|
Post by wrighter on Jul 30, 2018 7:02:25 GMT
Cant for the life of me see Crouchy leaving
|
|
|
Post by stokesupporter on Jul 30, 2018 7:09:08 GMT
We should keep Crouch. He has a major influence on team spirit, not to forget that he can still score. In the beginning last season we let Whelan and Walters go for peanuts and the rest of the team looked lost without them. Have we learned anything from that?
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Jul 30, 2018 7:19:53 GMT
It's a sad indictment of our club that 55 year old Peter Crouch is the only one of our footballers attracting any interest. Ha ha! In a nutshell!
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 30, 2018 7:27:06 GMT
We should keep Crouch. He has a major influence on team spirit, not to forget that he can still score. In the beginning last season we let Whelan and Walters go for peanuts and the rest of the team looked lost without them. Have we learned anything from that? That we should have replaced them properly? You can't keep players forever just because they're kegger-in-chief in the dressing room.
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Jul 30, 2018 7:51:11 GMT
We should keep Crouch. He has a major influence on team spirit, not to forget that he can still score. In the beginning last season we let Whelan and Walters go for peanuts and the rest of the team looked lost without them. Have we learned anything from that? The team also looked lost with them as that’s why they were allowed to leave or are we rewriting history? The results are there in black and white for Walters and Whelan last season with us
|
|
|
Post by stokesupporter on Jul 30, 2018 7:51:28 GMT
We should keep Crouch. He has a major influence on team spirit, not to forget that he can still score. In the beginning last season we let Whelan and Walters go for peanuts and the rest of the team looked lost without them. Have we learned anything from that? That we should have replaced them properly? You can't keep players forever just because they're kegger-in-chief in the dressing room. No, not forever. This is a big transition period for the club though and we need leading characters like Crouch. Why the sudden obsession of throwing out our good servants and replacing them with a mediocre players who's heart really isn't here? Will Shawcross be the next in line?
|
|
|
Post by stokesupporter on Jul 30, 2018 7:54:48 GMT
The team also looked lost with them as that’s why they were allowed to leave or are we rewriting history? The results are there in black and white for Walters and Whelan last season with us We stayed up comfortably with those two on board. We relegated after they left. And yes, they were replaced with mercenaries.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 30, 2018 7:59:02 GMT
That we should have replaced them properly? You can't keep players forever just because they're kegger-in-chief in the dressing room. No, not forever. This is a big transition period for the club though and we need leading characters like Crouch. Why the sudden obsession of throwing out our good servants and replacing them with a mediocre players who's heart really isn't here? Will Shawcross be the next in line? It’s not an obsession, they’d reached the end of the line and we got decent money for them. Shawcross is still an important first choice player. If we keep Crouch and he’s happy to sit on the bench all season great. If he’s offered a crack at the prem and Europe though you could understand him wanting to go and I don’t think at this stage he’s an enormous loss providing we bring in an adequate replacement.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 30, 2018 7:59:54 GMT
The team also looked lost with them as that’s why they were allowed to leave or are we rewriting history? The results are there in black and white for Walters and Whelan last season with us We stayed up comfortably with those two on board. We relegated after they left. And yes, they were replaced with mercenaries. We were tanking with them in the team as well. The thrashings were happening, performances were dreadful, it was all part of the same trajectory.
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Jul 30, 2018 8:01:17 GMT
That we should have replaced them properly? You can't keep players forever just because they're kegger-in-chief in the dressing room. No, not forever. This is a big transition period for the club though and we need leading characters like Crouch. Why the sudden obsession of throwing out our good servants and replacing them with a mediocre players who's heart really isn't here? Will Shawcross be the next in line? Shawcross is 30 and can lead our back four for 3-4 seasons yet (if he keeps injury free), Crouchy is 37! Crouchy will not be a regular starter, probably on good money as well so we might need his wages to purchase someone more important to our cause. Hopefully we can offload Adam, Imbula, Berahino and Afellay (just as well pay up his contract now with the latest injury). I would like to add Fletcher too, but I think he could be vital in the dressing room and on the training field. It depends on who we bring in really. We still need another left back/central defender, hopefully one who can cover both positions, and we certainly need another goalscorer/striker. That is the minimum we need if we hope for promotion.
|
|
|
Post by M on Jul 30, 2018 8:03:53 GMT
How long does Crouch have on his contract? Can't imagine the club would seriously consider taking a few hundred grand as a trade off for someone who is massive in stature (and size) for the club and will be a big need this season, unless he's told the club he wants to go...
|
|
|
Post by MilanStokie on Jul 30, 2018 8:07:34 GMT
There are pros and cons to selling/keeping him
the biggest con to keeping him is that he is probably one of the top earners still. I'd guess around 40k per week? it's difficult to fathom how that's sustainable in this league for his age and the fact he's potentially 3rd choice.
if it suits him and the club and we find a replacement then it makes sense to part ways.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Jul 30, 2018 8:08:07 GMT
How long does Crouch have on his contract? Can't imagine the club would seriously consider taking a few hundred grand as a trade off for someone who is massive in stature (and size) for the club and will be a big need this season, unless he's told the club he wants to go... I think he is on a yearly renewal at the moment. So I would imagine that he has a contract until next June.
|
|
|
Post by stokesupporter on Jul 30, 2018 8:08:20 GMT
No, not forever. This is a big transition period for the club though and we need leading characters like Crouch. Why the sudden obsession of throwing out our good servants and replacing them with a mediocre players who's heart really isn't here? Will Shawcross be the next in line? It’s not an obsession, they’d reached the end of the line and we got decent money for them. Shawcross is still an important first choice player. If we keep Crouch and he’s happy to sit on the bench all season great. If he’s offered a crack at the prem and Europe though you could understand him wanting to go and I don’t think at this stage he’s an enormous loss providing we bring in an adequate replacement. He wouldn't be a starter at Burnley either and I'm pretty sure he would have more playing minutes with Stoke. But if he definitely wants to go we should let him leave, but only after being clearly told that we definitely would like to keep him here. We have yet again seen that bringing in decent players is very very difficult. Given the time we have it's almost impossible.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 30, 2018 8:50:21 GMT
It’s not an obsession, they’d reached the end of the line and we got decent money for them. Shawcross is still an important first choice player. If we keep Crouch and he’s happy to sit on the bench all season great. If he’s offered a crack at the prem and Europe though you could understand him wanting to go and I don’t think at this stage he’s an enormous loss providing we bring in an adequate replacement. He wouldn't be a starter at Burnley either and I'm pretty sure he would have more playing minutes with Stoke. But if he definitely wants to go we should let him leave, but only after being clearly told that we definitely would like to keep him here. We have yet again seen that bringing in decent players is very very difficult. Given the time we have it's almost impossible. Yes but they’re in the Premier League and in Europe. We’re not. We have a full week and reportedly have options we’re looking at so it seems a long way from being impossible.
|
|
|
Post by GreaterGlasgowstokie on Jul 30, 2018 9:02:27 GMT
There are pros and cons to selling/keeping him the biggest con to keeping him is that he is probably one of the top earners still. I'd guess around 40k per week? it's difficult to fathom how that's sustainable in this league for his age and the fact he's potentially 3rd choice. if it suits him and the club and we find a replacement then it makes sense to part ways. More like 60k - 70k a week
|
|
|
Post by dadofsam on Jul 30, 2018 9:12:08 GMT
Weren't we told all wages had been halved on relegation?
|
|
|
Post by stokesupporter on Jul 30, 2018 9:16:22 GMT
We have yet again seen that bringing in decent players is very very difficult. Given the time we have it's almost impossible. Yes but they’re in the Premier League and in Europe. We’re not. We have a full week and reportedly have options we’re looking at so it seems a long way from being impossible. With almost a full summer window behind us now I must say I admire your positivity re. signing 5-6 players Rowett still wants including a decent replacement for Crouch.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Jul 30, 2018 9:16:28 GMT
We should keep Crouch. He has a major influence on team spirit, not to forget that he can still score. In the beginning last season we let Whelan and Walters go for peanuts and the rest of the team looked lost without them. Have we learned anything from that? The team also looked lost with them as that’s why they were allowed to leave or are we rewriting history? The results are there in black and white for Walters and Whelan last season with us I am sure Walters scored for us in his last season with us !, how many did Berahino score last season ?
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Jul 30, 2018 9:20:52 GMT
He wouldn't be a starter at Burnley either and I'm pretty sure he would have more playing minutes with Stoke. But if he definitely wants to go we should let him leave, but only after being clearly told that we definitely would like to keep him here. We have yet again seen that bringing in decent players is very very difficult. Given the time we have it's almost impossible. Yes but they’re in the Premier League and in Europe. We’re not. We have a full week and reportedly have options we’re looking at so it seems a long way from being impossible. In the process we trust , impossible no however with Laurel and Hardy doing the negotiating highly improbable.
|
|
|
Post by cheadlestokie on Jul 30, 2018 9:24:06 GMT
The team also looked lost with them as that’s why they were allowed to leave or are we rewriting history? The results are there in black and white for Walters and Whelan last season with us I am sure Walters scored for us in his last season with us !, how many did Berahino score last season ? Look, it was time for Walters and Whelan to go. Walters barely played for Burnley and Whelan was ok for Aston Villa but in the Championship. Don't give me the crap about being good in the building. The disgrace was that although it was clear for some time that both had reached their sell by dates the Manager completely failed to replace them adequately as he had completely failed to replace N'Zonzi before them and Arnautovic later
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Jul 30, 2018 9:32:11 GMT
I am sure Walters scored for us in his last season with us !, how many did Berahino score last season ? Look, it was time for Walters and Whelan to go. Walters barely played for Burnley and Whelan was ok for Aston Villa but in the Championship. Don't give me the crap about being good in the building. The disgrace was that although it was clear for some time that both had reached their sell by dates the Manager completely failed to replace them adequately as he had completely failed to replace N'Zonzi before them and Arnautovic later Did I say it wasn't time for them to go, I was just pointing out that he was more useful as a striker than the useless Berahino who is still here mainly because unlike Walters and Whelan no one wants him !, Crouch will be missed if he goes as he is still our plan B as you pointed out yet another Pulis player who has not been replaced properly by the chuckle brothers and Mark and his team.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 30, 2018 9:35:39 GMT
Yes but they’re in the Premier League and in Europe. We’re not. We have a full week and reportedly have options we’re looking at so it seems a long way from being impossible. With almost a full summer window behind us now I must say I admire your positivity re. signing 5-6 players Rowett still wants including a decent replacement for Crouch. I don’t think we’ll get five or six but I could see another three. There’s the loan window as well don’t forget.
|
|
|
Post by johnnysoul60 on Jul 30, 2018 9:36:34 GMT
Not sure he would play that many games for Burnley with Wood Vokes and Barnes and maybe Rodriguez going back , useful option for us for me a lot need shifting out before him Diouf and Berahino are two worse to start with in the striker department
|
|
|
Post by cheadlestokie on Jul 30, 2018 9:50:23 GMT
Look, it was time for Walters and Whelan to go. Walters barely played for Burnley and Whelan was ok for Aston Villa but in the Championship. Don't give me the crap about being good in the building. The disgrace was that although it was clear for some time that both had reached their sell by dates the Manager completely failed to replace them adequately as he had completely failed to replace N'Zonzi before them and Arnautovic later Did I say it wasn't time for them to go, I was just pointing out that he was more useful as a striker than the useless Berahino who is still here mainly because unlike Walters and Whelan no one wants him !, Crouch will be missed if he goes as he is still our plan B as you pointed out yet another Pulis player who has not been replaced properly by the chuckle brothers and Mark and his team. You won't get any arguments from me about Walters being better by far than Berahino - so far at least (ever the optimist)
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jul 30, 2018 9:52:11 GMT
That we should have replaced them properly? You can't keep players forever just because they're kegger-in-chief in the dressing room. No, not forever. This is a big transition period for the club though and we need leading characters like Crouch. Why the sudden obsession of throwing out our good servants and replacing them with a mediocre players who's heart really isn't here? Will Shawcross be the next in line? With a bit of luck
|
|
tribe
Youth Player
Posts: 303
|
Post by tribe on Jul 30, 2018 10:34:36 GMT
There is absolutely nothing in this deal for us.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2018 10:40:53 GMT
It took me till HT to figure out the St. Pauli stream and I wish I hadn’t bothered. The low point was Diouf (who I really like because he’s a decent bloke) missing a sitter that my gran could have scored and she died in 1965. I’d keep Crouch and let the other two go in a fire sale to save the wages. That only works if someone will take them. Big wages and no goals = we are stuck with with them. Then take the hit and end the contracts. They have no place at the club so what is the point of keeping them on the books? It's like paying a spectator £40,000 a week to come and watch. In truth at least the spectator is interested. Pay them up and get them gone. Then learn the costly lesson.
|
|
|
Post by JurgenVandeurzen on Jul 30, 2018 10:55:20 GMT
Getting rid of our second best striker on the eve of a new season, with seemingly no replacement lined up - sounds like a Stoke thing to do.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Jul 30, 2018 11:08:22 GMT
Getting rid of our second best striker on the eve of a new season, with seemingly no replacement lined up - sounds like a Stoke thing to do. Replace him with a lampost. We'll be no worse off.
|
|