Guest Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 You know that Oxlade-Chamberlain's entire career worth of experience was 36 League One appearances by the point that he went to Arsenal for of the order of £12 mil right? And hughes entire career is what 6 games ? so are you saying he is worth 12m after these games, would you not think that anyone paying this amount on a player is crazy ? Oxlade-Chamberlain had a full season before he moved, Will Hughes is starting to "attract interest from the Premier League", he may become a 12m player, but he is not now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uttoxram75 Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 The biggest fear is the clubs watching Will's progress may notice Jake. Is that why Nige is not playing him atm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 And hughes entire career is what 6 games ? so are you saying he is worth 12m after these games, would you not think that anyone paying this amount on a player is crazy ? Oxlade-Chamberlain had a full season before he moved, Will Hughes is starting to "attract interest from the Premier League", he may become a 12m player, but he is not now. The Championship season will be at least what... 26 games old by the time the next transfer window opens. He could have up to 30 appearances at Championship level by then to impress, unless he's struck down by injury that is. Even in such a case, if he did pick up an injury that stopped him playing often then most clubs would be reluctant to make a move for him then, making it far more likely for him to stay and play more. Long story short, by the time the real offers come in he'll have some experience under his belt. I hope the club doesn't sell him at the first chance given, but ultimately he's a good young player who if he does play well enough to attract interest at 17 years old there will be a huge price put on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramsbottom Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 With Hughes coming on so strongly we may have a chance to see what the current regime are made of. As Hughes is arguably the best prospect since Huddlestone who we all know went for 27p and a half eaten Twix. Current prices for Solid English prospects taken into account we would have to be starting in excess of 8m with a bucket load of add on's. You're talking bullsh*t. I ahve it on good authority there was a six pack of Muller Fruit Corners and a goldfish thrown in as well 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' /> As for young Mr Hughes, I haven't managed to get to a game yet due to holidays, family commitment etc but from what I'm reading he's very much in the mould of Paul Scholes & Jack Wilshire. Now they aren't too many players of that ilk around at the moment so if we were to cash in on him in a couple of seasons by which time, if he continues to progress, he would be worth a lot. I guess there could be worse things in the world than being a feeder club for top four clubs. Look where Southampton are now having sold their two hotest prospects of the last decade... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boycie Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 Arsenal are in the driving seat for his signature. Stop it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuitYourJibbaJivin Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 And hughes entire career is what 6 games ? so are you saying he is worth 12m after these games, would you not think that anyone paying this amount on a player is crazy ? Oxlade-Chamberlain had a full season before he moved, Will Hughes is starting to "attract interest from the Premier League", he may become a 12m player, but he is not now. Do you honestly think that the Ox was brought for £12m just because of his 36 league 1 appearences? He will have been scouted for years and the same goes Hughes. Im not 1 to drop sources in, or claim to be ITK but i have it on very good authority that DCFC have already turned down decent bids for Will because they believe he is the future maybe not in the future playing staff but he certainly will fund it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCFCfranco Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 i will only accept a bid of 500000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 for him. but then again he'll probably wont leave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 Do you honestly think that the Ox was brought for £12m just because of his 36 league 1 appearences? He will have been scouted for years and the same goes Hughes. Im not 1 to drop sources in, or claim to be ITK but i have it on very good authority that DCFC have already turned down decent bids for Will because they believe he is the future maybe not in the future playing staff but he certainly will fund it! So if your not one to be "ITK" or drop sources, what are you doing ? If someone rated him as highly as you are saying, he wouldnt be here, simple, and Im not "ITK" :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 i will only accept a bid of 500000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 for him. but then again he'll probably wont leave. For anyone who is curious, this number would be said as: Five hundred tredecillion I can't think of a good way of putting this number in context. How about this, if you replaced every person on the planet with the same number of people on the planet, then once again replaced every person produced with the total number there was, this would still be more than 10,000 times smaller than the number you quoted. How to put this better: - 7 billion people in the world today. - Replace each of these 7 billion (7,000,000,000) people with 7 billion (7,000,000,000) each - This gives us ~50 quintillion (50,000,000,000,000,000,000) people - Replace each with another 50 quintillion (50,000,000,000,000,000,000) people - This gives us ~2.4 duodecillion (2,400,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) people - You'd still need to replace each person with more than 10,000 people each to get the number you quoted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 For anyone who is curious, this number would be said as: Five hundred Tredecillion I can't think of a good way of putting this number in context. How about this, if you replaced every person on the planet with the same number of people on the planet, then once again replaced every person produced with the total number there was, this would still be more than 10,000 times smaller than the number you quoted. How to put this better: - 7 billion people in the world today. - Replace each of these 7 billion people with 7 billion each - This gives us ~50 Quintillion people - Replace each with another 50 Quintillion people - This gives us ~2.4 Duodecillion people - You'd still need to replace each person with 10,000 to get the number you quoted I dont understand that, cant you do a graph 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mary Hindge Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 For anyone who is curious, this number would be said as: Five hundred tredecillion I can't think of a good way of putting this number in context. How about this, if you replaced every person on the planet with the same number of people on the planet, then once again replaced every person produced with the total number there was, this would still be more than 10,000 times smaller than the number you quoted. How to put this better: - 7 billion people in the world today. - Replace each of these 7 billion (7,000,000,000) people with 7 billion (7,000,000,000) each - This gives us ~50 quintillion (50,000,000,000,000,000,000) people - Replace each with another 50 quintillion (50,000,000,000,000,000,000) people - This gives us ~2.4 duodecillion (2,400,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) people - You'd still need to replace each person with more than 10,000 people each to get the number you quoted Im curious if we do sell him for this amount will we be richer than Man City or not??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 Im curious if we do sell him for this amount will we be richer than Man City or not??? Let's put it this way, if you took the entire World's GDP, and replaced every £ with the World's GDP and then did this another time, it would still be about one 500th of the value of that transfer. I dont understand that, cant you do a graph 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' /> Hmmm... I'm trying to think of a way of graphing this. Give me a moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 I dont understand that, cant you do a graph 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' /> eV9kM Best I can really think of right now. This is a log-log scale, so basically, as you go along things get exponentially bigger. The black writing is to do with red squares which are the comparison points, the blue righting is to show the comparison to the scale we are talking here. All figures for the red squares are given in metres. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIMBAUD Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 how does that figure compare to 'undsclosed'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrivateDerby Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 So if we do happen to sell William for an undisclosed fee of five hundred tredecillion, would we be in a better position when ffp comes in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 So if we do happen to sell William for an undisclosed fee of five hundred tredecillion, would we be in a better position when ffp comes in? Yes. how does that figure compare to 'undsclosed'? Undisclosed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCFCfranco Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 how does that figure compare to 'undsclosed'? i heard it was the fee we got for shackell... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 i heard it was the fee we got for shackell... ...and Addison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SK47 Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 1 player cant change a team, but the 5+ mil we would have to spend on our team if he went, would. Its unfortunate we have to let our young talent go but we need that kind of money to get out this league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCFCfranco Posted September 14, 2012 Share Posted September 14, 2012 1 player cant change a team, but the 5+ mil we would have to spend on our team if he went, would. Its unfortunate we have to let our young talent go but we need that kind of money to get out this league. the fee we would get would certainly be 5+mill 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ph34r' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':ph34r:' /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.