James Tarkowski

[JJD_LCFC]

One of our weakest areas are from DEF and ATT set pieces. Tarkowski will help us with this. 
He is better with the ball at his feet than people think. 35 million for a proven premier league player, with potential to push for future England matches. May not be as exciting as we all want but he provides great strength to where we are a bit weak. Very good option I think. 

[GingerrrFox]

Think Tarkowski might be a bit disappointed at the end of this window, i get the feeling he’s a chess piece that’s been used to bring other clubs in line for different targets. 

[Gevans_97]

Have my heart set on Fofana for many reasons (age, ceiling, sell on value, current squad) but let’s not be silly here - Tarkowski would be a fantastic signing for us. 

[FrankieADZ]

im not sure how long hes got left on his contract tbh but if its 2 yrs i reckon we'll go in for him next year and more than likey get him

 

if we dont get him this

[HighPeakFox]

Can I just check - which overly-familiar possessive shortening of his surname is official here? Tark, Tarks, Tarky or (for shame) Tarka?

[ALC Fox]

1 hour ago, murphy said:

 

You're probably right, but the argument is whether Tarkowski represents good value by using two world record fees as benchmarks.

 

I think he would be good for us but we will be overpaying.  Look at the signing of Castagne.  He must be worth double.  That is how we progress as a club, by finding value, not by following United's clumsy missteps.  It looks like that might not be possible this time though.

 

Yeah I agree that's how we progress. We're a club that normally has to factor in resale value in deciding whether a transfer is worth it. Tarkowski probably doesn't have that unless he bosses it for a season and one of the big boys come knocking in 12 months.

 

I also agree it's not worth comparing the transfers of Stones and Maguire. We rinsed Man Utd for a player living off the back of a good World Cup and a perception of being decent on the ball despite having the turning circle of a P&O ferry. And Stones was supposed to be England's future at centre half but it's not materialised.

 

With Tarkowski, it would be a departure from our normal strategy. But, sometimes a player for the present moment becomes available and will fit in. I think he could be here for 4-5 seasons personally. As long as we don't spend too much money on several of this type of signing, leaving us with an aging, past-it squad in a couple of seasons, I think we'll be alright.

[1972 Fox]

24 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

Can I just check - which overly-familiar possessive shortening of his surname is official here? Tark, Tarks, Tarky or (for shame) Tarka?

Tarks sounds best to me. Rolls off the tongue nicely.

 

We'll be calling him something different though if he stays at Burnley.

[Dahnsouff]

Just now, Blue Fox 72 said:

Tarks sounds best to me. Rolls off the tongue nicely.

 

We'll be calling him something different though if he stays at Burnley.

Think if he stays at Burnley, he might have a new name for us as well....

[Walshy5]

Am I the only one who would rather have Tarkowski than Fofana? A proven premier league defender who wouldn't need time to settle in and would hit the ground running. I'm not doubting Fofana's ability but he's only 19, still raw with no premier league experience and would need time to settle in. Everyones saying that there's no sell on value with Tarks but we're not buying him to sell. We'd be buying him in the peak of his career and would hopefully be getting a good 5-6 years out of him.

Edited 29 September 2020 by Walshy5

[Dahnsouff]

Can only imagine Tarks is the backup, as we would prefer Fofana just because he represents our model (albeit at a hugely increased cost)

 

..unless we are forward planning of course

[Al-aLondon-Foxile]

45 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

Can I just check - which overly-familiar possessive shortening of his surname is official here? Tark, Tarks, Tarky or (for shame) Tarka?

I think you’re getting otter!

[ARM1968]

3 minutes ago, Al-aLondon-Foxile said:

I think you’re getting otter!

I’ll just go with Mr. Bang Average

[VLC86]

Hilarious when Dyche doesn’t have a penny to spend because we buy Fofana instead.

[Leicester_Loyal]

1 hour ago, GingerrrFox said:

Think Tarkowski might be a bit disappointed at the end of this window, i get the feeling he’s a chess piece that’s been used to bring other clubs in line for different targets. 

Yeah I think we'll get Fofana then go back in for Tarks next summer or sign him on a free the summer after.

[GingerrrFox]

1 minute ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Yeah I think we'll get Fofana then go back in for Tarks next summer or sign him on a free the summer after.

Seems the most logical option to me. Get the hot shot prospect in and then we can use this season to assess whether Jonny Evans is worth a contract extension and re-look at Tarkowski next summer when we will have an even stronger hand in the negotiations. 

[turtmcfly]

1 hour ago, HighPeakFox said:

Can I just check - which overly-familiar possessive shortening of his surname is official here? Tark, Tarks, Tarky or (for shame) Tarka?

 

If he's shit it'll be Owski

 

[MGLCFC]

Tarkowski for me. £35m is a lot of money, but he would be low risk. £35m for Forfana is high risk. No Prem experience, indeed no real experience at all. It's a real gamble that could go either way. What we don't need right now is another Benkovik who was also highly rated, but still isn't ready to compete for a place in the starting Xl.

ideally, buy both and loan Fofana back for a season to gain more experience.

[Guest Fktf]

This feels more likely to happen than fofana?Dyche desperate for players, and selling gives them the funds they need - bit like us a chilwell.

[urban fox]

after Sunday's performance i can see Burnley asking for Amartey as part of a swap deal. Big Dan plus £30m? Might be workable, and tempting but we saw how good he can be for us so not sure i would let him go. He would certainly be a sensible target for Dyche though due to his versatility.

[GingerrrFox]

If we can get Fofana now and then get Tarkowski for cheaper next summer why not?

[surrifox]

1 hour ago, HighPeakFox said:

Can I just check - which overly-familiar possessive shortening of his surname is official here? Tark, Tarks, Tarky or (for shame) Tarka?

The Tarkmeister General 

[tickler28]

I say we walk away from this one....£37 million for a 27 year old centre back....no thanks. We have Evans, Soyuncu, Fuchs, Morgan and Amartey.....even Benkovic and Ndidi when he's fit.....I say we manage with what we have and look for a left back

[Dahnsouff]

£27m + Dan for Tarks

€27m + Slim for Fofana

[Les-TA-Jon]

19 minutes ago, GingerrrFox said:

If we can get Fofana now and then get Tarkowski for cheaper next summer why not?

Because between suspensions, extra games and Evans' injury record, we need a proven CB now, not later

[urban fox]

1 minute ago, Dahnsouff said:

£27m + Dan for Tarks

€27m + Slim for Fofana

Think Burnley might go for that, but would rather keep big Dan. Surely he is worth more than £8M after that comeback.

If we offer Slim to ASSE they would up the price to £50M+