Xchurch Villa
Vital 1st Team Regular
Rowe looks very promising and I could certainly see him standing in for Watkins. Looks very quick with good feet and an eye for goal.
Sign him up.
Sign him up.
Watched Norwich against the Baggies last weekend and Rowe looked very good, definitely the stand out player on the day
Probably 15-20m, he is in the final 18 months of his deal.What will he cost though ?
Rowe looks very promising and I could certainly see him standing in for Watkins. Looks very quick with good feet and an eye for goal.
Sign him up.
Probably 15-20m, he is in the final 18 months of his deal.
The thing with saying sign him up is, have the club got enough wiggle room financially to do it in this window or, will it be better to wait until summer?
Thats probably a good point tbh and why we want rodgers and not rowe.Rowe is 5ft 8in so more of a Bailey or Diaby type, Rogers is 6 ft3 in, so a completely different type who could do the Ollie role, however having watched him against Chelsea he'd need to up his work rate tenfold.
Rowe is 5ft 8in so more of a Bailey or Diaby type, Rogers is 6 ft3 in, so a completely different type who could do the Ollie role, however having watched him against Chelsea he'd need to up his work rate tenfold.
No PL experience at all, not even a PL club he's been at, unlike Rogers.Probably 15-20m, he is in the final 18 months of his deal.
It's called FFP or P and S whatever you want to call it. We do however appear to be targeting young with a high ceiling. It also appears to be our current method.No PL experience at all, not even a PL club he's been at, unlike Rogers.
I don't see the point of selling Ramsey, Archer and Bidace who were not going to play then replacing them with more players of similar standard and age who are also not going to be anything but bench polishers, this season.
It works if the players you bring in are the same price and better, otherwise may as well trouser the money for a rainy day.It's called FFP or P and S whatever you want to call it.
I'm guessing FFP is the problem here, given that both these players would have a very high valuation put on them by their club.Considering who we are and our current status I just wish the talk was about the proven real deals .... like Eze and Olise.
It's the way it works. If you sell a home grown for say 10m. It all onto your P&S spending allowance. If you buy a player for 10m over say a 5 year contract, it costs you 2m per year. It's a silly system IMO and encourages teams to sell players they have developed.It works if the players you bring in are the same price and better, otherwise may as well trouser the money for a rainy day.
I get this is the latest thinking from the ITK experts but is it correct or just more guesswork?
I don't think it's about being a better player necessarily, as all the players we let go are clearly talented (albeit not at the standard we need yet).It works if the players you bring in are the same price and better, otherwise may as well trouser the money for a rainy day.
I get this is the latest thinking from the ITK experts but is it correct or just more guesswork?
It would be good to see the reality of what this does to the accounts. Feels like a rob Peter to pay Paul sort of thing. We're going to steal money from our future so we can get Pau and Diaby but we'll have to pay a premium to back fill positions we already had.No PL experience at all, not even a PL club he's been at, unlike Rogers.
I don't see the point of selling Ramsey, Archer and Bidace who were not going to play then replacing them with more players of similar standard and age who are also not going to be anything but bench polishers, this season.