Mihai
Full Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2013
- Messages
- 4,622
Yes, the "experts" who take "MEN Sport understands" as gospel. Those "experts".Those damm "experts" with their fancy Google research tool, eh?
Yes, the "experts" who take "MEN Sport understands" as gospel. Those "experts".Those damm "experts" with their fancy Google research tool, eh?
And what about if you just type into google "David Brooks 40m" and see it being mentioned many times Bournemouth are looking for 35-40m well before this link?Yes, the "experts" who take "MEN Sport understands" as gospel. Those "experts".
Makes no sense at all. In a covid climate, to spend £40m on a player to sit on the bench?Would be a very good squad option and a definite upgrade on what we have outside Bruno. 23, can play on the right of through the middle or deeper if necessary. And a localish lad from Warrington. Makes too much sense really doesn’t it?
Sounds like a decent lad too.Would be a very good squad option and a definite upgrade on what we have outside Bruno. 23, can play on the right of through the middle or deeper if necessary. And a localish lad from Warrington. Makes too much sense really doesn’t it?
He isn't shit. He's a young player with potential who has had a serious injury. Anything over £20m at this moment in time is absurd though. Better options in Europe for 30-40m. City just signed Ferran Torres for £24m.I'm convinced 80 percent of the outraged experts calling him shit have never watched him play.
Any reputable sources?And what about if you just type into google "David Brooks 40m" and see it being mentioned many times Bournemouth are looking for 40m well before this link?
Ferran Torres had 12 months left on his contract and made it clear he wasn't going to sign a new one.He isn't shit. He's a young player with potential who has had a serious injury. Anything over £20m at this moment in time is absurd though. Better options in Europe for 30-40m. City just signed Ferran Torres for £24m.
I completely agree with this. He was a huge loss for them this season and is by far their most creative player.Maybe not but such is life.
I'm fairly sure that had Brooks not got a long term injury Bournemouth wouldn't have been relegated.
No harm signing players from relegated teams. We signed Keane from a relegated team. Went pretty well...
Depends what a reputable source is too you, i am guessing the Bournemouth manager and chairman....Any reputable sources?
It still doesn't justify bringing a substitute player in for £40m if thats what the price is. When was the last time anyone spent £40m on a player to add strength to the subs bench? He's clearly not a player who makes our first 11.Ferran Torres had 12 months left on his contract and made it clear he wasn't going to sign a new one.
What a terribly underwhelming transfer window that would be. Far from decent window. Btw, VDB isnt'likely to come to us according to most reports.I can foresee this being a £25 to £30 million fee with add ons taking it to £40 million. It’s not a bad move if it’s in addition to getting a top draw CB and CM. Pau Torres, van de Beek and Brooks would be a decent window, if we don’t get Sancho, and all can be obtained in the range of the Sancho fee.
Link?Depends what a reputable source is too you, i am guessing the Bournemouth manager and chairman....
There's even a link to West ham and Sheffield United several weeks ago and the mentioned fee was 35m..
Who's calling him sh*t ?I'm convinced 80 percent of the outraged experts calling him shit have never watched him play.
Never heard of either of them (the first two), but it sounds a lot like "the grass is always greener" and the frankly silly notion that the exotic foreign player must be superior to the proven homegrown/domestic/PL-experienced one.Yeah, still don't want him.
For 40m pound, we could add a bit and get Aouor? So why get this guy?
Soler at Valencia will be a better value.
There are many options out there and added to the fact that Brooks has been out for a year, it can't be predicted how he comes back.
If we are hell bent on getting a relegated player, Buendia will be a better value for cheaper.
About 2 weeks ago, from the exact same club as Brooks.It still doesn't justify bringing a substitute player in for £40m if thats what the price is. When was the last time anyone spent £40m on a player to add strength to the subs bench? He's clearly not a player who makes our first 11.
Teams spend 40 million on squad players all the time, it's the going rate.It still doesn't justify bringing a substitute player in for £40m if thats what the price is. When was the last time anyone spent £40m on a player to add strength to the subs bench? He's clearly not a player who makes our first 11.
Read the thread.Who's calling him sh*t ?
That's City though and the only club that can compete with them in terms of spending limitlessly is PSGAbout 2 weeks ago, from the exact same club as Brooks.
Oh sorry, I thought you meant that Bournemouth chairman and manager confirmed Brooks would cost 40 million.
Yes. I prefer not to sign a single player who won’t expect to be in our first 11.This would be one of the most absurd signings we could make if the reports of £30-40m are true.
For those arguing that it would give us squad depth, thats a completely flawed argument. He doesn't improve our first eleven which means he would be a bench player. You don't pay £40m to bring a player to sit on your bench. You aim for players who will get into your first eleven such as Sancho. If you get Sancho, he naturally benches one of our first eleven players. The one that drops out of the first XI would then become the one that strengthens our bench options. That's how you strengthen squad depth.
You mean the same club that spent £50m on Mendy and £50m on John Stones. £100m money well spent. Great example mate. Let’s do the same.About 2 weeks ago, from the exact same club as Brooks.