Hugill Bid Rejected

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

£5m for a guy that scored 13 goals last season in our league is not expensive at all. They have clearly identified the type of striker they need because to buy him and then not play him to his strengths would mean our management team are clueless, which I do not believe to be the case. Eze who everyone rates scored 14 of which 4 were from the penalty spot. 

Would be a great addition.

[Branston Pickle 3,658]

33 minutes ago, BigFish said:

Probably priced right at £3m, not worth anymore. Bang average Champs striker unable to get a game in the Prem, or even in the squad. Seems to have struggled with fitness and injury over the years. Those who seem so desparate to get him probably would be happier if they had a time machine and travelled back to the seventies.

I’ve not seen anyone at any point suggest they are ‘desperate’ to get him, merely point out that he cold be a decent option in a part of the squad that absolutely everyone has agreed we need more.  It’s quite simple, really.

[East Rider 551]

It wouldn't surprise me if when do get him, that it drives Adam Idah on even more and he becomes our main striker towards the end of this season. 

[wcorkcanary 4,334]

2 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Any signing we make in the mould of Hugill would know he is the 'alternative' rather than the primary option

Exactly , and I would love to know where we could pick up someone of Hugills level of experience and ability for much less than we offered West ham for him. I see a lot of people saying hes not good enough or too expensive. We are not looking to replace Pukki, we are looking for someone that allows us to play differently, when the situation dictates.... it looks like Idah is being groomed to be Pukki mk2, but he has much yet to learn and should be given time and space to develop. Therefore someone like Hugill fits the bill. Biggest drawback I can see is that he may not fancy being plan B man, not the money. Its really not that much for a 28 year old that got 15 goals in a not very good championship side last season. 

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,558]

Lot of snobbishness about Hugill because he has a reputation of behind a bit of a target man. If the club have identified him as their primary target and are prepared to spend more on him than pretty much any other player they have brought in to date, then it would obviously be a set back to their plans if they can’t agree a deal with West Ham.

Norwich have tried several back ups to Pukki now with marginal success. Rhodes, although initially intended to be the main striker, has been the most successful and that is probably largely due to him knowing the league and not needing to adjust like Srbeny and Drmic needed to. 

There is no way we can expect Pukki to score 29 goals again this season so getting someone like Hugill who is coming off the back of a good season would be ideal. Someone like that will not come cheap. 

I accept he isn’t an exciting, exotic signing but he (or someone like him) could be just what Norwich need next season. 

[Branston Pickle 3,658]

Yup, Bethnal - spot on.  It’s a role we clearly need to fill and he seems a round peg for a round hole - I’ve not seen anyone in the ‘he’s rubbish’ camp come up with any alternatives.

[Dr Greenthumb 749]

55 minutes ago, Number9 said:

If you're looking for a big strong striker, Idah is sat on the bench already. 

 

He is just lacking that “streetwise” ability in the champs tho. They’ve made it clear they are looking for a bit more of that.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,558]

6 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

Yup, Bethnal - spot on.  It’s a role we clearly need to fill and he seems a round peg for a round hole - I’ve not seen anyone in the ‘he’s rubbish’ camp come up with any alternatives.

The best alternative I can think of is Macauley Bonne at Charlton.

But he is far less proven at Championship level, although had a really good season. There is also the issue that Burnley are keen to sign him. 

[Indy 3,300]

I always love this give us an alternative! Sorry don’t play football manager.....don’t scout so cannot really offer any alternative.

But opinions are a bases for discussion, can we buy him and pay his wages for less than 5 million? That’s a hefty chunk of money to us, the answer appears to be no, West Ham want around 5 million plus we’d have to offer big wages to get him here, so for me 8 million plus as a package is way too much, especially for someone who might not fit our style, might not get 15 goals again! Yes I suppose had he been 21 then you can argue he’ll potentially get better, but he’s 28.

As most of us on here said if SW thinks he’s worth it he’ll buy him, if not he’ll stay where he is or go elsewhere. We shall see.

Edited August 23, 2020 by Indy

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,431]

Either end of the pitch we don't win enough headers. Not just restarts but when Krul had to go longer because we got worked out trying to play out from the back. In the Prem it was simply giving possession away when Krul passed long.

I saw this lad once when he played for Preston - I sat behind Neil that day and Hugill was a pain in the backside. I don't see him as a Plan B , I see him as fixing a gap that became apparent last season. The closest we had to winning those longer passes was Stiepermann in the Champs , but he was non existent in the Prem. 

I wouldn't mind him. I think Pukki could play off him. 

[Legend Iwan 30]

58 minutes ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

The best alternative I can think of is Macauley Bonne at Charlton.

But he is far less proven at Championship level, although had a really good season. There is also the issue that Burnley are keen to sign him. 

He's a player we've also been linked with for a while https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/derby-county-four-clubs-interested-4368806

[TIL 1010 4,746]

Having watched the video of his goals for QPR last season my opinion is he would be a good signing for us and in today's market cheap as chips.

[HertsCanary93 222]

I think 5m is a decent bid and I would be very surprised if we go above that.

West Ham are well within their rights to reject though, but I would not be surprised if they are waiting for QPR to sell Eze.

[CANARYKING 638]

I have a problem with Farke’s plan B, it doesn’t click in until the 92 minute 

[Capt. Pants 4,234]

Not sure why so many 'fans' are concerned with us spending money. Agree the fee in question is cheap as chips, his wages however are another matter and he won't be taking the level of pay cut mentioned to come here. Dream on.

Our striking options worry me; will we get the Pukki that finished last season? Does Farke have faith in a largely untried Idah? Will Drmic actually do anything, ever? There aren't that many options out there, and if we're going out with derisory offers, even less.

[Legend Iwan 30]

All depends on pre-season, but get the feeling Idah's destined for a loan. Pukki, Sinani (fw/mid) and A.N.Other, which could be Hugill.

Drmic is clearly on his way out. All about us getting the best deal possible now.

[Nuff Said 5,141]

12 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

Not sure why so many 'fans' are concerned with us spending money. Agree the fee in question is cheap as chips, his wages however are another matter and he won't be taking the level of pay cut mentioned to come here. Dream on.

Our striking options worry me; will we get the Pukki that finished last season? Does Farke have faith in a largely untried Idah? Will Drmic actually do anything, ever? There aren't that many options out there, and if we're going out with derisory offers, even less.

Do you think there are supporters of other clubs out there thinking “I’m delighted with our striking options; we’re guaranteed to score plenty”, and who wouldn’t bite our hands off if we offered them Pukki?

Secondly, are you saying the £3/5 million offer for Hugill is derisory and you’d prefer we went in with an inflated offer? It’s damned if we do, damned if we don’t for some posters.

[Capt. Pants 4,234]

1 minute ago, Nuff Said said:

Do you think there are supporters of other clubs out there thinking “I’m delighted with our striking options; we’re guaranteed to score plenty”, and who wouldn’t bite our hands off if we offered them Pukki?

Secondly, are you saying the £3/5 million offer for Hugill is derisory and you’d prefer we went in with an inflated offer? It’s damned if we do, damned if we don’t for some posters.

I think that if the club has identified a player that ticks all the boxes, then they should make every effort to get them even if it means paying slightly over the odds. You won't get a proven goal scorer at Championship level for less than £10m. We'd want that for Idah and he's only played about 30 mins of league football.

[Nuff Said 5,141]

3 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

I think that if the club has identified a player that ticks all the boxes, then they should make every effort to get them even if it means paying slightly over the odds. You won't get a proven goal scorer at Championship level for less than £10m. We'd want that for Idah and he's only played about 30 mins of league football.

Let me know if you fancy a game of poker.

[KiwiScot 1,443]

Athough West Ham clearly want him off their wage bill they don't have to sell him. They can easily loan him out again to someone like QPR who don't have the finiancial clout to buy unlike us(which is funny to say). We have a bit more to spend due to doing prudent business so West Ham should clearly try and get their valuation met as there are plently of takers in the loan market.

But Capt Said, Nuff Pants are both correct in parts. If this player fits the bill then bid low and be prepared to pay high.

Edited August 23, 2020 by KiwiScot

[Number9 272]

50 minutes ago, Legend Iwan said:

All depends on pre-season, but get the feeling Idah's destined for a loan. Pukki, Sinani (fw/mid) and A.N.Other, which could be Hugill.

Drmic is clearly on his way out. All about us getting the best deal possible now.

Idah's not experienced enough so we play Sinani? 🤣

[Nuff Said 5,141]

10 minutes ago, KiwiScot said:

Athough West Ham clearly want him off their wage bill they don't have to sell him. They can easily loan him out again to someone like QPR who don't have the finiancial clout to buy unlike us(which is funny to say). We have a bit more to spend due to doing prudent business so West Ham should clearly try and get their valuation met as there are plently of takers in the loan market.

But what Capt Said, Nuff Pants are both correct in parts. If this player fits the bill then bid low and be prepared to pay high.

I don’t think you can change your user name on here, otherwise I would be sorely tempted to become Nuff Pants from now on.

[lake district canary 4,531]

1 hour ago, Legend Iwan said:

All depends on pre-season, but get the feeling Idah's destined for a loan. Pukki, Sinani (fw/mid) and A.N.Other, which could be Hugill.

I really hope Idah is not loaned out and is in the first team plans. His hat trick against Preston clearly showed he is up to the level required. His penalty against Spurs was composed and clinical and he has often done ok this last season when brought on as a sub in the PL.  Still only 19, but I would have thought he is ready to make the breakthrough this coming season.

The only reason for sending him on loan would be to give him game time, but would far rather he had that at Norwich, either alongside Pukki or as first choice after Pukki.

[Legend Iwan 30]

17 minutes ago, Number9 said:

Idah's not experienced enough so we play Sinani? 🤣

The third choice striker is hardly going to play the way we set up. A ‘big lad up top’, to generalise, is the Plan B going by our pursuit of Hugill, which means Idah would likely spend a lot of time on the bench.

It’s much easier to have Sinani as a forward option while also competing for a midfield space and allow Idah to have a full season starting somewhere else gaining valuable experience.

As said, pre-season may mean none of that happens. But that's my impression currently.

[Samwam27 527]

There's no guarantee that Pukki will score anywhere near the 29 he did last time round. There's no guarantee Pukki will score any goals. Bringing in Hugill, who at least knows where the back of the net is at this level could put pressure on Pukki to recapture his excellent form, as well as give us a plan B if we needed it in matches. Let's face it Pukki had no competition last season, so this would be a great signing.

Idah has a great future and huge potential, but he's only 19 and loads of time to learn and improve. It's a long season and all three could get plenty of game time, and become quite a force at this level.  

[Uncle Fred 526]

I would go for that Lewis Grabbin fella at Forrest he banged them in for them last season 

[Number9 272]

51 minutes ago, Legend Iwan said:

The third choice striker is hardly going to play the way we set up. A ‘big lad up top’, to generalise, is the Plan B going by our pursuit of Hugill, which means Idah would likely spend a lot of time on the bench.

It’s much easier to have Sinani as a forward option while also competing for a midfield space and allow Idah to have a full season starting somewhere else gaining valuable experience.

As said, pre-season may mean none of that happens. But that's my impression currently.

We both know that Farkes stated Plan b is to try harder at Plan a.

And since he normally brings subs on at 85 mins, not an awful lot of time for change of system to be fair. 

[birchfest 397]

I think people are mixing up the idea of 'plan b' and 'not as good'. If everything lines up and Pukki has a blinder again, we get our 25+ goals that we need from an individual to almost single handedly see us in the top two. But its horses for courses and there will be some teams and also in-game moments where Pukki wouldn't actually be the best player to lead the line.

5 million for probably somewhere between 8-10 goals would be a poor return if he was to be our starter every week, but when you look at those 8-10 goals in the context of what Pukki an others will hopefully bring to the table it could be huge. It would be 8 goals spread potentially over 8 games where its 0-0 with 10 minutes to go. Could result in a big points increase come the end of the season, which if resulting in promotion would look like pennies. 

 

I think this gets done, and soon. We obviously view him as the missing link and its just the natural back and forth, theres no talk of us walking away like the Mann stuff.

[norfolkngood 1,087]

31 minutes ago, Samwam27 said:

There's no guarantee that Pukki will score anywhere near the 29 he did last time round. There's no guarantee Pukki will score any goals. Bringing in Hugill, who at least knows where the back of the net is at this level could put pressure on Pukki to recapture his excellent form, as well as give us a plan B if we needed it in matches. Let's face it Pukki had no competition last season, so this would be a great signing.

Idah has a great future and huge potential, but he's only 19 and loads of time to learn and improve. It's a long season and all three could get plenty of game time, and become quite a force at this level.  

Idah has done little wrong and if pukki is not firing i would play him 19 is not to young if good enough 

Hugill would only be good if we went more direct 

Would we be able to Give him the game time he wanted i doubt

last two seasons he played 39/ 37 games would he get that here with pukki i do not think so 

 

 

[Indy_Bones 441]

There's all this talk about Pukki being unlikely to hit 29+ goals again (I agree it's a tough ask for ANY striker tbf), and that Hugill had a decent season last year, but let's not forget that the season before he managed a mere 6 goals in the league and the season before that he got 8 in the league.

If I'd proposed some random 28 year old striker from Europe who'd managed those limited returns at a price of between 5-8 million (fee + wages) I'd be getting laughed off the forum, so why is it different with Hugill???

I've said before he's a poor version of Grant Holt, a player we signed for 400k, who scored 24 goals in League 1, 21 in the Champs, 15 in his first season in the Prem, and then another 8 in that god awful Hughton season, now compare that to Hugill and tell me that even taking into account the increase in money in the game, that Hugill is anywhere even close to value or ability in comparison to Holt, or for that matter Pukki who cost us NOTHING.

West Ham KNOW he's not good enough for the prem, he's struggled to even be consistent in the Champs (and NEVER in his entire career at that level scored more than he did last season, with most of the time struggling to hit 10), and let's not forget that Rhodes came in with a FAR better scoring record, and would still probably cost us less than Hugill with a more proven history to boot. (I'm not saying we should sign Rhodes either).

I maintain that Hugill is not good enough, I don't care if it's as a "Plan B" option or not, if something were to happen to Pukki (e.g. Long term injury), I would hate to think that we'd be relying on Hugill to carry the load, or how we'd have to play to accomodate his style in that period as well.

On a final note, whilst I and some of the other detractors to his signing may not be providing a list of alternatives, that doesn't make Hugill the right choice, nor that there aren't far better options to consider either, but it's not my job as a fan to do that, but I can express a personal opinion about a player being strongly touted with a move to us and say I don't agree and hope we look elsewhere.