Jump to content

Transfer Speculation Summer 2016


Guest av1

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, CarewsEyebrowDesigner said:

Bamford would be a good signing but I can see someone like Bournemouth getting him.

Would he go though? Two failed loans already. Think he needs a permanent and regular football. Getting promoted with a team and pushing on..

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, rodders0223 said:

Would he go though? Two failed loans already. Think he needs a permanent and regular football. Getting promoted with a team and pushing on..

I'd love him here but I don't know if he'd come, I think he just needs a run of games

Link to comment
Share on other sites

similarly to Gayle, I do not really get the hype with Bamford. One good and one not so good loan spells in the Champions, two bad in the premier league, doesn't really sound like a £10m + player to me. at 22 it is make or break and for that kind of money, you would expect him to at least have shown something in the premier league. Similarly Dwight Gayle, just don't get what he has done that is so amazing, happy that he wen't to Newcastle. If we are going to spend such money on a striker, I would rather have one that has produced the goods in more than one season or go creative and find some foreigner or something.   

Bamford fell below players such as Gayle, Chamakh and Wickham, Fraizer Campell and Adebayor in Palace's pecking order. Mbokani (granted I think he is decent) and Cameron Jerome were valued higher in Norwich. These are not what I would call amazing strikers and I would not feel confident in signing a striker for £10m + that is worse than those.

Edited by Chicken Field
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A striker who's shown something in the Premier League will cost a lot more than £10m. We just need someone who's proven that they can score goals in the Championship, and Bamford has the advantage of being young so can still develop into a prem striker. Norwich didn't play him and perhaps they should have done, looking at what happened to them.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, useless said:

A striker who's shown something in the Premier League will cost a lot more than £10m. We just need someone who's proven that they can score goals in the Championship, and Bamford has the advantage of being young so can still develop into a prem striker. Norwich didn't play him and perhaps they should have done, looking at what happened to them.

I agree with you useless, I think he's a very good, young striker with scope to improve

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, useless said:

A striker who's shown something in the Premier League will cost a lot more than £10m. We just need someone who's proven that they can score goals in the Championship, and Bamford has the advantage of being young so can still develop into a prem striker. Norwich didn't play him and perhaps they should have done, looking at what happened to them.

I'm pretty sure Norwich will have looked at his 13 games without a goal and I might be totally wrong, but they might be judging him based on training. There are many players that look brilliant as youngsters that just don't develop and instead decrease in ability. Also there are many one season wonder strikers out there ! I trust Norwich's and Palaces judgement better than youtube clips or one season he had. 

Edited by Chicken Field
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chicken Field said:

I'm pretty sure Norwich will have looked at his 13 games without a goal and I might be totally wrong, but they might be judging him based on training. There are many players that look brilliant as youngsters that just don't develop and instead decrease in ability.

I think you are correct but I don't see that in Bamford, I've seen quite a few interviews of him and he seems to have his head screwed on. He's a really good finisher I think, knows where the goal is

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sir_gary_cahill said:

I think you are correct but I don't see that in Bamford, I've seen quite a few interviews of him and he seems to have his head screwed on. He's a really good finisher I think, knows where the goal is

I must admit to having never seen to much of him myself :) So I must not judge him to hard myself ;) Just think that £10m + seems like a lot. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, dudevillaisnice said:

 

£6m for Westwood would be very good indeed.

Yep.

I like Westwood and think he'd do a good job in the Championship. But I don't think we can turn our noses up at £6m if that's true.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

I agree with you useless, I think he's a very good, young striker with scope to improve

I agree. He's got some silky touches and lethal in the box when in the right team. Hopefully he can find a team to settle down in rather then the 6 months loans here and there and then will hit his potential.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at some of the mooted and actual transfer fee in the Premier League - Dann £20m, Tomkins £10m, Deeney £30m, Igahlo £35m, Westwood £6m, etc, has got me thinking if it's possible to build a Premier League capable squad whilst in the Championship at a fraction of the cost?

Obviously it's all relative to the level of income these teams now have, but they're not really adding much quality for these prices. If we do end up losing Gana, Adama and Ayew then I hope we get top dollar for them (unless relegation clauses prevent us from doing so).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, rodders0223 said:

6m? No chance.

40k? No chance.

 

 

I needed a few seconds to let that sink in. £40k pw. Wow, just wow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...
Â