Carroll value or not?

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
lamby

lamby

Needs a cold shower
Oct 3, 2011
59,398
42,546
113
64
Mitcham, Surrey
Looks like Andy Carroll will finally sign for West Ham today for £15m. He's scored 7 goals in 24 games for the Hammers and previously scored only 6 goals in 44 games for Liverpool. That after he cost them £35m.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22959336#

At the same time Darren Bent who has a miles better strike rate is allegedly available from Villa for al little as £8m. I know who I'd rather buy!

Question is Andy Carroll actually value for money or is he just all hype?
 
Carroll is the better deal if they can keep him fit due to his age and resale value. I'd be less concerned about the fee and more his 100,000p/w wages.
 
Liverpool have got a great deal IMO. I know it's a £20m loss but to recoup £15m for nothing other than a lump of a target man, I'd say that's great business.
 
Football in the premier league is progressing beyond players like Carroll.

Whilst he has tremendous ability in the air and will cause opposition defenders problems his current technical failings will mean he will simply fade into obscurity over the coming seasons as I just don't think he has the right attitude to improve.
I will be in shock if West Ham get there money back
 
Channonfodder said:
I think they were desperate, Fran. They had just sold Torres to Chelsea for £50M and had only a few days left in the transfer window. What good value that worked out to be!
Click to expand...

I've never taken the £35m figure too seriously. The rumour is that Liverpool told Chelsea Torres would cost whatever Newcastle wanted for Carroll plus £15m. If true, the Carroll fee is irrelevant really and Chelsea are the only ones who paid over the odds.
 
Puck said:
I've never taken the £35m figure too seriously. The rumour is that Liverpool told Chelsea Torres would cost whatever Newcastle wanted for Carroll plus £15m. If true, the Carroll fee is irrelevant really and Chelsea are the only ones who paid over the odds.
Click to expand...

If true, means that effectively Liverpool sold Torres for 30 million (if you take off their loss on Carroll). Probably that was also nearer to what Torres is actually worth...though I think he is a better player than he looks at Chelsea.
 
Carroll's issue is that he will only really suit certain teams. There is no doubt he is a handful to cope with when he wants to play rather than fight, whinge and moan. He is actually ok with the ball.

There are 100,000 reasons why this deal is daft, stupid and epitomizes everything that is wrong with English football. West Ham will benefit from this deal, I am fairly sure. If he stays fit and plays, he'll do well for them.

The scariest part for me is that other over-rated English footballers will now look at this deal and think, "If Andy Carroll is worth 100k a week, what am I worth?".... and so the spiral upwards continues and drives our glorious game to destruction.
 
Over-rated and over-priced. He's little more than a tall lump up front. He has no technical ability other than jumping and heading and more often than not his headers and knock-ons go nowhere because he doesn't have the intelligence of a true striker.

Andy Carroll's matches consist of him jumping and heading, jumping and heading, running a bit and then jumping and heading. Brilliant. The one time when he actually scored a decent goal was against West Brom. However, the media was raving like he'd scored a 50 yard volley from over his shoulder or something. The ball came in, he watched it, got lucky with the strike and it went in from 2 yards. Come on guys, we see this every week. But because Carroll is a media darling, we were forcible made to feel like we were witnessing England's answer to Zlatan Ibrahimović.

In short, no, Carroll is not value for money in any way, shape or form.
 
saintgreg10 said:
Over-rated and over-priced. He's little more than a tall lump up front. He has no technical ability other than jumping and heading and more often than not his headers and knock-ons go nowhere because he doesn't have the intelligence of a true striker.

Andy Carroll's matches consist of him jumping and heading, jumping and heading, running a bit and then jumping and heading. Brilliant. The one time when he actually scored a decent goal was against West Brom. However, the media was raving like he'd scored a 50 yard volley from over his shoulder or something. The ball came in, he watched it, got lucky with the strike and it went in from 2 yards. Come on guys, we see this every week. But because Carroll is a media darling, we were forcible made to feel like we were witnessing England's answer to Zlatan Ibrahimović.

In short, no, Carroll is not value for money in any way, shape or form.
Click to expand...

Not sure who the "Come on Guys " is aimed at. Seems most people have agreed with you in some variation of comment or another.
 
I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I'm actually a fan of Andy Carroll. He's obviously not worth £35m, or £100k a week in wages. However, for £15m, I don't think it's a bad deal (though presumably the wages are still a bit high). Bear in mind that he's still young; he's only 24, younger than Adam Lallana. It's pretty special for him to have such physical presence at his age, and to be such an animal aerially. I remember him coming on in the Euros and changing the game for us. He's not bad technically either. I thought us Saints fans would be a bit more sensitive to that, having seen Lambert systematically written off for just being a big, old-fashioned, target man.
 
He suits West Ham to a T and is one of the best options available for what they're looking for, and probably the safest option, but £15m and £100kp/w is having a laugh, no doubt about that. Although then again, these days... Who knows...
 
fatletiss said:
Carroll's issue is that he will only really suit certain teams. There is no doubt he is a handful to cope with when he wants to play rather than fight, whinge and moan. He is actually ok with the ball.

There are 100,000 reasons why this deal is daft, stupid and epitomizes everything that is wrong with English football. West Ham will benefit from this deal, I am fairly sure. If he stays fit and plays, he'll do well for them.

The scariest part for me is that other over-rated English footballers will now look at this deal and think, "If Andy Carroll is worth 100k a week, what am I worth?".... and so the spiral upwards continues and drives our glorious game to destruction.
Click to expand...

It's amazing how few people seem to notice this. Imo Carroll is subject to the same to the same blinkered outlook from fans as Peter Crouch often is. They see a big man, in Carroll's case also a strong one, and assume he's a one dimensional player. He isn't. If he knuckles down and works hard, Andy Carroll can flourish at West Ham, and also make a contribution to England.
 
Saint Birdsnest said:
I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I'm actually a fan of Andy Carroll. He's obviously not worth £35m, or £100k a week in wages. However, for £15m, I don't think it's a bad deal (though presumably the wages are still a bit high). Bear in mind that he's still young; he's only 24, younger than Adam Lallana. It's pretty special for him to have such physical presence at his age, and to be such an animal aerially. I remember him coming on in the Euros and changing the game for us. He's not bad technically either. I thought us Saints fans would be a bit more sensitive to that, having seen Lambert systematically written off for just being a big, old-fashioned, target man.
Click to expand...

"A bit high". That's my issue with the deal. 100k for someone who is not outstanding is so wrong.
 
Saint Birdsnest said:
I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I'm actually a fan of Andy Carroll. He's obviously not worth £35m, or £100k a week in wages. However, for £15m, I don't think it's a bad deal (though presumably the wages are still a bit high). Bear in mind that he's still young; he's only 24, younger than Adam Lallana. It's pretty special for him to have such physical presence at his age, and to be such an animal aerially. I remember him coming on in the Euros and changing the game for us. He's not bad technically either. I thought us Saints fans would be a bit more sensitive to that, having seen Lambert systematically written off for just being a big, old-fashioned, target man.
Click to expand...

Carroll does well what he does well. But West Ham is setting themselves up for a huge amount of trouble...if it's true that he's on a six-year deal, their total financial commitment with transfer fee, wages and bonuses could approach £50m. That's a massive amount of downside and very little upside; he'd have to turn into a far better player than anyone has seen to date to justify breaking their budget to that extent.

Also very curious to see where they go from here; they have, in effect, committed more than £15m this upcoming year just to keep a player that they had the year previous. Yes, they have the move to the Olympic Stadium in a couple years, but the likely inflation of their wage bill all but guarantees that they'll be going into that arrangement with a sizable pile of debt. They barely survived a year in the Championship; if things go sideways for whatever reason, their situation will be beyond dire.
 
100k a week is a joke. Looks like Carroll and his agent had West Ham eating out of their hands in desperation to keep him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back