Jump to content

Ethan Ampadu


momo

Recommended Posts

Lazy kink I reckon based upon if we didn’t go up and him being a target perhaps .. There is no way will they give us an option to buy, he is 18 yo and has undoubted quality but why would he join as a squad filler ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, thabucks said:

Lazy kink I reckon based upon if we didn’t go up and him being a target perhaps .. There is no way will they give us an option to buy, he is 18 yo and has undoubted quality but why would he join as a squad filler ? 

Oh, do tell us more...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/07/2019 at 11:04, thabucks said:

Lazy kink I reckon based upon if we didn’t go up and him being a target perhaps .. There is no way will they give us an option to buy, he is 18 yo and has undoubted quality but why would he join as a squad filler ? 

Is a lazy kink getting your gimp mask on but then you can’t be arsed?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, useless said:

Having a medical with Leipzig RB, according to Sky.

They are forming quite the team this season.

Lookman, now Ampadu. Someone out there has football brains I must say.

I look forward to our friendly with them in a few weeks with keen interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, useless said:

Having a medical with Leipzig RB, according to Sky.

So be it. You have to wonder whether we ever really wanted him on loan.

Perhaps the player chose Leipzig because he likes a German wurst and a bier, or does Frank still hold a grudge from the play-off final? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 16/07/2019 at 11:11, Villan_of_oz said:

I'm not sure how you can categorically rule it out. I've said it before to do so would be both arrogant and negligent. If player A can be loaned in for a season to fill a gap we otherwise can't fill and that helps us stay in the PL, why would anyone have a problem with that.

I don't want 5 loan signings but do be so against any loan is madness imo.

We've got the whole window and done our business early, "with 2 or 3 more to come" why would we leave a gap?

We look to have or aim to have 2 players for each position and bought young players. Lets let them develop as our own players over a few years rather than opting to develop other teams youngsters then send them back better players (whilst blocking the development of our own players).

The hierarchy have already stated we wont be doing this and why its a bad business model so don't know why people keep bringing it up every few days

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Junxs said:

We've got the whole window and done our business early, "with 2 or 3 more to come" why would we leave a gap?

We look to have or aim to have 2 players for each position and bought young players. Lets let them develop as our own players over a few years rather than opting to develop other teams youngsters then send them back better players (whilst blocking the development of our own players).

The hierarchy have already stated we wont be doing this and why its a bad business model so don't know why people keep bringing it up every few days

Haha that's the pot calling the kettle black. I only bring it up when I see someone comment how much they hate loans. As I've stated repeatedly, I don't understand how you can rule them out categorically because you don't know until deadline day if you have a big enough squad.

If we do then that's fantastic! If we still have holes in our squad and we don't feel the youth is good enough ........ Then you loan someone in.

Hope that is clear enough for you 😊

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never understood this link. Why would we develop another teams player? He is too young and raw to go in and make a difference for us right away. We would just spend our time and money to develop him. Young players needs game time, letting them make mistakes and have patience with them. If he is as good as reported, the Chelsea would just take him back after we had made him a proper player. No logic in this. If Chelsea payed us lots of money for it I would make sense for us, but that's not probable. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Junxs said:

I don't believe we were ever in for him in the first place

We might have been but I doubt we would have taken him on a season long loan without any option to make it permanent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â