Mark_w Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 Its amazing that Beckford is being singled out as a waste of money. Beckford cost us £2.5 million, and we will recoup most of that. On the other hand Waghorn cost us £3million... and he is far far worse and will have no resale value. But Beckford's earning around 3x as much, so in terms of which one it's a priority to sell, it's Beckford by a mile. We've already spent the £3m and £2.5m, we aren't getting that back so getting rid of the more valuable, older and higher earning striker makes a lot more sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibbosuk Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 Its amazing that Beckford is being singled out as a waste of money. Beckford cost us £2.5 million, and we will recoup most of that. On the other hand Waghorn cost us £3million... and he is far far worse and will have no resale value. How has Beckford shown he's worth 2.5 mil and 30k a week ..? your talking out your arse... Waghorn we might be able to sell for a Million (if we are lucky) Shit buys for far far to much money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deep blue Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 Its amazing that Beckford is being singled out as a waste of money. Beckford cost us £2.5 million, and we will recoup most of that. On the other hand Waghorn cost us £3million... and he is far far worse and will have no resale value. Waghorn may have more cred than you think around the football league. After all, he is still being selected for the U-21s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smudger63 Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 Would rather have Maynard than Beckford personally. Maynard looks like he`s going to Cardiff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox92 Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 Beckford wouldn't get in my starting eleven at the minute (I think Vardy and Nugent is the partneship to take us forward), but we need good backup to call upon, which Beckford does provide. If we can recoup the cash we spent on him, then I'm all for this, as long as we get a decent replacement in, maybe even on loan if Beckford only leaves on loan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lesta Legend Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 Its amazing that Beckford is being singled out as a waste of money. Beckford cost us £2.5 million, and we will recoup most of that. On the other hand Waghorn cost us £3million... and he is far far worse and will have no resale value. They were both a waste of money and beckford shouldn't be singled out. Only thing is some fans perhaps expected beckford to score for fun. Beckford is one of svens many signings in which money was spent in hindsight without any real plan. It failed and Pearson is trying to get it right. I'd personally be sad to see beckford go as I'd like to have given him better service and see the results. But it deffo ain't the end of the world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonnieTodger Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 If we do sell Beckford and are planning on a replacement, then it will be quite expensive. Clubs love hiking up the prices on deadline day. Unless we do the same, I think we'd be crazy to sell him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark_w Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 They were both a waste of money and beckford shouldn't be singled out. Only thing is some fans perhaps expected beckford to score for fun. Beckford is one of svens many signings in which money was spent in hindsight without any real plan. It failed and Pearson is trying to get it right. Plus the much higher wages, and the being much closer to the end of his career and the being able to get more back for Beckford even though he's done little to show he deserves it stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 That would be a plain stupid thing to do. Firstly you're selling to a rival and secondly who would you replace him with, who is a PROVEN regular goalscorer at this level who wouldn't cost millions ? West Ham probably want to offload Maynard, who we bid crazy money for this time last year, but he hardly set the world on fire there and there is no one else who immediately springs to mind as a replacement. If we didn't get anyone that leaves us with Futacs, definitely unproven, Schlupp, who's still learning, or, and I scare myself when I say this, Waghorn who was good in League One, what, three years ago. Stick with what we've got and look at the way we play to get the best out of the strikers we have because we clearly aren't doing that at the moment. I can't be arsed to read the whole thread, and I'm sure someone has already pointed out that you are a dick, but just in case nobody did, you are a dick. WAGHORN WAS GOOD IN THE CHAMPIONSHIP, NEVER PLAYED IN L1, SCORED MORE THAN BECKFORD DID!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfox Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 If Beckford goes and we fail to replace him, then we could well be fooked. Can't rely on Nugent and Vardy, with our only back-up striker being a target man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burmesefox Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 But Beckford's earning around 3x as much, so in terms of which one it's a priority to sell, it's Beckford by a mile. We've already spent the £3m and £2.5m, we aren't getting that back so getting rid of the more valuable, older and higher earning striker makes a lot more sense. You know Beckfords salary and Waghorns? Care to elaborate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox92 Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 Waghorn doesn't have the quality Beckford does, just my opinion like. Of course, Beckford's wages maybe higher, but if we need to be shipping out any attackers it should be Gallagher and Waghorn. Like I said above, if we get rid of Beckford we need a decent replacement... Schlupp is still young/learning, Futacs is a different player and Waghorn isn't good enough, in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark_w Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 You know Beckfords salary and Waghorns? Care to elaborate? No I don't but lets face it is going to be about that, no I have no proof, but I have no proof that Rooney is earning more than Waghorn, it's just obvious. We know that Beckford is on about £25,000-£30,000 a week according to Bert, I doubt that Waghorn will be earning much more than £10,000 a week because we simply wouldn't have needed to pay much more than that to convince Waggy to join. Waghorn doesn't have the quality Beckford does, just my opinion like. Of course, Beckford's wages maybe higher, but if we need to be shipping out any attackers it should be Gallagher and Waghorn. Like I said above, if we get rid of Beckford we need a decent replacement... Schlupp is still young/learning, Futacs is a different player and Waghorn isn't good enough, in my opinion. Beckford based on last year really shouldn't be ahead of Nugent and vardy has started pretty well, I doubt Beckford would want to stay as third choice, and I doubt we could afford to keep our highest earner as 3rd choice. We have decent alternatives in Futacs, Waggy and Schlupp, they just need to be given a chance. Plus Waggy is still young and learning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 If Beckford goes and we fail to replace him, then we could well be fooked. Can't rely on Nugent and Vardy, with our only back-up striker being a target man. Fooked? We played most of last season with only Beckford and Nugent, Beckford was (no matter what anyone tells me) guff for a large percentage of the time. Our only back up was Schlupp and Howard. Even if you got rid of Beckford, as long as Vardy keeps performing I think there is a very good case that our striker options are much stronger than last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfox Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 Fooked? We played most of last season with only Beckford and Nugent, Beckford was (no matter what anyone tells me) guff for a large percentage of the time. Our only back up was Schlupp and Howard. Even if you got rid of Beckford, as long as Vardy keeps performing I think there is a very good case that our striker options are much stronger than last year. But Babylon you got to think of injuries and stuff, everybody says that. I'd rather have a back-up goalscorer on the bench aswell as just a target man. A player of Beckford's stature would need replacing, he is a big name and Pearson started him in the first league game. Waghorn and Schlupp will offer nothing, then that will leave us with three Nugent, Vardy and Futacs. People already saying Futacs is shit despite scoring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 But Babylon you got to think of injuries and stuff, everybody says that. But we had less options last year and don't remember comments from you about us being fooked? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark_w Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 But Babylon you got to think of injuries and stuff, everybody says that. I'd rather have a back-up goalscorer on the bench aswell as just a target man. A player of Beckford's stature would need replacing, he is a big name and Pearson started him in the first league game. Waghorn and Schlupp will offer nothing, then that will leave us with three Nugent, Vardy and Futacs. People already saying Futacs is shit despite scoring. - He'd need replacing because he's a big name? - You can't say that Waggy and Schlupp will offer nothing, Schlupp has done well in League One and deserves the chance to step up, Waggy has done pretty well at this level previously no matter what you think about him, he has proven that he is capable of doing it. - People already suggesting Futacs is shit despite scoring, did you not tell us DeLaet was shit without him even playing? - If we get injuries, we can bring players in on loan if there is no available back-up, easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfox Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 But we had less options last year and don't remember comments from you about us being fooked? A player of Beckford's calibre would need replacing it's that simple, if Pearson get's rid of 3-4 tomorrow that will take a huge chunk out of our team, when our depth isn't the best as it is. Getting rid of 3 or 4 and getting in 1, would not be the answer, he said he wants 25 players instead of over 30, but now he only has 23, take 3-4 out that will leave us with 19-20 players. Most of these departures will need to be replaced with talented but cheaper signings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark_w Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 A player of Beckford's calibre would need replacing it's that simple No it's not, his previous record in the Championship is 9 goals, Vardy should be a more than capable replacement for that. What has he done to prove his calibre so far, really? Much as people love to ignore it, Beckford doesn't have as good a track-record as Fryatt in terms of scoring or setting up goals, and a lot of people don't rate him on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artursteppe Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 I can't be arsed to read the whole thread, and I'm sure someone has already pointed out that you are a dick, but just in case nobody did, you are a dick. WAGHORN WAS GOOD IN THE CHAMPIONSHIP, NEVER PLAYED IN L1, SCORED MORE THAN BECKFORD DID!!! Waghorn has never been better than average, and is now worse than he was. Why do people still talk about how good players used to be and see it as a good enough reason to still keep them. We could get a fairly decent wedge for Waghorn because he is still in the U21 team, but his value will diminish when people realise he has passed his peak. He will not get better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raw Dykes Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 A player of Beckford's calibre would need replacing it's that simple, if Pearson get's rid of 3-4 tomorrow that will take a huge chunk out of our team, when our depth isn't the best as it is. Getting rid of 3 or 4 and getting in 1, would not be the answer, he said he wants 25 players instead of over 30, but now he only has 23, take 3-4 out that will leave us with 19-20 players. Most of these departures will need to be replaced with talented but cheaper signings. I think Beckford is massively overrated by most people. I don't think we will need to replace him. I think we already have with Vardy, who I think could be a far better player. I don't think Gallagher would have had many appearances this season. It won't be important to replace him. I do think we will need another defender, though. Maybe even two if SSL leaves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark_w Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 Waghorn has never been better than average, and is now worse than he was. Why do people still talk about how good players used to be and see it as a good enough reason to still keep them. We could get a fairly decent wedge for Waghorn because he is still in the U21 team, but his value will diminish when people realise he has passed his peak. He will not get better. Passed his peak? Listen to yourself, the kids in the U21 team and you think he's passed his peak for **** sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 A player of Beckford's calibre would need replacing it's that simple, if Pearson get's rid of 3-4 tomorrow that will take a huge chunk out of our team, when our depth isn't the best as it is. If Vardy score 9 he could already have been replaced. But for an wrongly chalked off goal he would already be on 2. Our depth is vastly superior to that of last year already. Again, nobody was panicing last year to my memory. If he gets rid of 3-4 then yes, but that wasn't the original point. I would like a replacement, but don't think the "fooked" comment is correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfox Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 Beckford is a big name Championship striker, regardless how shit he has been for us, he was only in the Premier League tearing United apart two season's ago. He was only regarded as a starter two weeks ago against Peterborough, then Vardy or Nugent get injured or suspended, then we have Futacs, leaving with who on the bench? A shit Waghorn, oh he has a good record at this level blah blah blah, can you tell me what he has done for this football club since his loan spell in 2009-2010? Fook all that's what he has done, he isn't good enough for this league anymore, all his recent appearances apart from Leeds United have been beyond rubbish, he came on against Burnley last season to make an impact, and it was one of the worst impact displays I have ever witnessed, and against Burton he was absolutely woeful and that is against a League 2 team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark_w Posted 30 August 2012 Share Posted 30 August 2012 Beckford is a big name Championship striker, regardless how shit he has been for us, he was only in the Premier League tearing United apart two season's ago. Being a big name player, doesn't make you a great player, I think Sven's signings proved that pretty well. People who suggest players are fantastic because they're 'big names' is really annoying. A shit Waghorn, oh he has a good record at this level blah blah blah, can you tell me what he has done for this football club since his loan spell in 2009-2010? Fook all that's what he has done, he isn't good enough for this league anymore, all his recent appearances apart from Leeds United have been beyond rubbish, he came on against Burnley last season to make an impact, and it was one of the worst impact displays I have ever witnessed, and against Burton he was absolutely woeful and that is against a League 2 team. He hasn't had a chance to do well since his loan spell, being either injured, played on the wing or used as a sub with little time to make an impact. That Leeds game was one of his few starts, give the kid a break with the Burnley game FFS, he was coming back from injury as a sub without a great deal of time to make an impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.