And Maguire he just loaned out. He didn't really give Bowen opportunities either. In the second tier he could at least have used him as a sub at times.
Sir Matt would not want to take credit. He was not full of his own importance like the twatting Managers and Chairmen we have now.
I understand the comparisons being made but it's hard to judge the profit on Bruce's spending when the market increases by such an amount each year. The increase in premier league money just blows transfer fees out of the window. Look at Clucas. Same for every player we are buying now. If the transfer market continues on the same trend, any player we buy now for 4million is likely to be worth 6 or 7 million next year alone.
He loaned Maguire out for his first season with us, but played him 33 times in the second season. He didn't play Bowen at all.
He didn't give Bowen a single opportunity. Bowen was promoted to training with the senior squad and made his debut under Phelan. And he was found, scouted, spoken to, signed and managed by Pennock. I don't see what Bruce has to do with him.
And under Phelan Maguire got a contract extension. Bruce definitely had his priorities, such as extending Elmo.
No he didn't, he couldn't agree a new deal (we just triggered the one year extension in his old deal).
I was about to post something similar. The rate of inflation on player costs is ridiculous and makes any comparison of what we paid 3 or 4 years ago and fees we're getting back now very difficult.
MODS Is there a chance you can do a thread called BRUCEYS PROFIT/LOSS ON PLAYERS and we can keep the transfers thread for .......city transfers
I've wasted enough time moving stuff out of here already today, thanks. How much we've made on player transfers is a perfectly reasonable thing to have on a transfer thread anyway.
