Paul 0 Posted January 24, 2014 According to SSN. No details as yet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paul 0 Posted January 24, 2014 £3m apparently. For a player that has more time on the physio table than on the pitch. Hold out for £4m and cash in I reckon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ncfcstar 289 Posted January 24, 2014 £3m is pittance.He is worth at least £7m, if not more. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
City 2nd 191 Posted January 24, 2014 ncfcstar wrote the following post at 2014-01-24 8:46 PM:£3m is pittance.He is worth at least £7m, if not more.Why? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 24, 2014 When fit Pilks is quality. There''s no way we should consider selling our better players to a relegation rival unless there''s enough money offered to bring in a better replacement. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
snake-eyes 13 Posted January 24, 2014 Only if he stays fit, and that is a big if. 4-5 mil and reinvest. I believe there is better out there for the money. Snake Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrs miggins 0 Posted January 24, 2014 [quote user="City 2nd"]ncfcstar wrote the following post at 2014-01-24 8:46 PM:£3m is pittance.He is worth at least £7m, if not more.Why?[/quote]Because he scores goals, is 2 footed, can cross, take a free kick, help defensively and offensively when he plays Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 24, 2014 Name one that is proven in the Prem snake. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paul 0 Posted January 24, 2014 There is the issue Miggs. "When he Plays" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jedi 0 Posted January 24, 2014 3 million no way, he''s our best player on his day and is as good with either foot. We should be building not dismantling. If we sell we need someone lined up and doubt that''s the case. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ncfcstar 289 Posted January 24, 2014 [quote user="mrs miggins"][quote user="City 2nd"]ncfcstar wrote the following post at 2014-01-24 8:46 PM:£3m is pittance.He is worth at least £7m, if not more.Why?[/quote]Because he scores goals, is 2 footed, can cross, take a free kick, help defensively and offensively when he plays[/quote]Exactly Mrs Miggins.He''s also young, under a long contract, and just broken into the Irish national team. Yes he might be a bit injury prone, but when he''s in the side he''s a key player. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 24, 2014 Yep, he''s had a couple of bad injuries in his career, but he''s also played 66 games for us over 2.5 seasons, and has now returned from injury. Not exactly the perennial sicknote some would have you believe. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
City 2nd 191 Posted January 24, 2014 mrs miggins wrote the following post at 2014-01-24 8:50 PM:  City 2nd wrote: ncfcstar wrote the following post at 2014-01-24 8:46 PM: £3m is pittance. He is worth at least £7m, if not more. Why? Because he scores goals, is 2 footed, can cross, take a free kick, help defensively and offensively when he plays And keeps the physios in a job 24/7 - sick note! 14 goals in 66 appearances since JULY 2011. Your last quote says it all - ''when he plays''! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Monty13 2,231 Posted January 24, 2014 3 million for one of our best attacking players, two footed and scores goals. Was the reported fee for him 3 million (including add ons)?If true it''s almost as derisive as the Wes bid. He is worth at least double. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ncfcstar 289 Posted January 24, 2014 What more do you want City 2nd, for a bottom half PL side to have a midfielder scoring 14 goals is a great return. I can only think you have an irrational dislike for Pilks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrs miggins 0 Posted January 24, 2014 Yes his fitness is an issue. So it''s up to hughton. Technically, we probably won''t get a better winger for anywhere near that price atm, to me its worth paying his wages for that quality Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tetteys Jig 830 Posted January 24, 2014 January market, a winger that is proven at this level, but has a few niggling injuries now and then.Considering that without the injuries we''d be looking at £10m, £7.5m sounds fair. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Redders Right Foot 22 Posted January 24, 2014 Pilkington is one of our best wingers, and again it is a club in and around us in the table bidding for one of our players. we have the right to either flat our deny them or to hold out for ludicrous amounts. I don''t know how many times I have to say it, but if Pilks goes to them for 3m, and helps them get 2 or 3 spots above us in the table, how much prize money would we lose out on? how much was that 3m in the end, really? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sgncfc 1,227 Posted January 24, 2014 There''s no way we''ll consider selling Pilkington! This type of bid is just made to keep the fans thinking something is happening. Swansea have some issues at the moment and this is Mr Laudrup being a bit naughty and trying to unsettle a rival whilst also pretending that he is on the case.It will be laughed at. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zemas tendon 0 Posted January 24, 2014 I say sell, yes fully fit a great assest!! coming to the end of his contract, so i woulld say £3million plus aint a bad deal, as Guiterez is a good replacement!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
City 2nd 191 Posted January 24, 2014 ncfcstar wrote the following post at 2014-01-24 8:59 PM:What more do you want City 2nd, for a bottom half PL side to have a midfielder scoring 14 goals is a great return. I can only think you have an irrational dislike for Pilks.FOURTEEN goals since July 2011 - hardly prolific in approaching three years! I have no dislike of a Pilkington at all, but I would suggest the offer is based on exactly his returns and number of appearances over those near three years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
......and Smith must score. 1,341 Posted January 24, 2014 [quote user="Paul"]There is the issue Miggs. "When he Plays"[/quote]Exactly.I know he''s nowhere near as bad as James Vaughan was when it comes to spending time in the treatment room but his playing time is patchy at best. Coupled with that he often seems invisible when he is on the field, particularly away from home. When he''s on song there''s no doubt he''s great but that hasn''t happened too often since he''s been at Carrow Rd.If an offer of say £4m comes in I''d say take it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BOO 0 Posted January 24, 2014 When does his contract end? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Syteanric 1 Posted January 24, 2014 1 game played and then 10 out! Cashing in might seem prudent. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Monty13 2,231 Posted January 24, 2014 70 PL appearances in 2 and half seasons is pretty good considering we bought him injured. He actually hasn''t been out that much since. Plus a 1 in 5 goal ratio for a winger for a club of our level is a quality player.Howson has made only 57 appearances in 2 seasons so very similar and is currently injured, should we sell him to? What about Tettey and Turner?I''m actually surprised how many PL games Pilks has played. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BOO 0 Posted January 24, 2014 jas the barclay king wrote the following post at 24/01/2014 5:10 PM:1 game played and then 10 out! Cashing in might seem prudent. Reluctantly I think you may be right Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
snake-eyes 13 Posted January 24, 2014 I said I believe there is and why does it matter whether they are proven in the prem? Michu wasn''t to name one and look what he did in his first season and cost only 2mil. Same as Pilks. Pilks has made 55 appearances out of 98 available league games. Whilst on form he is undoubtedly a good player, his form is very inconsistent, and his injury record is troubling. Whilst 3 mil is too low, 4 - 5 is a good return for a player who is a risk that you may only get half a season from. Is he that good that you could afford to only have his services for half a season. Not only that, but for those games he does play, is he that good in them? I have seen quite a few games where he has been anonymous and has looked disinterested. Others he has looked good and has produced a bit more than we usually do. However to me this is not enough and I am sure we would soon look to upgrade anyway. Therefore I would seriously consider the money and use it towards an upgrade. So from you point you are saying that he is brilliant and irreplaceable? For me it would be harder to replace a player like Wes for the money than Pilks. Do I want him to go? Only if a better replacement can be found. The same as with Wes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Surfer 1,547 Posted January 24, 2014 " 4-5 mil and reinvest. I believe there is better out there for the money." Then why don''t Swansea go buy that player instead? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birchfest 397 Posted January 24, 2014 Isn''t his contract up in the summer.... Could it be 3 million now or nothing in the Summer? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
snake-eyes 13 Posted January 24, 2014 Why don''t you ask them Surfer? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites