By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
The bizarre thing is that Bowler actually sold for £4.25m - More than Smithies. we also eventually got our money back on Mutch.
So over £20m
When you think that Smyth, BOS, Wheeler, Scowen, Manning and Freeman have cost us what? £600K altogether? Even Matt Smith at £500K feels like a bargain.
The bizarre thing is that Bowler actually sold for £4.25m - More than Smithies. we also eventually got our money back on Mutch.
So over £20m
When you think that Smyth, BOS, Wheeler, Scowen, Manning and Freeman have cost us what? £600K altogether? Even Matt Smith at £500K feels like a bargain.
The bizarre thing is that Bowler actually sold for £4.25m - More than Smithies. we also eventually got our money back on Mutch.
So over £20m
When you think that Smyth, BOS, Wheeler, Scowen, Manning and Freeman have cost us what? £600K altogether? Even Matt Smith at £500K feels like a bargain.
Only £1.5m upfront though, the rest was add ons which we may or may not see depending how his career pans out there.
Actually I find the reminder of Austin's fee on top of Smithies a bit depressing, though the fact that he's played so little since perhaps shows why our players aren't as valuable as we think - a guy who was the fulcrum of our team can just go on the rack in the Premiership.
I suspect the problem on both those sales is that a willingness to sell to a Premiership club for a limited profit is one of the reasons we were able to get them at all.
The other thing is that buying Smyths etc is great but they won't all come off - we absolutely can't afford to use the profits to buy players we know straight off have no re-sale value. Old players have virtually got to be on a free.
Actually I find the reminder of Austin's fee on top of Smithies a bit depressing, though the fact that he's played so little since perhaps shows why our players aren't as valuable as we think - a guy who was the fulcrum of our team can just go on the rack in the Premiership.
I suspect the problem on both those sales is that a willingness to sell to a Premiership club for a limited profit is one of the reasons we were able to get them at all.
The other thing is that buying Smyths etc is great but they won't all come off - we absolutely can't afford to use the profits to buy players we know straight off have no re-sale value. Old players have virtually got to be on a free.
Agree about getting older players on a free. It's a shame our experience of older players was sullied by the Hughes era. In the past we signed a lot of older players who were magnificent for us, not just here for a last payday. I refer of cause to the likes of Webb, McClintock, Curry, Jim Langley et al.
0
The Selling Game on 09:46 - Jun 30 with 3331 views
Actually I find the reminder of Austin's fee on top of Smithies a bit depressing, though the fact that he's played so little since perhaps shows why our players aren't as valuable as we think - a guy who was the fulcrum of our team can just go on the rack in the Premiership.
I suspect the problem on both those sales is that a willingness to sell to a Premiership club for a limited profit is one of the reasons we were able to get them at all.
The other thing is that buying Smyths etc is great but they won't all come off - we absolutely can't afford to use the profits to buy players we know straight off have no re-sale value. Old players have virtually got to be on a free.
I think Austin has/ is still suffering from injuries which have curtailed his playing time. In a goals per minute played scenario I believe he was Soton's top scorer and was played whenever he was fit. The guy is a natural predatory striker and would always score goals when played.
I think Austin has/ is still suffering from injuries which have curtailed his playing time. In a goals per minute played scenario I believe he was Soton's top scorer and was played whenever he was fit. The guy is a natural predatory striker and would always score goals when played.
His injury record is part of the reason we didn’t get more money for him, which has to some extent been proved right as he has been injured for a lot of the time he’s been at Southampton. Indeed the reason we got him in the first place was because he failed a medical at Hull. Having said that, Pellegrino made a stupid decision not to pick him at the beginning of last season when he was fit and they weren’t scoring goals. It probably cost him his job ultimately and allowed Hughesless to swan in and ‘save the day’. Much as I like Charlie, I’m kind of hoping he doesn’t play so well he bails out Hughes this season.
I like our new strategy of bringing in cheaper players and adding value to them. Okay it’s not brought in huge dividends yet, but prefer that to the Forest, Birmingham, Villa strategy of paying fortunes to overrated hasbeens and will never bes.
Bit harsh saying Austin's been poor at Saints, injuries aside he's often been unlucky, in the end his goals last season kept them up - not as the Hughes hyperbole would have you believe that he did it.
Still I look forward to a season of struggle for them with that scumbag in charge. Which is annoying as I like Charlie and want to see him do well.
Bit harsh saying Austin's been poor at Saints, injuries aside he's often been unlucky, in the end his goals last season kept them up - not as the Hughes hyperbole would have you believe that he did it.
Still I look forward to a season of struggle for them with that scumbag in charge. Which is annoying as I like Charlie and want to see him do well.
Don't think anyone's saying he's been poor, certainly not me - more that the stupid economics of the Premier League mean that, even allowing for injuries, his talents have been a bit wasted.
He was such a class act for us - including in the Premiership in a terrible team - I just assumed someone would want him as their first choice striker and that he'd be priced at the level of a top premiership striker. But even if he'd been fit I'm not sure Southampton would have made him first choice, and that's Southampton FFS.
Maybe partly down to his injury record but I think also a bit of snobbery - I never thought he got the credit (outside of QPR) for his scoring record with us, if he'd played for Liverpool people would've been calling for him to play for England. So I think some of our players are undervalued just because they play for us.
Still got 14 in 46 overall apps, which considering many are coming off the bench late is impressive, his injuries aside I also think he's been unfortunate that SAints have beocme a bit of a mess (since Cortese left I think) and a couple of silly managerial appointments have hindered him, next season will be interesting in that he's worked with Hughes before I guess, we shall see.
Still got 14 in 46 overall apps, which considering many are coming off the bench late is impressive, his injuries aside I also think he's been unfortunate that SAints have beocme a bit of a mess (since Cortese left I think) and a couple of silly managerial appointments have hindered him, next season will be interesting in that he's worked with Hughes before I guess, we shall see.
The deal was clearly bent as a corkscrew, but our record is still Samba at 12 mill.
Lost £500k on that one but given how poor he was for us still a good deal. Wages were obviously a total spunk off but could say that about any one of about 30 Redknapp signings.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
