Saint Ezequiel!

  • 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!
Joe! said:
Point 2 is the one I'd focus on. Points 1 and 3 are true, but not really indicative of whether or not loans are a good idea.

If we don't spend a big chunk of this cash, I'll worry about it ever being spent. We don't need to spend all of it this summer, but taking three players on loan definitely seems like a cause for concern. On the other hand you can explain two of them as the only deal we could get for Osvaldo. Can't really explain the Bertrand one though. That's a red flag for me.
Click to expand...

You don't buy the temporary support to Targett without blocking his progress then?
 
Joe! said:
Not really. I'd buy it if we didn't have lots of money.
Click to expand...

I still hope that's the reason. Why buy (no matter how much money we have) someone on a 3/4 year contract if we think Targett is that close to being first team?

The money is irrelevant in this case for me.
 
fatletiss said:
I still hope that's the reason. Why buy (no matter how much money we have) someone on a 3/4 year contract if we think Targett is that close to being first team?

The money is irrelevant in this case for me.
Click to expand...

Because you want two good players competing for every position. If Targett only gets in the team because his competition is poor then that's no good, is it?
 
Joe! said:
Because you want two good players competing for every position. If Targett only gets in the team because his competition is poor then that's no good, is it?
Click to expand...

I get that, but isn't that what they're doing with Bertrand. I don't think he's that bad a player. If he does a good job and Targett comes through we may even sign him next year (not for 10m, I hope) or bring in another player then.
 
From Saint-Charlie on SaintsWeb:

I asked a couple of Italian Journos on Twitter if Taider and Schelotto were good signings:

Journo 1:

I think they are good moves, especially Taider. Schelotto can be very good but is inconsistent

Journo 2:

Good players, especially Taider, but Schelotto plays well if used properly. He (Schelotto) is an old-fashioned right-winger, high energy, decent crosser. Good enough for PL? Probably, yeah


For what it's worth, the journalists he spoke to are guys who are close with Di Marzio and run his website with him.
 
- Doing The Lambert Walk said:
From Saint-Charlie on SaintsWeb:

I asked a couple of Italian Journos on Twitter if Taider and Schelotto were good signings:

Journo 1:

I think they are good moves, especially Taider. Schelotto can be very good but is inconsistent

Journo 2:

Good players, especially Taider, but Schelotto plays well if used properly. He (Schelotto) is an old-fashioned right-winger, high energy, decent crosser. Good enough for PL? Probably, yeah


For what it's worth, the journalists he spoke to are guys who are close with Di Marzio and run his website with him.
Click to expand...

Well that doesn't sound too bad. Still want that BIG SIGNING though!
 
- Doing The Lambert Walk said:
From Saint-Charlie on SaintsWeb:

I asked a couple of Italian Journos on Twitter if Taider and Schelotto were good signings:

Journo 1:

I think they are good moves, especially Taider. Schelotto can be very good but is inconsistent

Journo 2:

Good players, especially Taider, but Schelotto plays well if used properly. He (Schelotto) is an old-fashioned right-winger, high energy, decent crosser. Good enough for PL? Probably, yeah


For what it's worth, the journalists he spoke to are guys who are close with Di Marzio and run his website with him.
Click to expand...

Well if Schelotto is cover for Tadic on the right then I think that's fair. We have no experienced cover on the wings. Taider sounds promising from a lot of different sources.
 
Joe! said:
Point 2 is the one I'd focus on. Points 1 and 3 are true, but not really indicative of whether or not loans are a good idea.

If we don't spend a big chunk of this cash, I'll worry about it ever being spent. We don't need to spend all of it this summer, but taking three players on loan definitely seems like a cause for concern. On the other hand you can explain two of them as the only deal we could get for Osvaldo. Can't really explain the Bertrand one though. That's a red flag for me.
Click to expand...

Yep we seem to be going for the opex route rather than capex. Which does concern me. Maybe in a few days everything may seem rosier (fingers crossed).
 
Blow these loaner midfielders I want to get the positions we desperately need filling like GK, 2xCBs and 2xStrikers!
We already have enough midfielders for goodness sake or are we going to sell some more of our players?
 
AshbySaint said:
Yep we seem to be going for the opex route rather than capex. Which does concern me. Maybe in a few days everything may seem rosier (fingers crossed).
Click to expand...

Kreuger did say all the money was available, but had to cover transfers and their operating costs. Players are on such high wages that a reasonable chunk of our money will go on their wages and associated costs. Loans still cost money, even if you avoid a big initial outlay. I think we need so many players, loans were inevitable.
 
Just remembered I had him on FIFA a few yeas ago! <laugh> Also had Wanyama before we bought him.

I remember the song I had for him:
Just one Schelotto, give it to me...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back