Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
norfolkbroadslim

On 29 January 2008 Norwich had a 850,000 bid rejected by Scunthorpe

Recommended Posts

In May 2008, Burnley had an offer of £400,000 rejected, which was then increased on 27th May 2008 to £550,000. This offer was also rejected on the same day. Paterson had a written transfer request rejected, and said the club had gone back on their word[3]. On 21 June 2008, it was revealed by Scunthorpe United that they had accepted a £1 million bid from Burnley, which would rise to 1.3 million depending on appearances. A deal which includes add ons and a 20% sell on fee.

[:|]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

If I have to spell it out for you [8-|]

Could an extra £150,000 have kept us in The Championship this season?

 

[/quote]

No

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

If I have to spell it out for you [8-|]

Could an extra £150,000 have kept us in The Championship this season?

 

[/quote]

tragically for some on here you do have to spell it out, I agree with your point, and you could put the same argument forward for Martin Taylor, an extra £250,000 and would we have gone down with him in defence? We are where prudence was always going to take us.

Wasn''t there also the possibility of £5 million immediately for players, around about October 2007, might just have been enough for a few players of our own?

 Still we have Delia, don''t worry, be happy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

In May 2008, Burnley had an offer of £400,000 rejected, which was then increased on 27th May 2008 to £550,000. This offer was also rejected on the same day. Paterson had a written transfer request rejected, and said the club had gone back on their word[3]. On 21 June 2008, it was revealed by Scunthorpe United that they had accepted a £1 million bid from Burnley, which would rise to 1.3 million depending on appearances. A deal which includes add ons and a 20% sell on fee.

[:|]

[/quote]So that''s £550k then. And it could''ve been more. Ever been to an auction?You could say similar things about most players NCFC have been interested in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Loan City Fc "]How much did we waste on Sibierski , Omar Koroma , and Lupoli , that money would have been better spent on Paterson .
[/quote]

Lupoli actually scored goals.. which is a lot more than Paterson would do at this level imo.

jas :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

In May 2008, Burnley had an offer of £400,000 rejected, which was then increased on 27th May 2008 to £550,000. This offer was also rejected on the same day. Paterson had a written transfer request rejected, and said the club had gone back on their word[3]. On 21 June 2008, it was revealed by Scunthorpe United that they had accepted a £1 million bid from Burnley, which would rise to 1.3 million depending on appearances. A deal which includes add ons and a 20% sell on fee.

[:|]

[/quote]Just take a minute and think about this.  Would Scunthorpe really have sold Paterson to us for say £1m, when we were one of their relegation rivals?  No, of course they wouldn''t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="jas the barclay king"]

[quote user="Loan City Fc "]How much did we waste on Sibierski , Omar Koroma , and Lupoli , that money would have been better spent on Paterson .[/quote]

Lupoli actually scored goals.. which is a lot more than Paterson would do at this level imo.

jas :)

[/quote]I''m not agreeing with them Jas...but Paterson has been scoring goals at this level, both for Burnley and Scunthorpe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Loan City Fc "]How much did we waste on Sibierski , Omar Koroma , and Lupoli , that money would have been better spent on Paterson .
[/quote]

I know there are loads of examples of what ifs and that that is just life.  I just thought I would highlight this one.

I have to agree with Loan City Fc.

Who is OUR (belongs to us) leading goal scorer this season?  How many goals do they have?  IMHO this is the main reason (but not the only) why (if we go down), we will get relegated.

£1m or so on a decentish striker (not necessarily Paterson), or relegation to League One reportedly costing £10m+.  I know it is not that clear cut.  But we haven''t had a striker all season, we have had Lita for a bit, and Lee (too little too late).

It just feels a bit like deja vu that''s all, If we''d signed Ashton at the start of the season, would we have stayed in the Premiership?

[:''(]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patterson was and is a quality player at this level (as would have been Martin Taylor). Why we insist on forking out on plenty of average championship squad players (and mediocre loan players ie Carney, Paattison, Bertrand, Mooney, etc etc)  rather than concentrating on concentrating our fire power is beyond me!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Loan City Fc "]How much did we waste on Sibierski , Omar Koroma , and Lupoli , that money would have been better spent on Paterson .[/quote]I don''t know - how much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Badger"][quote user="Loan City Fc "]How much did we waste on Sibierski , Omar Koroma , and Lupoli , that money would have been better spent on Paterson .[/quote]I don''t know - how much?[/quote] To much , and lots more beside on a never ending stream of waste of space loanees .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Loan City Fc "]How much did we waste on Sibierski , Omar Koroma , and Lupoli , that money would have been better spent on Paterson .
[/quote]

 

For interest only, Lupoli was on £15k per week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely, although our top scorer has only a handful to his name, our problem this season has not been inability to score. The table demonstrates that the 55 goals we have scored is actually pretty reasonable (Brum have only scored 51!) and is worthy of at least a mid-table side.  Where we have consistently shot ourselves in the foot is in the defensive department. Few sides have let in as many (64) placing us firmly in the relegation zone.  On reflection I would rather have seen us push the boat out and spend whatever extra we have on Tiny than Paterson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

Who is OUR (belongs to us) leading goal scorer this season?  How many goals do they have? 

[/quote]

That our top scorers on permanent contracts are Croft and Clingan on 5 each (clingan with 4 pens)

that our best striker is 11th in the list with 2 goals, 

that only 26 of our 55 league goals have come from owned players

that our owned strikers have contributed 4 goals - and outscored by 50% by Mr OG

tells a shocking story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Loan City Fc "]He has 18 for Burnley this season , slightly better than Mr Lupoli .
[/quote]

 

Yeah he has but he is part of a team that has performed and has shown great spirit. I don''t believe the strikers have had the service as it is so it is a little bit simplistic to try and question if one player could have changed our season. Our defence is as much the problem as anything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Jules"]Surely, although our top scorer has only a handful to his name, our problem this season has not been inability to score. The table demonstrates that the 55 goals we have scored is actually pretty reasonable (Brum have only scored 51!) and is worthy of at least a mid-table side.  Where we have consistently shot ourselves in the foot is in the defensive department. Few sides have let in as many (64) placing us firmly in the relegation zone.  On reflection I would rather have seen us push the boat out and spend whatever extra we have on Tiny than Paterson.
[/quote]

Our defence is weak,  but not in the middle where this season I think they have been OK despite the constant changing of pairings.  Adding Tiny would not have improved things.  Our problems there have been at full back,  with the right side in particular.  

The other main defensive problem has been our weak central midfield.   We have competed in  that area in far too few games all season, highlighted by the number of goals conceeded by opponents midfield players coming into the back from crosses from the flanks - clinkers/russell/fozzy/pattison have all consistently lost their runners to a costly effect this season.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Badger"][quote user="Loan City Fc "]How much did we waste on Sibierski , Omar Koroma , and Lupoli , that money would have been better spent on Paterson .
[/quote]

I don''t know - how much?
[/quote]

Well for the board supporters on here it seems to change according to what argument they are trying to win on a given day.  If the crap loans are being discussed it`s "the loans are cheap therefore the board have been clever in not risking too much" and if the board are being accused of lack of ambition it`s "we`re loaning Prem players and they are expensive".  As usual wanting it both ways.  Roeder stated that the loans represented 15% of player wages therefore i go with the "cheap option" argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Loan City Fc "]He has 18 for Burnley this season , slightly better than Mr Lupoli .
[/quote]

something to do with the fact that Paterson played games.. Lupoli didnt.

jas :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We''ve scored 55 goals this season, that''s 4 more than Birmingham City, who are 2nd.  If the table were based on goals scored, we''d be 10th.  We''ve conceded 64 goals this season.  If the table were based on goals conceded, we''d be, well, roughly where we are.  Losing an expensive veteran defender like Stefanovic for the season was a huge blow financially and on the pitch.  You could also argue that we were unlucky with Kennedy.  But the whole defence has been unsettled for most of the season.  So no, I don''t think signing Paterson would have made much of a difference.  Would a Paterson / Cureton forward line have worked ?  Who knows ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="blahblahblah"]We''ve scored 55 goals this season, that''s 4 more than Birmingham City, who are 2nd.  If the table were based on goals scored, we''d be 10th.  We''ve conceded 64 goals this season.  If the table were based on goals conceded, we''d be, well, roughly where we are.  Losing an expensive veteran defender like Stefanovic for the season was a huge blow financially and on the pitch.  You could also argue that we were unlucky with Kennedy.  But the whole defence has been unsettled for most of the season.  So no, I don''t think signing Paterson would have made much of a difference.  Would a Paterson / Cureton forward line have worked ?  Who knows ?
[/quote]

100% Spot on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...