|
Post by nott1 on Feb 22, 2013 9:50:28 GMT
We just need someone who can put the ball on his head..........Pennant!
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Feb 22, 2013 9:54:22 GMT
I take your point, Sheikh. It's not all about value. But "the family" still clearly want to see some balancing of the books, even with the new TV deal on the way. It doesn't have to be a 26-year-old at the peak of his powers, just someone who fits our particular needs better than an ageing Crouch. Jones would probably be a lot keener on remaining in the long-term if he didn't sense the political considerations that will always see Crouch ahead of him in the pecking order. The club just doesn't seem to be willing to offer Kenwyne a new contract though FM (perhaps because of the nature of the original deal?) I'd be stunned if he was still here in August. In the meantime we should stop painting having three forwards like Crouch, Jones and Jerome as a negative, if used correctly they can definitely be a great asset.
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Feb 22, 2013 10:02:54 GMT
They are already a great asset
|
|
|
Post by realstokebloke on Feb 22, 2013 10:20:59 GMT
Very, very simple to me.
Should have sold PC and had the money & wages available for the summer. Forget the 'loss' - that's football & was as good an offer as we'll get now, surely.
He would go with thanks and good wishes and the footnote in the history books along the lines of "PC was a very good and very skilful footballer (itself a rarity in Tony Pulis' sides) but was, ultimately not best suited to Stoke's more direct style."
We should be doing all we can to 'bottle' what makes KJ play well (as he has done recently) and really getting back to proper Pulisball.
And part of that would be playing KJ (& CJ) & also offering KJ a new deal.
Trouble is, PC now stays, plays ahead of a better (in our system) striker in KJ, who (rightly) won't want ano 18 months on the bench and so will probably want a summer move, leaving us with an even older PC - playing for two more years ahead of whoever 'cos Tone sploshed £10M or, god forbid, £12M on him.
Bonkers.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2013 12:15:43 GMT
Very, very simple to me.
Should have sold PC and had the money & wages available for the summer. Forget the 'loss' - that's football & was as good an offer as we'll get now, surely.
He would go with thanks and good wishes and the footnote in the history books along the lines of "PC was a very good and very skilful footballer (itself a rarity in Tony Pulis' sides) but was, ultimately not best suited to Stoke's more direct style."
We should be doing all we can to 'bottle' what makes KJ play well (as he has done recently) and really getting back to proper Pulisball.
And part of that would be playing KJ (& CJ) & also offering KJ a new deal.
Trouble is, PC now stays, plays ahead of a better (in our system) striker in KJ, who (rightly) won't want ano 18 months on the bench and so will probably want a summer move, leaving us with an even older PC - playing for two more years ahead of whoever 'cos Tone sploshed £10M or, god forbid, £12M on him.
Bonkers. Stop talking bloody sense...
|
|
|
Post by realstokebloke on Feb 22, 2013 12:35:12 GMT
Very, very simple to me.
Should have sold PC and had the money & wages available for the summer. Forget the 'loss' - that's football & was as good an offer as we'll get now, surely.
He would go with thanks and good wishes and the footnote in the history books along the lines of "PC was a very good and very skilful footballer (itself a rarity in Tony Pulis' sides) but was, ultimately not best suited to Stoke's more direct style."
We should be doing all we can to 'bottle' what makes KJ play well (as he has done recently) and really getting back to proper Pulisball.
And part of that would be playing KJ (& CJ) & also offering KJ a new deal.
Trouble is, PC now stays, plays ahead of a better (in our system) striker in KJ, who (rightly) won't want ano 18 months on the bench and so will probably want a summer move, leaving us with an even older PC - playing for two more years ahead of whoever 'cos Tone sploshed £10M or, god forbid, £12M on him.
Bonkers. Stop talking bloody sense... Ha ha. I wish.
That said, it does seem a very rare commodity these days where our transfers are concerned.
Perhaps why PC (Denise?) has closed the ever-open-magic cheque book of late?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2013 22:06:51 GMT
No mention of money but he could not get a regular start in a redknapp team at spurs very much a squad player here he is guaranteed to start and that was my point no other team that could afford him will give him that guarantee
|
|
|
Post by johnsmithsupper on Feb 23, 2013 0:13:24 GMT
I don't think getting in £5m and losing a £45,000-a-week wage for a 32-year-old could constitute us being "raped" though, Sheikh? We've got dead money tied up in his 33rd and 34th years, when he'll be in steep decline - and TP will feel duty bound to play him ahead of better fits. Still think it's a massive opportunity missed for us, and I'm not sure why we turned it down. This, I'm not going to say it but you all know what I'm thinking
|
|
|
Post by roylandstoke on Feb 23, 2013 8:53:04 GMT
Got to agree with FullerMagig and realstokebloke on this one. £3M would have persuaded me to let Crouch go. Crouch played his best football for us when he thought he still had a chance of getting in the England team. Since that ship sailed for good we've seen a player with less motivation who appears to be showing his frustration with his role in our system.
Crouch is a decent player, however his continued presence at our club is stopping players with attributes that suit our needs better from getting game time.
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Feb 23, 2013 10:05:12 GMT
I was told Harry wanted crouch and offered us £5m + a QPR forward (Mackie?) Pulis wanted £9m so he could buy Bent. I think this was a better deal than we ever could expect to get! I really can't see any reason why we didn't push this deal through! Amazing!!!
|
|
|
Post by Fred Astaire on Feb 23, 2013 10:28:37 GMT
I was told Harry wanted crouch and offered us £5m + a QPR forward (Mackie?) Pulis wanted £9m so he could buy Bent. I think this was a better deal than we ever could expect to get! I really can't see any reason why we didn't push this deal through! Amazing!!! We should have snapped their hands off for that deal! In fact the only way that QPR could have improved that deal is to remove Mackie from the equation and just give us the £5m
|
|