Adam Idah

If we had any ambition that’s what we should be doing but we have no ambition so that’s what we won’t be doing.

 

Don't fear... we will sign a loanee from Chelsea as a counter to selling O'Riley and then some bizarre left field 21 year old for £2mill from any random 2nd division east European league

 

Guess teams might start upping their fees when they realise they are dealing with a team with a fortune sitting in the bank and only have one striker at their club. Who’d a thought it eh. Pay the money and get him in for * sake.

 

Seriously?! Sorry, but that’s absolutely mental in my opinion. Why would we spend six or seven million on a third choice striker, who would likely play less than the equivalent of ten games over the course of the season?

If we were spending that on a player (after signing a striker), I’d be absolutely livid if we spent it on a third striker.

 

Meh... not like we ain't got the money to spend.

Signing quality like this would make rotation and different tactics more available.

People want better than Oh.... well then, pay for it.

 

If we played two strikers then I could see us being able to attract a decent third striker, but we don’t. Can’t see any established striker wanting to sign and be behind Kyogo and Idah (if that ever happens) let’s get a second striker in first and then worry about the third.

 

if we sign a left winger
I can see maeda been third striker option.

 

I'm with him. I'm greedy.

We have the money to do that. We have the money to keep them happy.

 

Getting a lil worried now wanna see some players coming in and fast

 

dont ruin the surprise for everone

 

We don’t have the money to be paying £6m or £7m for a third choice striker who then wants say £20k a week. If we start paying third choice players that sort of money, we’d quickly have huge financial issues.

 

Signing Idah and Miovski is never going to happen, and nor should it tbh.

 

Miovski is not good enough for us, as he is inconsistent, and flatters to deceive imo.

I see nothing concrete to suggest we are in any way, shape or form interested in him, apart from some oblique link with him the last transfer window.

Idah evidently is good enough, as witnessed by his valuable contribution the last time around, but he is not indispensable, and we certainly should not be getting ripped off by a no mark like Norwich.

 

So idah and miovski aren't good enough but an overweight hun * in shankland is aye mate very good ffs

 

Think it does depend on matt being sold by looks of it. Don't know why when we have cash in bank but it's the lawwell way

 

Where did I say Idah was not good enough in my post ?

Whether or not we sign Shankland is up to the manager, but if it became down to Mioski or Shankland, personally I would opt for Shankland for his experience and goal scoring record alone.

Personal levels of fitness can be improved you know by correct attention to the player's diet, physique and cardio by the club's team specialists.

 

I don't know how highly I rate Miovski, but I'd take him every single time over Shankland.

Shankland is towing a caravan when he moves.

 

Many pens has shankland scored in his numbers? Purple patch. You can't coach that to a near 31 year old conditioning

 

We would, in no small part down to UEFA’s financial sustainability rules. If we started paying third choice players that kind of money (and rightfully other players in the squad demanded wage hikes), our wage bill would go through the roof and we couldn’t possibly comply.

I’m not against Miovski (admittedly not totally sold on him either). My point is that it’s not financially viable for us to be spending £6-7m on third choice players, along with the wages they’d demand. We need to be smarter than that with recruitment and, as Rodgers has said, that third choice striker needs to be a development option.