Callum O'Hare

h_m_boro said:
So Sky commentators stating Coventry want £8-9m for him..... Burnley offered £6m and were turned down.

Surely with £25m+ in the kitty he'd be well worth a bid for that price???
Click to expand...
He’s decent but I don’t think that would leave us much for a striker or strikers - if we have more than half of the Tav/Spence money to spend I’d be amazed. Gibson is not going to sanction a £20m plus spending spree
 
Funky_Chicken said:
He’s decent but I don’t think that would leave us much for a striker or strikers - if we have more than half of the Tav/Spence money to spend I’d be amazed. Gibson is not going to sanction a £20m plus spending spree
Click to expand...
If the Muniz / Armstrong deals (🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️) are loans, few quid to sort these; £5.5m on Forss and Hoppe.....still leaves a few bob in the kitty. We need to replace Tav, so pushing the boat out to get O'Hare? Suppose it depends where the biggest priority is.
Accept we need 5-6 players in to beef up the squad so it's a tough call where the money goes.
 
I don't want us to blow 7-10mil on any player. I hope and believe we have moved away from the madness of Fletcher / Saville and Flint (and many more).

You simply don't see champo clubs paying those fees now. Why sell Tav and spend nearly all of it on his replacement? That's not good financial buisness sense.

Hopefully 'trust' the recruitment team to find a gem for a fraction of the cost we sold Tav for.

You expect to pay a bit of a premium for a CF. Yet still wouldn't want to pay anywhere near 15mil for one incase he turned out to be another dud. We've only just recovered from Britt and his wages.
 
We won't blow a lot on anyone 3 to 4 M max ish, think we are balancing our books from ffp myself ?, hence we won't spend a lot regardless
 
Chair is a number 10 or a wide playermaker, you can't play him in the midfield 3 in Wilders 3-5-2 beacause he's as weak as **** and has no redeeming defensive attributes

I think some fans have to realize that the players we need to fit Wilders tactical framework have to have certain attributes, we play with an anchor in midfield and 2 x box to box ahead of that anchor, and then with 2 x pressing forwards who Widers want to run for 90 minutes, hence why he like 4 strikers, it's horses for courses, dainty numbers 10's and attackng midfielders or strikers who don't run and press will never be considered regrdless of how talented they are
 
Gunslinger said:
Chair is a number 10 or a wide playermaker, you can't play him in the midfield 3 in Wilders 3-5-2 beacause he's as weak as **** and has no redeeming defensive attributes

I think some fans have to realize that the players we need to fit Wilders tactical framework have to have certain attributes, we play with an anchor in midfield and 2 x box to box ahead of that anchor, and then with 2 x pressing forwards who Widers want to run for 90 minutes, hence why he like 4 strikers, it's horses for courses, dainty numbers 10's and attackng midfielders or strikers who don't run and press will never be considered regrdless of how talented they are
Click to expand...
From Wilders comments certainly looks like they are looking for players to suit the system rather than "he's good, we'll squeeze him in somehow". Left footers play on the left, right footers on the right. Players have to fit their profile of what exactly they need, sensible really.
 
CW was defo hinting in his presser yesterday that he thought Cov were taking the **** when we enquired earlier about Gyokeres. I would be surprised if they go back to that club again asking them to deal sensibly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top