Confirmed Signing Fabian Delph

[Tubey]

Wouldn't mind him but he isn't what I'd call a priority signing.

 

[JimmyK]

Well it's a totally different argument that has no bearing on this one to start with

I mean, it was you who said it like.

Reporting yourself for being off topic is a new one on me but knock yourself out if that's the road you want to go down.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

I mean, it was you who said it like.

Reporting yourself for being off topic is a new one on me but knock yourself out if that's the road you want to go down.

What on Earth are you on about?

You brought up a completely different point that had no bearing on my original comment, so I was merely pointing it out

We weren't talking about hyped signings

 

[scotchbutterpin]

Good player. Very good news if it happens.

 

[mkrudden]

It all depends on how much he costs, how much he'll be paid and how often he'll play for me

The first two need to be low enough and the third will need to be high enough for the deal to be worthwhile

Again, I don't think he's an awful player or anything, but I don't especially think he's a necessary signing either

As I've already mentioned, I would much rather us see if we could loan Ross back from Chelsea

There would be absolute carnage if that happened.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

There would be absolute carnage if that happened.

Like there was when Rooney came back you mean?

If he came back he'd be quickly forgiven I think

 

[Papa Shango]

Like there was when Rooney came back you mean?

If he came back he'd be quickly forgiven I think

I still hate Rooney.

 

[JimmyK]

What on Earth are you on about?

You brought up a completely different point that had no bearing on my original comment, so I was merely pointing it out

We weren't talking about hyped signings

It's pretty straightforward really. You were saying that signings people think will be underwhelming often are underwhelming, and using that to bolster your argument that we shouldn't sign Delph. I was pointing out that signings people think will be great are also often underwhelming, so it doesn't really make the point you were going for. It was more of a light hearted jibe at our recruitment than a genuine attempt to disagree with you, if i'd known I was going to have spend half an hour explaining it I probably wouldn't have bothered.

 

[big nev lookalike]

I don’t know where he would fit in our current side,too expensive for a squad member and I would rather use one of the three youngsters who started in midfield for the second half on Sunday as a back up.

 

[zook]

Just think this is one we could perhaps revisit on deadline day if we manage to shift out who we want to, far more pressing concerns than getting him in

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

It's pretty straightforward really. You were saying that signings people think will be underwhelming often are underwhelming, and using that to bolster your argument that we shouldn't sign Delph.

Err, actually no, that's not what I'm saying. I haven't said we shouldn't sign him, I've just said that questioning him as a signing is perfectly valid and just saying "If he's good enough for Brands then he's good enough for me" is not a good enough justification for signing him on it's own. We've seen in the past that signings that looked underwhelming did indeed turn out to be underwhelming, so just blindly having faith that this will be a good idea isn't the best way to go

I was pointing out that signings people think will be great are also often underwhelming, so it doesn't really make the point you were going for. It was more of a light hearted jibe at our recruitment than a genuine attempt to disagree with you, if i'd known I was going to have spend half an hour explaining it I probably wouldn't have bothered.

This is a completely different point and not relevant to the point I was making. Of course signings that get hyped can eventually end up being underwhelming, but that has nothing to do with this particular issue, so I was challenging you on that. The two aren't connected. If you don't want to explain your points maybe you should make points that make sense and are actually valid to the discussion at hand?

 

[JimmyK]

Err, actually no, that's not what I'm saying. I haven't said we shouldn't sign him, I've just said that questioning him as a signing is perfectly valid and just saying "If he's good enough for Brands then he's good enough for me" is not a good enough justification for signing him on it's own. We've seen in the past that signings that looked underwhelming did indeed turn out to be underwhelming, so just blindly having faith that this will be a good idea isn't the best way to go



This is a completely different point and not relevant to the point I was making. Of course signings that get hyped can eventually end up being underwhelming, but that has nothing to do with this particular issue, so I was challenging you on that. If you don't want to explain your points maybe you should make points that make sense and are actually valid to the discussion at hand?

I can't work out if you're just spoiling for an argument or you really are as dense as you're coming across. Either way i'll leave it there.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

I can't work out if you're just spoiling for an argument or you really are as dense as you're coming across. Either way i'll leave it there.

Okay mate xx

 

[banno]

Mikey & JimmyK please shake hands

 

[davids]

"The club will target younger players, on lower salaries, to replace them with the director of football confirming the stance at the Football Innovation Summit this week".