Captain... Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 A manager is judged by his transfer business ..... and this is the best example yet of his incompetence. I tend to judge managers by the results on the pitch, transfer dealings and negotiations are often not done by the manager, if Schlupp is surplus to requirements then he will most likely be sold, the fee will be negotiated between the 2 clubs and not by NP and Alex Ferguson. If you think NP is wrong to view him as surplus to requirements that is one thing, but he doesn't put a value on him, so to criticise him for the amount United have offered is a bit daft.
1964FOX Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 If he's good enough for United to want to buy him we should be playing him in our side.
Captain... Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 1. Good. Walk away .... Give him the chance he deserves in our side. 2. We aren't Man Utd's feeder club despite what Pearson thinks .... We are Leicester City - he plays for us. If Man Utd want him then they have to pay for him. 3. Because there are plenty of other clubs to do business with. Us bending over and letting them shaft us doesn't help in the long run - and the relationship is with NP not LCFC .... and I don't want to give our talent away to fund NP's next managerial appointment. Fair point we could probably get more for him from Charlton as Powell is a fan, but they don't have the money to spend. If we get the same for Schlupp that we paid for RDL, then we can't really complain, more or less the same age, but RDL has proven his worth in the championship and the prem, Schlupp hasn't, despite all his potential potential, there is very little evidence of it.
MooseBreath Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 So is that the reason he's looking to offload him?? It's a fair reason. It was Sven who gave schlupp the huge contract. If i remember correctly it was on the back of one half decent performance. Sven being the brilliant judge of ability and shrewd financial operator that he is signed Jeff up on some ridiculously high terms. Now with FFP coming in the last thing we need is bit part players with large salaries.
5waller5 Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 I tend to judge managers by the results on the pitch, transfer dealings and negotiations are often not done by the manager, if Schlupp is surplus to requirements then he will most likely be sold, the fee will be negotiated between the 2 clubs and not by NP and Alex Ferguson. If you think NP is wrong to view him as surplus to requirements that is one thing, but he doesn't put a value on him, so to criticise him for the amount United have offered is a bit daft. He's given a transfer and wage budget ... selling and buying are both his responsibilities. He's choosing to give away a player .... he may not directly deal with the negotiations .... but he gives the walk away price and he tells the board who he wants to buy and at what value.
Rocky Dennis Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 All those players had been playing in the England (or Wales) set-up since around the Under-16 or Under-17 stage and/or made an impact with their sides in the league. With all due respect to Jeff, he's done nothing to warrant a hefty price tag. Bale (For Southampton) = 45 apps - 5 Goals Walcott (For Southampton) = 21 apps - 4 Goals Oxlade Chamberlain (For Southampton) = 36 apps - 9 Goals Powell (For Crewe) = 55 apps - 14 Goals Schlupp (including Brentford loan) = 36 apps - 8 Goals I beg to differ
5waller5 Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 I know it's fashionable on here to think that everything Sven did was idiotic and that NP is above criticism..... But a couple of years ago a successful England Manager, that had won 27 trophies in European football came in to LCFC and immediately played Schlupp. The most successful manager in English club history is bidding for him right now. A guy that has won division one as his only trophy doesn't play him. hmmmm ..... It's a shame when NP has gone and your loyalties will be back in balance with LCFC not NP it will be too late to regret selling JS for a quarter of his worth.
21st Century Fox Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 Bale (For Southampton) = 45 apps - 5 Goals Walcott (For Southampton) = 21 apps - 4 Goals Oxlade Chamberlain (For Southampton) = 36 apps - 9 Goals Powell (For Crewe) = 55 apps - 14 Goals Schlupp (including Brentford loan) = 36 apps - 8 Goals I beg to differ And what's the average difference in transfer fee for a future England International and a Ghanian? England players generally tend to have incredibly over-inflated fees, so it makes sense to get them early and take a punt based on the fact that they've been playing in the set-up since 16 and had the benefit of being known to Premier League scouts week-in, week-out. The fact that they've had to take him on trial first, should speak volumes as to how much of an unknown quantity he is.
Captain... Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 I know it's fashionable on here to think that everything Sven did was idiotic and that NP is above criticism..... But a couple of years ago a successful England Manager, that had won 27 trophies in European football came in to LCFC and immediately played Schlupp. The most successful manager in English club history is bidding 1.5 million for him right now. A guy that has won division one as his only trophy doesn't play him. hmmmm ..... It's a shame when NP has gone and your loyalties will be back in balance with LCFC not NP it will be too late to regret selling JS for a quarter of his worth. Fixed it for you. Would you honestly play Jeff ahead of Nugent or Wood up front? Or Konchesky at left back? Or Knocky on the wing? I would like to have seen Jeff given more of a chance, but he shouldn't be starting league games for us, unless there is injury, this season is too important to be taking such risks. Fergie has bid 1.5 million, because that is what he thinks he is worth, he sold RDL, Drinky, James for less, if a swap deal for Keane was involved, I would be happy, I don't think this is a valid stick to beat NP with.
Haydos Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 WE CAN'T AFFORD TO TAKE A RISK ON SCHLUPP IN OUR CURRENT POSITION, THEY CAN. Simple as that.
5waller5 Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 Fixed it for you. Would you honestly play Jeff ahead of Nugent or Wood up front? Or Konchesky at left back? Or Knocky on the wing? I would like to have seen Jeff given more of a chance, but he shouldn't be starting league games for us, unless there is injury, this season is too important to be taking such risks. Fergie has bid 1.5 million, because that is what he thinks he is worth, he sold RDL, Drinky, James for less, if a swap deal for Keane was involved, I would be happy, I don't think this is a valid stick to beat NP with. In the poor run of form Knocky has had I'd have rested him and played JS as a winger for 3 games .... he could have been a revelation - he may have just been as good as Dyer .... nothing to lose either way. When Konch is looking tired he'd have had a few games at LB and kept his place not dropped the instant he makes one mistake. And he'd have come off the bench as a striker in all those games that we have needed soem fresh legs up front - he wouldn't be in ahead of Nugent or Wood ... but he would be ahead of Waghorn, Vardy, Futacs... That's why £1.5m is a joke.
5waller5 Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 Fixed it for you. Would you honestly play Jeff ahead of Nugent or Wood up front? Or Konchesky at left back? Or Knocky on the wing? I would like to have seen Jeff given more of a chance, but he shouldn't be starting league games for us, unless there is injury, this season is too important to be taking such risks. Fergie has bid 1.5 million, because that is what he thinks he is worth, he sold RDL, Drinky, James for less, if a swap deal for Keane was involved, I would be happy, I don't think this is a valid stick to beat NP with. We bid £1m for Vardy .... doesn't make him worth that ....
21st Century Fox Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 In the poor run of form Knocky has had I'd have rested him and played JS as a winger for 3 games .... he could have been a revelation - he may have just been as good as Dyer .... nothing to lose either way. When Konch is looking tired he'd have had a few games at LB and kept his place not dropped the instant he makes one mistake. And he'd have come off the bench as a striker in all those games that we have needed soem fresh legs up front - he wouldn't be in ahead of Nugent or Wood ... but he would be ahead of Waghorn, Vardy, Futacs... That's why £1.5m is a joke. Now apply that principle to paying £1.5m for a player and you've answered why they've offered that.
MattyFromLE Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 He wasn't though was he, that's the thing. He was mainly crap for the first few months and looked a shadow of the player he was last season. But whilst we dropped Schlupp after one bad game, we've persevered with Konchesky, and eventually he's come into some good form. Do we have a more accomplished left winger? Knockaert is much better in the centre IMO and I wouldn't call Dyer accomplished. I'd say he's very limited but has just been here so long by default because we've not brought in anyone better in that position. I'm convinced Schlupp is almost if not as quick, stronger and better at putting crosses in. But he's not been given a chance over the often disappointing Dyer so how would we know whether he'd be better? It's my opinion he would, I can't be sure, but you can't be sure he wouldn't either. I just don't think weve done our best to get the best out of him. Agree with your final part. I personally think however that Konchesky has been just as good as he was last year. Reason for why he has looked iffy at time this year? Well, I think other players have just outshone him in fairness. I agree with your final point, but I wouldn't call him a winger - from memory whenever he was played wide he looked a little out of sorts. That said, can we base an opinion on the 20 odd games we've seen him?
5waller5 Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 Now apply that principle to paying £1.5m for a player and you've answered why they've offered that. What - he's got potential in a third position and could still be a decent player there?
21st Century Fox Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 What - he's got potential in a third position and could still be a decent player there? Could being the operative word in general. Taking into account, he isn't going to be a home nations International and subject to a potentially, ridiculous inflated future transfer fee, his potential is just a lot of if's, maybe's and coulds.
Bettsj2 Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 1. Good. Walk away .... Give him the chance he deserves in our side. 2. We aren't Man Utd's feeder club despite what Pearson thinks .... We are Leicester City - he plays for us. If Man Utd want him then they have to pay for him. 3. Because there are plenty of other clubs to do business with. Us bending over and letting them shaft us doesn't help in the long run - and the relationship is with NP not LCFC .... and I don't want to give our talent away to fund NP's next managerial appointment. 1 - There's no opportunity in our current side. 2 - Schlupp is the only player of ours that Man Utd have shown an interest in. To say that makes us their feeder club is a massive over reaction. 3 - As long as NP is our manager it is of benefit to us. As for plenty of other clubs to do business with, yes there are but why should that stop us doing business with Man Utd?
Rocky Dennis Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 And what's the average difference in transfer fee for a future England International and a Ghanian? England players generally tend to have incredibly over-inflated fees, so it makes sense to get them early and take a punt based on the fact that they've been playing in the set-up since 16 and had the benefit of being known to Premier League scouts week-in, week-out. The fact that they've had to take him on trial first, should speak volumes as to how much of an unknown quantity he is. But Ghana are considerably higer in the FIFA rankings than Wales, so actually jeff (in theory) should be seen as more accomplised as Bale was in 2006, should he not?
Captain... Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 We bid £1m for Vardy .... doesn't make him worth that .... I agree on that, we also got Drinkwater, James and RDL from United for about 1 million each, Wood as well was about 1.5 million (I think) Who would you rather have out of those 3 and Schlupp? They have all proved their quality at this level, Drinky and RDL had gone a long way to proving their quality before that by playing a number of games at this level and above, and Wood was clearly good enough at this level when we signed him from WBA. Jeff has as yet proved nothing, yet you think he should be valued at much more than RDL, James, Drinkwater and Wood? I don't agree.
21st Century Fox Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 But Ghana are considerably higer in the FIFA rankings than Wales, so actually jeff (in theory) should be seen as more accomplised as Bale was in 2006, should he not? I don't imagine anyone takes FIFA rankings into account for anything, let alone transfer fees. A home nations player like Bale, playing in the Premier League has for more marketability than a Ghanaian would. The fact that he may have to leave mid-season to play in an African Cup of Nations might even be slightly detrimental in that respect.
okie fox Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 Jeff has as yet proved nothing, yet you think he should be valued at much more than RDL, James, Drinkwater and Wood? Man U got rid of RDL, James and Drinkwater, they want Schlupp. That says something about Schlupp's potential.
dmayne7 Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 The inflated English player theory still applies to Jeff even though he has choosen to represent Ghana. The fact is that he has been trained in this country so counts as a home grown player which is generally where the inflated prices come from. You also have to look at the fact that Ghana offered him his debut when he was 18 and still largely unproven. They did that because they wanted to secure him ahead of Germany and England who he is eligible for so thats 3 different national setups (of high quality) that wanted him. I will be sad to see him go as I really feel he could be a top, top player in any position but you can't stand in his way with a move like this on the horizon.
Lambert09 Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 I'm happy with this, we should get first priority if they consider loaning him out though. Could be useful in a few seasons times
21st Century Fox Posted 5 March 2013 Posted 5 March 2013 The inflated English player theory still applies to Jeff even though he has choosen to represent Ghana. The fact is that he has been trained in this country so counts as a home grown player which is generally where the inflated prices come from. You also have to look at the fact that Ghana offered him his debut when he was 18 and still largely unproven. They did that because they wanted to secure him ahead of Germany and England who he is eligible for so thats 3 different national setups (of high quality) that wanted him. I will be sad to see him go as I really feel he could be a top, top player in any position but you can't stand in his way with a move like this on the horizon. It's more to do with marketability. Clubs want England/Home Nation internationals because supporters want to see them playing for their team, how many Bale or Walcott shirts could you sell compared with a Schlupp. He chose Ghana because he wasn't going to get a full cap for Germany. I'll be sad to see him go but I can see where United are coming from. We've shot ourselves in the foot really with not playing him to his potential so we don't even know his value ourselves, but we don't really have the luxury of being able to experiment with unknown quantities at this stage.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.