Mcburnie

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

dc_blade said:
A few contracts being signed now. Is this a case of Wilder having delivered a kick up the arse in the right quarters? A condition of him returning to the club? Or just the usual process playing itself out?
Click to expand...

It'll just be the usual process. It should have fuck all to do with Wilder, who will likely be out of the club before any extended contracts expire
 

I expect Wilder to be hear a long time …..so long as The Prince is in charge anyway. I suspect that Chris has realised that this is the best job he is going to get & actually now that we have no money - he is our best option.
 
jt64 said:
It'll just be the usual process. It should have fuck all to do with Wilder, who will likely be out of the club before any extended contracts expire
Click to expand...
Based on what?
 
UddersBlade said:
I expect Wilder to be hear a long time …..so long as The Prince is in charge anyway. I suspect that Chris has realised that this is the best job he is going to get & actually now that we have no money - he is our best option.
Click to expand...
That's probably why he took the job, mainly because nobody else was interested in him, he's also come back in roughly the same position as he left.
 
TJ blade said:
That's probably why he took the job, mainly because nobody else was interested in him, he's also come back in roughly the same position as he left.
Click to expand...
Actually slightly better. There’s no established dead wood to out, more funding than last time, and a much better youth setup. Were also not in league one, unable to get out and slowly drowning.
We’re in a shit state but we were in a worse one when he last came in.
 
Last edited:
He going to sign that contract? Wilder wasn't asked about him directly today.
 
I like McBurnie in the sense he gives us somat different up top. However, it gets a bit tedious when he comes back and lasts a couple of games and is then out again for another stretch. It seems to be the same format all season

Needs a good long run in the side
 
Blade58 said:
I like McBurnie in the sense he gives us somat different up top. However, it gets a bit tedious when he comes back and lasts a couple of games and is then out again for another stretch. It seems to be the same format all season

Needs a good long run in the side
Click to expand...
It use to be a couple of games but now we are lucky if its a whole one. This becomes a real issue when building a team both in defence and in attack. I would only offer him a contract at a massive wage reduction and build a team around someone else. He can then be the bit part player he has already become
 
I don't think it's worth giving him a contract, for the amount we will need to pay him. He only manages about half the games each season. If were to give him a 3 year deal at the end of the season, he'd be 31 when it's up and if his pattern of injuries etc. in his prime years persist (likely) it'll be even more money lost.

A bit of a shame, as I have warmed to him a lot, but I think we need to be practical about it.
 
TopBoy said:
Injured, comes back, looks unfit, gets fit, looks great, injured, punctuated with some off-the-field shit. Rinse and repeat. He should be in his prime but his prime seems to last 4-5 games a season. Get rid.
Click to expand...
I agree, unforetunetly a fully fit Oli is never going to be a top player, he seems to be a great lad but coupled with the in injury problems we need to move him on
 
I'd be more willing to lose McBurnie if I saw many viable alternatives who can offer the same things

But it is a problem with all the injuries. We can hardly afford it with a player we aim to build the attack around. We should use this factor to negotiate a lower wage that reflects the likely reality that he won't start more than 30 games a season

It'll be interesting to see what other options he might have, all this considered

If you're reading, Oli, I think you should stay, because this club is exactly your level, you are well settled here now and playing well. But maybe money will talk
 

Hamandcheese said:
I'd be more willing to lose McBurnie if I saw many viable alternatives who can offer the same things

But it is a problem with all the injuries. We can hardly afford it with a player we aim to build the attack around. We should use thus factor to negotiate a lower wage that reflects the likely reality that he won't start more than 30 games a season

It'll be interesting to see what other options he might have, all this considered

If you're reading, Oli, I think you should stay, because this club is exactly your level, you are well settled here now and playing well. But maybe money will talk
Click to expand...
Queuing up 👍😂.

When you include wages / bonuses / signing fees etc. it will add up to £30m as near as makes no difference.

Fandabbydozzie 😡.

UTB
 
DronnieBlade said:
Queuing up 👍😂.

When you include wages / bonuses / signing fees etc. it will add up to £30m as near as makes no difference.

Fandabbydozzie 😡.

UTB
Click to expand...
We're fully invested in him now and won't get that money back. So we might as well keep him and get maximum value out of him

We've overspent but he can still be a good signing, with service over many years. He's already helped us back up once, playing a vital role, if he can do it again that is arguably a decent return
 
For his first season and last season he's been a fine signing, definitely not a disaster.

As for now, we need experience and leadership and he's popular in the dressing room. Good player too.

Rather he stayed, as we'll be very sparse up top in the summer if he goes. Archer and BBD won't be here and Osula being ready to lead the line isn't at all certain.
 
LJBlade said:
Completely different players
Click to expand...
As in the 'big man' option they're similar. What differences do you see? (I Genuinely don't know)

He would get similar or more goals and be available. (I am a Mcburnie fan but financially and availability can we afford him?)
 
Hamandcheese said:
We're fully invested in him now and won't get that money back. So we might as well keep him and get maximum value out of him

We've overspent but he can still be a good signing, with service over many years. He's already helped us back up once, playing a vital role, if he can do it again that is arguably a decent return
Click to expand...
Can You or anyone please address this overspent myth? Spent well under 100m with ins and outs over 3 years of premier league football plus parachute payments.
 
Ndiayewillalwaysloveyou said:
As in the 'big man' option they're similar. What differences do you see? (I Genuinely don't know)

He would get similar or more goals and be available. (I am a Mcburnie fan but financially and availability can we afford him?)
Click to expand...

McBurnie shouldn't be being played as the 'big man' option. He's got a much more to his game than that. He wasn't considered as a target man until he joined us.
 
LJBlade said:
McBurnie shouldn't be being played as the 'big man' option. He's got a much more to his game than that. He wasn't considered as a target man until he joined us.
Click to expand...
I agree with that tbh. The 'big man' option is just a shit term and a thing of the past usually.
 

s20Blade said:
Can You or anyone please address this overspent myth? Spent well under 100m with ins and outs over 3 years of premier league football plus parachute payments.
Click to expand...
Are you including the PL money we had to return and covering the losses of no crowds during covid when calculating the 3 years of PL football?
There was around £140M spent during those 2 PL seasons, nothing coming back in with another £35-40m this season. The £140m is your overspend, which over 2 years PL money, a significant amount of which was returned means that unfortunately it's not a myth.
 
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