EnigmaRam Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 How many people said they wanted a Nugent from 5 years ago? Seems like we might be getting that player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derbydaz22 Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 I would hope this deal is something like £4 mil and the rest of the fee in add ons if we get promoted etc,if it is and he scores over 20 goals to get us promotion it’s money well spent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaspode Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 If it means we can shift some deadwood I don't have a problem with signing Waghorn - good player at this level and always a pain to opposition defences - plus works his socks off for the team. A younger version of Nugent..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DazzaRam Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 A deal worth £8m maybe...£2m in cash...15 goals £1m...£3m on promotion...£2m on any sell on. Not a chance its £8m cash. People get too excited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 3 minutes ago, ShoreRam said: I don't believe for a second we're spending £8m on Waghorn, that's pie in the sky numbers maybe leaked to placate Ipswich fans, no idea - It's not true though. Complete guess but imagine it's more likely to be say £4m plus players that cost us £4m (but are worth nothing to us). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gccrowdpleaser Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 39 minutes ago, TomBustler1884 said: Any bid for Waghorn will surely include lots of clauses that could add up to 8m, but there's no chance it will be 8m upfront. People should keep in mind that only all reports of £8million stem from an original report in the DAILY MAIL. The DAILY MAIL! A rag for publishing notoriously false stories even in situations where they can be libellous. In the arena of football which is full of egos, inflated figures and fan clicks they will quite frankly write anything for a bit of attention. I don't doubt that there is interest there but I do doubt the £8million figure. We will not spend £8million on Waghorn. We may spend £3m on Waghorn with Blackman going the other way and a further £3m if we get promoted. All sortes of ways to make a deal reach numbers if you want it to. Could even be that the '£8m deal' includes committee spend on his wages. £25K per week on a 3 year deal is near £4m. £3m fee and Pearce makes it to roughly an £8m deal. Lots of possible ways here to reach a newspaper figure. Remember the Marriott figure has suddenly gone from £6.5m to a reported £4.75m. That's a 27% fee decrease in a matter of just a few hours. I suspect even if both were to come in with a bit of money down you would see 23 year old Marriott on a 5 year deal and 28 yo Waghorn on a 3 year deal. From and FFP perspective the costs are then spread comparatively thinly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDCAR Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 1 minute ago, gccrowdpleaser said: People should keep in mind that only all reports of £8million stem from an original report in the DAILY MAIL. The DAILY MAIL! A rag for publishing notoriously false stories even in situations where they can be libellous. In the arena of football which is full of egos, inflated figures and fan clicks they will quite frankly write anything for a bit of attention. I don't doubt that there is interest there but I do doubt the £8million figure. We will not spend £8million on Waghorn. We may spend £3m on Waghorn with Blackman going the other way and a further £3m if we get promoted. All sortes of ways to make a deal reach numbers if you want it to. Could even be that the '£8m deal' includes committee spend on his wages. £25K per week on a 3 year deal is near £4m. £3m fee and Pearce makes it to roughly an £8m deal. Lots of possible ways here to reach a newspaper figure. Remember the Marriott figure has suddenly gone from £6.5m to a reported £4.75m. That's a 27% fee decrease in a matter of just a few hours. I suspect even if both were to come in with a bit of money down you would see 23 year old Marriott on a 5 year deal and 28 yo Waghorn on a 3 year deal. From and FFP perspective the costs are then spread comparatively thinly. Lovely post ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BathRam72 Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 12 minutes ago, gccrowdpleaser said: People should keep in mind that only all reports of £8million stem from an original report in the DAILY MAIL. The DAILY MAIL! A rag for publishing notoriously false stories even in situations where they can be libellous. In the arena of football which is full of egos, inflated figures and fan clicks they will quite frankly write anything for a bit of attention. I don't doubt that there is interest there but I do doubt the £8million figure. We will not spend £8million on Waghorn. We may spend £3m on Waghorn with Blackman going the other way and a further £3m if we get promoted. All sortes of ways to make a deal reach numbers if you want it to. Could even be that the '£8m deal' includes committee spend on his wages. £25K per week on a 3 year deal is near £4m. £3m fee and Pearce makes it to roughly an £8m deal. Lots of possible ways here to reach a newspaper figure. Remember the Marriott figure has suddenly gone from £6.5m to a reported £4.75m. That's a 27% fee decrease in a matter of just a few hours. I suspect even if both were to come in with a bit of money down you would see 23 year old Marriott on a 5 year deal and 28 yo Waghorn on a 3 year deal. From and FFP perspective the costs are then spread comparatively thinly. Stop talking sense. (Good post) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldben Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 Would you rather have Marriott or Waghorn? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rab a dab doo Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 Hope its true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nijul_cluff Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 1 minute ago, Oldben said: Would you rather have Marriott or Waghorn? Both. I'm greedy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rab a dab doo Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 Let's be greedy and have both go on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffsRam Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 24 minutes ago, Redcar said: Franks prob given Ipswich a list of 8 players they can pick from...... ”Here you go, any two from that lot, take ya pick” Blackman Anya Blackman Anya Blackman Anya Blackman Anya Take your pick, any two... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnigmaRam Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 1 minute ago, Oldben said: Would you rather have Marriott or Waghorn? Both. As they are both improvements on what we’ve currently got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gccrowdpleaser Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 1 minute ago, Oldben said: Would you rather have Marriott or Waghorn? If you're going to play a high energy press on the opposition defence and midfield it has to be led from the front. With the exception of Nugent we don't have anyone that can do that. We certainly don't have anyone that can do that Sat/Tues throughout the season. So in truth we probably need both. On the proviso that have plans to shift others on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffsRam Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 22 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: Complete guess but imagine it's more likely to be say £4m plus players that cost us £4m (but are worth nothing to us). If we can shift out some of the FFP drags then that would indeed be a bonus, especially those who's contracts aren't too far off being up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRam Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 7 hours ago, Cam the Ram said: Either this is going to be a very complicated deal - or the figure being banded about by journos is just wrong. Based on the money that's come in, we can't afford to spend ~£12m+ on two players even if we sell Vydra for ~£10m A little over £4m is what we need to balance for FFP, we know that, and I think as Jozefzoon was 750k more than we got for Weimann - so with wages saved we're likely only about £1.5m of the way there (unless those we released were some of the highest earners, which I doubt with the big money we spent on players after them). We'd probably be looking to see £15m come in, in order to fund this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimmu Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 17 minutes ago, gccrowdpleaser said: People should keep in mind that only all reports of £8million stem from an original report in the DAILY MAIL. The DAILY MAIL! A rag for publishing notoriously false stories even in situations where they can be libellous. In the arena of football which is full of egos, inflated figures and fan clicks they will quite frankly write anything for a bit of attention. I don't doubt that there is interest there but I do doubt the £8million figure. We will not spend £8million on Waghorn. We may spend £3m on Waghorn with Blackman going the other way and a further £3m if we get promoted. All sortes of ways to make a deal reach numbers if you want it to. Could even be that the '£8m deal' includes committee spend on his wages. £25K per week on a 3 year deal is near £4m. £3m fee and Pearce makes it to roughly an £8m deal. Lots of possible ways here to reach a newspaper figure. Remember the Marriott figure has suddenly gone from £6.5m to a reported £4.75m. That's a 27% fee decrease in a matter of just a few hours. I suspect even if both were to come in with a bit of money down you would see 23 year old Marriott on a 5 year deal and 28 yo Waghorn on a 3 year deal. From and FFP perspective the costs are then spread comparatively thinly. I so wish to like this post but unfortunately, it's still biased. Dismissing high figure presented by Daily Mail is fine, but highlighting shady twitter account's price drop is hardly convenient. It just suits better for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimmu Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 If we have money, go get him Frankie! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anag Ram Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, EnigmaRam said: Both. As they are both improvements on what we’ve currently got. I struggle to see how you could pick both. Wilson and Lawrence will play. So will Bryson, Mount and Hudds/Ledley. So unless we decide to play 3 at the back, there's no room for both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.