |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 10:46 - Dec 8 by _clive_baker_ |
I'm not sure what Wes Burns is paid, he's signed a new deal since signing so I'm sure it's not bad.
I was told what Pigott earns though, and nearly fell off my chair. |
We had to beat off pretty strong interest from Reading - then a fairly decent Champ side - for Pigott. I'm told it was in the region of 11-12k p/w! | | | |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 10:51 - Dec 8 with 6013 views | _clive_baker_ |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 10:48 - Dec 8 by portmanking |
We had to beat off pretty strong interest from Reading - then a fairly decent Champ side - for Pigott. I'm told it was in the region of 11-12k p/w! |
Sunderland too if his agent was to be believed, who were deemed a divisional L1 competitor at the time.
That's the range I was given. There's worse ways to earn 1.5m over 3 years (plus a 6 figure signing on fee). | | | |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 11:08 - Dec 8 with 5921 views | FrimleyBlue |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 10:11 - Dec 8 by davblue |
'Burns has been absolutely fantastic'
Are you sure on that? Our resident whack a post thinks he's rubbish... |
Rubbish no
Overated and inconsistent. Yes. |  |
| |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 11:12 - Dec 8 with 5921 views | wkj |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 11:08 - Dec 8 by FrimleyBlue |
Rubbish no
Overated and inconsistent. Yes. |
Yet both are equally as wrong as claiming he's rubbish [Post edited 8 Dec 2023 11:16]
|  |
| |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 11:19 - Dec 8 with 5885 views | RobTheMonk |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 11:08 - Dec 8 by FrimleyBlue |
Rubbish no
Overated and inconsistent. Yes. |
Disagree with you on this one Frimmers. He's been a staple of our team since he's got here and we're now second in the Championship (so he must be doing something regularly right).
He offers a lot from a workrate point of view both offensively and defensively and is deceptively good in the are for an out ball. Started scoring goals again. Delivery can be a little suspect at times, but then he'd be playing at a higher level. |  | | |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 11:19 - Dec 8 with 5889 views | itfcjoe |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 11:08 - Dec 8 by FrimleyBlue |
Rubbish no
Overated and inconsistent. Yes. |
"Overated" - the player who most people thought was in danger of losing place this season but is now still a key man for a Championship auto contender
"Inconsistent" - the player who has been a model of consistency for over 100 games since he's been at the club, just the key man in what we do tactically and contributes in every phase of the game and on the stat sheet | |
| |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 11:20 - Dec 8 with 5885 views | StokieBlue |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 11:08 - Dec 8 by FrimleyBlue |
Rubbish no
Overated and inconsistent. Yes. |
Time for you to fook off about Burns. Everyone has had enough, go be a weirdo about him on Tw*tter or something.
SB |  | | |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 11:30 - Dec 8 with 5791 views | davblue |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 11:19 - Dec 8 by itfcjoe |
"Overated" - the player who most people thought was in danger of losing place this season but is now still a key man for a Championship auto contender
"Inconsistent" - the player who has been a model of consistency for over 100 games since he's been at the club, just the key man in what we do tactically and contributes in every phase of the game and on the stat sheet |
i do really struggle to see his point on Burns, he's been very good since he's been here. His crossing can be hit and miss sometimes, certainly in his early career here but he's improved it without a shadow of a doubt. | | | |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 11:31 - Dec 8 with 5776 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 11:20 - Dec 8 by StokieBlue |
Time for you to fook off about Burns. Everyone has had enough, go be a weirdo about him on Tw*tter or something.
SB |
It's fine. We all know Frimmers doesn't understand football. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 11:32 - Dec 8 with 5578 views | tractorboy1978 |
| No way did we only pay what we paid for Wes Burns! on 11:19 - Dec 8 by itfcjoe |
"Overated" - the player who most people thought was in danger of losing place this season but is now still a key man for a Championship auto contender
"Inconsistent" - the player who has been a model of consistency for over 100 games since he's been at the club, just the key man in what we do tactically and contributes in every phase of the game and on the stat sheet |
24 goals and 25 assists in 104 games for us. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
