http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2017/11/27/le ... ells-in-j/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This website is sh*te

What's the problem?
Leeds would have to make the approach, Burnley would have to agree to it, otherwise it wouldn't happen. Either way, it would only happen if it suited our plans. get over it.

I think the point is that Wells has been injured - not dropped. The "news" article makes out that he is out of favour, which is clearly not true. It is an article created for click bait ads and people will click them

I hope this is true. The Championship is his level and it would make space in our squad for a proper nr 10 and maybe a pacey right winger to give us options. Best for Wells as well as is not going to start for us much if ever. It was always an odd sgning.

And how do you know that the Championship is his level when he has never played in the Premier?

BeijingClaret wrote:http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2017/11/27/le ... ells-in-j/
This website is sh*te

Absolutely, just don't go there.

summitclaret wrote:I hope this is true. The Championship is his level.

Nothing like making a decision on a player without having seen him play for us.

Come on everybody knows 15 minutes of championship highlights is enough to see if a player is up to it or not.

FulledgeClaret wrote:Come on everybody knows 15 minutes of championship highlights is enough to see if a player is up to it or not.

Or if he is the greatest Defensive Midfielder that never played there

Ive heard from a couple of different people who watch the under 23's regularly that he is looking really impressive and really sharp. Hopefully we will see him soon in the first team.

It WAS an odd signing on the face of it but why would we let a player go who, due to injury, hasn't proved anything one way or the other? My only problem with him, and it's not his fault, is that I get the impression we've been conned into buying a crock, but then again what do I know. I hope I'm wrong.

houseboy wrote:It WAS an odd signing on the face of it but why would we let a player go who, due to injury, hasn't proved anything one way or the other? My only problem with him, and it's not his fault, is that I get the impression we've been conned into buying a crock, but then again what do I know. I hope I'm wrong.

It will be a good signing. Many regard him as a better player than Chris wood.

Iloveyoubrady wrote:It will be a good signing. Many regard him as a better player than Chris wood.

He's got his tried and trusted tropical boilies out for this one, looking for a 20lb+ here...

Iloveyoubrady wrote:It will be a good signing. Many regard him as a better player than Chris wood.

Hope so, we need someone tricky and fast. I like Wood a lot and he's been great so far and he's been a great acquisition but he is a bit too much like Vokes (only better I think) so we need more variety. That's why I want to see what Wells is made of. We do need options up front more than anywhere because I still think Barnes is a good sub but not really PL class and I still can't believe we bought Walter. That signing has bemused me from the outset.

We have 4 fit strikers at the moment, Wood, Vokes, Barnes and Wells with a 5th, Walters, just getting back into full training. We play 1 up top and occasionally vary it to a 2. Always going to be a judgement call for SD as to who he starts and who misses out from the 18. He sees them working every day rather than the brief views we get from the Stands. The time will come when he sees Wells as fit enough and the right man for the job on a particular day. He is the one who will decide whether we scooped up a bargain or overpaid for someone who needs to be quietly shipped out.