Mort Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 This guy, if we sign him, will end up getting more stick than AA did!Money could be better spent elsewhere imo. The main objection to him is the price... its totally inflated. At the same time he's a player who's record and style of play offer us nothing we dont already have and hasnt already seen us flirting with relegation for the last few seasons... on and did i mention the price that's being associated with him!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teblin Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 No so sure we have anyone with that pace, that has and can put the ball in the net. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 The main objection to him is the price... its totally inflated. At the same time he's a player who's record and style of play offer us nothing we dont already have and hasnt already seen us flirting with relegation for the last few seasons... on and did i mention the price that's being associated with him!? To be fair the price mentioned is only paper talk, as is the fact that we're linked to him at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mort Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 No so sure we have anyone with that pace, that has and can put the ball in the net. I don't want to sound like Little watching the Savo Milosevic tape, but based on that, where do we sign?! He has got everything we need like speed, power and energetic! Todorov, Pedersen and Eastwood all realisitc targets and some people (who'd turn their noses up at Cort or Cresswell - Both of whom have better records at this level than McLeod) are pluming for a striker who was a total failure at this level before but has now put in some good performances in League Two!... we might as well look to resign Chris O'Grady and Lee Morris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milan_foxes Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 I dunno. A lot of those goals are down to slow League Two centre-backs being outwitted by a simple through-ball.1) The defending in our league is a million times better. 2) We don't have any midfielders capable of those sort of through balls anyway (yet ) -- If he has a decent touch and can hold the ball up as well, I'd be more inclined to take him. I haven't seen him very often so can't really comment but I still think £1.5million is a bit steep. I'd be looking at paying around £800,000 with add-ons. Yes but if we have got 2 good strikers then we would just tear them apart but i see what your saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Collymore Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 Does that video come up if you search by "The world worst defending"? I think the fact that he had time to chest the ball down in the 6 yard box, have a cup of tea, have a two week holiday, retire and score sums up the quality of that defending! The goal where he took on about 6 defenders in the box looked good on the eye but those defenders should have been lined up and shot after. Shocking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverFox Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 He looks quality to me. I have to say I am pretty tired of people bringing up the Josh Low thing to justify not buying players from lower leagues. FFS Josh Low cost us nothing and had no reputation whatsoever...this lad does have a reputation and he actually looks like he has some quality. i.e. Pace, skill, quick feet. What is not to like...IMO worth a go. Josh Low was a Rob Kelly Panick buy because we had nothing to spend last season...this lad is on a different page to Low. Neil Lennon and Robbie Savage both played for Crewe before we signed them...does that make them shite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverFox Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 Just look at the goal at the 1:50 mark on the video...Josh Low never had that ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mort Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 I have to say I am pretty tired of people bringing up the Josh Low thing to justify not buying players from lower leagues. FFS Josh Low cost us nothing and had no reputation whatsoever...this lad does have a reputation and he actually looks like he has some quality. i.e. Pace, skill, quick feet. Josh Low, featured in the League Two team of the season and was roundly rated within that league, his performances were good and he’s shown similar ability now he’s back playing at that level with Peterborough. McLeod has a great record in League Two, a good record in League One and an absolutly dire record in the Championship… he has proven (as Low did) that it’s simply not a level he’s capable of performing at! He is not worth the risk, not worth the time and certainly not worth 10X what we paid for a similar “lower league wonder kid†in Fryatt a little over a year ago! Eastwood, Todorov, Pedersen even Cort and Cresswell (neither of whom I’d want to see at the club)all have records and ability that completely out pace McLeod’s efforts in the lowest league of English football were he’s finally succeeding after being tried at a higher level and found repeatedly wanting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Dennis Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 Quote: Martin Allen, Leicester City Manager. "I will add - don't believe newspaper speculation. I will do my utmost to let supporters know through our website rather than ducking and diving through newspapers. I won't comment on deals or speculation until people have signed on the dotted line". If he dont beleive it, neither do i! £1.5M=Hilarious :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tubes Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 He looks quality to me.I have to say I am pretty tired of people bringing up the Josh Low thing to justify not buying players from lower leagues. FFS Josh Low cost us nothing and had no reputation whatsoever...this lad does have a reputation and he actually looks like he has some quality. i.e. Pace, skill, quick feet. What is not to like...IMO worth a go. Josh Low was a Rob Kelly Panick buy because we had nothing to spend last season...this lad is on a different page to Low. Neil Lennon and Robbie Savage both played for Crewe before we signed them...does that make them shite? i agree with you SF people just wont give players a chance at this club what about mcauley he was a free transfer from the lower leagues and this season has been one of our best most consistent performers i say give mcleod a chance should he comes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cat Burger Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverFox Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 Josh Low, featured in the League Two team of the season and was roundly rated within that league, his performances were good and he’s shown similar ability now he’s back playing at that level with Peterborough.McLeod has a great record in League Two, a good record in League One and an absolutly dire record in the Championship… he has proven (as Low did) that it’s simply not a level he’s capable of performing at! He is not worth the risk, not worth the time and certainly not worth 10X what we paid for a similar “lower league wonder kid†in Fryatt a little over a year ago! Eastwood, Todorov, Pedersen even Cort and Cresswell (neither of whom I’d want to see at the club)all have records and ability that completely out pace McLeod’s efforts in the lowest league of English football were he’s finally succeeding after being tried at a higher level and found repeatedly wanting. I take your point but I don't think it is sensible to judge players on someone else's standards. Just because Josh Low was a dissapointment it does not mean that every player that comes from a lower level will be poor. As for McLeod at this level I can honestly say I haven't seen him play in the Championship so I wouldn't know whether he was good bad or indifferent...I do know that he couldn't do any worse than Hammond or Fryatt who between them managed something like an astonishing 8 goals this season. I am of the opinion that players can improve so the boy that you saw a few years ago may now be ready to be a man step up and prove what he can do given the chance. We will have to see...that is IF he comes here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head Honcho Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 i agree with you SF people just wont give players a chance at this clubwhat about mcauley he was a free transfer from the lower leagues and this season has been one of our best most consistent performers i say give mcleod a chance should he comes You have to be realistic though! If we buy him for 300k and he gets us 8-12 goals a season then fair do's because that's the very very best you can expect for the money. If on the otherhand we pay 1.5M for him then we'd all expect 20-25 goals and that just ain't gonna happen! We paid £225000 for Elvis and we got our moneys worth imo. 4 goals a few assists and a lot of running around. We paid £350000 for Fryatt and we maybe got our moneys worth. 8 goals in a season and a half even fewer assists and a medical bill. We need a couple of proven strikers to get us 20 goals each this season and unless we get a them from the continent or on free transfers I can't see it happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicfox Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 The fee for McLeod will be inflated as i think Derby have a 30% sell on clause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newms Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 think you'll find we paid a bit more for Fryatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head Honcho Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 think you'll find we paid a bit more for Fryatt It was around the £350k mark. The rest will be add on's, which I can't see there being many of! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookwhaticando Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 It was around the £350k mark. The rest will be add on's, which I can't see there being many of! Paid 100k for staying up, didn't we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teblin Posted 3 June 2007 Share Posted 3 June 2007 We paid 750k for fryatt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysalis Posted 4 June 2007 Share Posted 4 June 2007 It’s not “a bit steep”… it’s a bloody joke! His record (54 goals in 116 starts with MK Dons) is actually not all that different to Fryatt’s (70 starts & 27 goals) before joining city, now Fryatt set us back £100k why then should we look to be spending over 10x(!) that sum on a player who if marginally better is also older!? It’s absolutely barmy! We do not have this money to waste; at best I’d rate McLeod as commanding an up front fee in the region of £300k (perhaps with add-ons pushing it closer to £500k)… but £1.5mil is a huge amount of money to spend on “Fryatt MkII”, when we could spend a similar fee to bring in proven quality up front (Eastwood being the name that springs to mind). I would say been older is better as could argue he is more matured and will be less lightweight but I agree that the price is very steep in fact too steep, clubs have paid less then that for strikers who are proven in this league, whist this guy is unproven and is a gamble. Its always the case tho when you are known to have money to spend prices will become inflated for anyone you buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysalis Posted 4 June 2007 Share Posted 4 June 2007 He looks quality to me.I have to say I am pretty tired of people bringing up the Josh Low thing to justify not buying players from lower leagues. FFS Josh Low cost us nothing and had no reputation whatsoever...this lad does have a reputation and he actually looks like he has some quality. i.e. Pace, skill, quick feet. What is not to like...IMO worth a go. Josh Low was a Rob Kelly Panick buy because we had nothing to spend last season...this lad is on a different page to Low. Neil Lennon and Robbie Savage both played for Crewe before we signed them...does that make them shite? I agree and add to the fact allen was the manager that got him playing like that so its reasonable to expect him to continue to get the best out of him, the issue I have is I think the price is too high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPH Posted 4 June 2007 Share Posted 4 June 2007 everyone wants a striker who has played for england, bagged 30 goals last season, loves leicester is pacy and that we spend 5 million on. It AINT gonner happen. Some lower league signings work out, some dont. But one thing we all agree on- our current squad is NOT good enough to get us promotion. When sigining Fryatt we put all our eggs in one basket. This season, if we sign a striker for 750k-1.5m we wont be doing so, also, no disrespect to the current squad or to mk dons if we do sign Izale, then he will be playing hopfully with better quality players, who will pass better/cross better giving him more chances. he was younger when he was last in the champ and just wasnt playing with a very good squad at the time. Is he lazy? possibly. maybe playing at a higher level, with a bigger wage might help motivate him. i personally would prefer us to go for somone like Robert Earnshaw, but it wont be a disaster if we go for Izale and he isnt upto it. Yes we have a promising manager, but right now i think as far as other players are concerned, Allen is relatively unproven ( especially at this level) and any real quality siginings might have to wait until January by which time players would of been able to suss us out, see where we are going, and how the manager gets on. alot of the players we might want to go for are probably already at clubs who are at the stage we would LIKE to be at so its and as they would have ambitions of prem football it might be too much of a risk for them to leave a team already geared for a push for the prem, making it more feasible for us to look for quality in the lower divisions. We are not yet a team gunning for promotion. we have alot of rebuilding to do. I dont think the problem is the wages, or the transfer fees, but persuading quality players to come here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koke Posted 4 June 2007 Share Posted 4 June 2007 If we do sign him then I just hope we don't get on his back immediately. £1.5 million is a lot of money and if he doesn't put in the performances quickly, then I can see him getting a whole lot of abuse by October unfortunately - All because of his price tag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head Honcho Posted 4 June 2007 Share Posted 4 June 2007 We paid 750k for fryatt. Link! The fee was undisclosed so how do you know this? If we paid £750K upfront for him then we need to sue the numpty who sanctioned it! When Merson was manager he said he'd take 250-300K when Forest were after him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPH Posted 4 June 2007 Share Posted 4 June 2007 Link!The fee was undisclosed so how do you know this? If we paid £750K upfront for him then we need to sue the numpty who sanctioned it! When Merson was manager he said he'd take 250-300K when Forest were after him. i have to admit, i seem to remember the fee of 750k mentioned.... But i just checked fm2007 and it says we paid 500k... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.