Good , swift Business.

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

While McCormack, Assombalonga saga dragged on (here and the press, anyway) our fine Club secure a fine young player in a couple of days(here and in the press, anyway). Done Deal.

My point is that i''ve been reading more than posting and so much of what is posted is speculation on the same players then Bam! Alex Pritchard, super player.

Well done NCFC , good work. Definitely on the ball, there, City.

[birchfest 397]

We hear talk of lack of ambition... I think aggressively intercepting one of the top young talents from going to a potential rival, while adding another starter to the squad shows the opposite. As ever, judge the window when it''s shut, as yesterday proved a lot can happen in half a day, we still have a long way to go...

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

You''re spot on Bircho, just proves we know fooook all of waas gorn on?

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

If we wanted Pritchard, why did we wait until Brighton had agreed a deal?

Do you think we were going to try and get him cheaper close the end of the window? If so, it''s a risky stategy, especially with the amount of points on offer in August.

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

We are not close to the end of the window!

[GJP 79]

Feels slightly like a panic signing.

But he is a good player.

[Redders Right Foot 22]

as stated, still a month left in the window, far too early to consider this a panic buy.

And my guess in leaving Pritchard as late as we did (and lets be real, all any of us have are guesses) is that once a hard pricetag was on him the club decided to firm up interest, as well as the added incentive of not letting a rival for promotion gain someone that has the potential of Pritchard.

[Dean Coneys boots 1,398]

Oh no we mucked up the McCormack signing; quick sign a midfielder to appease the fans by gazzumping Brighton. Err that doesn''t solve the striker problem! Shhh go away. The end

[Norfolk Mustard 94]

Pritchard is a player NCFC have admired for a while - seems a bit strange we allowed negotiations with Brighton to advance so far & risk not signing him. No gloating from me over hijacking Brighton - however I''m delighted we have secured a gem of a player who will have a decent sell-on value. Most talented short guy to sign from Spurs since Paul McVeigh...

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,735]

you say "good,swift" business but if Brighton are to be believed , we only did this because of a delay on the M25?

were we in for him all along aswell as McCormack, or is this something we hastily then turned to once the McCormack deal fell through?.

I would have rather thrown a couple more million at getting McCormack rather than sign a player in a position we''re already well catered for..

[Norfolk Mustard 94]

Maybe we''re assembling a team of shorter, more skilful ball players to pass Barcelona-style around immobile CB''s? Could be exhilarating on the deck...

[Norfolk Mustard 94]

Signing a short player does incur extra cost though - we''ve just installed a big screen so we can actually see him!...

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]you say "good,swift" business but if Brighton are to be believed , we only did this because of a delay on the M25?

were we in for him all along aswell as McCormack, or is this something we hastily then turned to once the McCormack deal fell through?.

I would have rather thrown a couple more million at getting McCormack rather than sign a player in a position we''re already well catered for..[/quote]

A player in a position well catered for.... This comment bugs me! Pritchard is an upgrade on what we have, we have improved the squad by signing him. If it was simply a case of stocking up with average players than perhaps fair enough, but this isn''t the case here.

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

What i meant in the title was that , even if we''d been in for him for a while, it wasnt really reported until nearly a done deal. Thats good business.

[Nuff Said 5,089]

But if it''s done under the radar, you get people complaining the the club is either doing or telling us nothing.

Having typed that, I suppose the key phrase in the above sentence is ''you get people complaining''. Haters gonna hate whatever...

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]I would have rather thrown a couple more million at getting McCormack rather than sign a player in a position we''re already well catered for..[/quote]Jesus wept.How f**king much do some of our fans think McCormack is worth FFS???Apparently it''s already costing Villa 12m upfront with a further 2mil in addons, along with 45k a week, ''throw'' a couple more mil at that and you''re talking a close to 16-17 mil fee for a 30yr old with no re-sale value who has never performed above Champs level and that NO Prem has ever decided is worth spending anywhere near that sort of cash on - so why the f**k do you think we should have completely smashed our record transfer fee on him???In fact, let''s put it into perspective, you wanted us to pay virtually the same over a 2 year period as it''s going to cost Man Utd to have Ibrahimovic, despite McCormack not even being on the same planet ability wise, and considering that Ibra has a scoring record at the highest level that makes McCormack look even $hitter by comparison! I think it''s utter and complete madness to suggest we pay that sort of money for RM, and I genuinely can''t get my breath at even the mere suggestion that this would be a good idea!

[hogesar 9,617]

[quote user="GJP"]Feels slightly like a panic signing.

But he is a good player.[/quote]

I''m not sure panic signings exist with 3-4 weeks of the window still to go.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,735]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]I would have rather thrown a couple more million at getting McCormack rather than sign a player in a position we''re already well catered for..[/quote]Jesus wept.How f**king much do some of our fans think McCormack is worth FFS???Apparently it''s already costing Villa 12m upfront with a further 2mil in addons, along with 45k a week, ''throw'' a couple more mil at that and you''re talking a close to 16-17 mil fee for a 30yr old with no re-sale value who has never performed above Champs level and that NO Prem has ever decided is worth spending anywhere near that sort of cash on - so why the f**k do you think we should have completely smashed our record transfer fee on him???In fact, let''s put it into perspective, you wanted us to pay virtually the same over a 2 year period as it''s going to cost Man Utd to have Ibrahimovic, despite McCormack not even being on the same planet ability wise, and considering that Ibra has a scoring record at the highest level that makes McCormack look even $hitter by comparison! I think it''s utter and complete madness to suggest we pay that sort of money for RM, and I genuinely can''t get my breath at even the mere suggestion that this would be a good idea![/quote]

 

He''s "worth" what anyone is prepared to pay for him.......regardless of your opinions of how good a player he is?

[westcoastcanary 0]

GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary wrote: "He''s "worth" what anyone is prepared to pay for him.......regardless of your opinions of how good a player he is?"Wrong, should read "He''s "worth" to X (replace X with name of club) whatever X is prepared to pay for him.......regardless of your opinions of how good a player he is?"

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]He''s "worth" what anyone is prepared to pay for him.......regardless of your opinions of how good a player he is?[/quote]Ah, that''s the sort of logic that sent Leeds out of the prem, never to return...If we then apply that logic to the extreme, had Villa offered a world record 120 million for his services, then he''d have been worth it...yeah, whatever...So let''s forget that ridiculous argument and be sensible about this instead.How about you go do a poll of 100 football fans, and ask these 2 simple questions:1) Is a Champs level striker who''s hitting 30 worth paying a 14-16 mil transfer fee for - considering you can get talented players from abroad for similar or even far less than this amount?2) Would you rather have Ibrahmiovic or McCormack if you were to assume that both would cost virtually the same over a 1-2 year period?The vast majority (I''d expect 96-100% "No" for the first, and 100% "Ibra" for the second) really wouldn''t agree with you about him being worth it - and clearly neither did AN or our board...

[Essjayess 307]

I was liking the idea of City  going in for McCormack, even though it was for sure  a big sum, but  i understood why as Fulham wanted a profit  from what they originally paid for him. 15 mill was always a big amount, and from Alexs words last weekend he clearly said although discussions were continuing that City had  put in enough money already and would not spend more. Such was Alex''s determination to want the guy, he thrashed out discussions as long as he could, but NCFC are not a club who can, and never will, just "throw another couple mill" at a situation if they deem they have reached a ceiling. Indy is right, McCormack is not worth the whole package,transfer, wages etc. and City thought the same.I was calling for Alex to let go of the RM chase  early in the week, as it turns out Villa came in and there was obviously a point for Alex to  say ok enough, and the oppurtunity suddenly emerged  for Alex to go after Pritchard a player he had admired and wanted last season. Armed with the money that was earmarked for the RM  deal (im only presuming here, none of us know for sure) he then very swiftly got the whole affair in top gear, with some help from our dear friend (on this occasion) the M25, and landed a super player.So i would agree with the topic header, but title it "Good, swift, Oppurtunistic Business".

[GJP 79]

[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="GJP"]Feels slightly like a panic signing.

But he is a good player.[/quote]

I''m not sure panic signings exist with 3-4 weeks of the window still to go.

[/quote]

They might when the season is about to start. And they might if you have missed other targets.