Bournemouth/Defoe

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 12:40 pm

19 appearances in all competitions and 3 goals scored...

Fantastic return on their investment.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 1:01 pm

Can understand why they signed him. Bit cant understand why they signed him on a 3 year deal. Perhaps thats the only way they couldve got him.

Id have been happy with him at the start of the season. Not all transfers pay off but can completely understand why an attacking team like Bournemouth signed him. Its not like he was past it. Just hasnt worked out. Luckily for them it hasnt mattered this season.

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 1:17 pm

They will still have him next season.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 1:30 pm

Steve1956 wrote:Three year contract and £115,000 a week offer on the table...the world has gone mad.

Apparently so.....

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 5:08 pm

That's what you get if you don't spend wisely on strikers like we did with Walters and Wells. What a return on investment those two have been this year

UpTheClaretsFCBK · Post by **UpTheClaretsFCBK** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:17 pm

They must be mental. He’s done nothing this season.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:33 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:That's what you get if you don't spend wisely on strikers like we did with Walters and Wells. What a return on investment those two have been this year

On the plus side they're far far cheaper in wages and fee than Defoe.

Wages rumoured to be over £100k a week and a decent signing on fee.

We've been unlucky with Walters getting injured tbh, or lucky depending on which way you look at it because we're 7th.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:33 pm

UpTheClaretsFCBK wrote:They must be mental. He’s done nothing this season.

He had a rare two good seasons and everyone got excited.
If nothing else he's got experience which he can pass on to younger players.

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:26 pm

“Rare good 2 seasons” ?

He’s just had a rare bad 2 seasons.

I do think the contract Bournemouth gave Defoe was ridiculous for a player of his age. I thought I read he was on £130k a week. They picked him up on a free as he was end of contract but still crazy money. He had a 4 year deal at Sunderland on £90k a week which was effectively Sunderland taking over the contract and wage he was on at Toronto FC.

Comparing this to our signing of Walters and Wells is also ridiculous.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:27 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:That's what you get if you don't spend wisely on strikers like we did with Walters and Wells. What a return on investment those two have been this year

No club gets every signing to work out!

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:47 pm

TVC15 wrote:“Rare good 2 seasons” ?

He’s just had a rare bad 2 seasons.

I do think the contract Bournemouth gave Defoe was ridiculous for a player of his age. I thought I read he was on £130k a week. They picked him up on a free as he was end of contract but still crazy money. He had a 4 year deal at Sunderland on £90k a week which was effectively Sunderland taking over the contract and wage he was on at Toronto FC.

Comparing this to our signing of Walters and Wells is also ridiculous.

He also apparently got a signing on fee somewhere in the region of £5 million, so his agent did well there pulling down the pants of Bournemouth.

As for his seasons, he generally got about 10 league goals a season in the PL with the odd few of 14 or higher, whilst some he was less than 10.
Not the most prolific and the last two at Sunderland were amongst his highest scoring ones.

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:54 pm

Spijed wrote:No club gets every signing to work out!

Are you talking about Burnley or Bournemouth?

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:00 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:Are you talking about Burnley or Bournemouth?

Every club

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:13 pm

Spijed wrote:Every club

Agreed and that was the point I was making so thanks for the supporting posts

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:17 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:Agreed and that was the point I was making so thanks for the supporting posts

But you said about not spending wisely. It's impossible to spend wisely on every player, the difference being that Defoe was being awarded an eye-watering contract despite nothing in his career to suggest he warranted it, especially taking his age into consideration. He's slightly better than your average journeyman striker, as his stats show.

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:40 pm

Spijed wrote:But you said about not spending wisely. It's impossible to spend wisely on every player, the difference being that Defoe was being awarded an eye-watering contract despite nothing in his career to suggest he warranted it, especially taking his age into consideration. He's slightly better than your average journeyman striker, as his stats show.

He's had a lot better career than both Walters and Wells and we've prob spent between 10-12m on the pair of them this year. Don't see difference between giving a freebie a bumper contract compared with blowing millions on a transfer fee. At end of day both clubs thought the signings were worth it and both clubs were equally wrong

Rick_Muller · Post by **Rick_Muller** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:43 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:That's what you get if you don't spend wisely on strikers like we did with Walters and Wells. What a return on investment those two have been this year

Same could be said of buying cheap keepers like Pope or spending a fortune on a Centre Half for the bench like Tarkowski who both did nothing for over a year since they signed...

...hang on a minute........

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 9:01 pm

Exactly some transfers work some don't just like at Bournemouth they've had some great bargain signings and Defoe didn't work. It's easy to find a terrible signing from any club no matter how well they've done like this thread has done with Bournemouth and Defoe and I was just highlighting that by showing even at a club as well run and as successful as we have been you can still find isolated examples of us looking crap in the transfer market

bfcmik · Post by **bfcmik** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 11:58 pm

There is a huge difference between investing ~£5m and a reasonable wage on a 27 year old striker who you know will need time to get fit or the same amount plus a crazy wage on a 34 year old who relies on an eye for goal and some sharp acceleration (which can disappear at any time at that age). The comparison with Walters is also unsafe. He is a totally different sort of player to Defoe in that he relies much more on strength and positioning to get goals and has had real bad luck in getting injured twice already this season There were times, especially during that recent poor spell when the goals were hard to find, that we could have done with his experience

tim_noone · Post by **tim_noone** » Fri Mar 16, 2018 12:11 am

One of the best value for money players bournemouth signed has got to be junior stanislas. Who was never that popular on this Board.de foe was insurance for staying up.im sure they will.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Fri Mar 16, 2018 1:19 am

Devils_Advocate wrote:He's had a lot better career than both Walters and Wells and we've prob spent between 10-12m on the pair of them this year. Don't see difference between giving a freebie a bumper contract compared with blowing millions on a transfer fee. At end of day both clubs thought the signings were worth it and both clubs were equally wrong

How much are we paying them in wages??

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:36 am

I'm fairly sure that the £115k was a newspaper headline figure. It was rolling in his signing on fee, appearance bonus, etc on top of his basic wage.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:52 am

Either way, he's not justified the outlay.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Fri Mar 16, 2018 2:54 pm

Sidney1st wrote:On the plus side they're far far cheaper in wages and fee than Defoe.

Wages rumoured to be over £100k a week and a decent signing on fee.

We've been unlucky with Walters getting injured tbh, or lucky depending on which way you look at it because we're 7th.

Won't be too much difference.

Defoe will have cost them £15m ish.

If we guess Wells and Walters are on a combined £20k (they wont be, it will be double that) they will have cost us around £10m for no return. Whichever way we look at it Wells was a bad signing. Walters was potantially a good one in the same way Defoe was for Bournemouth. Thankfully we havent needed Walters like Bournemouth havent needed Defoe.

However had we struggled both those signings would be under severe scrutiny and rightly so.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Fri Mar 16, 2018 2:56 pm

Sidney1st wrote:He had a rare two good seasons and everyone got excited.
If nothing else he's got experience which he can pass on to younger players.

In a near 20 year career he has only failed to score double figures 4 times. Hardly a rare two good seasons.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:36 pm

cricketfieldclarets wrote:In a near 20 year career he has only failed to score double figures 4 times. Hardly a rare two good seasons.

Which stats are you looking at?

I can see 8 Pl seasons where he's not his double figures in league goals, you know, the important stuff.
Or are you including cup games where it could well be against weaker opposition, and even then you're wrong...it's 8 if you include cup games and allow him about 15 appearances a season to give him a fighting chance.

He's a slightly better than average striker, but not the goal machine people make him out to be.

3 PL seasons where he's hit 15 league goals or more.
10 PL seasons where he's only done single figures.
The rest he's hit 10-13 in a season.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:01 pm

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Won't be too much difference.

Defoe will have cost them £15m ish.

If we guess Wells and Walters are on a combined £20k (they wont be, it will be double that) they will have cost us around £10m for no return. Whichever way we look at it Wells was a bad signing. Walters was potantially a good one in the same way Defoe was for Bournemouth. Thankfully we havent needed Walters like Bournemouth havent needed Defoe.

However had we struggled both those signings would be under severe scrutiny and rightly so.

Walters wasn't needed because we never lost all three or even two out of three of Vokes, Wood and Barnes. So there are actually two reasons why we shouldn't have signed him - one, he was going to be injured; two, the three ahead of him weren't. Dyche out!

I don't know why we signed Wells. Maybe we'll find out, maybe we won't. Do I care? Has it spoiled the season?

(Anyway, Defoe will cost Bournemouth a heck of a lot more next season than Wells/Walters will cost us. You shouldn't look at them as one-season costs.)

Incidentally, £10m for Wells and Walters? You've given them £1m salary between them, so that means £9m combined transfer & signing fees. I doubt they were that much.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:12 pm

Sidney1st wrote:Which stats are you looking at?

I can see 8 Pl seasons where he's not his double figures in league goals, you know, the important stuff.
Or are you including cup games where it could well be against weaker opposition, and even then you're wrong...it's 8 if you include cup games and allow him about 15 appearances a season to give him a fighting chance.

He's a slightly better than average striker, but not the goal machine people make him out to be.

3 PL seasons where he's hit 15 league goals or more.
10 PL seasons where he's only done single figures.
The rest he's hit 10-13 in a season.

Wasnt including cup games. But even if I did its not like they dont count! He has scored double figures in the league (you know, the important stuff) 75% of his career. Its an excellent record.

2000/01 - 18 league goals
2001/02 - 10 league goals
2002/03 - 8 league goals
2003/04 - 18 league goals
2004/05 - 13 league goals
2005/06 - 9 league goals
2006/07 - 10 league goals
2007/08 - 12 league goals
2008/09 - 10 league goals
2009/10 - 18 league goals
2010/11 - 4 league goals
2011/12 - 11 league goals
2013/14 - 12 league goals
2014/15 - 4 league goals
2015/16 - 15 league goals
2016/17 - 15 league goals

4 seasons where he hasnt scored double figures in 16. Wont be many with a record of double figures that stands up like that over such a period.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:14 pm

dsr wrote:Walters wasn't needed because we never lost all three or even two out of three of Vokes, Wood and Barnes. So there are actually two reasons why we shouldn't have signed him - one, he was going to be injured; two, the three ahead of him weren't. Dyche out!

I don't know why we signed Wells. Maybe we'll find out, maybe we won't. Do I care? Has it spoiled the season?

(Anyway, Defoe will cost Bournemouth a heck of a lot more next season than Wells/Walters will cost us. You shouldn't look at them as one-season costs.)

Incidentally, £10m for Wells and Walters? You've given them £1m salary between them, so that means £9m combined transfer & signing fees. I doubt they were that much.

Well, Wells was £5m for a start. And he isnt on a 12 month deal either...

Walters could have been a reasonable signing. Wells never looked like being good value. Injured and his contract running down. It was a waste of money. Thankfully it hasnt mattered and it certainly hasnt affected my enjoyment of the season. The success of this seasons means they havent been scrutinised.

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:26 pm

I thought he was a great signing for Bournemouth in the context that they can afford to spunk money up the wall and the fact he has been a very good striker in this league.
It’s not turned out that way but that’s nothing to do with his previous record.
You don’t get the goals Defoe has got, the wages and big money moves and get picked in as many England squads / teams as Defoe has by being a “slightly better than average striker”.

How many strikers in the Premier League era have a better record than Defoe in the 27 or 28 seasons it has been going ? It would need to be a hell of lot of strikers to make him slightly better than average - at a guess his record must be in the top 10%.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:35 pm

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Well, Wells was £5m for a start. And he isnt on a 12 month deal either...

Walters could have been a reasonable signing. Wells never looked like being good value. Injured and his contract running down. It was a waste of money. Thankfully it hasnt mattered and it certainly hasnt affected my enjoyment of the season. The success of this seasons means they havent been scrutinised.

I know. But we only pay his £5m once; Bournemough are paying Defoe his £6m every year.

What's the relevance of Wells being a bad signing? In the last couple of years, off the top of my head, we've signed Defour, Hendrick, Brady, Pope, Gudmondsson, Taylor, Lennon, Wood, Wells, Cork ... and Wells hasn't worked out. (YET!) Where's the benefit in looking at 10 relatively big money signings and even mentioning that 1 of them hasn't worked out? 9 out of 10 is a very good record.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:56 pm

I'm pretty sure that we're also paying Wells and Walters a salary. The two of them are likely to cost more than Defoe costs bournemouth but that's how football works.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Fri Mar 16, 2018 11:02 pm

dsr wrote:I know. But we only pay his £5m once; Bournemough are paying Defoe his £6m every year.

What's the relevance of Wells being a bad signing? In the last couple of years, off the top of my head, we've signed Defour, Hendrick, Brady, Pope, Gudmondsson, Taylor, Lennon, Wood, Wells, Cork ... and Wells hasn't worked out. (YET!) Where's the benefit in looking at 10 relatively big money signings and even mentioning that 1 of them hasn't worked out? 9 out of 10 is a very good record.

Because its comparing Bournemouths one bad signing.

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 1:25 am

aggi wrote:I'm pretty sure that we're also paying Wells and Walters a salary. The two of them are likely to cost more than Defoe costs bournemouth but that's how football works.

I’m pretty sure that the 2 of them are not costing as much as Defoe. Walters maybe on £30k a week ; Wells £15k to £20k (doubling his Huddersfield wage probably).

Defoe - minimum £90k a week (what he was on at Sunderland) ...reported cost £130k a week....probably somewhere in between.

Defoe no sell on value - we’d get something for Wells and Walters i’m sure

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 1:29 am

TVC15 wrote:I’m pretty sure that the 2 of them are not costing as much as Defoe. Walters maybe on £30k a week ; Wells £15k to £20k (doubling his Huddersfield wage probably).

Defoe - minimum £90k a week (what he was on at Sunderland) ...reported cost £130k a week....probably somewhere in between.

Defoe no sell on value - we’d get something for Wells and Walters i’m sure

We would get money for Walters but they wouldnt defoe?

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 8:50 am

They wouldn't get much for Defoe, at his age, on those wages they'll probably have to give him away.

Slightly above average striker in the past, barely average now and in fast decline.
Agent had their pants right down and off

KRBFC · Post by **KRBFC** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 9:33 am

Sidney1st wrote:They wouldn't get much for Defoe, at his age, on those wages they'll probably have to give him away.

Slightly above average striker in the past, barely average now and in fast decline.
Agent had their pants right down and off

Wow can't believe a signing hasn't worked out, who'd have thought it???? crazy.
Ignore the wages, there was no transfer fee so the wages/signing on fee make up for the fee he would've cost to buy. It's like the whole ''look at Middlesbrough paying £100K p/w to Negredo'' but if you look at the bigger picture he cost less than Nahki Wells' transfer fee alone.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 10:13 am

Both over rated players who flopped.
Both players you'll argue were worth the risk despite evidence to the contrary with Negredo and Defoe's age.

Go and play somewhere else, I'm not going over the Negredo one again, he's toss, was toss in the league at Boro, about average at City in the league and has been toss since Boro and was for two years in Spain.
He was only actually any good prior to his City move but you keep banging one out to how good you bizarrely perceive him to be....

You'd have an absolute fit if we signed either Defoe or Negredo and they were as toss as they are.

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 10:50 am

Sidney1st wrote:They wouldn't get much for Defoe, at his age, on those wages they'll probably have to give him away.

Slightly above average striker in the past, barely average now and in fast decline.
Agent had their pants right down and off

Sidney you are talking toss with this slightly above average striker nonsense. I get that you don’t rate him much but repeating the same comment does not substantiate your view. As I said previously I would guess his record is in the top 10% of strikers in the Premier League era.

Negredo was a one year loan deal btw. Burnley fans would not havd been unhappy with this signing - you are saying this with hindsight. Negredo was playing and scoring at a much higher level than any of the Boro team at the time.

We would never have signed Defoe at those wages but Bournemouth can afford to take the risk - it didn’t pay off but I can’t remember any Bournemouth fans or fans / pundits in general thinking that they were signing a bad player - again it’s all with hindsight.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 10:57 am

Negredo scored 10 league goals in two years prior to signing for Boro..

Well worth signing on that basis...

taio · Post by **taio** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 11:00 am

TVC15 wrote:Sidney you are talking toss with this slightly above average striker nonsense. I get that you don’t rate him much but repeating the same comment does not substantiate your view. As I said previously I would guess his record is in the top 10% of strikers in the Premier League era.

Negredo was a one year loan deal btw. Burnley fans would not havd been unhappy with this signing - you are saying this with hindsight. Negredo was playing and scoring at a much higher level than any of the Boro team at the time.

We would never have signed Defoe at those wages but Bournemouth can afford to take the risk - it didn’t pay off but I can’t remember any Bournemouth fans or fans / pundits in general thinking that they were signing a bad player - again it’s all with hindsight.

Yes, slightly above average at his best is absolute toss. He's 7th in the list of all time top PL scorers and I couldn't care less how many appearances that's based on because that in itself says something.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 11:17 am

He's played in the top flight for X number of years that's all it means.

If he's scoring around 10 a season then it stands to reason he'd climb the scoring charts, it isn't rocket science even for some of you on here.

Some of you just appear overly enamoured of him.
As for the money he's earned and fees paid for him, Arry is to blame.

Serious question though for his fan club.

Why did he never play for someone like Utd or Chelsea where he could've won stuff?
Could it be they didn't want him or view him as good enough?
How did someone allegedly so good end up at somewhere like Portsmouth?

taio · Post by **taio** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 11:30 am

Sidney1st wrote:He's played in the top flight for X number of years that's all it means.

If he's scoring around 10 a season then it stands to reason he'd climb the scoring charts, it isn't rocket science even for some of you on here.

Some of you just appear overly enamoured of him.
As for the money he's earned and fees paid for him, Arry is to blame.

Serious question though for his fan club.

Why did he never play for someone like Utd or Chelsea where he could've won stuff?
Could it be they didn't want him or view him as good enough?
How did someone allegedly so good end up at somewhere like Portsmouth?

Not a fan. Not outstanding. Not slightly above average.

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:07 pm

Sidney1st wrote:He's played in the top flight for X number of years that's all it means.

If he's scoring around 10 a season then it stands to reason he'd climb the scoring charts, it isn't rocket science even for some of you on here.

Some of you just appear overly enamoured of him.
As for the money he's earned and fees paid for him, Arry is to blame.

Serious question though for his fan club.

Why did he never play for someone like Utd or Chelsea where he could've won stuff?
Could it be they didn't want him or view him as good enough?
How did someone allegedly so good end up at somewhere like Portsmouth?

"It isn't rocket science for some of you on here" ?.....you are starting to embarrass yourself now Sidney. Making out that you are more intellectual than other people having just come out with the a dumb statement like "he's played in the top flight for x number of years that's all it means".

"That's all it means" ?.....that`s exactly like saying people thought x player was only good because he played for England 120 times. Are you seriously saying that he only has a good record simply because he has played in the top flight for a number of years ? You don't think that he played in the top flight because other people thought he was a good striker and scored goals ?......just a thought - I know its a bit technical and all that.

Nobody on this thread is overly enamoured with him - you are the only one with an extreme view as far as I can see.

Just because Chelsea and United did not buy him does not make him "slightly better than average". They are the 2 most successful clubs in The Premier League in the last 20 years. Harry Kane, Alan Shearer and many other great strikers have not played for them either....are they "slightly better than average" ?

Why did he end up at Portsmouth ?...You mean the Portsmouth who won the FA Cup ? You mean the Portsmouth that signed David James, Sol Campbell, Peter Crouch, Kanu, Dialla, etc etc. Surely "even you" are clever enough to work that out....but just in case the answer starts with "m" and ends in "oney"

Dyched · Post by **Dyched** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:07 pm

Defoe - £0 fee, £130,000 per week
Minutes played - 825
Cost per minute - £8,194

Wells - £5m fee, £15,000 per week
Minutes played - 32
Cost per minute - £180,625

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:16 pm

Dyched wrote:Defoe - £0 fee, £130,000 per week
Minutes played - 825
Cost per minute - £8,194

Wells - £5m fee, £15,000 per week
Minutes played - 32
Cost per minute - £180,625

Why are you making this comparison ? Why don't you compare the Defoe signing to Jack Cork or even Ashley Barnes ?
I`m not saying I think the Wells signing was great but why pick out one bad signing out of all the good signings. What is the point you are trying to make ? Is it that you can`t get all your transfer signings correct ?.....no manager in history ever has.

Defoe is going to cost Bournemouth £18m plus - and there will be no sell on value at his age. We are not in that position with Wells by a long way. But a lot more relevant than this point is that our £500k each strikers of Barnes and Vokes have been instrumental in getting us to 7th so we have not needed to play Wells....that`s a good thing right ?

Dyched · Post by **Dyched** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:21 pm

TVC15 wrote:Why are you making this comparison ? Why don't you compare the Defoe signing to Jack Cork or even Ashley Barnes ?
I`m not saying I think the Wells signing was great but why pick out one bad signing out of all the good signings. What is the point you are trying to make ? Is it that you can`t get all your transfer signings correct ?.....no manager in history ever has.

Defoe is going to cost Bournemouth £18m plus - and there will be no sell on value at his age. We are not in that position with Wells by a long way. But a lot more relevant than this point is that our £500k each strikers of Barnes and Vokes have been instrumental in getting us to 7th so we have not needed to play Wells....that`s a good thing right ?

Im comparing a new this season Burnley forward signing to a new this season Bournemouth forward signing. Both haven’t worked out for their respected clubs.

Be a bit weird to compare Cork to Defoe, y’not think?

Im making a point that people keep having a dig of how other clubs are run, signings they make without looking at outselves a little. I understand clubs cant always get it right and Im certainly not having a pop at our board/manager fir the Wells signing. **** happens.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:28 pm

There are players who spent less time in the PL and scored a similar amount of goals.

He's only in that list because he's been in the top flight so long, averaging slightly over 10 a season...

That's it, doesn't make him a goal machine.

Nor am I questioning anyone's intelligence, just can't understand why people can't see the link between longevity and goals record.

Anyway, bored of going round in circles.

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:43 pm

Why a bit weird ? We signed Cork in the summer just like they signed Defoe in the summer.

Surely the debate is about the transfer policy as a whole rather than picking out just the bad one or two individual transfers. Bournemouth`s transfer record has not been that great recently. Begovic - £10m and £50k a week not been great ; Are - £20m and will be on a lot of money ; Defoe wages of best part of £20m ; Jordan Ibe - £16m and hardly ever plays ; Afobe £10m always on the bench and now back at Wolves. Yes they have made a couple of good / cheap signings in Stanislas and Josh King but overall they have spent a hell of a lot of money and do not appear to have improved their team much.

Our record in the transfer market is better than most (if not all) teams in the division so it seems pretty reasonable for fans to be having a dig at other clubs are being run. There are a lot of clubs who are fighting relegation who have made multiple £15m to £20m signings who have been flops. For the likes of Everton, West Ham and Leicester they have made a few £25m to £35m flop signings.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:47 pm

Sidney1st wrote:There are players who spent less time in the PL and scored a similar amount of goals.

He's only in that list because he's been in the top flight so long, averaging slightly over 10 a season...

That's it, doesn't make him a goal machine.

Nor am I questioning anyone's intelligence, just can't understand why people can't see the link between longevity and goals record.

Anyway, bored of going round in circles.

Do you not think hes 'only played in the premier league that long' because hes good? You dont play in the prem for 10 plus years and become one of the leading scorers if you arent.

His record is great. Look at the company he is in. Look at the players he is above Anelka Giggs Scholes Yorke Drogba even Aguero and RVP. All played in the league a long time at top clubs. Look at his goals to game ratio.