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
HighPeakFox

Luke Thomas

By HighPeakFox, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

Jimmy

Jimmy

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Jobyfox said:

I agree he’s been “fine” this season. As we’ve declined as a team we’re now meeting his levels.

 

Is he the player you sign to get you out of the division or is he the player you sign because you’re planning for a long stay? I think that’s the worry of the 4 years. It feels like either a lack of ambition or adjusting to meet our new reality 

Neither he's the player you re-sign to provide squad depth while strengthening other areas of greater priority.

 

Whilst also knowing if someone else does want him you now have a stronger hand to negotiate with.

 

If we just let all the players go on a free what incoming funds do we use offset money spent to buy players?

  • Like 2
Dan

Dan

Posted
Posted

It's one of them that you could probably gloss over if they didn't have previous for giving out stupid contracts for nothing. I remember all of the same being said about the Choudhury deal.

 

Four years is ridiculous to be honest. I've really seen nothing to convince me he could be a PL left back, and if we're giving four years, then absolutely that should be the case.

  • Like 1
Donwebbio

Donwebbio

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, JimJams said:

Maybe he didn't want less?  And maybe he's cheap.

 

Fact is he's one of a number of players that would be out of contract next summer.  So rather than need to replace 2 mids in Winks and Soumare, 2 fullbacks in Ricardo and Thomas, 2 forwards in Daka and Ayew, we have one less thing to think about next summer.  We could be in trouble if we just let them all run down their contracts and Thomas is probably one of the easier and cheapest to sort.

 

We're going to have a big headache next year just keeping a squad together, so this is a simple fix for a small potential problem. 

I agree with most of what you are saying but 4 years is excessive for an average player. 2 would have been ideal, 3 years just about fine, but 4 years totally unnecessary. 4 year deals should be there for locking in your top tier talent.

Edited by Donwebbio
  • Like 1
Claudio Fannieri

Claudio Fannieri

Posted
Posted

I have no issue with this, he is more than capable for the level we will be at for the next couple of years and this gives us some protection to secure a future fee which would be 100% profit for PSR so as long as it’s on a sustainable wage structure then it’s a very sensible move by the club. 
 

My only concern with LT is his lack of physicality, he does get out muscled a lot and be bullied by physical pacy players. 

  • Like 2
LCFCJohn

LCFCJohn

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Dan said:

It's one of them that you could probably gloss over if they didn't have previous for giving out stupid contracts for nothing. I remember all of the same being said about the Choudhury deal.

 

Four years is ridiculous to be honest. I've really seen nothing to convince me he could be a PL left back, and if we're giving four years, then absolutely that should be the case.

It all depends if the wages are ones we could sell him. That was the problem with Choudhury. Even then Sheff Utd were potentially winning that play off final from signing him. 

Trav Le Bleu

Trav Le Bleu

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, VLC86 said:

Quoting someone who can’t count to call others thick doesn’t scream irony at all.

Calling something ironic that someone called someone thick for not being unable to count when that wasn't actually what happened is ironic.

 

 

  • Haha 1
Trav Le Bleu

Trav Le Bleu

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, JimJams said:

Maybe he didn't want less?  And maybe he's cheap.

 

Fact is he's one of a number of players that would be out of contract next summer.  So rather than need to replace 2 mids in Winks and Soumare, 2 fullbacks in Ricardo and Thomas, 2 forwards in Daka and Ayew, we have one less thing to think about next summer.  We could be in trouble if we just let them all run down their contracts and Thomas is probably one of the easier and cheapest to sort.

 

We're going to have a big headache next year just keeping a squad together, so this is a simple fix for a small potential problem. 

There are worse problems in the team.

 

That people are doing their nut over this is almost moon on a stick levels of requirement.

Edited by Trav Le Bleu
  • Like 1
Jobyfox

Jobyfox

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Jimmy said:

Neither he's the player you re-sign to provide squad depth while strengthening other areas of greater priority.

 

Whilst also knowing if someone else does want him you now have a stronger hand to negotiate with.

 

If we just let all the players go on a free what incoming funds do we use offset money spent to buy players?

Never like the argument of signing players for “squad depth”. I’d always rather sign better players who, by definition, then create squad depth. 

  • Like 1
BKLFox

BKLFox

Posted
Posted

DeSilva didn’t outshine him other than maybe has more pace & Bidwell isn’t any better than him.

 

Which LBs in the championship are so far ahead of him they make him look as bad as this forum thinks? 

  • Like 3

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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