Confirmed Signing Josh King

[ValBlue]

But they arent even similar players.

King is a proven Premier League player over a number of seasons who would possibly be available for a reasonable fee.
Brooks is an unproven injury-prone twiglet who would

Brooks is somewhat PL proven, 7 goals and 5 assists in his first season isn’t exactly bad. His injury was more down to bad luck if I remember, just one of those that needed surgery and a long time to recover, not like he was getting niggly things repeatedly. He had a bad injury, wouldn’t label him ‘injury prone’. Pretty sure he scored against City not too long ago after making his return.
The price I will agree on though, pretty sure his contract is pretty chunky so he won’t be cheap. We need support on the right much more then the middle or the left though 100%

 

[Goat]

Brooks is somewhat PL proven, 7 goals and 5 assists in his first season isn’t exactly bad. His injury was more down to bad luck if I remember, just one of those that needed surgery and a long time to recover, not like he was getting niggly things repeatedly. He had a bad injury, wouldn’t label him ‘injury prone’. Pretty sure he scored against City not too long ago after making his return.
The price I will agree on though, pretty sure his contract is pretty chunky so he won’t be cheap. We need support on the right much more then the middle or the left though 100%

The fact that you used the word "somewhat" proves my point really doesn't it?

Hes 23 years old and he's played 1 full Premier League season and less than 100 games in his whole career.

Im not saying he's a bad player and I see why people consider him a talent, but he's not for me.

 

[brieverton]

Weird that Carlo said when asked on new players 'Our Director is dealing with that'

Im not bothered on King at all really.

I wonder did Ancelotti just answer that in general terms, meaning outgoing transfers.
King won't be signing,news would have broken already.

 

[ValBlue]

The fact that you used the word "somewhat" proves my point really doesn't it?

Hes 23 years old and he's played 1 full Premier League season and less than 100 games in his whole career.

Im not saying he's a bad player and I see why people consider him a talent, but he's not for me.

Only said somewhat because of the minutes like you say, but I do think his goal contributions justify the label of proven given his circumstances

 

[Brisan123]

Having offloaded Walcott, I really don't see the point in bringing in another player with a similar (lack of) ability.
King would be a very vanilla signing. He's certainly not going to improve the team and he'd be classed as deadwood within the squad in a week or two.

Fixed

 

[Terrarian]

Nobody wants him, I think it's due to the fact he isn't good value for money. Strikers who can barely scratch double figures who aren't kids are not good enough for where we want to go. Not even convinced 'he could do a job' for the money and wages he demands.

 

[RomanReigns]

Maybe we will try sign him for free next summer and sort out a pre contract deal in January

 

[AmericasToffee]

Simms it is, I guess

 

[Goat]

Maybe we will try sign him for free next summer and sort out a pre contract deal in January

Doubt it spud, think it was no or never personally.

 

[Eggsyblueskin]

Maybe we will try sign him for free next summer and sort out a pre contract deal in January

I doubt we were even vaguely interested and are unlikely to be so in the future.

 

[Tubey]

Simms it is, I guess

But it isn't. It's Richarlison who'd be back up for DCL.

If anything, "Bernard it is" would be the correct response, which is fine.

 

[Jayhow15]

But it isn't. It's Richarlison who'd be back up for DCL.

If anything, "Bernard it is" would be the correct response, which is fine.

Yup

 

[Marius57]

Thank god thats over. Can we lock and archive this thread.

 

[Toffe3m4n]

Think as others have suggested.. we have Richarlison who can play up top with the likes of Gordon and Bernard who can take up his usual place on the left.

 

[Devanski]