Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
teblin

Mame Biram Diouf

By teblin, in Transfer Talk

Recommended Posts

AS78UK

AS78UK

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, The whole world smiles said:

Your are either attention seaking or you can't remember the Taylor era!

 

We have signed James Maddison, Ricardo Perieia and Jonny Evans this Window. All exciting highly rated players that every side outside the top 6 would be delighted to sign. It's hardly Trevor Benjamin, Matthew Jones and Dennis Wise. Get a grip man for God's Sake.

 

Thank you, think i needed that!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Koke

Koke

Posted
Posted

The PeterTaylor comparisons are tragic lol

 

Taylor dismantled a decent team. Puel is  trying to move on aging players and average players (Simpson, Musa, King, Ulloa, Slimani). Which one of these players are gonna take City foward? None. Plus, Taylor replaced a highly rated manager who was finishing top half. Puel replaced Shakespear who had us 17th before he got sacked ffs.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oadby.fox

oadby.fox

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, Koke said:

The PeterTaylor comparisons are tragic lol

 

Taylor dismantled a decent team. Puel is  trying to move on aging players and average players (Simpson, Musa, King, Ulloa, Slimani). Which one of these players are gonna take City foward? None. Plus, Taylor replaced a highly rated manager who was finishing top half. Puel replaced Shakespear who had us 17th before he got sacked ffs.

I agree we need to move a few players on, but why should we replace them with the same kind of quality or worse!? 

 

Ghezzal is actually older than Musa and Diouf is another one that is over 30. Both have been relative failures at their previous clubs as well and don't show any likely sign of improvement. So I'd ask which of these players is going to take our club forward? Hopefully with Ghezzal being 26, he has a little time on his hands to improve and if he does then we could get a few years out of him. That's still a big if though.

 

If we end up paying £10mil for Ghezzal and £15mil for Diouf, then I think the mood will continue to sour. It screams sheer incompetence to me. Especially if those players/the team don't hit the ground running. I personally was resigned to having the squad we did have before Ghezzal came in, and I quite liked the idea of clearing out players and only bringing in those who would actually have the potential to improve us/would have some resale value. 

 

The idea that we have to replace players that were so far away from the first team that they were on loan is ludicrous.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gerard

Gerard

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, oadby.fox said:

I agree we need to move a few players on, but why should we replace them with the same kind of quality or worse!? 

 

Ghezzal is actually older than Musa and Diouf is another one that is over 30. Both have been relative failures at their previous clubs as well and don't show any likely sign of improvement. So I'd ask which of these players is going to take our club forward? Hopefully with Ghezzal being 26, he has a little time on his hands to improve and if he does then we could get a few years out of him. That's still a big if though.

 

If we end up paying £10mil for Ghezzal and £15mil for Diouf, then I think the mood will continue to sour. It screams sheer incompetence to me. Especially if those players/the team don't hit the ground running. I personally was resigned to having the squad we did have before Ghezzal came in, and I quite liked the idea of clearing out players and only bringing in those who would actually have the potential to improve us/would have some resale value. 

 

The idea that we have to replace players that were so far away from the first team that they were on loan is ludicrous.

 

"Sheer incompetence" is the right phrase.

 

As a club we're attractive to any player in the world outside a few hundred. If up to £15m for Diouf is the best we can do then someone needs sacking. I was ecstatic with our early season business of Pereira, Evans and Maddison. All three were certain first team starters which improved positions for us that we'd been crying out for.

 

The Ward signing was awful. A world record fee for a reserve GK who was 25 and had a poor season in the Championship. As soon as we'd signed him I was 99% certain that we'd never be able to get our money back on him at any point if we decided to sell from that moment onwards. 

 

Ghezzal was another poor signing. He's not without talent but after having a negative net spend it's a poor choice to spend good money on a player that has basically failed throughout his career and in a key position.

 

Diouf probably takes the biscuit though. He's not even good enough to start for a Championship side, 31 later this year and we want to spend a fortune on him. I wouldn't mind if he was a free agent like Hernandez who came here. He wasn't good enough and six months later he was back in Spain for a small profit but what value does anyone at the club think we'll get out of Diouf?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
STUHILL

STUHILL

Posted
Posted

I just want to emphasis, that I think this would be a woeful signing! Not just in terms of the player we would be getting, but also the idea that our recruitment team and/or Puel, think these are the types of players we should be buying to take us forward. Scary!

 

To play devil's advocate and also help me not top myself if this does actually happen, I have been reading Stoke's opinion of him on their forum - Many find the transfer fee laughable and asked if they are paying us that amount to take him... However, there are many also, that definitely do not want to sell and do see the value of having a player like him in the team. Described as  '...A selfless, work horse, that can play as striker, winger or ever a full-back (apparently). He does very little wrong, and will consistently work his socks off and also contribute with some important goals (occasionally).'

 

I imagine the club see him as someone who will sit on the bench all season, but also when called on, will bust a gut and create chances for others and maybe chip in with a handful of goals himself. That said, this would still be a dubious signing even if it was on a Free and I'm clutching at straws big time to try understand this for anything close to the £10million being rumoured.

 

Hopefully it's simply not true, but it was interesting to see at least a portion of Stoke fans, see his value in a team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Babylon

Babylon

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, STUHILL said:

I just want to emphasis, that I think this would be a woeful signing! Not just in terms of the player we would be getting, but also the idea that our recruitment team and/or Puel, think these are the types of players we should be buying to take us forward. Scary!

 

To play devil's advocate and also help me not top myself if this does actually happen, I have been reading Stoke's opinion of him on their forum - Many find the transfer fee laughable and asked if they are paying us that amount to take him... However, there are many also, that definitely do not want to sell and do see the value of having a player like him in the team. Described as  '...A selfless, work horse, that can play as striker, winger or ever a full-back (apparently). He does very little wrong, and will consistently work his socks off and also contribute with some important goals (occasionally).'

 

I imagine the club see him as someone who will sit on the bench all season, but also when called on, will bust a gut and create chances for others and maybe chip in with a handful of goals himself. That said, this would still be a dubious signing even if it was on a Free and I'm clutching at straws big time to try understand this for anything close to the £10million being rumoured.

 

Hopefully it's simply not true, but it was interesting to see at least a portion of Stoke fans, see his value in a team.

My mine gripe isn't the player particularly, he is as you say a squad man who gives 100%, he'll serve a certain purpose. There is no harm in having a few grafters in the squad, you need them.

 

It's the fee in relation to the sort of player he is, his age and the head scratching squad building that's going on.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Babylon

Babylon

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, STUHILL said:

I just want to emphasis, that I think this would be a woeful signing! Not just in terms of the player we would be getting, but also the idea that our recruitment team and/or Puel, think these are the types of players we should be buying to take us forward. Scary!

 

To play devil's advocate and also help me not top myself if this does actually happen, I have been reading Stoke's opinion of him on their forum - Many find the transfer fee laughable and asked if they are paying us that amount to take him... However, there are many also, that definitely do not want to sell and do see the value of having a player like him in the team. Described as  '...A selfless, work horse, that can play as striker, winger or ever a full-back (apparently). He does very little wrong, and will consistently work his socks off and also contribute with some important goals (occasionally).'

 

I imagine the club see him as someone who will sit on the bench all season, but also when called on, will bust a gut and create chances for others and maybe chip in with a handful of goals himself. That said, this would still be a dubious signing even if it was on a Free and I'm clutching at straws big time to try understand this for anything close to the £10million being rumoured.

 

Hopefully it's simply not true, but it was interesting to see at least a portion of Stoke fans, see his value in a team.

My mine gripe isn't the player particularly, he is as you say a squad man who gives 100%, he'll serve a certain purpose. There is no harm in having a few grafters in the squad, you need them.

 

It's the fee in relation to the sort of player he is, his age and the head scratching squad building that's going on.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gerard

Gerard

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, STUHILL said:

I just want to emphasis, that I think this would be a woeful signing! Not just in terms of the player we would be getting, but also the idea that our recruitment team and/or Puel, think these are the types of players we should be buying to take us forward. Scary!

 

To play devil's advocate and also help me not top myself if this does actually happen, I have been reading Stoke's opinion of him on their forum - Many find the transfer fee laughable and asked if they are paying us that amount to take him... However, there are many also, that definitely do not want to sell and do see the value of having a player like him in the team. Described as  '...A selfless, work horse, that can play as striker, winger or ever a full-back (apparently). He does very little wrong, and will consistently work his socks off and also contribute with some important goals (occasionally).'

 

I imagine the club see him as someone who will sit on the bench all season, but also when called on, will bust a gut and create chances for others and maybe chip in with a handful of goals himself. That said, this would still be a dubious signing even if it was on a Free and I'm clutching at straws big time to try understand this for anything close to the £10million being rumoured.

 

Hopefully it's simply not true, but it was interesting to see at least a portion of Stoke fans, see his value in a team.

 

There are people on here who think Benalouane has been a reasonable signing.

 

Diouf is 31 later this year, has never done much in the PL and now finds himself on Stoke's bench. How anyone at Leicester thinks this is a good use of the club's resources is beyond me. £10m on a 31 year old Championship reserve .

 

I'm not saying he isn't without certain qualities, even Hitler was an animal lover but he'll be another one who comes here as a squad player with no resale value, no chance of improving and sitting on the bench for three years taking a wage. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Babylon

Babylon

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Gerard said:

 

There are people on here who think Benalouane has been a reasonable signing.

 

Diouf is 31 later this year, has never done much in the PL and now finds himself on Stoke's bench. How anyone at Leicester thinks this is a good use of the club's resources is beyond me. £10m on a 31 year old Championship reserve .

 

I'm not saying he isn't without certain qualities, even Hitler was an animal lover but he'll be another one who comes here as a squad player with no resale value, no chance of improving and sitting on the bench for three years taking a wage. 

Benny looks a sodding snip at £6m now lol

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wymsey

Wymsey

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, Max Power said:

Im sure if we signed him it would to play wide right rather than up front but still hoping this is pure fabrication 

Agreed.

Unless, maybe, a deal has been agreed for another LCFC forward to leave already but the club is trying to (albeit hopefully not) get this one over the line first..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Max Wall

Max Wall

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, Paddy. said:

Diouf is a prime example of a Category D footballer. His ineptitude was so outstanding it actually made a long term impression on me.

This line is all that was required but I enjoyed the thought and effort you put into the unexpurgated post too. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...