Sol thewall Bamba Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 1 hour ago, davieG said: Brentford agree terms with free agent Ben Mee as ex-Burnley captain eyes instant return to the Premier League… with 32-year-old defender set to become the Bees’ fourth major signing of the summer https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-11037071/Brentford-agree-terms-bring-former-Burnley-captain-Ben-Mee-West-London.html Probably kills their interest in Vestegaard if they had any.
Dan Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 2 hours ago, Out Foxed said: seen some west ham fans say he actually only had 9 good games anyway. This is essentially what I mean. It's one good run of form. He's done nothing in the last 3 years that Iheanacho hasn't. 1
Izzet is God Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 25 minutes ago, FoyleFox said: West Ham tried to get him back in Jan, as I recall, but Man U said no. And fairly sure it's been reported West Ham were trying again this window, but not offering as high wage deal as Forest have. Fair enough. Shows that West Ham didn’t think he was worth 80k a week though.
Richard Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 3 hours ago, Izzet is God said: Fair enough. Shows that West Ham didn’t think he was worth 80k a week though. Reported that West Ham offered him £150k a week but Forest offered £200k
Guest Col city fan Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 The Florists have now signed 11 new players. Talk about ‘having a go’ Bloody Hell!
AKCJ Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 35 minutes ago, Col city fan said: The Florists have now signed 11 new players. Talk about ‘having a go’ Bloody Hell! Most teams that come up do that.
StriderHiryu Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 42 minutes ago, Col city fan said: The Florists have now signed 11 new players. Talk about ‘having a go’ Bloody Hell! They had to though, because 7 of their starting 11 were loan players. Makes it even more embarrassing the way we capitulated against them in the Cup. 2
Corky Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 Lingard earning anything from £80k to £200k a week depending on which rag you read. They really do blag it, don't they? Then the first to moan their industry isn't given enough respect.
z-layrex Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 27 minutes ago, Corky said: Lingard earning anything from £80k to £200k a week depending on which rag you read. They really do blag it, don't they? Then the first to moan their industry isn't given enough respect. Journalists ruin lives without any accountability. I can't think of an industry I have less respect for. 2 2
Miquel The Work Geordie Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 18 hours ago, Tuna said: 10 signings is a lot but Forest have had to replace loanees they've not been able to retain like Zinkernagel, Davis and Spence. Lingard is an excellent signing for them if he can return to the form he had at West Ham. Actually really surprised West Ham didn't sign him. West Ham were very good without him last season though, maybe they just didn't think he'd be worth the cost at his age for such a marginal improvement on what they have - they've started shopping annoyingly sensibly. 1
KingsX Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 20 hours ago, tom27111 said: If he was under contract and cost £10m, you wouldn't raise an eyebrow and you'd still have to pay 100k a week. Sign him on a free on 200k a week, total cost £10.4m I really don't see the risk at all. Forest are guaranteed a year of Premier League TV revenue (which will hit nine figures even if they finish last) plus parachute payments. So this one-year deal makes financial sense even at 200K/week. Lingard has a high enough profile to be talked about (witness this thread) ... they will want one or two players like that. And he was the best they could get.
davieG Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 2 hours ago, StriderHiryu said: They had to though, because 7 of their starting 11 were loan players. Makes it even more embarrassing the way we capitulated against them in the Cup. No club should be allowed that many loans.
whoareyaaa Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 3 hours ago, StriderHiryu said: They had to though, because 7 of their starting 11 were loan players. Makes it even more embarrassing the way we capitulated against them in the Cup. Can't see that going well for them trying to bed a new team in the Prem won't be an easy task, a few bad results and there heads will drop the one plus point is they do have a good manager. 1
Guest Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 2 hours ago, davieG said: No club should be allowed that many loans. They aren't - the effective limit is five because that's how many you're allowed to name in a match day squad. Forest had Zinckernagel, Lowe, Garner, Spence and Osei-Tutu, who left in January when Davis came in.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 4 hours ago, Corky said: Lingard earning anything from £80k to £200k a week depending on which rag you read. They really do blag it, don't they? Then the first to moan their industry isn't given enough respect. I think it's likely the 200k reports are adding the signing on bonus
StriderHiryu Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 59 minutes ago, whoareyaaa said: Can't see that going well for them trying to bed a new team in the Prem won't be an easy task, a few bad results and there heads will drop the one plus point is they do have a good manager. Yeah they’d be one of the favourites to go down for sure. Even a great manager would find it hard to get a team to gel quickly in those circumstances. But with Everton being awful and selling their best player, as it stands all of the promoted teams have a chance.
davieG Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 43 minutes ago, Guest said: They aren't - the effective limit is five because that's how many you're allowed to name in a match day squad. Forest had Zinckernagel, Lowe, Garner, Spence and Osei-Tutu, who left in January when Davis came in. I think that’s to many, it should be 2 plus goalkeeper.
Super_horns Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 (edited) Will Lingard try to have this on his shirt for real ? https://mobile.twitter.com/JesseLingard/status/1550516200563671041?t=4IVdvpV9TiKNmxEyG6XumQ&s=19 Edited 22 July 2022 by Super_horns
Sampson Posted 22 July 2022 Posted 22 July 2022 Arsenal spent £120mil now this summer after spending £150mil+ last summer. Sadly we just can’t realistically compete with that. That said, surely Arteta has to make top 4 this season to keep his job?
Pliskin Posted 23 July 2022 Posted 23 July 2022 (edited) 12 hours ago, Sampson said: Arsenal spent £120mil now this summer after spending £150mil+ last summer. Sadly we just can’t realistically compete with that. That said, surely Arteta has to make top 4 this season to keep his job? They’ve signed some odd players though. None of them have torn up any trees. Feels a bit like they’ve turned up late to the auction and they’ve got a everyones second choices. Arsenal won’t push the top 6 for me. Spurs have had a more productive window than they have in terms of quality. Still how many teams actually make while sale signings and it radically changes their form? Not many to none I would suggest. In some cases it actually causes a regression, because there is little time to build that team cohesion. Man City rarely go out and sign 11 players these days, Liverpool too. Top teams have the bull of their squad already in place and merely being in replacements and the odd refresh. It’s one of the reasons I’m confident we will do well, this squad is settled and with a couple of fresh faces in by deadline day, we will be in pretty good shape. Edited 23 July 2022 by Pliskin
StanSP Posted 23 July 2022 Posted 23 July 2022 2 minutes ago, Pliskin said: They’ve signed some odd players though. None of them have torn up any trees. Feels a bit like they’ve turned up late to the auction and they’ve got a everyones second choices Jesus is a quality signing though let's be fair. They've been crying out for a decent striker and they've got it from a side in which he scored shed loads of goals.
Pliskin Posted 23 July 2022 Posted 23 July 2022 2 minutes ago, StanSP said: Jesus is a quality signing though let's be fair. They've been crying out for a decent striker and they've got it from a side in which he scored shed loads of goals. With Man City though you always have to consider the sheer class they have, he’s alright but if he was as good as that then City wouldn’t have sold him, and to Arsenal of all teams. I don’t really rate Jesus in all honesty… neither do I rate Zinchenko I think he’s a bit shit in my opinion. We will see how Jesus does, but I’d be surprised if he returned the kind of figures he did at Man City.
Miquel The Work Geordie Posted 23 July 2022 Posted 23 July 2022 Yeah Arsenal have bought some clearly very good players and they should be comfortably Top 6 - Zinchenko and Jesus are definitely the characters they need but they won't be bothering Top 4.
Tommy Fresh Posted 23 July 2022 Posted 23 July 2022 29 minutes ago, Pliskin said: With Man City though you always have to consider the sheer class they have, he’s alright but if he was as good as that then City wouldn’t have sold him, and to Arsenal of all teams. I don’t really rate Jesus in all honesty… neither do I rate Zinchenko I think he’s a bit shit in my opinion. We will see how Jesus does, but I’d be surprised if he returned the kind of figures he did at Man City. Man City have just signed a striker who arguably will be the best in the world for years, stating they would have kept Jesus if he was that good is a weird way to look at it. Also if they really want to they could just throw cash at him to get him back if need be. For both him and Zinchencko it also may simply be a case of wanting to play week in week out
Recommended Posts