Nobody signs to be 2nd choice but that's the way it works. If your cover is ****e then you start losing when the 1st choice is injured. I'm surprised you don't understand this mate. We're not Mike ashleys nufc anymore we're a club that wants to be the biggest club in the world. All prem clubs have decent 11,s, but It's about being able to withstand injuries, suspensions the higher you go up the division. Rotation substitutions and having another option for certain games is another strength you need.
Should go in for Joe Gomes off Liverpool, play's across the back 4, R/C/L Back and only 22. I'd pay $40m for him over anyone we've been linked with.
I'm not saying we should sign a crap back up player, I'm simply saying we don't need to be spending near 20m on back up fullbacks. If we get Targett, which would be my first choice, if he gets injured then we have multiple players that can cover that position - Trippier, burn, manquillo. I would like a decent back up, but we don't need to spend 21m on this Madrid kid as back up. I get your point. I understand. We have money, so we should spend it on making the squad strong, I'm saying buying targett and this kid seems a bit like Overkill. Are we in a position where we start spending 15-20m on back up options? Do we need to spend that much? We wont have an unlimited budget. This is my assumption, but it's a reasonable assumption considering the owners have said this is going to be a slow and steady process, which we're going to approach carefully. We have other areas in our team that need strengthening - Mainly CB's and strikers, which may cost 100m combined. A left back is important for us, but do you really think we'll have the budget to spend 35-40m on lb's on top of all the other things we'll need? We don't need two first team quality LB's, just a main choice and a back up. Like I said before, Targett and this kid sounds like overkill.
Personally I think left back has been so deprived for so long that it isn't overkill... We've spent loads on other areas. Does it mean not buying other players? No. It's not back up both are 1st team players.. That's just how it works these days... Target would play some and he'd play in others.
It doesn't mean not buying other players, but what do you think our transfer budget will be? Do you think it will be unlimited? I don't think so. I agree we need a first choice LB and a back up, but I don't think we need to spend 35-40m to get first choice LB and a back, and the fact that we're being linked to this kid implies we may not get targett. I don't think we'd buy Targett to be cover, and I don't think we'd spend 21m on this kid to be a back up for targett. It's either going to be one or the other.
We need two left backs that's all I know and if both are good players great This idea you need 11 good players and a few crap ones backing them up is for the 90s. The more good players we have the better that's as far a I think about it. Money isn't my concern in a fan let the businessmen look after that they know better
