Just playing devils advocat for a moment.
with all this talk of us having ambition i wish to say that from the signings that we have made so far, compared to other teams (namely promoted teams and fulham) would it be fair to either question our supposed ambition.
all this talk of 45k stadiums put to one side for the moment and let us just focus on the transfer side of things.
so far we have signed andy johnson (3 goals all season how old 32?)
nelson (how old 36)
diakite (yes, great buy)
ju sing park (supposedly legs shot how old 32?)
fabio loan yes only loan.
now, for argument sake, would any of you prefered that we went after clyne 22 years old (soon to be southampton) instead of a nelson or fabio.
how about going after rodeaggea 27 years old (fulham free transfer) instead of an injury prone aging andy johnson. why not a rodriges (21 or 22 year old winger) southampton again 7mil signing.
serious question. have we really done good busniess in the transfer market? is hughes really being backed with money in this window?
also like to add, tony fernandez comments today. paste........................................
"I think, done for a while actually because we would then have a good nucleus for a long time.
"The work then has to start on the academy and bringing through kids, who started at QPR at 11 and go all the way up."
does he expect these ageing players being able to preform in the top league until the youth start coming through the acadamy in probably 4-5 years time?
is he saying that this will be the last of the socalled spending spree? if that is the case, i hold the view that we should have gone for the likes rodeaga and clyne as it would cement our future without the need of spending much again.
p.s please exuse the appalling spelling
with all this talk of us having ambition i wish to say that from the signings that we have made so far, compared to other teams (namely promoted teams and fulham) would it be fair to either question our supposed ambition.
all this talk of 45k stadiums put to one side for the moment and let us just focus on the transfer side of things.
so far we have signed andy johnson (3 goals all season how old 32?)
nelson (how old 36)
diakite (yes, great buy)
ju sing park (supposedly legs shot how old 32?)
fabio loan yes only loan.
now, for argument sake, would any of you prefered that we went after clyne 22 years old (soon to be southampton) instead of a nelson or fabio.
how about going after rodeaggea 27 years old (fulham free transfer) instead of an injury prone aging andy johnson. why not a rodriges (21 or 22 year old winger) southampton again 7mil signing.
serious question. have we really done good busniess in the transfer market? is hughes really being backed with money in this window?
also like to add, tony fernandez comments today. paste........................................
"I think, done for a while actually because we would then have a good nucleus for a long time.
"The work then has to start on the academy and bringing through kids, who started at QPR at 11 and go all the way up."
does he expect these ageing players being able to preform in the top league until the youth start coming through the acadamy in probably 4-5 years time?
is he saying that this will be the last of the socalled spending spree? if that is the case, i hold the view that we should have gone for the likes rodeaga and clyne as it would cement our future without the need of spending much again.
p.s please exuse the appalling spelling
Comment