I'd be willing to pay more for Scott Hogan than Chris O'Grady personally. I get the Luke Steele point though. However, you're working on the assumption that clubs were willing to pay for him? If no interest was shown, we've just banked £300k+ towards new players by letting him go for free. Wouldn't be surprised to see him back in three or four years either
In terms of preferring Scott Hogan a player with no goalscoring record above League 2 than CoG a player in his prime with a very good Championship record can you say why you think an untried player is a better investment. Is there a reason or just dissing our players. Genuine question.
Agreed. Unfortunately, we need them off the wage bill. Clubs know this so aren't going to pay market value are they? Disappointed we didn't get more than £500k for O'Grady but as the weeks have gone on we need to get shut. Hogan is younger & a completely different player. Rochdale also don't need him off the wage bill because they can afford what he's on. Context is a massive miss on here.
How am I dissing our players by preferring to invest another club's money in another player? I also think Messi is better than Jennings, and Nardiello would still be our best striker by a country mile. Scott Hogan is a different type of player. Exciting, young, very eye catching with a great eye for a pass. Chris O'Grady is a decent enough striker, but a bit one dimensional, not an amazing finisher, and backs up his lack of pure footballing ability with desire and work rate. I'd have loved him up front in League One for us as I think he's a 20 goal a season striker at this level. Would I sign him as a Championship club? Possibly, but that depends on the type of football I wanted to play.
Not dissing anyone. In terms of potential, I think Hogan has much more than COG, who in my opinion showed nothing of the player he was under Flitcroft from the Sheff Wed game onwards last season - one or two noteable exceptions. But in general he wasn't the only one. That said in football's current market Brighton are getting a very good striker for half a mill - from a relegated side, who could maybe use his salary and fee to better all round effect, and with just a year left on his contract. COG's been our best striker in recent times. So behave with the silly diss comment.
Is it not fair to say lots of players who have played well in League 2 have failed at a higher level. For every David Currie there's a string of Stuart Rimmers. My question was along the lines that it seems almost perverse to say that a player with no track record at a certain level is preferably to one with a proven track record if both were priced comparably. Brighton a dirty team but not exactly hoof ball merchants.
I guess whether you are the type of team that wants to invest in someone with a proven track record to take you into the play offs and beyond like say Brighton or a team that will probably struggle at the other end of the table in Brentford who are may wish to invest in the future potential of a player like we did with Frimpong for example. It does seem a little perverse to me to say one is preferably to the other. Both have good or bad points.
Does it have to be one over the other though ? I can see why both teams want those strikers and why the fees are what they are - not just on the individual's ability, but external factors too.
Brentford have had their pants pulled down by Keef. Another overpriced transfer fee linked to an English player.
I wish Keith had been pulling down pants when at Barnsley. Unfortunately, for the majority of the time, it was Keith with his pants round his ankles. Not necessarily saying it was all his fault, but, according to reports, it was Keith who turned down a huge transfer fee from Palace for Matt Done.
Yeah with hindisight it's a shame we reportedly turned down a million for both Done and Jordan Clark (him due to him turning them down).
I'd rather have COG than Hogan. I rate the latter, and he's got potential, but he's an unknown quantity at this level and above whereas COG has proven he's capable of delivering over the last few years. Difference in fee though will be down to that potential, the fact he can operate out wide or up top, and the fact that Rochdale don't need to sell him to balance the books.
Don't get me wrong, I really rate Chris O'Grady and can't think of anyone I'd rather have leading the line for us this season (we can say 'this' season now can't we?). But I don't buy in to this proven capability that everyone keeps going on about. He's had one good season at Championship level in terms of being a goalscorer, and prior to joining us his goals to start ratio doesn't warrant a £500k fee. Yes he brings a lot more than goals to the team, but until we grabbed hold of him he was really going nowhere. Before we signed him hadn't he scored something like 20 goals in 100+ games? Granted that many of them were from the subs bench, but doesn't that tell it's own story? I repeat, this isn't a dig at Chris O'Grady, just a viewpoint.
Other clubs know we are desperate to sell. I'm suprised Brighton have offered 500k as has been reported. I would have offered 100k and told us to think about the wages we are paying which, as it looks like we can't afford.
If we do get 750k for Hogan, it's the best business we've ever done. Brilliant finisher and pace to burn, but also gets injuries and disappears in games that haven't been going our way. Chris O'Grady remains the finest striker I've seen at Spotland in over 30 years (just take a minute to think who that includes, one of them will be playing in the Chamipons League in front of the Kop next season and another is Daggers....). Hogan will be remembered as a good striker, COG is a legend. I'd send Hogan your way tomorrow for free if it meant we could have COG in exchange on affordable wages.