Jump to content

Saints ran out of money and could not sign Eriksen

Batman

By Batman
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted

according to Mark Wotte

 

Just read a piece stating how Morgan was desperate to leave saints when we were relegated to league 1. The club convinced him to stay as we would be 'back'

 

Wotte also mentioned that when we signed morgan, it meant we were unable to afford signing a 16 year old Eriksen......which is a shame

sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
why would you ask that question?

 

Because you said it was a shame that we couldn't sign Eriksen because we had signed Morgan. Would you say signing Morgan was a poor move by the club?

Batman

Batman

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Because you said it was a shame that we couldn't sign Eriksen because we had signed Morgan. Would you say signing Morgan was a poor move by the club?

 

no didnt. I stated what Wotte has reported in saying.

you have interpreted it that way. Which is what you do. go around this board and putting right what you see as wrong

 

it was a shame we were in such financial trouble and coulud not have signed eriksen regardless, IMO

sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
We couldn't afford either of them truth be told. Both were or would have been poor signings at a time when we were lacking experience and quality.

 

The word on the Internet at the time (and feel free to take it with a pinch of salt if you like) was that Lowe had sanctioned the signing of Morgan because he was worth more and he planned to sell him fairly quickly to make some money. Fortunately he wasn't sold as he, along with Lambert and Fonte were the best signings the club made for £1m and helped us get where we are today.

sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted (edited)

So you are saying Wotte said that was a shame, because the way you have written it is looks like you said it was a shame. Either way signing Morgan didn't turn out too bad in the end did it?

Edited by sadoldgit
Batman

Batman

Posted
  • Author
Posted
So you are saying Wotte said that was a shame, because the way you have written it is looks like you said it was a shame.

 

that was my opinion....it is obvious within the post.

 

you have interpreted it as it was morgan instead of eriksen...not both

 

 

as you say, maybe you should let this one go

SaintZamboni

SaintZamboni

Posted
Posted
that was my opinion....it is obvious within the post.

 

you have interpreted it as it was morgan instead of eriksen...not both

 

 

as you say, maybe you should let this one go

 

Pot kettle black?

Beckenham Saint

Beckenham Saint

Posted
Posted
that was my opinion....it is obvious within the post.

 

you have interpreted it as it was morgan instead of eriksen...not both

 

 

as you say, maybe you should let this one go

 

To be fair, the way you've phrased it, combined with posting history, it does read as if you thought it a shame we signed Morgan and not Ericksen.

Batman

Batman

Posted
  • Author
Posted
To be fair, the way you've phrased it, combined with posting history, it does read as if you thought it a shame we signed Morgan and not Ericksen.

 

there we go.

I said it was a shame. People assumed why I thought it was a shame

pez86

pez86

Posted
Posted

What a signing that would have been, would have added even further to that team that rose up the leagues the last few seasons. We had a heck of a scouting department back then for spotting youngsters.

 

Despite the misunderstanding of others, thanks for sharing - interesting stuff.

Saint-Armstrong

Saint-Armstrong

Posted
Posted

I interviewed Mark a couple of years back - when he was at the SFA - and he said to me then his one big regret was not being able to complete a deal for Eriksen (who was 16).

 

Shame, but I'm sure every club has stories like this.

 

Just yesterday I was listening to the Peterborough owner saying they had Jamie Vardy (then of Fleetwood) in a restaurant with Darren Ferguson finalising a transfer, then Leicester came in and Vardy had no interest. Suppose it happens to everyone from time to time, in different ways.

Lighthouse

Lighthouse

Posted
Posted
I'm sure there's been lots of players we'd have liked to buy but couldn't afford them!?

 

For every Eriksen, Drogba, Coutinho or Rosicky, there is a Lamela, Beasley, Piper or Mido.

 

Still interesting that we looked at him.

5string

5string

Posted
Posted

Do you think Erikson would have developed as well as Morgan did, if he had [or could have] signed for us?

 

I'm not sure we have a knack for developing strikers as much as we do for midfielders.

 

Or am I about to be proved wrong...?

st alex

st alex

Posted
Posted
according to Mark Wotte

 

Just read a piece stating how Morgan was desperate to leave saints when we were relegated to league 1. The club convinced him to stay as we would be 'back'

 

Wotte also mentioned that when we signed morgan, it meant we were unable to afford signing a 16 year old Eriksen......which is a shame

 

I agree, it was a shame that we didn't have enough money to sign eriksen, is there a link to the article?

van Hanegem

van Hanegem

Posted
Posted
Christian Eriksen?

 

I'm asking myself the same question... If it is Christian Eriksen it's a load of crap. Ajax bought him for less than 1 million euro's from Odense after Chelsea said they didn't want him. A choice between Ajax and Southampton back in 2008 wasn't difficult for a teenager... But Wotte is known in Holland for talking crap, unbelievable that this idiot got a chance at Southampton after all his terrible mistakes at Feyenoord.

andoru

andoru

Posted
Posted
To be fair, the way you've phrased it, combined with posting history, it does read as if you thought it a shame we signed Morgan and not Ericksen.

 

I didn't read it that way to be honest. I assumed Batman was lamenting the fact we couldn't get both players in and were forced to choose between one or the other. A fair reason to lament.

SaintJackoInHurworth

SaintJackoInHurworth

Posted
Posted
Do you think Erikson would have developed as well as Morgan did, if he had [or could have] signed for us?

 

I'm not sure we have a knack for developing strikers as much as we do for midfielders.

 

Or am I about to be proved wrong...?

 

Mick Channon, Steve Moran, Alan Shearer, Matt Le Tissier - all pretty good if you ask me!! You could also add Terry Paine, though he was more renowned as a winger. To a lesser degree you could also add Nathan Dyer who has not done too badly - though mainly as a winger.

 

You could also add:

 

Kevin Davies - Started at Chesterfield but developed as a top-flight striker at Saints.

James Beattie - started at Blackburn, but was developed as a top-flight striker at Saints.

Peter Crouch - moved around a number of clubs before Saints but only really got established as a top striker once he had joined us - he has always opted to play for teams that play in red ever since - and mostly clubs that play in red and white stripes!!

 

Beyond those I'm not too sure! :)

SaintJackoInHurworth

SaintJackoInHurworth

Posted
Posted
Do you think Erikson would have developed as well as Morgan did, if he had [or could have] signed for us?

 

I'm not sure we have a knack for developing strikers as much as we do for midfielders.

 

Or am I about to be proved wrong...?

 

Mick Channon, Steve Moran, Alan Shearer, Matt Le Tissier - all pretty good if you ask me!! You could also add Terry Paine, though he was more renowned as a winger. To a lesser degree you could also add Nathan Dyer who has not done too badly - though mainly as a winger.

 

You could also add:

 

Kevin Davies - Started at Chesterfield but developed as a top-flight striker at Saints.

James Beattie - started at Blackburn, but was developed as a top-flight striker at Saints.

Peter Crouch - moved around a number of clubs before Saints but only really got established as a top striker once he had joined us - he has always opted to play for teams that play in red ever since - and mostly clubs that play in red and white stripes!!

 

Beyond those I'm not too sure! :)

 

I forgot to include the Wallace brothers (Danny and Rod not Ray!), Theo Walcott and Alex Oxlaide-Chamberlain - again mainly wingers, but have been used as strikers (Rod was primarily a striker).

Noodles34

Noodles34

Posted
Posted
Indeed as I am very confused.

 

I guess people like you make this place the way it is, it was quite obvious that he said it was s name in the context of signing both.

niceandfriendly

niceandfriendly

Posted
Posted

What's more is Eriksen to be fair to Jamie is or isn't what was originally on offer if Wotte could or couldn't within the limits of what Lowe and others haven't discussed so to lambast Jamie or SOG on this matter is completely and utter correct if taken without context on this forum or at least considering the history of the club.

sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
Seemed pretty clear to me. Not like soggy to form wildly incorrect opinions without thinking...

 

Thanks for the usual dig Hypo - in fact it was a gentle wind up but that seems to have passed most people by. Too subtle perhaps ;)

sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
I guess people like you make this place the way it is, it was quite obvious that he said it was s name in the context of signing both.

 

People like me? Pot, kettle, black. See my post above. And perhaps you could do something about your avatar? It brings back bad memories.

The9

The9

Posted
Posted
People like me? Pot, kettle, black. See my post above. And perhaps you could do something about your avatar? It brings back bad memories.

 

Maybe you could change your settings to browse without seeing avatars if you're sensitive about it?

 

I find doing that makes it a lot easier not to form preconceptions about people. In fact I have no idea if I even have an avatar, because I always browse without. It's in your profile in the settings somewhere, it's years since I set it up though.

 

As for the other stuff, it is a shame we couldn't sign Eriksen for not much, though whether he'd have been the same player if we had, and indeed whether Wotte isn't just being unrealistic about our opportunities are a different matter.

 

Also, to clarify the stupid argument earlier, because Wotte specifically said money was the limitation and we had signed Schneiderlin, so the question if someone would prefer we signed Schneiderlin to Eriksen, because we'd have only been able to spend on one of them, was indeed valid and fair.

 

The fact Batman didn't answer it is interesting, but entirely in line with his previous posts, which tend to be over-simplifications from an opposing view to the OP, frequently missing the point or any nuance to the argument. FWIW I wouldn't change the way things worked out, it's a hell of a stretch to think we could have made a better decision than signing Schneiderlin when we did, when you consider his contribution to our revival and the profit the club made when he eventually became good enough to get out of our wage scale.

 

Also, I think you'll find "putting right what you see wrong" is in fact, MY thing. :D

VectisSaint

VectisSaint

Posted
Posted
What's more is Eriksen to be fair to Jamie is or isn't what was originally on offer if Wotte could or couldn't within the limits of what Lowe and others haven't discussed so to lambast Jamie or SOG on this matter is completely and utter correct if taken without context on this forum or at least considering the history of the club.

Thanks for clearing that up then :?

sotonjoe

sotonjoe

Posted
Posted
I interviewed Mark a couple of years back - when he was at the SFA - and he said to me then his one big regret was not being able to complete a deal for Eriksen (who was 16).

 

Shame, but I'm sure every club has stories like this.

 

Just yesterday I was listening to the Peterborough owner saying they had Jamie Vardy (then of Fleetwood) in a restaurant with Darren Ferguson finalising a transfer, then Leicester came in and Vardy had no interest. Suppose it happens to everyone from time to time, in different ways.

 

Cool story bro.

5string

5string

Posted
Posted
Mick Channon, Steve Moran, Alan Shearer, Matt Le Tissier - all pretty good if you ask me!! You could also add Terry Paine, though he was more renowned as a winger. To a lesser degree you could also add Nathan Dyer who has not done too badly - though mainly as a winger.

 

You could also add:

 

Kevin Davies - Started at Chesterfield but developed as a top-flight striker at Saints.

James Beattie - started at Blackburn, but was developed as a top-flight striker at Saints.

Peter Crouch - moved around a number of clubs before Saints but only really got established as a top striker once he had joined us - he has always opted to play for teams that play in red ever since - and mostly clubs that play in red and white stripes!!

 

Beyond those I'm not too sure! :)

 

Well OBVIOUSLY Mick (checks avatar :smug:).

 

Yep, good call on most of those. MLT was more an attacking mid, imo, and the various wingers you mention weren't really out-and-out strikers.

 

So, that boils down to about 6 (9 if you include Danny & Rod and add Ron Davies 'back in the day'). Not exactly a production line conveyor belt of striking talent.

 

I stand by my point... so far...

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
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...