James Milner
- Thread starter Ryan
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Very happy with this.
Same here.
Well, I prefer to look at the signing in isolation, and in isolation he's a great signing 🙂
He's a really important signing in terms of having a player in the team to set the tone for the level of commitment and hard work everyone has to put in.
Certainly, Oncy. I doubt any of us see him as *the* big summer signing, though he could well turn out to be as important as any, the new Sir Gary Mac.
Yeah, very happy with this. He's an instant improvement on what we've got. Step one, as Oncy says, but a good step.
I think it's step one of three.
One:Milner
Two:Ings
Three:Benteke
All the other steps that should be taken have been forgone in the hope that Origi, Kent etc step up, & cos they don't have full confidence in Rodgers long term anymore.
Still fucked, sadly.
Yep. We've gone through this the last few years, judging each signing in isolation, most have looked ok. But overall, transfer windows have been mostly disappointing when you look at the bigger picture.
I'll wait to see who else we sign before considering this a great signing.
It's a good signing, I'm not sure the order in which players are signed should be an indication of priority, players are away etc, Milner is on a free so there's no club to approach. It's a good signing in isolation, but we need a top quality attacker, preferably someone young and exciting, it doesn't have to be a top brass big name.
Take note Leicester.
Poor transfer windows overall don't invalidate individual signings. Signing Milner's the right move to make, though it's true that other signings will be needed to maximise the benefit we can derive from it.
Yes they do. If signing Milner means we can't sign a striker or someone else of higher priority, then it would be a poor signing. The whole window needs to be looked at as one. Each transfer influences another one.
How would signing Milner be likely to have that effect when he's coming on a free?
I didn't say "free", I said "on a free" meaning (as if you didn't know) no initial transfer fee. The wages will certainly be considerable but I doubt clubs mix up capital and revenue expenditure like that when making these decisions. If we do, we definitely *are* in trouble.
Erm.. Isn't that what he just said?
other signings will be needed to maximise the benefit we can derive from it.
Yeah but you implied the transfer was effectively costless by saying it couldn't impact on other deals.
When the wages and other costs are as excessive as this then that's obviously untrue.
But you also have to factor that we've lost Gerrard's wages and Johnson's, surely that's as relevant?
That was money freed up to spend - and it's been spent.
It could've been spent on anything: it was spent on this.
Well we need a replacement for Gerrard and we need quality in midfield, so it's not an unnecessary move, he's a good player and will be a valuable asset. We need a right back too, so we'll have to replace Johnson, are you going to say the same about going for Clyne? We need a quality attacker but spunking the entire wad on one isn't going to suddenly paper over the other cracks in the team.
I'm completely not arsed.
- Status