CONFIRMED Scott Hogan

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?


unitedbhoy said:
67 games in 4 years. Does his horrific injury record not worry anyone?
Click to expand...
A lot.

I was excited by Hogan earlier this summer but then we were linked with Gallagher and rumours of Abraham (despite not being solid) led me up the garden path. Then I heard he had no pre season and was injured (again).
 
Don't get this at all.

We'll be paying bigger wages than we would've been for anyone else, for a striker who isn't the type we need most, and who not only has had fitness issues but has done his ACL twice.
We make a big deal of having a pre season then splash this on someone who still needs one?

This is a stupid choice of player to break our wage structure on.

It's a huge gamble and probably Wilder getting caught up on a player he knows from non league.
 
Eric Cartman said:
Why are we willing to pay big for Hogan's wages when he's not had a pre season and is apparently injured but not for Gallagher or Abraham? Assuming Abraham is probably on a bit more mind, point still stands
Click to expand...

So'ton's position all along has been that they want to sell and they're after £8million. Whether that'll change towards the end of the window I have no idea, but it's a very big price for someone who hasn't really done owt yet.

Abraham is probably a pipe dream. Reported this weekend that he's after a European loan move.
 
"SHEFF U. Willing to pay Hogan’s wages in full for a season on loan. That’s a big effort. See how it plays. And if any others come in."
 
IF he stays fit, I’d be very excited by this. Talk to Villa fans, they blame Bruce more than Hogan for his Villa career so far.
 
IOM Blade said:
Have i missed something? Why are people convinced it's Hogan he's on about?
Click to expand...

Because he said so.

24l7tc0.png
 
If he's fit, he will get 20 for us this season. But it's the fitness issue. However, if he didn't have the injury/fitness issues, he wouldn't be going out on loan and therefore would be unattainable. It's the market we've got to shop in. There's not many proven championship strikers around and even less are available, there has to be a reason they are available and with Hogan it's his injuries.
 
Fair enough.

This is a massive gamble and short term thinking.
I'd much prefer us to reinvest our Brooks fee into Gallagher or Brereton than pay for the wages of two loanees we won't be able to afford permanently in Hogan and Woodburn.

Well we might afford Hogan but we'll need to sell another family jewel to afford him...
 
Luke1993 said:
If he's fit, he will get 20 for us this season. But it's the fitness issue. However, if he didn't have the injury/fitness issues, he wouldn't be going out on loan and therefore would be unattainable. It's the market we've got to shop in. There's not many proven championship strikers around and even less are available, there has to be a reason they are available and with Hogan it's his injuries.
Click to expand...
Hogan and McGoldrick's injury records are a huge concern
 

Paying this for Hogan on loan severely decreases the possibility of reinvesting the Brooks money properly on permanent signings.
 
SteveBlade said:
It's basically £1 million for a potentially top striker at this level for year.

50/50 if it goes tits up and he snaps himself in half, could be good though.

Only Jesus knows.
Click to expand...
Agreed 100%, could be class. Injury free he wouldn't be within our reach. HOWEVER, this time next year we still need to find a Brooks replacement and a top class striker with a large percentage of the fee we've got for Brooks having already been spent on short term signings.

Bit of a waste I think. Especially if we build all our momentum around them two.
 
According to mr potato head

Hogan has got the same injury around his groin," he said.

“It’s inflammation of the pubic bone, down there in your groin. It needs rest because it keeps coming back.
 
Ricky said:
Paying this for Hogan on loan severely decreases the possibility of reinvesting the Brooks money properly on permanent signings.
Click to expand...
There will still be money in the pot.

Less so, but still quite a bit.

Better version of Lee Gregory, and we know Tufty rates Gregory. So this makes a lot of sense.

If his wages are indeed £35k per week it’s a less than £2m (calculated I would assume) gamble. Not a lot in this market.

I’d also add that I’m pleased Wilder has held out for his top targets.

Which from my perch looked like either Hogan or Gallagher.

UTB
 
I’d be more likely to pass a medical than this lad and I’m wrong side of 30 and 16 stone.
 
I'd be happy with this. Even more so if we get an agreed fee that we're not tied to, but have an option to take up.
 
FWIW, I heard (from someone in the local media) that the difference between what we were prepared to pay Waghorn and what he wanted was £15k pw :( UTB
 
If we signed this lad last year our fans would be absolutely creaming themselves and would be up our owners arse but because Villa medical staff are fucking useless and Bruce is a brainless twat who doesn’t play to his players strengths this is somehow a terrible signing because we’re paying possibly in the region of 30k p/w for a PROVEN Championship striker who has bags of pace which is what every fan wants. The club seriously cannot win.
 

TCsLoveChild said:
FWIW, I heard (from someone in the local media) that the difference between what we were prepared to pay Waghorn and what he wanted was £15k pw :( UTB
Click to expand...

Probably right. I imagine we would be looking at £20k tops?? He'll be on on £35k at Derby no danger
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom