CONFIRMED David Brooks to Bournemouth

[I should coco]

When we sold the 2xK's how many players did we buy with the money!
When we sold Harry how many players did we buy with the money
When we sold DCL how..........
When we got the Kyle walker windfall.......

Yes because the losses we make in all of those years (£3-7m p.a.) don't count.

They are covered by the wonderful money tree, so every penny raised from selling players should go on more established players with higher wages than those we sold.

"It's the economy, stupid!"

 

[Darthblade]

Thats the the first post I've read that's made me question whether we should keep him. I'm a huge Brooks fan, his potential is endless- he could be the next Giggs or Bale. On the other hand £12m, a huge sell on clause and Wilson would probably temp me far too much


1 word of warning though. Wages. While cashing in on a player who's currently just an impact sub makes sense if we can bring in 2 or 3 quality signings, wages would still be a massive hurdle.
At best the board would give us 10million of that 12 to reinvest. If you were to get my 2 top targets Wilson and Hogan they are both going to be on 20k a week minimum. So while losing Brooks might cover the transfer fees his 5 or 6 grand a week wages aren't going to make a dent in what a 5million quid striker would be on.

Indeed wages could very well be the issue mate …….. and that's probably why ( I believe) we will go for 1 striker on permanent and 1 on loan.

Whilst they served us admirably last season, I think it would be a very dangerous risk for us to assume that Billy & Leon will get 25+ goals again next season …… we need 2 strikers with pace and strength to challenge for starting places immediately and to push Billy & Leon to maintain their standards …..

Its also up to Tufty to force the Board to make available every penny of the transfer fee IF Brooks is sold ……. and to ensure the Board don't get star struck at the prospect of a bit of cash and do our usual and have our pants pulled down ….

If he is to go ( and I hope that he doesn't) then it really does need to be for stupid money that will be added to our existing budget and fund significant first team improvements.

UTB & FTP

 

[Darthblade]

I think that CW sees young David as a striker.

I think what we will see is us hold on to DB allowing us to spend more on 1 more striker.

The strike force will be DB, Leon, Fat Lad + 1 more .... then possibly another unproven Lg1 or 2 striker.

We will keep DB for one more season IMO.

I'm quite surprised that a few people seem to consider brooks as a striker

I see him as an attacking midfield player, a direct challenger for Duffy's position behind two strikers. He's too lightweight, doesn't hold the ball up and doesn't make the runs that a natural striker makes ( imho)

I see Brooks and (another) taking over from Duffy this season, in that role ……

UTB & FTP

 

[sheffielder]

I'm quite surprised that a few people seem to consider brooks as a striker

I see him as an attacking midfield player, a direct challenger for Duffy's position behind two strikers. He's too lightweight, doesn't hold the ball up and doesn't make the runs that a natural striker makes ( imho)

I see Brooks and (another) taking over from Duffy this season, in that role ……

UTB & FTP

It drives me mad when I see people describe him as an attacking midfielder. His goals have been scored playing off the last defender and he’s too slight for the type of player he is to beat 2 men. People will just cut across him which they do a lot when he plays deeper. With one man to beat he knows how to find space has pace and can finish. I really don’t get the argument

 

[Bladezz]

It drives me mad when I see people describe him as an attacking midfielder. His goals have been scored playing off the last defender and he’s too slight for the type of player he is to beat 2 men. People will just cut across him which they do a lot when he plays deeper. With one man to beat he knows how to find space has pace and can finish. I really don’t get the argument

Think that’s the issue with him we don’t know fully where to play him. When we went to like a 3 up front against Leicester he tore chilwell apart! All depends how we set up next season.

Think it mainly depends on who we sign etc.

 

[Sean Thornton]

It drives me mad when I see people describe him as an attacking midfielder. His goals have been scored playing off the last defender and he’s too slight for the type of player he is to beat 2 men. People will just cut across him which they do a lot when he plays deeper. With one man to beat he knows how to find space has pace and can finish. I really don’t get the argument

He's scored three times.

 

[sheffielder]

He's scored three times.

These 3 goals? How many players between Brooks and the keeper

 

[Groucho Blade]

I don’t think Brooks is ready to be our no. 10.
I’d be very happy to be proved wrong but I’ve not seen anything in his game to show that he can come in and replace Duffy. Yet. His range of passing isn’t there. Yet.

 

[Dronfield Blade]

User 1: I would rather us not sell Brooks, hard to replace.

User 2: I would sell him for £15M. Buy 3x players with money.

User 3: Magic money tree!?... we need to sell to balance the books.



Problem with user 1: If Brooks wants out he is gone. No player is bigger than the club.

Problem with user 2: If Brooks is worth £15m, what is the 3x replacements worth?

Problem with user 3: Until we reach the Premiership, we will always run at a loss; Can keeping Brooks can help us get to Prem OR do we need to balance the books.

My view is that I understand "User 1“ taking into account Brooks' age, talent and potential, we will not replace him like-4-like. Would be nice for a change to keep a young talent.

My issue with "User 2“ is that Chris Wilder has already stated we have exhausted the pond of bargain buys, as much as we don't like to admit it, Wilder will not pull another Leon/Baldock/O'Connell out of his hat. IMO.

Finally, “User 3" always has a fair point, its not our money we are talking about spending BUT at some point in the near future United is going to have to gamble on keeping a player instead of hoping we can do it on a budget if we want to get to the Premiership.

All 3 users have valid points. Overall its just fucking frustrating.

 

[BushBlade]

Yes because the losses we make in all of those years (£3-7m p.a.) don't count.

They are covered by the wonderful money tree, so every penny raised from selling players should go on more established players with higher wages than those we sold.

"It's the economy, stupid!"

We failed in our gamble to go up and we’d run out of parachute payments, which were covering our wage bill. It was exactly the same situation Villa are in now, but with lower numbers.

 

[FinchleyBlade]

He is a second striker who plays off the frontman, he isn't a no.10 playmaker like Duffy.

 

[Booker4]

He is a second striker who plays off the frontman, he isn't a no.10 playmaker like Duffy.

I'm not so sure I want to see Brooks played up as a second striker though, as it has also meant that when played in that role that we've not elected Duffy, who creates so much and Brooks only has 3 goals in 33 games. I agree that Wilder sees Brooks in the second striker role though, based on last season. I would expect Brooks to get 10 plus goals though next season if he does play more than 40 games next season but not sure where that leaves Duffy or Holmes.

 

[Mouth of the South]

I'm not so sure I want to see Brooks played up as a second striker though, as it has also meant that when played in that role that we've not elected Duffy, who creates so much and Brooks only has 3 goals in 33 games. I agree that Wilder sees Brooks in the second striker role though, based on last season. I would expect Brooks to get 10 plus goals though next season if he does play more than 40 games next season but not sure where that leaves Duffy or Holmes.

I remember it working fairly well at Leeds last season Duffy being 33 won't be able to play 46 games next season. Personally, I think Brooks is far more suited to the second striker role - Clarke and Gallagher (if he arrives) would both be good foils for him. Then as you say it would be up to CW who he selects for the mid 3.

 

[Booker4]

I remember it working fairly well at Leeds last season Duffy being 33 won't be able to play 46 games next season. Personally, I think Brooks is far more suited to the second striker role - Clarke and Gallagher (if he arrives) would both be good foils for him. Then as you say it would be up to CW who he selects for the mid 3.

I expect Wilder to sign two forwards so it'll be interesting to see where it fits in with Brooks. You're spot on that Duffy won't play as much next season, especially if Brooks stays.

 

[I should coco]

We failed in our gamble to go up and we’d run out of parachute payments, which were covering our wage bill. It was exactly the same situation Villa are in now, but with lower numbers.

You and your so called 'facts!

These really aren't helpful to the McCabe robs our club blind, mob.

 

[BigBed]

Why don't we just keep him??
I for one would love to see him stay at the Lane,

 

[bladesmanluke]

Best suggestion this summer.

 

[IdLiketoRogerMoore]

Why don't we just keep him??
I for one would love to see him stay at the Lane,

As cliched as it is: him and Coutts will be like two new signings...

Two fookin good ones at that!

 

[Houso]

Midfield shouldn't be touched. And if we must, it should only be to add an option with a bit of pace; but I still think our system is sound.

 

[Maidenhead]

OMG why didn't I think of that?

Must have been because I was too busy reading the Brooks thread in Rumour Mill

 

[Kozzy_is_my_Dad]

Why don't we just keep him??
I for one would love to see him stay at the Lane,

WHY HAS NOONE THOUGHT OF THIS BEFORE?!?

 

[stringer]

Midfield shouldn't be touched. And if we must, it should only be to add an option with a bit of pace; but I still think our system is sound.

Ryan Leonard

 

[gavtheblade]

Glttl

 

[Groucho Blade]

Ryan Leonard

I’m hoping that, after a full pre-season with us, Lenny will be like a new signing too!!

 

[DronnieBlade]

IF Wilder sees him as more than the bit part player we saw last season, agreed.

If not .................

Like other clubs, we must manage resources.

One £15m player who’s arris is permanently glued to the subs bench, could realistically be considered as gross mismanagement of resources.

On top of which is the players desire to play.

And don’t forget the wages bit either.

UTB

 

[mancunianblade]

Said it before I can see Leonard dropping back to compete with Basham. Reckon he will make that position his own too

 

[mancunianblade]

IF Wilder sees him as more than the bit part player we saw last season, agreed.

If not .................

Like other clubs, we must manage resources.

One £15m player who’s arris is permanently glued to the subs bench, could realistically be considered as gross mismanagement of resources.

On top of which is the players desire to play.

And don’t forget the wages bit either.

UTB

If we are talking about a £15m player yes but in this instance I’d consider Brooks to be £15m of potential. And the management of such potential has to be completely different.

 

[ChipButtyBlade]

Wilder wants to keep him,he's a good tea boy.

 

[BigBed]

I just assumed, that pointing out the fucking obvious may help a few folk

 

[Houso]

Ryan Leonard

Attacking pace Danny. Attacking pace.

I'm thinking more a winger or two as an option, but like I say, I'm not wed to this idea and happy to leave the midfield as is.