Rationale for buying strikers

[Rashid]

This is our main striker outlay of the past 5 years:

 

2000 – Heskey £11m

 

2002 – Diouf £10.5m

 

2004 – Cisse £14m

 

2005 – Morientes, Crouch £13.5m

 

So to be fair to the board we have spent a fair amount on strikers these past 5 years – that’s sum £50m odd.

 

Am I a total numbskull into thinking we would have been better off buy 2 or 3 strikers rather than 5 but spent £15-£20m on them? Not being funny but looking at the strikers who have done it season in and season out in the PL since 2000 (Shearer, Henry, Owen we got free but now cost Newcastle £17m, Nistellroy etc) all cost a fair wad but they haven’t need to be replaced year on year.

 

Please, a decent discussion, I can’t be assed with shite-house arguments.

[Strontium]

Please, a decent discussion, I can’t be assed with shite-house arguments.

Don't start shite-house debates then.

[coop]

Henry was £11 million the same amount we spent on Heskey.

[Juniper]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing

[RedinSweden]

Henry was £11 million the same amount we spent on Heskey.

 

Ha. We showed THEM.

[Mark P]

Please, a decent discussion, I can’t be assed with shite-house arguments.

 

That just sounds wrong.

 

I'm not sure where the "decent discussion" can come from...

 

- We've made some errors in the transfer market?

 

- We've had some of the most talented strikers in Europe on our books in the last 10 years?

[Rashid]

Henry was £11 million the same amount we spent on Heskey.

 

Yeah but he was a winger at Juventus and £11M was a huge gambleand huge risk taken on by Wenger to be fair.

[Hermes]

This is our main striker outlay of the past 5 years:

 

2000 – Heskey £11m

 

2002 – Diouf £10.5m

 

2004 – Cisse £14m

 

2005 – Morientes, Crouch £13.5m

 

 

Apart from Cisse none of them had a decent strike rate when we bought them and that didn't change after we bought them. You get what you pay for.

[RedinSweden]

Yeah but he was a winger at Juventus and £11M was a huge gambleand huge risk taken on by Wenger to be fair.

 

Henry isn't really a striker though is he? he is a forward. Remember Arsenal's search for a fox in the box? The one that ended with them shelling out big money for Jeffers (stop sniggering at the back).

By saying that you have to pay above a certain amount to guarantee quality shows how little you understand about the transfer market i'm afraid. Big money guarantees nothing at all.

[Rashid]

Apart from Cisse none of them had a decent strike rate when we bought them and that didn't change after we bought them. You get what you pay for.

 

Which brings me to my point, why pay £11M for Heskey when you can have Nistellroy for double that but 10 times the results? (an example)

[Rashid]

Henry isn't really a striker though is he? he is a forward. Remember Arsenal's search for a fox in the box? The one that ended with them shelling out big money for Jeffers (stop sniggering at the back).

By saying that you have to pay above a certain amount to guarantee quality shows how little you understand about the transfer market i'm afraid. Big money guarantees nothing at all.

 

I agree, big money guarantees nothing, you only have to look at Veron and Drogba and the rest.

 

But the two best goal getters of the past decade Shearer and Nistellroy cost BIG MONEY - and guaranteed goals by the bucket load.

[Hoddy]

 

But the two best goal getters of the past decade Shearer and Nistellroy cost BIG MONEY - and guaranteed goals by the bucket load.

 

So did Michael Owen. Then he goes gets a bad injury and suddenly £17mil is looking like a very poorly played gamble. Sometimes you don't always get what you pay for.

[sh#t waffle]

Yeah but he was a winger at Juventus and £11M was a huge gambleand huge risk taken on by Wenger to be fair.

I'm not sure how that backs up your argument to be honest.

It seems to me that this thread is essentially a way of you advocating blockbuster signings, but there are a few important facts to consider (apart from facts like Anelka only costing Arsenal about a million when Drogba cost £24):

That £50m was spent over 5 years - We can't run as a club with the attitude of "well, we'd have spent £11m on so and so and he'd have turned out to be shit so we'd have to replace him. So let's just spend 5 years budget at once."

If you spend more on your credit card than you can afford, the interest payments mount up. Surely it's the same if our football club spends more than it has.

Also, Rafa hasn't made too many huge money signings because he simply had too many players to buy for his vision. When we signed Reina and Momo, it suggested to many people that we must have mega money to spend, as these were two positions that we didn't seem to be too badly covered in. Yet so much of our success so far this season is down to these two and the subtle changes they bring compared to other players in the squad. These two add more to our chances of success than one Schevchenko. Which brings me to one last point: Ferguson spent an entire transfer budget on Rooney, thinking that he would win trophies almost on his own. He neglected to look at their aging midfield and shite defence. They've won fuck all now, and he's now having to panic buy to try and improve things..

[Hermes]

Which brings me to my point, why pay £11M for Heskey when you can have Nistellroy for double that but 10 times the results? (an example)

 

Kezman had a better strike rate in Holland than RVN but cost Chelsea 30% of what Man U paid for RVN. My point is that we bought 4 strikers that we knew were not going to score goals at a cost of £36m!!!!!

[Rashid]

I'm not sure how that backs up your argument to be honest.

It seems to me that this thread is essentially a way of you advocating blockbuster signings, but there are a few important facts to consider (apart from facts like Anelka only costing Arsenal about a million when Drogba cost £24):

That £50m was spent over 5 years - We can't run as a club with the attitude of "well, we'd have spent £11m on so and so and he'd have turned out to be shit so we'd have to replace him. So let's just spend 5 years budget at once."

If you spend more on your credit card than you can afford, the interest payments mount up. Surely it's the same if our football club spends more than it has.

Also, Rafa hasn't made too many huge money signings because he simply had too many players to buy for his vision. When we signed Reina and Momo, it suggested to many people that we must have mega money to spend, as these were two positions that we didn't seem to be too badly covered in. Yet so much of our success so far this season is down to these two and the subtle changes they bring compared to other players in the squad. These two add more to our chances of success than one Schevchenko. Which brings me to one last point: Ferguson spent an entire transfer budget on Rooney, thinking that he would win trophies almost on his own. He neglected to look at their aging midfield and shite defence. They've won fuck all now, and he's now having to panic buy to try and improve things..

 

 

Good points there, and I agree with the Reina and Momo analogy.

 

My point is that we seem to pay an awful lot for players who are not top drawer or in Morientes case unwanted at his club who then don't go on to prove value for money.

 

Since Rush the two we have got scoring shedloads have cost us nothing, Collymore cost loads but he scored a fair amount and made Fowler even better. I think unless you are buying young like a Walcott or an Anelka, it's probably better to spend that little bit more and go for real quality.

[ugm9mjh]

Not being funny but looking at the strikers who have done it season in and season out in the PL since 2000 (Shearer, Henry, Owen we got free but now cost Newcastle £17m, Nistellroy etc) all cost a fair wad but they haven’t need to be replaced year on year.

 

People always forget yakubu, who has to be the most underated striker in the premiership. Only henry and van nistelrooy have scored more than him in the last few seasons and hes played for crap clubs. Cost portsmouth a few million and boro got an absolute bargain when they payed 7 million this summer.

[RedinSweden]

I agree, big money guarantees nothing, you only have to look at Veron and Drogba and the rest.

 

But the two best goal getters of the past decade Shearer and Nistellroy cost BIG MONEY - and guaranteed goals by the bucket load.

 

Rash, you are contradicting yourself. On the one hand you say it guarantees nothing and yet say that they guaranteed goals. Henry scores loads and cost 11 million. He didn't guarantee goals did he, due to his price tag.

I would rather the manager bought players that can do what he wants them to do, than big money stars with a "reputation". You obviously don't agree.

[Juniper]

Yeah but no but yeah but no

 

Look. You may buy a striker who is rated and doing the business in another country or another team in the prem but who says he’s going to do the business for you.

Fair game Van Horse was a proven goal scorer in Holland, but Cisse was a proven goal scorer in France. Admittedly Cisse hasn’t lived up to the hype as much as we though he would but when it was first decided by GH that he wanted him, I’m sure he thought he would do a job over here (I did too).

 

It hasn’t worked out quite like that though, but you can’t tell if a proven goalscorrer will do the job at your club, no matter his reputation and there’s plenty of examples out there.

 

You gotta stop seeing the bad in every aspect of the club man

 

The reason we have bought five is cause everyone hasn’t really lived up to the hype as much as the club thought they would.

[Rashid]

People always forget yakubu, who has to be the most underated striker in the premiership. Only henry and van nistelrooy have scored more than him in the last few seasons and hes played for crap clubs. Cost portsmouth a few million and boro got an absolute bargain when they payed 7 million this summer.

 

People are scared they will buy another Heskey, Yakubu has in some games played like an absolute donkey but I get your point, he is a good player.

 

If I was looking for a striker now, and wanted to pay the money, apart from Owen I'd try and get someone like Villa at Valencia or Kuyt.

[Rashid]

Yeah but no but yeah but no

 

Look. You may buy a striker who is rated and doing the business in another country or another team in the prem but who says he’s going to do the business for you.

Fair game Van Horse was a proven goal scorer in Holland, but Cisse was a proven goal scorer in France. Admittedly Cisse hasn’t lived up to the hype as much as we though he would but when it was first decided by GH that he wanted him, I’m sure he thought he would do a job over here (I did too).

 

It hasn’t worked out quite like that though, but you can’t tell if a proven goalscorrer will do the job at your club, no matter his reputation and there’s plenty of examples out there.

 

You gotta stop seeing the bad in every aspect of the club man

 

The reason we have bought five is cause everyone hasn’t really lived up to the hype as much as the club thought they would.

 

Has Cisse had a decent run of games though? I think if you played him in 20 consecutive games he would score at least 12.

[lifetime fan]

Good points there, and I agree with the Reina and Momo analogy.

 

My point is that we seem to pay an awful lot for players who are not top drawer or in Morientes case unwanted at his club who then don't go on to prove value for money.

 

Since Rush the two we have got scoring shedloads have cost us nothing, Collymore cost loads but he scored a fair amount and made Fowler even better. I think unless you are buying young like a Walcott or an Anelka, it's probably better to spend that little bit more and go for real quality.

 

I wondered how long it would take you to mention him. :whistle:

[Juniper]

Has Cisse had a decent run of games though? I think if you played him in 20 consecutive games he would score at least 12.

 

 

 

I see what your getting at but I just don’t fancy the guy (not in that way before all of you go all gay on me) to be a 20-30 goals a season striker even if he played every game of the season. His one on one finishing is awful at times and I just don’t feel he’s a natural goal scorer

 

And this is coming from someone who thought the sun shined out of his backside until this season.

 

Nice hair though

[Gray - YPC]

If only if only....

 

If only we'd have splashed out big money on good centre halves, rather than relying on £2.5m for a Finnish donkey, and £3.5m for a Swiss fella who looks fucked after 5 minutes.

 

If only we'd have broken the bank fro Cherno Samba - he's the next Robbie Fowler.

 

 

 

The point is - if you can point back to BEFORE these things happened and you were critical I could accept that, but hindsight, revisionism, and selective us of facts prove nothing.

[fivetimes]

If only if only....

 

If only we'd have splashed out big money on good centre halves, rather than relying on £2.5m for a Finnish donkey, and £3.5m for a Swiss fella who looks fucked after 5 minutes.

 

If only we'd have broken the bank fro Cherno Samba - he's the next Robbie Fowler.

The point is - if you can point back to BEFORE these things happened and you were critical I could accept that, but hindsight, revisionism, and selective us of facts prove nothing.

 

Or in short, another bullshit pointless thread from Rashid.

[kopitegaz]

Which brings me to my point, why pay £11M for Heskey when you can have Nistellroy for double that but 10 times the results? (an example)

 

 

You have a point do you? I thought your sole purpose was to piss every off by seemingly ignoring any points they made that differed from yours