Confirmed Signing Neal Maupay

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why does that matter?

No risk, no reward. Maupay guarantees 8-10 goals a season but so what? McGoldrick at Sheffield United scored as many Premier League goals as Maupay did last season. It is not a number to aspire to, for me.
Still waiting for your list of proven Prem scorers we can afford and who would realistically sign for us
 
Those players didn't win anything and now even worse ones are coming. If Everton keep buying players like this then you will die before you see a trophy
Our arguably best team ever had players like a ‘past it broken down’ Peter Reid who we took a punt on and ‘aging not what he was’ Andy Gray. Liverpool reject Sheedy as well if you want?

Where you buy players from, how much they cost and how highly they’re rated doesn’t mean anything, it’s how they fit into the team and so far the new signings of Coady and Tarkowski clearly suit Franks game plan so if he wants Maupay then I look forward to seeing how it works.
 
Dennis, Cornet and Pukki outscored Maupay last season and all were relegated. Wood and Benteke outscored him the season before that.

10 goals (assuming he gets 10 as he hasn't done that in the last 2 seasons) is not going to be enough for a leading CF. This is the calibre of striker we want?

Kalajdzic, Burkardt, Zirkzee, Gouiri, Ramos and several others represent greater risk, at a similar price, but potentially far greater reward.

Ramos has been quoted at £35m, Kalajdzic 20m+, Gouiri reports suggest 40m.

The other two not worth our time.

Maupay at £15m is a brilliant deal and one where should it not work out, we’d make our money back or close to it.
 
Last edited:

They're hawking him around everywhere and the clubs that are interested are us and Fulham. I'm not sure most "superheroes" have two relegation favourites as their only suitors. Let's also be realistic about the keeping them up part of your argument, Brighton were never in danger last season and not because of Neal Maupay.
Take 8 goals away from a club scoring around 40 and they're leaking a lot of points. Whether that's enough to relegate them is another question, but in a low-scoring team like that it probably costs them 1 or 2 points in a lot of those fixtures.

When I say "superhero" that's in the context of our roster. 10/8/8 is far more production at that end than we've received from anyone other than DCL in the last three seasons that remains here.

It's half of a reliable answer at a very fair price. Whether the club wants to roll with hoping DCL stays healthy and Gordon emerges as the other half remains to be seen.
 
Not confirmed so that means he’s not in the team for tomorrow absolute joke this club another game with no striker or rondon if you can call him one.
 
1661518602092.jpeg
 
You've listed a load of players Newcastle and West Ham have been linked with there.

Players need to want to come as well - I know Zirkzee has jibbed us twice before, a few others I've not heard of and had to Google and personally I'm not in favour of us spending any money we might have on strikers from the Bundesliga/Ligue 1. That Burkardt has apparently scored 12 in 67 over there.

We can take Moise Kean type risks when we're more secure - now it's about a baseline to try and stay competitive enough to stay in the league.

That is okay, I understand that you want Maupay and think he is the best option because you want us to try and stay competitive in the league.

I want to see us be more ambitious and sign young players who might excite the fans, who might get more than 8 or 9 goals a season.

It is just a different strategy. All signings are risks but some offer greater rewards than others. Maupay is a low risk, low reward type signing.
 

And all guaranteed to score goals in the Prem?
Clearly not. Some will likely also not work out as well. But if your not buying value propositions that could potentially be better or sold for future profits that then can be reinvested you are committing to stagnation or regression. Our relegation scrap case and point. Let alone the justification of a signing based on a hyper necessity for goals to push off relegation this year. Its all symptomatic of not having done that well enough in the past.

Relegation is a deserved fear. So much so it makes sense to sell the winger attached to a 60 million move and buy at a higher number for more goals assurance as well as upside (if the risk of the other names is too risky). Poorly that seems to be for deadline day or not at all.

If such parameters were made for the majority of teams, there wouldn’t be 16 teams above us by the end of the year. I doubt that will be Brighton’s rationale with their reinvestment from this deal.

By almost all angles we aren’t in my opinion understanding a broader context to our business and I think it might come at a cost down the road.
 
Last edited:
That is okay, I understand that you want Maupay and think he is the best option because you want us to try and stay competitive in the league.

I want to see us be more ambitious and sign young players who might excite the fans, who might get more than 8 or 9 goals a season.

It is just a different strategy. All signings are risks but some offer greater rewards than others. Maupay is a low risk, low reward type signing.

When your priority is being competitive enough to stay in the league, it's perhaps wise/pragmatic to go for low risk transfers.

I've felt for a long time we need a period of a few transfer windows of low risk, with potential resale signings. He's one, IMO.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top