Jump to content

Shane Long


9-3
 Share

Recommended Posts

Handy player, but the short answer is no. Consider that Chelsea are paying less for a striker of Remy's class and the answer to your question is obvious.

 

Transfer fees are largely irrelevant by themselves, since Bosman. That is before you take into account that he wouldn't come here.

 

Long - £12m, 4 year deal at (say) £40k per week = total £20.320m

Remy - £10.5m, 4 year deal at (say) £100k a week = total £31.3m

 

Then as I have constantly said, it might also be good to judge his signing by who Hull get in to replace him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Transfer fees are largely irrelevant by themselves, since Bosman. That is before you take into account that he wouldn't come here.

 

Long - £12m, 4 year deal at (say) £40k per week = total £20.320m

Remy - £10.5m, 4 year deal at (say) £100k a week = total £31.3m

 

Then as I have constantly said, it might also be good to judge his signing by who Hull get in to replace him.

 

Tbh 12m on a foreign import isn't always the best e.g. Kostas Mitroglou last January.

Transfer are gambles- they pay iff or they don't, i also agree eith post above. If Hull spend that money on Abel Hernandez, there is certainly no guarantee he will be better than Long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to my mate who's an actuary the average value of a human life is about £100k...

 

At 41 I'm probably worth a bit less on the other hand my 4 year old is obviously worth more, very young, very hungry and far too quick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything is relative. If we get better service from Long than we did from Osvaldo (which wont be difficult) the you could argue that it has been money well spent.Transfer fees and footballers wages seem to operate in their own universe but I do wonder if the fees quoted ever actually get paid. Given the money we got for Shaw and Chambers I am not going to lose any sleep over what we paid fo Long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything is relative. If we get better service from Long than we did from Osvaldo (which wont be difficult) the you could argue that it has been money well spent.Transfer fees and footballers wages seem to operate in their own universe but I do wonder if the fees quoted ever actually get paid. Given the money we got for Shaw and Chambers I am not going to lose any sleep over what we paid fo Long.

 

You doubt we have paid the quoted fees for the players we've bought but happy that we've received the full fees for the players we've sold?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Hull and Steve Bruce were quite smug with the fee, but what good is £12m in the bank

 

Hull are now struggling to replace him

 

this is absolutely 100% correct.

 

I rate long too... reckon he would be a nightmare to defend against. he really opens up the game and gives the creative guys in the midfield a chance to put some nice passes through

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having been wholly against us signing Shane Long at any price, I have now changed my mind completely having seen him play at Millwall on tuesday and West Ham on saturday. I don't think he will be our top goalscorer, or get many assists but he is already going some way to repaying what we spent on him with good performances. He is good on the ball and doesn't let defenders rest. We will win a fair few free kicks in dangerous positions and penalties due to his commitment to running down every ball and he seems a real team player. Think we are a better team for having him.

 

I also think, for what it's worth, that player prices are irrelevant. What matters is that he's a Saints player. Players don't decide how much a club pays for them, and it's not our money any way, so players shouldn't be judged against their price tags, but by how good they are on the pitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Hull and Steve Bruce were quite smug with the fee, but what good is £12m in the bank

 

Hull are now struggling to replace him

 

 

I guess they are, and I agree with the rest.

 

Sure they got £5m in 8 months. What is interesting though is the press reaction to this. Why didn't they mention the £12m profit we made in a year on Lovren? Lovren in demand and a bit of a scarce resource? Probably, but then we obviously/probably thought the same about Long and what he has to offer. Which comes back to who Hull will (or won't) sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...