David Brooks Windfall £,£££,£££

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

If we get promoted it has yeah
What's the prize money ?
150 million minimum ?
And our spending suggests to me that the Brooks money has been used and that quote from.wilder was during the summer transfer window
Fair enough, game of opinions and all that
 



Shouldn't you be tediously referring to yourself in the third person for some weird reason?
Thought so. Clueless. Yet you are happy to berate the club for their apparent incompetence over the matter.
 
“Not touched the Brooks money” is the new “think Liverpool”, when it comes to being quoted incorrectly. trotted our ignoring the fact that that it relates to a particular moment in time.

Hindsight’s a wonderful thing though, be interesting to look back and see which posters were predicting this scenario at the time the deal was done. snootyfenooty for example called it at the time and it looks like he was bang on. Did Danny do the same or just now sees a headline in it later?
 
Thought so. Clueless. Yet you are happy to berate the club for their apparent incompetence over the matter.
It’s a pretty moot point until he actually moves isn’t it, Bobby?
And who’s berating? How’s my opinion any different from any other that’s been expressed since he was sold? :confused:
 
“Not touched the Brooks money” is the new “think Liverpool”, when it comes to being quoted incorrectly. trotted our ignoring the fact that that it relates to a particular moment in time.

Hindsight’s a wonderful thing though, be interesting to look back and see which posters were predicting this scenario at the time the deal was done. snootyfenooty for example called it at the time and it looks like he was bang on. Did Danny do the same or just now sees a headline in it later?

Couldn't agree more on the "not touched the Brooks money"- the idea of Wilder having ~£12M sat waiting for a rainy day is laughable.
 
One major factor in Brooks' development / impact on the Bournemouth team is simply, Eddie Howe picked him, played him, showed faith and gave him consistent first team football. Wilder never did this.
 
Maddison had proved himself far more in the championship than Brooks had.
Yeah, because Wilder wouldn't play him, look what's happened since Eddie Howe has shown faith and played him consistently?
 
One major factor in Brooks' development / impact on the Bournemouth team is simply, Eddie Howe picked him, played him, showed faith and gave him consistent first team football. Wilder never did this.

Booo Wilder out.
 



And do you think for one moment that Tufty will see that "windfall" if Brooks does get sold ……. o_O

The same will happen as happened to the Brooks transfer fee and the windfalls from Maguire & Murphy …. :tumbleweed:

UTB & FTP
Are you the caller that sometimes phones RS up and asks....."Where's Muney Gone"
 
Not as precisely as that, no, as far as I recall. Just that he’d been hugely undersold.

I think I remember that, it was more to do with the valuation being bandied around now. I dont recall many suggesting that at the time.
 
Yeah, because Wilder wouldn't play him, look what's happened since Eddie Howe has shown faith and played him consistently?
Because he was very ill, then recovering, then trying to displace the man that went on to become our player of the season.

What was Wilder to do?
 
It's turned out far better for Brooks and Bournemouth than United

But surely it’s better to sell to someone like Bournemouth for a few million less than a spurs or Everton as Everton/spurs are very unlikely to sell brooks on again for loads .

Whereas Bournemouth will always likely have teams buying players of them.

If brooks carries on teams will be bidding 50/60 maybe more so isn’t it better say if we’ve got 20 % sell on to sell him to a team like Bournemouth further down in the food chain
 
But surely it’s better to sell to someone like Bournemouth for a few million less than a spurs or Everton as Everton/spurs are very unlikely to sell brooks on again for loads .

Whereas Bournemouth will always likely have teams buying players of them.

If brooks carries on teams will be bidding 50/60 maybe more so isn’t it better say if we’ve got 20 % sell on to sell him to a team like Bournemouth further down in the food chain
Humour me. It’s hypothetical of course but what if United kept Brooks and got promoted this season? What would he be worth then?
 
Of course we should....

In the meantime we've got good money for a decent player which allowed him to progress, allowing us to build on what we have in areas we needed to. We now sit much higher up the division and look stronger for selling him.


Six seasons in division three from selling his mates doesn't seem like a good business plan?
 
We're 3rd in the league, where is the current threat of relegation?

How much would you say that we need to spend and on which players would you suggest we spend it on to guarantee promotion?

prehaps we could buy that Brooks kid, he'd fit in well and we'd only have to pay £40M+ apparently?
 



By the time the Summer transfer window had finished we hadn’t touched the Brooks money, by the time the January transfer window had finished we had almost certainly used a fair old chunk of the Brooks money, that’s how I understand it anyway. In other words, the Brooks money wasn’t used to improve the side at the start of the season but it was used to fund the wages of our loans in January, again, that’s how I understand it.

All opinions of course but I thought it was pretty clear that Brooks was a classy player and would go on to bigger and better things, I also said he would go on to have a better career than Woodburn but got shouted down for it, obviously by those people who berate the players we get rid of and immediately praise the ones we bring in. Early days I know but I’ll stick to that opinion.
 

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