Sky Sports saying Tudgay has signed (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter junglej13
- Start date
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
Yes I put the news on the tudgay thread also.
1 year deal agreed and signed and will be confirmed later.
Great news.
Need 1-2 more strikers. What about when MT or SM get injured and banned?
1 year deal agreed and signed and will be confirmed later.
Great news.
Need 1-2 more strikers. What about when MT or SM get injured and banned?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
They must have showed him round Shitsfields - it swung the deal.
shy_tall_knight
Well-Known Member
A reasonable strike rate played mostly at a higher level than the third division, so may be more effective in a lower quality league but a 1 year contract is that a lack of confidence in him by the club or a lack of confidence in the club by the club, ensures another season of wheeling and dealing in 2015
lewys33
Well-Known Member
Holbrooks park always did it for the best of players.
ccfcmustang
New Member
I just cant for the life of me understand why we wont spend a bit of cash on a striker, the striker position is one where you need to spend a bit of cash to get a player capable of getting 10-15 goals a season, 20+ and your probably looking for a figure over £1m, i accept that is probably too much. But spending half that on a player whos going to score 15 is worth it in my book
shy_tall_knight
Well-Known Member
Miller is 5ft8 tudgay is a lot taller at 5ft10 - looks like we will be playing on the floor
said who? one or two people start to get a bit nervous because he hadn't signed yet and that means you need to resort to stupid posts.
Anyway great news, weather or not he is a great signing we needed him and we'd almost certainly have been worse off if he hadn't signed.
FRY-CCFC
Well-Known Member
But...he won't join us...bloody sisu...
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Who are we going to sign for cash then? Any suggestions? Any players with higher level calibre?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Well I long for day we had Freddie Eastwood and Cody McDonald those free scoring goal machines.
Things dried up when we got that loan from forest, that freebie from charlton and that kid from the academy.
TrueSkyBlueLiam
Member
1 year deal is not great. Should be a 1 year deal with an option of a further 12 months. I don't know why SISU use this sort of deal cus if they do well, they'll jump ship at the end of their contract and we get nothing back. Narrowminded thinking by our esteemed owners. But take nothing away from the fact Tudgay is a fantastic player and probably in the top 5 strikers in the league. I can only think of 1 striker better than him in League 1. Another couple of tweeks to the playing squad, plus a return to the Ricoh could put us in with a shot of play-offs. Big signing for us
skybluepm2
Well-Known Member
Pretty much summed up everything I wanted to say. Thanks for saving me 5 minutes of my life Liam
TrueSkyBlueLiam
Member
No problem pal. Great minds think a-like
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Contracts are bi-lateral agreements you know
Warwickhunt
Well-Known Member
unless you sign a top quality proven striker then you are always gambling, take Callum Wilson for arguament sake, if Bournmouth do not play to his strengths i.e pushing a ball through the backline for him to run onto he will have a lean season. So with respect to Tudgay we are not in a position to gamble and should imagine that talks to increase the length of his intial contract will not take place untilJanuary time by which SP wil know that he is a long term prospect
Last edited:
TrueSkyBlueLiam
Member
But why wouldn't Tudgay want the option of an extra year if he wanted it? Theres more stability for him. If he gets a better offer, he can leave for free after 12 months. If there isn't, he cant stay for another year
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
No chance he has any resale value. 1 year is not unreasonable for a striker that age, the younger midfielders signed got 2 year deals. This reflects market forces..
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
Go on the link for the transfer centre and it has a slot on there around 10am.
Danceswithhorses
Well-Known Member
Michael Higdon ?
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
How much did Clarke or McGoldrick cost? Let's not spend money just to be seen to be spending money....
WM
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
BRB off to tell the owners of Real and Man City they can save millions.
This is such an asinine argument.
I could reel out Manset, Slager, Philliskirk, Kilbane, Elliot, Edge, Heridasson, O'Donovan.
And that's just the last 3 seasons. Not even getting to the likes of Sherwood and De Zeeuw.
Last edited:
Grendel
Well-Known Member
To compare to premier league and European leagues is absurd. The reason they attract fees is that clubs have them on long contracts.
Most of these players are out of contract. Lower league clubs offer players shorter contracts. Therefore there are fewer signed while in contract. Transfer fees in league one are extremely rare.
If we sign a player in contract or under 24 we pay a fee.
The perversity of your argument is summed up by joe Murphy. He is free as he is out of contract. By you and most on here if we'd signed him the pitchforks would be out as he was a freebie, clearly crap.
Don't see why the fact that we've spent money on some clunkers, and done well with some freebies necessarily has to undermine the basic principle that you have more, and better options available to you if you have money to spend. That's not a recommendation to SP, that's just how capitalism works. The best way to beat the competition is to allocate your resources wisely, but whichever way you look at it, when we're in urgent need of at least one more good striker, the fact that SP still has his hands tied to some extent is a problem, especially when we've just had £2 mn come into the club.
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
We haven't got the money Man City and Madrid do clearly.
At the level of cash we would be spending it is pretty much irrelevant, if people seriously expected us to splash out 750k-1 million on a player they were deluded.
It seems our fans would be happy if we went out an bought a player and paid a token fee of 50-200k. When you're dealing with transfer fee's that small it isn't an indicator of quality, it just means he is under contract.
Look at Tudgay for example, would we better off paying 100k for an unproven young striker with a decent record in L2/conference? I personally don't think so as we could get another Deegan, Hussey, Simpson, Mcdonald, Barton, Dunn, Platt which we payed fee's for all of them.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
You mis-represent my argument. I'm not saying all frees are crap, I'm saying that saying that all signings that cost money are crap is stupid.
Of course you can pick up players on a free who are decent, but you are looking at a smaller pool. One that, by definition is full of either players their last club deemed not good enough or who they asked for too much money.
You will never sign a form player on a free, as we don't compete on wages. Look at our signings, almost all of them are coming back from a long term injury. Very few of them have played at this level, none of them were in high demand. That's a risk, no?
I wouldn't care as much if we hadn't got rid of £4m worth of players this summer. Is it really too much to ask that we go in for one of the many players moving around at this level for a fee? Why constrict yourself when you've got that cash floating about?