@ReturnToSenda said:
But signing Stockton would be signing another main 9 and that's just not realistic
Why wouldn’t we want 2 number 9 strikers?
We have 2 right backs, 2 left backs in fact pretty much 2 or more in every position
We wouldn't sign someone of that calibre to largely sit on the bench - and he wouldn't want to do that unless we were throwing a whole heap of money at him. He's too good and probably out of our price range anyway.
@ReturnToSenda said:
But signing Stockton would be signing another main 9 and that's just not realistic
Why wouldn’t we want 2 number 9 strikers?
We have 2 right backs, 2 left backs in fact pretty much 2 or more in every position
We wouldn't sign someone of that calibre to largely sit on the bench - and he wouldn't want to do that unless we were throwing a whole heap of money at him. He's too good and probably out of our price range anyway.
So we only want one player of any quality for any position?
This concept of signing players who are happy to sit on the bench seems totally at odds with Ainsworth's culture. I'd have thought anyone good enough to press Vokes for his place would be confident enough to think he'll play plenty.
@Right_in_the_Middle said:
This concept of signing players who are happy to sit on the bench seems totally at odds with Ainsworth's culture. I'd have thought anyone good enough to press Vokes for his place would be confident enough to think he'll play plenty.
Indeed. I would suggest nobody in our squad wants to be on the bench and is waiting for their moment to shine. We either say: 'Wow, fancy having Grimmer, Gape, Hanlan, Pendlebury and Forino on the bench!' or we go back to saying ' Who the hell have we got on the bench to change things up/replace X?????'
Have we come to the conclusion that we know Vokes wants to stay?
Has anyone considered that if Vokes goes, we will actually save money by signing Stockton? Asset wise, Stockton is a much more sensible longer term acquisition than Vokes.
@thecatwwfc said:
Have we come to the conclusion that we know Vokes wants to stay?
Has anyone considered that if Vokes goes, we will actually save money by signing Stockton? Asset wise, Stockton is a much more sensible longer term acquisition than Vokes.
How would we save money? I think he's out of the question in any case and a mid-table Champ club will go for him.
@thecatwwfc said:
Have we come to the conclusion that we know Vokes wants to stay?
Has anyone considered that if Vokes goes, we will actually save money by signing Stockton? Asset wise, Stockton is a much more sensible longer term acquisition than Vokes.
How would we save money? I think he's out of the question in any case and a mid-table Champ club will go for him.
Do you think we would pay more in wages for Vokes or Stockton?
@thecatwwfc said:
Have we come to the conclusion that we know Vokes wants to stay?
Has anyone considered that if Vokes goes, we will actually save money by signing Stockton? Asset wise, Stockton is a much more sensible longer term acquisition than Vokes.
How would we save money? I think he's out of the question in any case and a mid-table Champ club will go for him.
Do you think we would pay more in wages for Vokes or Stockton?
You seem to be arguing, @ReturnToSenda, that we wouldn't sign a player to compete for a starting spot with Vokes (assuming he stays)?
Surely that's the way to end up with a complacent, un-competitive squad. To be progressive you need players who'll compete for as many starting places as possible
@thecatwwfc said:
Have we come to the conclusion that we know Vokes wants to stay?
Has anyone considered that if Vokes goes, we will actually save money by signing Stockton? Asset wise, Stockton is a much more sensible longer term acquisition than Vokes.
How would we save money? I think he's out of the question in any case and a mid-table Champ club will go for him.
Do you think we would pay more in wages for Vokes or Stockton?
Similar I reckon
We don't know the details of the deal involved to bring Vokes to Wycombe.
It is without doubt that there is some sort of performance related bonus/contribution from Stoke towards his £30k per week wages/get out clause.....we don't know. What what do know is...he is on BIG wages for League 1.
If we go for Stockton, I don't think for a minute we will offer him anywhere near what Vokes is on, nor do I think we would have BOTH of them on our books.
One thing I do know is, Stockton is more a long term investment than Vokes, with a potential sell on fee. Therefore, we save/have the potential to make more money out of him than we ever will with Vokes.
I'm guessing your reply was because contrary to my thoughts, you think the opposite - so I'd like to know why you think we won't save/make money in swapping Vokes for Stockton.
@Twizz said:
You seem to be arguing, @ReturnToSenda, that we wouldn't sign a player to compete for a starting spot with Vokes (assuming he stays)?
Surely that's the way to end up with a complacent, un-competitive squad. To be progressive you need players who'll compete for as many starting places as possible
You do, but I think you go for someone younger and not a 'guaranteed starter' - which Stockton will justifiably see himself as. It can work the other way and spark disharmony.
@thecatwwfc said:
Have we come to the conclusion that we know Vokes wants to stay?
Has anyone considered that if Vokes goes, we will actually save money by signing Stockton? Asset wise, Stockton is a much more sensible longer term acquisition than Vokes.
How would we save money? I think he's out of the question in any case and a mid-table Champ club will go for him.
Do you think we would pay more in wages for Vokes or Stockton?
Similar I reckon
What what do know is...he is on BIG wages for League 1.
Also not sure there's much sell-on potential in Stockton unless he has an absolutely mad
first season - he's already 28. We might save a bit of money on wages, but obviously we want to keep hold of Vokesy!
Anyway, idk why I'm still debating this as he'll end up at a bigger club who we still can't match financially. Vokes will still be a Wycombe player next season and we'll bring in a younger back-up/competitor ?
We rightly laud Gareth for both spotting young talent (Mehmeti, 09, Gape, Pierre, Mawson)as well as giving underperforming or unfancied youngsters (Hanlan, Thompson, Scowen) a chance as well as offering older 'past it' players a chance to stay in the game and contribute (McLeary, Tyson, Bayo) and yet we think they'll all be off at the first opportunity. Vokes had a terrible time at a 'mid-table Championship side' but seems to be enjoying a new lease of life. Lets get the season over before we start reading player's minds or prematurely waving them off.
let's be realistic, I would imagine if all those teams are interested in hin then I would say we would be his last pick , they are all bigger clubs than ours and we are likely to pay him the least.
If only everyone was as realistic as you when it comes to signings @Quartersman80 as you point out some players might see us as their 'last pick'. Perhaps not all Gareth and Rob's fault then? You'd be surprised at some of the opinions on here about it.
Apparently Morecambe want something like 600k for Stockton and apart from him surely not being worth that, there’s no way we’re going to pay that (considering we supposedly walked away from both Sam Lavelle and Ben Hamer because their clubs were pushing for 250k).
We undoubtedly need a backup for Vokes, but I don’t think we necessarily need to pay a transfer fee to do that. We’re not looking for a superstar who’s going to score 20 goals, we just need an experienced, old-school centre-forward who’ll get a few goals at this level, but most importantly who’ll allow us to play our usual attacking style when Vokes isn’t available (and who won’t mind mostly sitting on the bench). There must be plenty of free agents out there who match that description.
What about, just as an example, Nathan Delfouneso? Free agent (reased by Bolton in the summer) 31, 6’1, not a prolific goalscorer, but bags of experience at this level and is big, strong, reasonably quick and if memory serves has pretty good hold-up play.
To be clear, I’m not demanding the club announce his signing immediately and obviously Stockton is the superior player of the two, but I’m just suggesting him as an example of a realistic alternative to forking out a six figure sum on a second choice striker.
he is 28 and probably looking for a big contract which if you Compare against other clubs we are up against then I would imagine we would offer the least competitive package. in regards to Mawson, he knows the club and cN help him to get a bigger move and vokes needs to be the main man which we could offer him . personally think Stockton over rated , would of loved to have been Uche back
Comments
Why wouldn’t we want 2 number 9 strikers?
We have 2 right backs, 2 left backs in fact pretty much 2 or more in every position
We wouldn't sign someone of that calibre to largely sit on the bench - and he wouldn't want to do that unless we were throwing a whole heap of money at him. He's too good and probably out of our price range anyway.
So we only want one player of any quality for any position?
This concept of signing players who are happy to sit on the bench seems totally at odds with Ainsworth's culture. I'd have thought anyone good enough to press Vokes for his place would be confident enough to think he'll play plenty.
Indeed. I would suggest nobody in our squad wants to be on the bench and is waiting for their moment to shine. We either say: 'Wow, fancy having Grimmer, Gape, Hanlan, Pendlebury and Forino on the bench!' or we go back to saying ' Who the hell have we got on the bench to change things up/replace X?????'
Have we come to the conclusion that we know Vokes wants to stay?
Has anyone considered that if Vokes goes, we will actually save money by signing Stockton? Asset wise, Stockton is a much more sensible longer term acquisition than Vokes.
How would we save money? I think he's out of the question in any case and a mid-table Champ club will go for him.
God its only the endless optimism and confidence in our club that keeps us going isn't it?
Do you think we would pay more in wages for Vokes or Stockton?
Similar I reckon
You seem to be arguing, @ReturnToSenda, that we wouldn't sign a player to compete for a starting spot with Vokes (assuming he stays)?
Surely that's the way to end up with a complacent, un-competitive squad. To be progressive you need players who'll compete for as many starting places as possible
We don't know the details of the deal involved to bring Vokes to Wycombe.
It is without doubt that there is some sort of performance related bonus/contribution from Stoke towards his £30k per week wages/get out clause.....we don't know. What what do know is...he is on BIG wages for League 1.
If we go for Stockton, I don't think for a minute we will offer him anywhere near what Vokes is on, nor do I think we would have BOTH of them on our books.
One thing I do know is, Stockton is more a long term investment than Vokes, with a potential sell on fee. Therefore, we save/have the potential to make more money out of him than we ever will with Vokes.
I'm guessing your reply was because contrary to my thoughts, you think the opposite - so I'd like to know why you think we won't save/make money in swapping Vokes for Stockton.
You do, but I think you go for someone younger and not a 'guaranteed starter' - which Stockton will justifiably see himself as. It can work the other way and spark disharmony.
Do we?
Also not sure there's much sell-on potential in Stockton unless he has an absolutely mad
first season - he's already 28. We might save a bit of money on wages, but obviously we want to keep hold of Vokesy!
Anyway, idk why I'm still debating this as he'll end up at a bigger club who we still can't match financially. Vokes will still be a Wycombe player next season and we'll bring in a younger back-up/competitor ?
We rightly laud Gareth for both spotting young talent (Mehmeti, 09, Gape, Pierre, Mawson)as well as giving underperforming or unfancied youngsters (Hanlan, Thompson, Scowen) a chance as well as offering older 'past it' players a chance to stay in the game and contribute (McLeary, Tyson, Bayo) and yet we think they'll all be off at the first opportunity. Vokes had a terrible time at a 'mid-table Championship side' but seems to be enjoying a new lease of life. Lets get the season over before we start reading player's minds or prematurely waving them off.
I'm not sure anyone has said they think Vokes will be off?
Like Fleetwood or Port Vale? I hope we're working on a cheeky deal for him on the down low...
I think there's much better value to be had. He's had one good season in his career. In any case, he's not going to be happy warming the bench.
shurely we can play two up front
let's be realistic, I would imagine if all those teams are interested in hin then I would say we would be his last pick , they are all bigger clubs than ours and we are likely to pay him the least.
If only everyone was as realistic as you when it comes to signings @Quartersman80 as you point out some players might see us as their 'last pick'. Perhaps not all Gareth and Rob's fault then? You'd be surprised at some of the opinions on here about it.
So are you saying that no other clubs were interested in Sam Vokes and Alfie Mawson before we signed them?
Apparently Morecambe want something like 600k for Stockton and apart from him surely not being worth that, there’s no way we’re going to pay that (considering we supposedly walked away from both Sam Lavelle and Ben Hamer because their clubs were pushing for 250k).
We undoubtedly need a backup for Vokes, but I don’t think we necessarily need to pay a transfer fee to do that. We’re not looking for a superstar who’s going to score 20 goals, we just need an experienced, old-school centre-forward who’ll get a few goals at this level, but most importantly who’ll allow us to play our usual attacking style when Vokes isn’t available (and who won’t mind mostly sitting on the bench). There must be plenty of free agents out there who match that description.
What about, just as an example, Nathan Delfouneso? Free agent (reased by Bolton in the summer) 31, 6’1, not a prolific goalscorer, but bags of experience at this level and is big, strong, reasonably quick and if memory serves has pretty good hold-up play.
To be clear, I’m not demanding the club announce his signing immediately and obviously Stockton is the superior player of the two, but I’m just suggesting him as an example of a realistic alternative to forking out a six figure sum on a second choice striker.
he is 28 and probably looking for a big contract which if you Compare against other clubs we are up against then I would imagine we would offer the least competitive package. in regards to Mawson, he knows the club and cN help him to get a bigger move and vokes needs to be the main man which we could offer him . personally think Stockton over rated , would of loved to have been Uche back
You’d loved to have been Uche back in the day @Quartersman80 ? I think you’d have been getting a better press.
Did you mean Tom Hamer, Jonny? The Burton defender. Ben Hamer - Watford’s 6’4 goalkeeper would have been quite a signing.
I did like the sound of Tom Hamer though. Can play anywhere across the back four and has a 30 odd metres throw in.
Indeed @micra, got my Hamers well and truly mixed up there.