Newcastleclaret93 wrote:Jamal Lowe is a good player. For the money being talked about I would take the risk. There is certainly a bit of X factor with this lad. That goal he scored against Sunderland in the checkatrade trophy was class.

Only wigan and millwall in for him?....that must say something about the standard he's at.....

Not quite sure how people have convinced themselves Jamal Lowe would be an acceptable signing

SGr wrote:Not quite sure how people have convinced themselves Jamal Lowe would be an acceptable signing

Because buying cheap players under the age of 25 is the new scratch card game from Lotto. Will you win big!?!

SGr wrote:Not quite sure how people have convinced themselves Jamal Lowe would be an acceptable signing

Young goalscoring winger. Battled his way up from non-league so would fit the kind of hungry profile that Dyche likes. Won't rock the boat if he isn't starting straight away. Low transfer fee, low risk.

What's unacceptable about the deal?

Does he have pace to burn?

mkmel wrote:Does he have pace to burn?

Can he track back?

boatshed bill wrote:Can he track back?

Hopefully like McNeil does and be as good going forward.

https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/foot ... -1-8964934" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Lowe is 25 next month, so we aren't talking about a player for the development squads, and prior to last season he never really stood out.

Last season was his best ever, by a ridiculous margin. So what happened, is he a late bloomer, the signator to a Faustian pact or did he start eating his Weetabix.

The poorer performing teams in the league one seem to pick their playing formations out of a bingo ball bowl, putting out a different one every week. Portsmouth seem to have settled on a 4-2-3-1 formation and that focus appears to be paying dividends for them. A team can't swap and change formations every week and expect to be effective.

Ronan Curtis also had a best in his career season, playing on the opposite side of the 4-2-3-1. In fact quite a few of the Portsmouth players posted their career best performances last season.

I think that is probably the best explanation for the zero to hero performance of Lowe, Portsmouth are a strong team in a weak league and their dedication to a front loaded formation is benefitting everyone in the squad.

All told, this rumour is a bit of a strange one if you ask me. We currently have JBG, Hendrick, Lennon and Brady who can all play on the right wing. If none of our wingers leave us in this window then I can't see what we will do with him, other than send him out on loan.

£3m isn't a huge sum of money, but it is fairly substantial if we consider the other players that could be available for the same price, a lower price, or on free transfers. I would prefer a younger player if we are speculating to accumulate, or a player with consistent performance credentials over the course of their career.

Ideally I would like a player in a position we actually need to fill - like left back, centre midfield or up front.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football ... 16245759?2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; linked with adam webster from bristol city

jojomk1 wrote:Hence our interest in Dawson rekindled, as his replacement

And/or Dael Fry to develop

Watford challenging us for Craig Dawson while Dyche has spoken to Bolton’s Harry Brockbank.

Alan Nixon:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football ... west-brom/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nixon again - Bournemouth for Hart

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football ... d-burnley/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Dawson? I’m in a time loop.

ClaretTony wrote:Nixon again - Bournemouth for Hart

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football ... d-burnley/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think Nixon works on the principle of if he mentions enough names, sooner or later he'll get one right.

Wonder if Dawson has a similar clause in his contract to Rodriguez?

With Bilic in as new manager would he be happy to see established starters leaving the club

Would like to remind everyone, it’s 5 years this summer since we first tried to sign Dawson.

SGr wrote:Would like to remind everyone, it’s 5 years this summer since we first tried to sign Dawson.

And if Dyche still sees him as someone who will improve our squad what’s the problem?

SGr wrote:Would like to remind everyone, it’s 5 years this summer since we first tried to sign Dawson.

Cheers for reminding us.
You obviously see that as some kind of negative. On the plus side he now has another 4 years of proof he can play in the Premier League.

TVC15 wrote:Cheers for reminding us.
You obviously see that as some kind of negative. On the plus side he now has another 4 years of proof he can play in the Premier League.

I'm yet to see much proof he's PL quality tbh, pretty sure when he became a regular, results at WBA started to plummet.

TVC15 wrote:Cheers for reminding us.
You obviously see that as some kind of negative. On the plus side he now has another 4 years of proof he can play in the Premier League.

*3 as he spent last year in the championship.

Isnt it 4 of the last 5 years ?

TVC15 wrote:Cheers for reminding us.
You obviously see that as some kind of negative. On the plus side he now has another 4 years of proof he can play in the Premier League.

I do see the fact he is now 29 and would cost us about 3-5x what was being asked for back then as a negative, yes.

No secret our budget is not on the level of the majority of our rivals, the money could be better spent elsewhere in my opinion.

Rileybobs wrote:And if Dyche still sees him as someone who will improve our squad what’s the problem?

Why do we even debate potential signings then if this is the only argument that matters?

SGr wrote:I do see the fact he is now 29 and would cost us about 3-5x what was being asked for back then as a negative, yes.

No secret our budget is not on the level of the majority of our rivals, the money could be better spent elsewhere in my opinion.

Yep - it turned out really bad for us signing Keane and Tarks and probably end up making about £60m. I’m sure we can afford him - and i’m also sure Dyche is a better judge of defenders than you or me.

Goobs wrote:*3 as he spent last year in the championship.

5-1 = 4.....I think

SGr wrote:Why do we even debate potential signings then if this is the only argument that matters?

There is one positive for you in his signing. Least you already know who to whinge about on twitter in reply to the clubs official account at 14.01 every Saturday the line up is announced.

SGr wrote:Why do we even debate potential signings then if this is the only argument that matters?

My point was that it doesn’t matter how long we have chased Dawson for. If Dyche still rates him then the amount of time he has been interested in him is irrelevant.

TVC15 wrote:Yep - it turned out really bad for us signing Keane and Tarks and probably end up making about £60m. I’m sure we can afford him - and i’m also sure Dyche is a better judge of defenders than you or me.

You’re right. Keane and Tarks were great signings, two young centre halves who had the potential to significantly improve, and brought massive dividends to our team.

Dawson (like I just said) is 29. And would cost more than either of them two. Yes we can afford it, but it doesn’t mean in my opinion that we should.

Also, the whole “Dyche knows more than us” argument would kind of makes this entire board irrelevant. Am I not allowed to have a different opinion to him or something? The idea that he knows more is sort of an understatement.

Rileybobs wrote:My point was that it doesn’t matter how long we have chased Dawson for. If Dyche still rates him then the amount of time he has been interested in him is irrelevant.

That’s fair enough. I just personally don’t think it’s worth another window going after him.

SGr wrote:You’re right. Keane and Tarks were great signings, two young centre halves who had the potential to significantly improve, and brought massive dividends to our team.

Dawson (like I just said) is 29. And would cost more than either of them two. Yes we can afford it, but it doesn’t mean in my opinion that we should.

Also, the whole “Dyche knows more than us” argument would kind of makes this entire board irrelevant. Am I not allowed to have a different opinion to him or something? The idea that he knows more is sort of an understatement.

Point is more that if Dyche thinks he is a good player then he’s got a great track record in this area. He has obviously thought Dawson was a good player for a number of years and still thinks he is now.
He can’t carry on finding £3m bargains and turn them into internationals - plus the way the market has moved on Brentford would be asking for £15m now for Tarks instead of the £3m they did back then.
Dawson has always looked a decent player to me and he can play right back too - which is a bit of a problem position for us. If the price is £15m that does not bother me at all given the profit we will make on Tarks.

TVC15 wrote:5-1 = 4.....I think

why is there no face-palm emoji on here?

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:There is one positive for you in his signing. Least you already know who to whinge about on twitter in reply to the clubs official account at 14.01 every Saturday the line up is announced.

Hahahaha how did I know you’d be along. You’re genuinely more interested in me on here than the players we may or may not sign.

KRBFC wrote:I'm yet to see much proof he's PL quality tbh, pretty sure when he became a regular, results at WBA started to plummet.

That will be Dawson’s fault will it ?
Do you think West Brom’s defensive performance improved or “plummeted” after Dawson became a regular ?

TVC15 wrote:Point is more that if Dyche thinks he is a good player then he’s got a great track record in this area. He has obviously thought Dawson was a good player for a number of years and still thinks he is now.
He can’t carry on finding £3m bargains and turn them into internationals - plus the way the market has moved on Brentford would be asking for £15m now for Tarks instead of the £3m they did back then.
Dawson has always looked a decent player to me and he can play right back too - which is a bit of a problem position for us. If the price is £15m that does not bother me at all given the profit we will make on Tarks.

I agree re the bargains, obviously £15m is affordable and the sort of money we can expect to pay per position. For the record, when we paid exactly that for Gibson last season, I thought that was a great signing. He was 25 at the time.

As for Tarkowski, well that’s if we sell him, which is likely but not at all guaranteed.

I don’t think we should (or will) buy Dawson unless Tarks is going...i’d rather keep Tarks but not sure we will have much of a choice if he wants to go.

SGr wrote:Hahahaha how did I know you’d be along. You’re genuinely more interested in me on here than the players we may or may not sign.

Hhhmmm, that's a very bold statement to make, theres several others out there who also catch the eye.
Dont be so confident.

MACCA wrote:Hhhmmm, that's a very bold statement to make, theres several others out there who also catch the eye.
Dont be so confident.

TVC15 wrote:I don’t think we should (or will) buy Dawson unless Tarks is going...i’d rather keep Tarks but not sure we will have much of a choice if he wants to go.

All player's have the power these days, as shown when and how Tarky arrived here.
It's all about maximising what we get should he leave, and trying to either find someone who weakens us the least, or if Gibson is promoted to the role, we find the next one for the conveyor belt.

I think he will go, he's good, but certainly not irreplaceable.

This window will be a very good one, I'm very confident of that.

SGr wrote:

We could buy young and develop again, we cant cherry pick first team ready players, and even if we could, the framework is massive to how we gain results so doubt any new players would be thrown straight in.

MACCA wrote:We could buy young and develop again, we cant cherry pick first team ready players, and even if we could, the framework is massive to how we gain results so doubt any new players would be thrown straight in.

We do have to improve the starting XI eventually. Gibson at 25 for £15m was a great move for me, because he has plenty of ability, plenty of time to adapt to our way of playing, and he probably will end up as a starter for us. Dawson at 29 for £15m on the other hand, I’m not convinced at all.

I’d rather play Long than pay £15m for Dawson.
He might have a mistake in him but so do Tarks and Mee. He also has some very good games and is more of a threat from dead balls than either of our regulars, this being the only plus that I see in Dawson.

SGr wrote:We do have to improve the starting XI eventually. Gibson at 25 for £15m was a great move for me, because he has plenty of ability, plenty of time to adapt to our way of playing, and he probably will end up as a starter for us. Dawson at 29 for £15m on the other hand, I’m not convinced at all.

I'd be extremely shocked if we paid 15m for Dawson.

We hold all the cards now, as both WBA and the player might want the sale/move.

I'd personally not go into double figures million wise for him.
Personally would prefer us to buy the next Keane/Tarky, give Gibson a chance then keep Long and new lad as back up.

MACCA wrote:
I'd personally not go into double figures million wise for him.
Personally would prefer us to buy the next Keane/Tarky, give Gibson a chance then keep Long and new lad as back up.

Agree completely with all of this

God there's some pointless shyte posted on here.

burnley007 wrote:God there's some pointless shyte posted on here.

I see what you did there.

The point is that Tarks likely transfer value will depend on the number and status of the clubs after him plus the amount received for Maguire. If Maguire goes for £80m then Tarks will attract a fee that is higher than it might be especially if Leicester, Wolves and potentially as rumours elsewhere suggest Arsenal, Liverpool, Everton are allegedly monitoring the situation go for him, there may be a bidding war. If that happens it makes perfect sense to go for Dawson as a replacement especially as there doesn't seem to be a lot of suggestions on here for anyone else. As for £15m for Dawson I suggest if Tarks goes for £50m then £15m seems reasonable in the circumstances. Paying that amount or possibly slightly more for Dawson could also be an inducement to WBA to let us have JayRod provided Leicester don't blow us out of the water on wages and JayRod is ok on personal terms as he appeared to be the last time we enquired about him.

burnley007 wrote:God there's some pointless shyte posted on here.

Yep hence the reason i tried to make the point of this thread as easy as possible, and to be fair was followed up until, CT obviously thought otherwise, which is fair enough, but its now ruined and no point reading it like all other treads because of the amount of crap and infighting that goes on.

Seems we are ok selling at 20 million plus but not buying at that amount for replacements or even adding to the starting 11

SGr wrote:Would like to remind everyone, it’s 5 years this summer since we first tried to sign Dawson.

Don't you mean "& every year for the last 5 years"