The way hughton said "we have 5 strikers at the momet" was basically implying that that's too many by my reckoning. I will be astonished if he hasn't got another striker lined up. I would be concerned going with just holt,morison,jackson and martin for atleast the first few months of the season.
i was told months ago (back in january when there were rumours that he was joining) that he is not on the radar and won't be as he's considered a) not good enough, b) too expensive and c) unbelievably his wage demands will be too high, so unless something dramatic happens, he won't be coming here. i'm not trying to annoy people over this, but people keep banging on about him and its not going to happen so it gets a bit boring.
I've just seen it a few times in the papers and the net, it doesnt suprise me and proberbly explains why they signed clayton and scanell etc!
yeah, they pay big wages up at huddersfield, hence why clark got the boot for not being able to get them anywhere near the top two (among other misdemeanours). surprised its that much but as i say, his demands would have been out of our reach so i knew they must be high
Also, Supers, how many lower league goal machines have in recent seasons got big money moves only to flop in their new environment. At least Vaughan got his early training at a Premiership club. I just can't see any sense in sending him out on loan. If he continues to be injury prone the other Club will send him back, if he does well he will come back with a big reputation, be pursued by other clubs and leave City with little power to keep him as he will be in the final year of his contract. After watching last nights game I think we need all the pace we can muster up front.
The question is, how many goalscorers are there across Europe and further afield who are in our price range? Quite a few I would imagine, Rhodes has just caught up in the inflated fee bracket and so it will only be a mug club who will pay the wages and fee that is required to sign him! He may well be good enough but what huddersfield and rhodes want money wise is just not worth the risk!
Exactly this must be a bad rumour, it makes no sense whatsoever to loan out Vaughan who looks in fine form, I think his bad luck with injuries must be behind him. Someone else mentioned before the partnership of Holt and Vaughan looks very sharp, someone with great awareness and the abilility to knock on balls as Holt can and someone with pace and strength (more than Jackson) should be a brilliant partnership.
thing is, rhodes may very well end up being the best thing since sliced bread but unless someone is prepared to pay the ludicrous transfer fee and wages, we'll never find out. its quite right that we aren't in the market for him because it would risk the vast majority of our modest transfer budget. i'd much rather it be invested in areas we are short on such as full back and DM. if rhodes value was £2.5m then i think there'd be takers but at £7m (up front) it isn't going to happen and that exactly why he's been priced like that, so nobody tries to sign him!
I didn't see anything in CH's remarks quoted in the EDP to suggest Vaughan was going anywhere. Rather the contrary in fact. I wish people wouldn't call rumour "news". News has to be true, otherwise it isn't news!
From actually listening to the interview with CH, he said, "No one is going anywhere at the moment, as I am still assessing all of the players". I quite expect we'll know more as the match against Fulham approaches
