Jump to content

Extend Joe Ledley’s Contract Please.


Coneheadjohn

Poll worthy  

164 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

 I'm not impressed with a midfield that relies on Huddz and Ledley, but that's just me. :)

We're unbeaten since Gary parented the two of them up in the centre. I can appreciate that their age/speed might be a warning sign, but they deserve some credit for (both) their roles so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

He's not a flashy player, and arguably never has been, but he does all the simple things right. Passes the ball at the right time, persists in the challenge, moves about considerably well for his age, and is a clearly positive voice/personality on the pitch and, I assume, in the dressing room.

I'd like to see him stay until at least the end of the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

If we hadn't signed Ledley we'd have to have played a different way - didn't Gary say the 'horses for courses' bit. I'm not impressed with a midfield that relies on Huddz and Ledley, but that's just me. :)

Neither am I but it looks more solid than Huddz/Bradders has.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2017 at 10:54, sage said:

Going by comments made about transfer deadline day that we had to loan out Bryson to buy Kieftenbeld it is pretty clear that we running close to FFP.

Ledley will be on high wages. Any transfer fee is spread over the length of the contract in FFP terms.

What is important is we have the right kind of CM player. We play 4231. Thorne. Huddlestone and Ledley all play in the 2 and are all competing for one place IMO. We need a more mobile CM playing alongside them. Some who can pass a ball as well as being mobile. So that rules out Johnson.  

It's the amortisation that's 'charged' to FFP and,because of changes from 15/16,these amounts will now be significantly less than the transfer fee instalments,but I guess that probably reinforces your argument;however these fees do eventually have to be paid by something,or someone,irrespective of FFP considerations.

As far as the debate about whether we are or aren't close to the FFP limit,I've previously said that it's no longer possible to give a reasonable estimate these days,just broad ranges. What I will say,however, is that Stephen Pearce disclosed that Mel funds the club up to the limits that FFP allows.The obvious thing to say, therefore, is that we're always going to be sailing close to the threshold whilst Mel continues to do this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Mel's funding keeps us close to FFP limits it is not altogether helpful when it produces a situation like it did at the end of the last window when we had to complete the Bryson loan before we could submit on MK  and ultimately time ran  out . This left us with  a big gap in our squad where the MFG should have been and GR's plans in disarray. Fortunately we have been able to rectify this using a player who was out of contract. Joe Ledley looks like a better option than an enthusiastic youngster who is still learning. He has quickly and effectively slotted into the squad and brought the stability of tried and tested experience  we needed in the heart of our midfield.

There must be a balance there somewhere.................. .

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...