|
|
Post by anarchicalan on Jan 14, 2009 23:22:57 GMT
Just seen on SSN that Bullard may be on his way to Bolton for around £5m - if that goes through then I don't want us paying more than £2.5m for Ledley. Bullard is a damn fine player and I can't see £5 being enough, but if it is, then we need to do some hard bargaining to get Ledley for his proper comparative worth.
I know it's a seller's market most of the time, but surely the powers that be have to use their brains at some point!
|
|
|
|
Post by garyhackett on Jan 14, 2009 23:25:42 GMT
Bullard is a fantastic player, Ledley is very over rated.
|
|
|
|
Post by bogus on Jan 14, 2009 23:25:58 GMT
I suppose the only thing would be that Bullard would have little re-sale value, he's 29 already, but Ledley is buying enormous potential.
I do agree that Bullard is the better player, at the moment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Jan 14, 2009 23:27:49 GMT
On what I've seen it would have to be Bullard.
There are pros and cons as in everything. Bullard is about to hit 30 and has a questionable injury record but is Premier class and I'm sure would prove to be a top signing.
Ledley is much younger and a good prospect but hasn't played a single game at this level. Given time he may well blossom into a top player but the question is have we got the time?
Given we payed £3M for Seyi, a £5m move for Bullard (even if he is out of contract in the summer) would be an excellent purchase.
I just doubt we would be prepared to match his wage demands.
|
|
|
|
Post by potterspride88 on Jan 14, 2009 23:34:48 GMT
no brainer for me, got to be bullard
|
|
|
|
Post by victoriaboothenboy on Jan 14, 2009 23:40:02 GMT
If TP/PC think Bullard is the better option they could offer up yo £7 million (the price the seemingly will play for Ledley). The question is for the money they pay, how many years can they serve the club-obviously Ledley has the longer career ahead of him. Right now the priority is survival and with that in mind I would go for Bullard
|
|
|
|
Post by Ursemboy on Jan 14, 2009 23:42:23 GMT
Isn't it brill to be linked with all these players, no more "blown out the water" Lets text to the big screen  For LEDLEY text 65000 For BULLARD text 50000  |
|
|
|
Post by anarchicalan on Jan 14, 2009 23:54:37 GMT
Actually, we aren't linked with Bullard, and as far as I'm aware, we never have been.
My point is that if he's only worth £5m, then Ledley must be worth less tahn £5m.
Even allowing for the age difference, Ledley has had a few injuries too according to some posters on here, (I don't know that much about him to be honest), every signing has a risk value and I honestly don't think SCFC should be drawn into the "fleece 'em" trap.
|
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Jan 14, 2009 23:56:10 GMT
re Bulllard: we're mentioned as an interested party in today's Sun, for what that's worth.
|
|
|
|
Post by anarchicalan on Jan 15, 2009 0:14:42 GMT
Well, I've had my say, I'm off to bed.
I want to see extra players in, but I don't want the money spent unwisely.
|
|
|
|
Post by BraveSirRobin on Jan 15, 2009 0:19:35 GMT
its not your money so fuck it!
|
|
|
|
Post by anarchicalan on Jan 15, 2009 0:28:38 GMT
OK, I was going to bed, but I have to reply to such a moronic attitude!
It's not my money?
Really?
I could go into the reasons why "saint" Peter is so rich, or how we as the punters and buyers of the advertisers' wares, their TV packages et al, actually pay ALL the costs of football either directly or indirectly, but I doubt you'd grasp it.
I'll just say that I'm wary and have genuine concerns by listing these clubs who spent unwisely and find themselves distanced from the premiership by many a mile - regardless of what you think about their teams, their fans have invested just as heavily in time, money and emotion in their teams as we have in SCFC.
The money men have shown a terrible disregard for their feelings. I don't want SCFC to be in the same boat, is that OK?
Luton
Charlton
Liecester
Leeds
Sheff Weds
MK Dons (formerly Wimbledon)
possibly soon to be followed by West Ham and who knows who else.
"fuck it" indeed!
|
|
|
|
Post by arniepieinthesky on Jan 15, 2009 0:51:23 GMT
I'd love see Bullard at Stoke, that would really put the icing on the cake for this transfer window. He is about to hit 30, but if he could stay clear of injuries then he would give a good 3/4 years, players keep themselves alot fitter nowa days, well all accept Big Jon Parkin. So 100% Bullard out the two, Ledley's a great prospect I'm sure, but 7million on a maybe is lot of money. However I dont think we will bring in Bullard, so If Ledley were to come in I'm sure he would bring something to the team, but he wont have long to get up to speed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 15, 2009 1:50:35 GMT
Ledley has had a few injuries too according to some posters on here anarchicalan56 can you provide a link to any of the posts on this message board that you claim say Ledley has had a few injuries? Ledley is on 199 games for Cardiff, and is aged just 21. That is an absolutely INCREDIBLE record for somebody so young. The maths pretty much tell you all need to know with regard to his time out due to injurys.  |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Jan 15, 2009 7:40:42 GMT
Actually, we aren't linked with Bullard, and as far as I'm aware, we never have been. My point is that if he's only worth £5m, then Ledley must be worth less tahn £5m. Even allowing for the age difference, Ledley has had a few injuries too according to some posters on here, (I don't know that much about him to be honest), every signing has a risk value and I honestly don't think SCFC should be drawn into the "fleece 'em" trap. Bullard is a talented player and would improve our side but he is 9 years older than Ledley and has a much worse injury record. On that basis I can understand why TP might think that Ledley offers better value for money. As to whether Ledley is actually worth £6 million or £7 million, possibly not, but if Coates is prepared to fund him (on lower wages than Bullard?) and TP wants him then I'll go along with that because, from what I have seen he WILL improve our central midfield. AND he is young enough to have room for improvement and he will certainly have more resale value if we ever get relegated. |
|
|
|
Post by Danstoke82 on Jan 15, 2009 8:11:56 GMT
I would still have Ledley, he has bags of potential and could be a gem for us. Ok so we will pay a lot for him, but so what?! it's not our money!!. Theres no doubting Bullard is an ace player, but is injury record isn't great and obviously as most mention he is a lot older than Ledley.
Sorry guys, I will probably get stick but I'd rather Ledley.
|
|
|
|
Post by Staffsoatcake on Jan 15, 2009 11:06:13 GMT
Get both of them. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by sgtpotter89 on Jan 15, 2009 11:13:37 GMT
agreed ;D if it was to be 1 of them i'd go for ledley |
|
|
|
Post by matt1986 on Jan 15, 2009 11:25:01 GMT
No brainer IMO, Bullard is proven premiership quality and thats what we need
|
|
|
|
Post by Bick on Jan 15, 2009 11:46:09 GMT
I would MUCH prefer bull over led! BUT it is true that Ledley has his best to come, and Bullard will soon be over the hill.
|
|
