
stmichael wrote:it was essentially chelsea's money anyway.
kazza wrote:woof woof ! wrote:but can't help wondering what we might have got for the money if we hadn't been so desperate.
Fabragas?
mart wrote:SouthCoastShankly wrote:How many wrote off Peter Crouch early on in his career?
A lot.
Of fools
So we paid 35 mill for another Crouch or Heskey?
Who is the fool?
stmichael wrote:the kid is a work in progress ffs. he was brought for the long term (5-10 years) and to be judged after 2 games just shows how out of touch some of our support is these days.
The forum is strangely negative lately considering the club has just spent 100M or so and we've offloaded a chunk of deadwood and beaten Arsenal at the Emirates for the first time in 11 years.
mart wrote:SouthCoastShankly wrote:How many wrote off Peter Crouch early on in his career?
A lot.
Of fools
So we paid 35 mill for another Crouch or Heskey?
Who is the fool?
Greavesie wrote:The forum is strangely negative lately considering the club has just spent 100M or so and we've offloaded a chunk of deadwood and beaten Arsenal at the Emirates for the first time in 11 years.
too right mate. We've came out of the tunnel from the Hicks and Gillett (and Roy) debacle to have decent owners for a change who have actually invested in the squad. Business is going on behind closed doors, Kenny's back as a manager and we can send out a Carling Cup squad that can win a game without having to send in too many first teamers
derm wrote:mart wrote:SouthCoastShankly wrote:How many wrote off Peter Crouch early on in his career?
A lot.
Of fools
So we paid 35 mill for another Crouch or Heskey?
Who is the fool?
The owners saved money in that window by budgeting a rumoured 30 mill for acquisitions and spending only a couple.
If it doesn't bother them why should it bother the fans??
The net cost of Carroll is about a million - an absolute steal if you ask me!
Return to Premiership - General Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests