Manwell Pablo Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 I'm not sure we could keep Hume, Campbell and McLeod happy let alone Fryatt.I was very surprised to see the link in the papers today. I would be pleased if we signed him and wouldn't mind if it meant Fryatt leaving but there's no need to go through all of that yet again. I will be a bit annoyed if we go into the season without signing more players down the left side though. Thats what I was thinking, except I tagged De Vries and Court on as well, who both look like they wont get a kick next season. However four decent strikers is probabley what we need to suceed and if it means one of them being benched for alot of the season despite being a good player at this level then it's fine by me.
Thracian Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 I'm not sure we could keep Hume, Campbell and McLeod happy let alone Fryatt.I was very surprised to see the link in the papers today. I would be pleased if we signed him and wouldn't mind if it meant Fryatt leaving but there's no need to go through all of that yet again. I will be a bit annoyed if we go into the season without signing more players down the left side though. It's tricky but MA talks of "squad" rather than team - and emphasises the point - so I don't think it will be a problem. I really expect him to use everyone frequently and to make changes whatever the situation. He won't consider he has a first team and a shadow team. More likely he'll view everyone as a good player and when change is made it will simply be swopping good for good. If one team is winning there'll be no reason the same team but with changes shouldn't win, or why another selection completely shouldn't win the following week. There's already been evidence of his viewpoint with the number of captains he's fielded. Watch soon. I'm quite sure Mattock will get it. It's a way of showing confidence in people - of saying I don't give a toss who gets the responsibility of captain because you are all captains and all capable of acting as such. And he won't view a second pair of strikers as any better or worse than the first.
The People's Hero Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 I wish we'd been able to agree to take JDJ on. He'd complete that front line, for me.
Dr The Singh Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 Thats what I was thinking, except I tagged De Vries and Court on as well, who both look like they wont get a kick next season.However four decent strikers is probabley what we need to suceed and if it means one of them being benched for alot of the season despite being a good player at this level then it's fine by me. Carl Cort was supposedly a big signing for us and MA was supposedly ecstatic to beat off the competition for his sisgning, so i'm presuming he will have a role to play. I can't see us spending another 1.5 mil (~£3mill in total) on strikers, Fryatt will have to give way!!!
RedOnRed Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 I've been watching McLeod and Clive Platt for the last few seasons. On the one hand Platt was the kind of player that could only score in the six yard box and didn't have shot on him and definitely wasn't worth much. TBH, he's no great loss in the long run. McLeod on the other hand is a completely different type of player. He's more then capable of getting stunning goals out of nothing from well outside of the area that i'd defy any keeper to save. Many of the goals he scored were completely unexpected that he had no right to score and ended up winning games for us we shouldn't really have won. He's an exciting hot prospect. If you get him he could be a real diamond for you. He's only 22 and with higher level coaching he's a player that can only get better and when he goes we'll miss him. I just hope we can find a player half as prolific at scoring.
meadwell5 Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 Thats what I was thinking, except I tagged De Vries and Court on as well, who both look like they wont get a kick next season.However four decent strikers is probabley what we need to suceed and if it means one of them being benched for alot of the season despite being a good player at this level then it's fine by me. Totally agree. At this level u can not risk only having 3 forwards, we are now in a position that we can afford a big squad and that means having 4-5 good strikers, with them all competing for places and all having different attributes can only be good. The small problem i see is we dont have that same compition throughout the squad specially in midfield.
RedOnRed Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 What is this DJ Campbell and Elvis stuff? I've never heard of them. Is your management branching out into wedding reception entertainment?
Ric Flair Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 I wish we'd been able to agree to take JDJ on. He'd complete that front line, for me. I agree. Job would have been quality for us IMO. I doubt he'd have cost anywhere near as much as DJC or McLeod either.
meadwell5 Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 I agree. Job would have been quality for us IMO. I doubt he'd have cost anywhere near as much as DJC or McLeod either. Job would be a good player, but both IM and DJC have age on their side, 22 and 25 is better than 30plus in my opinion. Also Job has nothing to prove compared to IM and DJC. Bring on the season.
Geo V Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 Leicester are set to sign MK Dons striker Izale McLeod. (Daily Mirror)Do we really need him now ? In an ideal world we would have 4 quality strikers. We have DJ, Hume and Matty and McLeod could be that 4th striker. Cort is too much of a risk as the lad had problems with his fitness and Elvis and MDV shouldnt be seen as the answer to our striking problems. They never have been and never will. DJ, Hume and Matty and McLeod would be absolute quality with Odihambo and Cort in the backround. Elvis and MDV should be sold and quickly.
Toby or not Toby Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 Can McLeod only play upfront? Can he not play on either wing? I know nothing about him!
Master Fox Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 Can McLeod only play upfront? Can he not play on either wing? I know nothing about him! His preferred position is goal keeper
RedOnRed Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 Can McLeod only play upfront? Can he not play on either wing? I know nothing about him! I've only ever seen him play up front. Although he is known to go wide and can be useful there, but he's not a wide player in a dedicated winger sense.
Stevosevic Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 His preferred position is goal keeper Goal defence
Geo V Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 Can McLeod only play upfront? Can he not play on either wing? I know nothing about him! He`s too gangly to be a winger
Daggers Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 I'm not sure we could keep Hume, Campbell and McLeod happy let alone Fryatt. You do not understand the power of the Buddha's tummy
The People's Hero Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 Is this thread still going? And still vaguely on topic? I feel physically sick.
Nick Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 I am not anti-Izzy.I am pro-Izzy I am anti-Izzy if it is at the expense of Fryatt. I WANT BOTH. I'm not sure how good Izzy will be in this division, It's all a bit Adi Akin-buy-ee to me. I feel I have to put my faith in the club managers decision...its just that proven championship quality I would have preferred. I like Thracians comment about Carl Cort, he would have to have been put down by now....his pride wouldn't surely allow him to go into a rescue home and nobody would choose him as a family pet because of his size, ego and running costs. Such a big dog and with the vets bills, feeding, brushing and temperement-maintainance, there will always be a cuter family pet in the adjacent cages. The problem is that there is also always one last punter at the track saying he's got a couple of races left in him. It's not the size of your basket, It's how quickly you can get up out of it without letting the trainer see your failing arthritic back legs. Knackers yard, anyone ? (Graphic methodology greatly appreciated.) N.
Ajax Treesdown Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 You'll hear an interview on Radio Leics tomorrow morning or definately sometime tomorrow with MM. In his interview he says that the club are not interested in McLeod at this moment but MM does throw another name into the hat in his interview (My source cannot remember his name!!) Perhaps Robinson from Swansea.
Maybes Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 You'll hear an interview on Radio Leics tomorrow morning or definately sometime tomorrow with MM. In his interview he says that the club are not interested in McLeod at this moment but MM does throw another name into the hat in his interview (My source cannot remember his name!!) Perhaps Robinson from Swansea. What a great source
RedOnRed Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 You'll hear an interview on Radio Leics tomorrow morning or definately sometime tomorrow with MM. In his interview he says that the club are not interested in McLeod at this moment but MM does throw another name into the hat in his interview (My source cannot remember his name!!) Perhaps Robinson from Swansea. Wahey! Good news all round then
Ajax Treesdown Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 What a great source It is mate Just listen on radio tommorrow.
Blue Bob Posted 24 July 2007 Posted 24 July 2007 It has been in several of the papers again today, personally I think it is the usual paper crap. I have a view that if McLeod was any good then why hasnt he been signed already? Sharp / Eastwood were snapped up pretty quickly. There is this £1.5M price tag that has been mentioned but is he worth it. There eas a lot of demand for Eastwood and Sharp and that is reflected in their price tag. There hasnt been the interest for McLeod so maybe we shouldnt be paying such a high fee if we do decide to go after him.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.