What's the difference between Sturridge and Borini?
No Bent
Can't even make Aston Villa team yet some people want him here. Also doesn't have the technical ability to play BR style.
What's the difference between Sturridge and Borini?
===============================
Sturridge is a wide forward while Borini is more of a centre forward..
Sturridge can play out wide as a supporting striker, which I think Borini can't do. He is much quicker and brings pace into the side. Borini is more of a poacher, and hangs on the last man. However, Borini has been held back by Suarez doing so well in the middle.
If we sign the players I mention then we have:
Suarez, Sturridge, Borini and Bent to pick for strikers!
No way Bent. It's likely Walcott is on his way.
Walcott and Sturridge?
Walcott and Sturridge would be around £20 - £30, which I don't think Rodgers will get just for January. Why not get Bent in on loan? His goal record speaks for itself, and he would only be here for half a year. We could then look at Walcott when his contract runs out, and get him for free.
*would be around £20m - £30m...*
I would be extremely happy with:
D Ba
T Walcott
D Sturridge
What you have to remember is that BR needs fluidity from his strikers, that is strikers that can play all across the front line; the 3 i listed all can and all of them are very realistic targets, esp if we hit 4th before Jan.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
To be honest i'm amazed we are within 4 points of fourth. Everton and Spurs should have put fourth well out of our reach by now. Everton have failed to win games they have dominated and Spurs have shown a lack of experience to throw games away with 10 minutes or so to go on plenty of occassions.
I still think we are a good 6-7 players away from being able to actually get through a champions league group.
I think we need the following in the next two windows:
Starters: Left back, center midfielder, wide-forward/striker.
Back-up: Center back, defensive center midfielder, wide-forward/striker.
I agree Got_Better. I just feel that Brendan will get £15m for January, which will not be enough for even two of those strikers. Getting Bent on loan is a quick and cheap short term fix, and can replace Suarez during Europa League and FA Cup games against lower sides.
I'm not too keen on Bent. Don't think he wuld fit in with the playing style. Also, I don't see why he would want to come to us if he was going to end up sitting on the bench again. I'm sure he'd rather go somewhere he could get regular playing time.
I'd like to see Walcott over Sturridge.
There is absolutely no way Walcott will go for above £10m
Otherwise Arsenal will be stuck with a player that isn't going to be there, but having to pay him for the remainder of his contract while he potentially has already agreed to play for someone else.
Arsenal sold Alex Song for £15m and he had 3 years of his contract left.
Walcott £9m, Sturridge £12m.. Sell Downing for £6m, Joe Cole for £3m and we still have a potential of £17m from Andy Carroll being sold.
No way Bent. It's likely Walcott is on his way.
Walcott and Sturridge?
=================================
I think if Sturridge can drop his bad attitude you can get a lot more out of him than Walcott who is just pace and quite one dimensional. Sturridge has pace and sometime goes past players so easily.
I think i differ (what again!!!) from most here, i can see LFC having maybe £20M+ to spend in Jan; they may offset the £17M from the A Carroll salein the summer
I am not sure Arsenal will sell Walcott.
I think Wenger might dig his heels in and make him stay until the end of the season, even though it will cost them a few million.
Plus from Walcott's (and his agents) viewpoint, he can get get more money via signing on fee and higher wages if a club doesn't have to pay a fee for him.
I think there is a chance we might get him, but I don't think it will be in January.
No way.. If there's a player they would dig their heels in over it would have been van persie.
Walcott is gone and everyone knows it. Arsenal will be hoping for a bidding war.
I am not so sure.
RVP was £20m.
Walcott will be £10m max, and if he stays the rest of the season and does the business to get them in the CL then that alone will offset the loss.
I think they will only sell him in January if they sign a replacement (not Henry, who will be only be here 5 minutes).
Wenger wanted to keep Nasri when he had 1 year left on his deal, Nasri was sold to man city to stop him leaving on a free!
Wenger wanted to keep RVP when he had 1 year left on his deal, RVP was sold to Man Utd to stop him leaving on a free!
If Walcott hasn't signed by the jan window, the money men at arsenal will flog him, end of!
Exactly my thoughts too KLS.
He has already changed tack with Walcott then, because by your theory he should have gone in August.
The money men allowed him to stay another 6 months, why not another 6?
Had they sold him in August they could have got £15m, now it will only be £10m, so they have already lost money.
Plus its not even up to them.
Walcott can sign for a foreign team on January 1st, agreeing to join at the end of the season for nothing.
Arsenal will have no say if that is the case.
A massive risk by the money men if they were not planning on making him see out the season.
Cant see Walcott staying now, hopefully he sees LFC as a club back on the up with really good youth and more players like Suarez coming in....hopefuly.
Selling Walcott, Song and Van Persie would have been stupid.
Perhaps they thought Walcott would stay... Who knows
I could still see him resigning for Arsenal as Wenger and the board are facing some serious question from the fans.
Seeing another player being sold off could be the breaking point them if their inconsistent start to the season continues.
Sign in if you want to comment
What do we need in January?
Page 1 of 2
posted on 10/12/12
What's the difference between Sturridge and Borini?
posted on 10/12/12
No Bent
Can't even make Aston Villa team yet some people want him here. Also doesn't have the technical ability to play BR style.
posted on 10/12/12
What's the difference between Sturridge and Borini?
===============================
Sturridge is a wide forward while Borini is more of a centre forward..
posted on 10/12/12
Sturridge can play out wide as a supporting striker, which I think Borini can't do. He is much quicker and brings pace into the side. Borini is more of a poacher, and hangs on the last man. However, Borini has been held back by Suarez doing so well in the middle.
If we sign the players I mention then we have:
Suarez, Sturridge, Borini and Bent to pick for strikers!
posted on 10/12/12
No way Bent. It's likely Walcott is on his way.
Walcott and Sturridge?
posted on 10/12/12
Walcott and Sturridge would be around £20 - £30, which I don't think Rodgers will get just for January. Why not get Bent in on loan? His goal record speaks for itself, and he would only be here for half a year. We could then look at Walcott when his contract runs out, and get him for free.
posted on 10/12/12
*would be around £20m - £30m...*
posted on 10/12/12
I would be extremely happy with:
D Ba
T Walcott
D Sturridge
What you have to remember is that BR needs fluidity from his strikers, that is strikers that can play all across the front line; the 3 i listed all can and all of them are very realistic targets, esp if we hit 4th before Jan.
posted on 10/12/12
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 10/12/12
To be honest i'm amazed we are within 4 points of fourth. Everton and Spurs should have put fourth well out of our reach by now. Everton have failed to win games they have dominated and Spurs have shown a lack of experience to throw games away with 10 minutes or so to go on plenty of occassions.
I still think we are a good 6-7 players away from being able to actually get through a champions league group.
I think we need the following in the next two windows:
Starters: Left back, center midfielder, wide-forward/striker.
Back-up: Center back, defensive center midfielder, wide-forward/striker.
posted on 10/12/12
I agree Got_Better. I just feel that Brendan will get £15m for January, which will not be enough for even two of those strikers. Getting Bent on loan is a quick and cheap short term fix, and can replace Suarez during Europa League and FA Cup games against lower sides.
posted on 10/12/12
I'm not too keen on Bent. Don't think he wuld fit in with the playing style. Also, I don't see why he would want to come to us if he was going to end up sitting on the bench again. I'm sure he'd rather go somewhere he could get regular playing time.
I'd like to see Walcott over Sturridge.
posted on 10/12/12
There is absolutely no way Walcott will go for above £10m
Otherwise Arsenal will be stuck with a player that isn't going to be there, but having to pay him for the remainder of his contract while he potentially has already agreed to play for someone else.
Arsenal sold Alex Song for £15m and he had 3 years of his contract left.
Walcott £9m, Sturridge £12m.. Sell Downing for £6m, Joe Cole for £3m and we still have a potential of £17m from Andy Carroll being sold.
posted on 10/12/12
No way Bent. It's likely Walcott is on his way.
Walcott and Sturridge?
=================================
I think if Sturridge can drop his bad attitude you can get a lot more out of him than Walcott who is just pace and quite one dimensional. Sturridge has pace and sometime goes past players so easily.
posted on 10/12/12
I think i differ (what again!!!) from most here, i can see LFC having maybe £20M+ to spend in Jan; they may offset the £17M from the A Carroll salein the summer
posted on 10/12/12
I am not sure Arsenal will sell Walcott.
I think Wenger might dig his heels in and make him stay until the end of the season, even though it will cost them a few million.
Plus from Walcott's (and his agents) viewpoint, he can get get more money via signing on fee and higher wages if a club doesn't have to pay a fee for him.
I think there is a chance we might get him, but I don't think it will be in January.
posted on 10/12/12
No way.. If there's a player they would dig their heels in over it would have been van persie.
Walcott is gone and everyone knows it. Arsenal will be hoping for a bidding war.
posted on 10/12/12
I am not so sure.
RVP was £20m.
Walcott will be £10m max, and if he stays the rest of the season and does the business to get them in the CL then that alone will offset the loss.
I think they will only sell him in January if they sign a replacement (not Henry, who will be only be here 5 minutes).
posted on 10/12/12
Wenger wanted to keep Nasri when he had 1 year left on his deal, Nasri was sold to man city to stop him leaving on a free!
Wenger wanted to keep RVP when he had 1 year left on his deal, RVP was sold to Man Utd to stop him leaving on a free!
If Walcott hasn't signed by the jan window, the money men at arsenal will flog him, end of!
posted on 10/12/12
Exactly my thoughts too KLS.
posted on 10/12/12
He has already changed tack with Walcott then, because by your theory he should have gone in August.
The money men allowed him to stay another 6 months, why not another 6?
Had they sold him in August they could have got £15m, now it will only be £10m, so they have already lost money.
posted on 10/12/12
Plus its not even up to them.
Walcott can sign for a foreign team on January 1st, agreeing to join at the end of the season for nothing.
Arsenal will have no say if that is the case.
A massive risk by the money men if they were not planning on making him see out the season.
posted on 10/12/12
Cant see Walcott staying now, hopefully he sees LFC as a club back on the up with really good youth and more players like Suarez coming in....hopefuly.
posted on 10/12/12
Selling Walcott, Song and Van Persie would have been stupid.
Perhaps they thought Walcott would stay... Who knows
posted on 10/12/12
I could still see him resigning for Arsenal as Wenger and the board are facing some serious question from the fans.
Seeing another player being sold off could be the breaking point them if their inconsistent start to the season continues.
Page 1 of 2