Social media always seem to be in meltdown. Social media seems to be the origin of the meaning of the word meltdown.
Call me crazy, but I'm starting to think it might not be a truly representative sample of either our fanbase or, more widely, rational human beings at all.
My concern is whenever they mention Palace and us in negotiations for the same player they are talking about a loan with a commitment to buy at the end of the period whilst we are quoted as wanting an option!
We will need see Hugnil play but he looks a back up player for exactly times like we have at the moment, a role Sakho would have likely played if he could have been bothered. I doubt we would have bought him had Carroll not been injured and Sakho sold but as this is the current picture I think we need a striker and one who can hopefully hit the ground running and bring a few goals between now and the end of the season when filling in for injuries or replacing players later in games when needing press for a goal. I would have preferred a loan for a Giroud or Bats but in the absence of that sort of business I think it's a reasonable attempt at filling a need.
We are replacing a lump of dead wood in Sakho with a player who will, at the very least, try his heart and soul to get into the first team, and will try his damnedest any time he gets on the pitch, imo.
I am hoping not too much Fortuneseeker as I think getting anything for Sakho was good as I expected him to walk in the summer so the extra we pay which may be around 4-5m (not sure what is being suggested) will be about right and I would imagine wages are likely not massive as has come from Div 1.
He looks strong and alongside Arnie's greater ability but equal strength on the ball they could be quite a handful if playing together at times.
All talking about him like he's signed. So far Ayew hasn't left and this other fella hasn't signed. Not long left now. Still think there will be 0 more signings.
All talking about him like he's signed. So far Ayew hasn't left and this other fella hasn't signed. Not long left now. Still think there will be 0 more signings.
I reckon we'll get Hugill done, and sell Ayew to Swansea.
If, however, we haven't addressed the DM position by the end of the window, particularly given the shenanigans with Carvalho in the summer, I won't be best pleased.
Sakho and Ayew going Mario on loan and a bloke from Preston Yep I’m happy with lol
Are you serious, or being sarcastic? ;hmm
I’m sooooo excited
Makes me think the latter.
But then who is the Macca85 who previously said he
- thought Mario looked good in last nights game - thinks it is better to loan rather than buy if we are getting players from outside the PL. - wants 'young blood' rather than players late 20's 30s (Hugill + Mario, both 25) and - (I quote) "We have unearthed some very good players from the lower leagues and I think that's where we should be focusing a lot of our attention".
So will I even after some of the duff signings we have made over many years, but if we are approaching deals with the can we have an option to buy later instead of an outright purchase or a loan deal with some kind of commitment on our part it isn't going to convince a prospective player that we are that keen to have them or have I missed something?
Do we know if SuperMario was available to buy, and if so whether he would have signed a permanent deal?
Didn't seem to cause an issue with Manu.
I suspect if we offer contracts to players we first take on loan, it will be the size of the paycheck/contract length that convinces them we want them, rather than whether or not we had them on loan first.
He was great when he came to us. I think it says more about West Ham and what happens to players once they have been with us for a little while than him. He scored against PSG first game . Zaza, Snodgrass are other recent examples of players who join us becoming poor but leaving and improving straight away. Hugill is very cheap and the number of clubs he has been loaned to long (Tranmere , Hartlepool etc) None of the teams were decent though.
Aleksandar Mitrovic’s proposed loan to Anderlecht has broken down because Anderlecht have failed to sell another player to fund the move, Sky Sports News understands.
Sakho hadn't really played above the second division in France, so I'm not convinced he was great when he came. Rather, he came and settled quickly and was prolific. And he was a lump of deadwood in the sense that he hasn't started a league game in about 300 years
re Giroud, I agree that the £30.00 number initially banded about was steep , I wish we had had the resolve to just go in with about bid of £18m or so to find out if there was any interest.
If he really has gone for that money, I think that is a bargain.
Going back in the thread to negotiation tactics, the difference in football is that the asset you are after is a human being with feelings, there is merit in making a bid that makes the target actually feel wanted, we are not bidding for an inaminate object such as a building or a financial deal.
I of course understand the principle of not just paying what the seller wants but there is a case for going in with a realistic assessment of value.
I know the discussion moved on, but as an individual, if I was led to believe that I was worth X and an offer came in at literally half that amount, I certainly would not be feeling the love.
Comments
Call me crazy, but I'm starting to think it might not be a truly representative sample of either our fanbase or, more widely, rational human beings at all.
The family name apparently derives from an old Norse word meaning "hollow" or "ravine".
I'm just surprised it isn't doesn't mean "carthorse". [See also the Anglo-Saxon "carroll".]
My concern is whenever they mention Palace and us in negotiations for the same player they are talking about a loan with a commitment to buy at the end of the period whilst we are quoted as wanting an option!
;doh
This will take us to the next level?
It's down to how much it will cost us and could that money have got someone else from the Championship if that is where we are now looking?
We are replacing a lump of dead wood in Sakho with a player who will, at the very least, try his heart and soul to get into the first team, and will try his damnedest any time he gets on the pitch, imo.
And he might turn out to be any good.
http://www.skysports.com/transfer/news/11705/11230892/west-ham-midfielder-moses-makasi-joins-plymouth-argyle-on-loan
He looks strong and alongside Arnie's greater ability but equal strength on the ball they could be quite a handful if playing together at times.
If true, I'd assume that deal is pretty much dead.
If, however, we haven't addressed the DM position by the end of the window, particularly given the shenanigans with Carvalho in the summer, I won't be best pleased.
But then who is the Macca85 who previously said he
- thought Mario looked good in last nights game
- thinks it is better to loan rather than buy if we are getting players from outside the PL.
- wants 'young blood' rather than players late 20's 30s (Hugill + Mario, both 25)
and
- (I quote) "We have unearthed some very good players from the lower leagues and I think that's where we should be focusing a lot of our attention".
He's certainly an improvement over Ayew, and I'm looking forward to watching him play.
If Hugill comes, I'll back him, like I would anyone in the shirt.
So will I even after some of the duff signings we have made over many years, but if we are approaching deals with the can we have an option to buy later instead of an outright purchase or a loan deal with some kind of commitment on our part it isn't going to convince a prospective player that we are that keen to have them or have I missed something?
(I am being sarcastic, in case you weren't sure.)
Do we know if SuperMario was available to buy, and if so whether he would have signed a permanent deal?
Didn't seem to cause an issue with Manu.
I suspect if we offer contracts to players we first take on loan, it will be the size of the paycheck/contract length that convinces them we want them, rather than whether or not we had them on loan first.
Didn't they do well? ;doh
He was great when he came to us. I think it says more about West Ham and what happens to players once they have been with us for a little while than him. He scored against PSG first game . Zaza, Snodgrass are other recent examples of players who join us becoming poor but leaving and improving straight away.
Hugill is very cheap and the number of clubs he has been loaned to long (Tranmere , Hartlepool etc) None of the teams were decent though.
Aleksandar Mitrovic’s proposed loan to Anderlecht has broken down because Anderlecht have failed to sell another player to fund the move, Sky Sports News understands.
Yup Dedoncker deal is dead in the water.
Sakho hadn't really played above the second division in France, so I'm not convinced he was great when he came. Rather, he came and settled quickly and was prolific. And he was a lump of deadwood in the sense that he hasn't started a league game in about 300 years
If he really has gone for that money, I think that is a bargain.
Going back in the thread to negotiation tactics, the difference in football is that the asset you are after is a human being with feelings, there is merit in making a bid that makes the target actually feel wanted, we are not bidding for an inaminate object such as a building or a financial deal.
I of course understand the principle of not just paying what the seller wants but there is a case for going in with a realistic assessment of value.
I know the discussion moved on, but as an individual, if I was led to believe that I was worth X and an offer came in at literally half that amount, I certainly would not be feeling the love.
Just my tuppence worth