|
nochee
|
 |
« Reply #330 on: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 19:52:56 » |
|
The thing is with the Morrison case is that Fitton had to do something or he was going to lose. If the price is right or not, i dont know but at least he got a 6 figure sum instead of a Tribunal sum.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DiV
Has also heard this
 Offline
Posts: 32338
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #331 on: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 19:54:11 » |
|
ive heard he went for close to 1m upfront with sell on clauses same as jutkiewizc
I doubt it - but either way the point is if we can get that much for Ben Tozer than 250k for Morrison is under priced. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
|
« Reply #332 on: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 19:55:07 » |
|
Which (in some peoples opinion) is exactly what he hasnt done with Morrison.
My personal opinion is Morrison should be worth more than 250k and we've been sold short. Not by much but when you compare it to 300k upfront for Ben Tozer who played 2 games and get sent off in one of them it seems stupid.
Wasn't the Tozer deal one of Diamond Mike's efforts, by this logic you'd think he was better for the club than Fitton. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DiV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 32338
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #333 on: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 19:56:05 » |
|
yeah because thats what I said reg.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Spencer_White
|
|
« Reply #334 on: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 19:58:42 » |
|
Ben Tozer was just typical Newcastle bad management. We got lucky.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RobertT
Offline
Posts: 11745
|
|
« Reply #335 on: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 20:05:05 » |
|
I think £250k+ is good money for Morrison. We got the money for Tozer based on potential, if he'd played the same number of games as Morrison and performed as he has then we would have got much less. It often works like that, as someone plays more, they can devalue by showing that the initial potential doesn't amount to much, or not as much as anticipated. Please see Prutton as someone who has declined in value the more he played because he just never got any better. For my money, Morrison is no better a player than his first game. Reading clearly still think they can unlock the potetial and are taking a calculated risk.
On the contract point, I'd imagine the next person to try will get told to bugger off and we'll risk them not signing.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
leefer
Offline
Posts: 12851
|
|
« Reply #336 on: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 20:10:29 » |
|
I think £250k+ is good money for Morrison. We got the money for Tozer based on potential, if he'd played the same number of games as Morrison and performed as he has then we would have got much less. It often works like that, as someone plays more, they can devalue by showing that the initial potential doesn't amount to much, or not as much as anticipated. Please see Prutton as someone who has declined in value the more he played because he just never got any better. For my money, Morrison is no better a player than his first game. Reading clearly still think they can unlock the potetial and are taking a calculated risk.
On the contract point, I'd imagine the next person to try will get told to bugger off and we'll risk them not signing.
Morrison no better player than his first game...you need a third eye as one aint working. A statement like that is not even worth arguing about. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
bobby
Offline
Posts: 171
|
|
« Reply #337 on: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 20:16:40 » |
|
No better than first game are you having a laugh! Morrison is a goalscoring defender something cuthbert isn't not just to say a big game player! Off the top of my head Morrison has scored against charlton, huddersfield, Southampton and Bristol rovers and in three of them games they were the winning goals! 250k in my opinion for somebody of his age is slightly cheap!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RobertT
Offline
Posts: 11745
|
|
« Reply #338 on: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 20:20:14 » |
|
I honestly think it, in the same way as I think Kennedy would struggle to make it beyond this level. Morrison has some big weaknesses for a central defender and they don't seem any better than when he first began. His marking is poor, games should have improved that. His pace will never improve, although I don't think he is a slouch, for me it's more his agility - he has decent enough speed in a straight line but the turning cycle and reaction speed of an oil tanker. That would have improved by now if it was going to.
Cuthbert is a far better starting base for a central defender and would have himself to blame if he doesn't cut a decent trade at Championship level or back in the Scots Prem.
I even think Lecs is a better prospect at the moment....again, he may never cut out the concentration and over playing issues he faces.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RobertT
Offline
Posts: 11745
|
|
« Reply #339 on: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 20:23:24 » |
|
Oh, and I'm not saying Morrison is a bad player. I think he'll end making a good career at this level. I'm just saying he hasn't improved where he really needs to. Goalscoring is a bonus. He needs to defend first, you just can't rely on a defender scoring consistently (Taylor had a good year but his defending was his primary skill). It adds very little to his value.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
bobby
Offline
Posts: 171
|
|
« Reply #340 on: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 20:25:33 » |
|
I honestly think it, in the same way as I think Kennedy would struggle to make it beyond this level. Morrison has some big weaknesses for a central defender and they don't seem any better than when he first began. His marking is poor, games should have improved that. His pace will never improve, although I don't think he is a slouch, for me it's more his agility - he has decent enough speed in a straight line but the turning cycle and reaction speed of an oil tanker. That would have improved by now if it was going to.
Cuthbert is a far better starting base for a central defender and would have himself to blame if he doesn't cut a decent trade at Championship level or back in the Scots Prem.
I even think Lecs is a better prospect at the moment....again, he may never cut out the concentration and over playing issues he faces.
Get real the reason reading are paying money for Morrison and not cuthbert is because there scouts see more potential in Morrison otherwise they would be paying money for cuthbert! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nochee
|
|
« Reply #341 on: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 20:29:05 » |
|
Get real the reason reading are paying money for Morrison and not cuthbert is because there scouts see more potential in Morrison otherwise they would be paying money for cuthbert!
 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RobertT
Offline
Posts: 11745
|
|
« Reply #342 on: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 20:32:52 » |
|
Cuthbert is above their budget more like. Cuthbert > Morrison, by a long chalk. He's not played his best at times, but he's a much better player than Morrison and has the potential to have a pretty good career.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Dr Pierre Chang
ITK Curran lover
Offline
Posts: 3002
|
|
« Reply #343 on: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 20:36:37 » |
|
Get real the reason reading are paying money for Morrison and not cuthbert is because there scouts see more potential in Morrison otherwise they would be paying money for cuthbert!
Why couldn't Morrison get a look in last season? Why was he sent out on loan to Southend? Because Cuthbert is twice the player. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DiV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 32338
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #344 on: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 20:42:57 » |
|
Get real the reason reading are paying money for Morrison and not cuthbert is because there scouts see more potential in Morrison otherwise they would be paying money for cuthbert!
Reading are paying money for Morrison and not Cuthbert because they've got Morrison at a steal and if they sold him tomorrow (I know they cant) they'd make a profit. If they wanted Cuthbert they'd have probably have had to pay what he is actually worth not some under estimated release fee. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
