Jump to content

Reach Theory


Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, A12owl said:

Norwich sold James Maddison to Leicester for £25m. Reach has to be worth at least £15 - 20m on that basis.

Still wouldn't want him to go. It's taken him a couple of years to establish himself in our team and would probably take a new player the same. I think like Bannan he is happy here. Contracted to us till June 2021. 

 

Maddison is an exceptional player and young too, he will certainly play regularly for England

 

Reach will never play for England and he’s not worth £15m.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Beholder said:

Selling Yr best players to fund a promotion drive is like cutting off yr arms to make you run faster. 

 

I suppose it depends on what fee you get for your player.  Our recruitment has been poorly managed in recent years with over recruitment in certain positions (forwards especially) and under recruitment in others such as full backs.  If one or two big sales allows the new manager to rebalance the squad and hopefully improve the financial situation then so be it.

Personally I’d prefer to see others go before Reach as I really like the lad, but I guess it all boils down to money at the end of the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, hawksmore said:

 

Maddison is an exceptional player and young too, he will certainly play regularly for England

 

Reach will never play for England and he’s not worth £15m.

According to some,he wasn't worth the figure we paid for him,i'd be a bit hacked off if we "gave" him away transfer fee wise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, hawksmore said:

 

Maddison is an exceptional player and young too, he will certainly play regularly for England

 

Reach will never play for England and he’s not worth £15m.

 

1 minute ago, DELUDED OWL said:

According to some,he wasn't worth the figure we paid for him,i'd be a bit hacked off if we "gave" him away transfer fee wise.

 

 

How much did Cardiff pay for Madine ? 6m was it ?

 

Based on that and that alone Reach must be worth at least 10m

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, alanharper said:

 

I wouldn't be surprised if he was sold in January, but if a deal was already lined up there's no way he'd have even been in the squad yesterday. 

 

Yep, there would have been no chance of him playing if a move was already in the pipeline.

 

I can see it happening though if a decent bid is made. We have been in a situation before when we have refused bids for players and have subsequently seen their value plummet fairly quickly due to injuries or inconsistent performances. If selling 1 or 2 of our best players for premium prices means we don't have to suffer a similar situation to last summer next year then it is surely something the club will now consider. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, SolihullOwl79 said:

Listening to Bullen's comments about wrapping up Reach in Cotton wool, I think they're protecting our most valuable/saleable asset from serious injury to sell him to the highest bidder in the madness of January transfer window. This is how I think they're going to fund a promotion drive from Steve Bruce! 

 

Thoughts? 

Image result for mind blown gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stocksyuto said:

Maybe, I’d be happy for him to leave if we got more than 10 million for him any less not bothered , not ideal selling him but if it helped us 

 

Most teams do it they sell their big players and recruit clever again that’s how most teams stay away from ffp sometimes you have to let your best toys go and dc seems to be having issues letting go.

This is exactly what I mean. It's about cashing in at the right time. Then using that profit wisely to reinvest in the team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, fpowl said:

That’s because your reading into something negative to protect yourself from thinking anything positive 

 

what I think is he was a bit tight after the boro game and tightened up in the WBA game do they brought him off as a precaution 

 

not sure why I think that....oh wait because that’s what Bullen said and I’ve no reason to look for a conspiracy theory 

He's not going to say "we took him off because we're worried he may get injured and no longer be in the shop window when we really need to sell him for a huge profit to get some fresh blood in" is he!!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, SolihullOwl79 said:

He's not going to say "we took him off because we're worried he may get injured and no longer be in the shop window when we really need to sell him for a huge profit to get some fresh blood in" is he!!! 

Then he wouldn’t have played him last three games then would he 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SolihullOwl79 said:

Listening to Bullen's comments about wrapping up Reach in Cotton wool, I think they're protecting our most valuable/saleable asset from serious injury to sell him to the highest bidder in the madness of January transfer window. This is how I think they're going to fund a promotion drive from Steve Bruce! 

 

Thoughts? 

Donald why have you closed down the governmentWTF:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SolihullOwl79 said:

Listening to Bullen's comments about wrapping up Reach in Cotton wool, I think they're protecting our most valuable/saleable asset from serious injury to sell him to the highest bidder in the madness of January transfer window. This is how I think they're going to fund a promotion drive from Steve Bruce! 

 

Thoughts? 

I wish people would stop 'thinking' on here.

:picnic:

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...