Why Ings over Austin?

burnely felt the 3 mil on offer in jan was less than tribunal so they told him he had to stay and keep them up... which he didn't do.

Only if we agree a deal while he's still there. If he walks away of his own accord and becomes a free agent, there's no compo.

---

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

Never mind all the free agent talk........does anyone relly want Ings? Is this the answer to our striker woes? Or even a piecof the puzzle?

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

I suppose the question has to be is he an upgrade on Borini/Balotelli?

I guess so, not by much in my opinion though.

Not greatly inspiring.

Is Ings top of my list of players to sign? No.

Could he be better than Balotelli/Lambert/Borini? Yes.

Will he be? Impossible to tell.

He is definitely a sensible signing business wise, and we do have to be better at maximising our transfer profits as part of working round FFP.

A flop Ings will still be worth the same as paid in 2 years, if not more, and if he doesn't flop, then everyone's happy.

He is definitely a sensible signing business wise, and we do have to be better at maximising our transfer profits as part of working round FFP.

-----------------------------------------------

100% true and at the same time such a shame that we have to look so closely at the business end of things now rather than pure talent. Moneyball.

It's not even moneyball.

All clubs have to do it now apart from Man Utd and maybe Arsenal.

Chelsea have become brilliant at it in recent years, making huge profits on players to put back into the kitty.

We can't compete at that level as we can't afford to buy the Schurrles and De Bruynes before they do, but we can still make money on players with clever purchases.