Jump to content

Harewood on loan


AndyD

Recommended Posts

Would be an ideal solution to our lone striker role. Holds the ball up brilliantly and brings others into play.

 

The likes of Lallana would certainly benefit from playing alongside Harewood.

 

However, it just won't happen!

 

Harewood's wages are bound to be too much for us and he doesn't fit in with the young and unproven policy we have!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heres the majority of his post.

The Baird deal i believe to be true,but i was led to believe it was part of a deal for Lallana.

 

 

Saints are set to complete a loan deal for Marlon Harewood, it is believed his wages have been arranged whereby we pay 25%.

 

Lallana is not leaving. It is thought that if we do give in to any bid that the only reason would be if we have an option to bring him back on loan until the end of the 2009/2010 season (season and a half loan).

 

Surman is leaving but only on loan, Fulham have declared an interest if Bullard is sold, and have offered Baird in exchange (like the Dyer/Robertson loan)

Tottenham are not interested for this window, as it would take too long for Surman to adapt to the team and the Premiership, leaving any bid from them unlikely until the Summer where he will have pre-season to adapt.

 

Jack Cork is staying, and could even be kept on until December 2009 providing we stay up. He will not be sold by Chelsea as they see him as the future and is highly rated by the club.

 

Jason Euell is interesting Bristol City, where team mate John is currently loaned. Euell is likely to join permanently in the Summer.

 

Wotton, as I told you last week is off to Brighton.

 

Nathan Dyer is to re-join Sheff Utd, and is subject of an agreed £1.5m should Sheff Utd be promoted

 

Saganowski declined an offer to link up with Pearson at Leicester, and looks set to stay unless a team from abroad declares a last minute interest.

Derby were said to be eager, however with Jewell leaving, interest has stopped. It was thought he would join on loan in exchange for Villa who was set to leave after Jewell lost patience with him.

-------------------------------------------

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heres the majority of his post.

The Baird deal i believe to be true,but i was led to believe it was part of a deal for Lallana.

 

 

Saints are set to complete a loan deal for Marlon Harewood, it is believed his wages have been arranged whereby we pay 25%.

 

Lallana is not leaving. It is thought that if we do give in to any bid that the only reason would be if we have an option to bring him back on loan until the end of the 2009/2010 season (season and a half loan).

 

Surman is leaving but only on loan, Fulham have declared an interest if Bullard is sold, and have offered Baird in exchange (like the Dyer/Robertson loan)

Tottenham are not interested for this window, as it would take too long for Surman to adapt to the team and the Premiership, leaving any bid from them unlikely until the Summer where he will have pre-season to adapt.

 

Jack Cork is staying, and could even be kept on until December 2009 providing we stay up. He will not be sold by Chelsea as they see him as the future and is highly rated by the club.

 

Jason Euell is interesting Bristol City, where team mate John is currently loaned. Euell is likely to join permanently in the Summer.

 

Wotton, as I told you last week is off to Brighton.

 

Nathan Dyer is to re-join Sheff Utd, and is subject of an agreed £1.5m should Sheff Utd be promoted

 

Saganowski declined an offer to link up with Pearson at Leicester, and looks set to stay unless a team from abroad declares a last minute interest.

Derby were said to be eager, however with Jewell leaving, interest has stopped. It was thought he would join on loan in exchange for Villa who was set to leave after Jewell lost patience with him.

-------------------------------------------

 

I'd be happy with any or all of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this looks like the start of a transfer rumour/January window thread to me. Excellent. How about renaming it and making it a sticky?

 

For what its worth I'd like to see Skacel, Saga and Euell out the door. Primiarly to reduce the wage bill but also because I'm not a fan of any of those three.

 

If I'm honest I know that Surman will be sold. The club has no choice, but I would be very dissapointed if the fee is the wrong side of £2.5m.

 

Lallana is clearly a talent. I'd like to see him get the right guidance as he could blossom into a Joe Cole sort of player. Anyone that writes him off after 20 odd first team games is just shortsighted. This sort of talent doesn't come round very often and you need to enjoy it not moan about it.

 

As for players coming in we need some pace out wide, and some strength and power down the middle and all round the pitch some quality.

 

If we had money available I'd buy Dean Keates from Colchester and Andy Bishop from Bury.

If we are looking at loans then how about some of these:

Pele from WBA

Vaz Te from Bolton

Leroy Lita from Reading

John Bostock from Spurs

Damien Plessis from Liverpool

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happened to the kid we were supposed to be getting on loan from Everton. Can't remember his name, but was supposed to have been training with us already. Has the deal collapsed?

 

Lee Molyneux. I'd of thought that will only happen if Skacel goes to Ipswich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chez, I like the optimism. But I imagine we'll end up with 18 year old's Joe Bloggs from Wolverhampton Reserves and John Smith from Wycombe Wanderers reserves. Bostock is a rising star, Lita will surely go somewhere else for reasonable money.

 

you are of course correct, but if we got over the odds for Surman then maybe just maybe there would be money available. Cardiff want £6m+ from Stoke for Joe Ledley. Is he that much better than Surman I wonder?

 

Anyone that comes in clearly has to be on peanuts wages. No point in selling Surman for £1.5m only for all of the money to go on one or two players wages (hence John and Rasiak out the door). 15k crowds mean players on less than £5k a week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Molyneux, thats the fella.

But why was he training with us if it was dependent on Skacel leaving and why would Skacel go to Ipswich? They couldn't agree terms before, I don't see what has changed.

 

perhaps Skacel wants less and Ipswich are prepared to offer more now?

 

Not sure really unless Skacel is going to play in midfield?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will some of you learn....anything on 606 is 100% bullsh!t.

 

Harewood signing won't happen for these reasons:

 

- There is no way we can afford him.

- He would not come to the Championship from a club like Villa, particularly for a team struggling at the bottom.

- He is currently their first choice back up striker for Agbonlahor while Carew is injured.

- Remember O'Neil's reaction to the way we treated O'Halloran when he was on loan....I'm pretty sure that loaning a player to us would be his last choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm honest I know that Surman will be sold. The club has no choice, but I would be very dissapointed if the fee is the wrong side of £2.5m.

 

Lallana is clearly a talent. I'd like to see him get the right guidance as he could blossom into a Joe Cole sort of player. Anyone that writes him off after 20 odd first team games is just shortsighted. This sort of talent doesn't come round very often and you need to enjoy it not moan about it.

 

I'm told, by no-one in any real position to know, that Surman is off to Reading for £3.25m, and Lallana probably to Fulham or Sunderland.

 

Wherever they go, £3.25m for Surman would be a good price in the current climate for a player I'd rather we kept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm told, by no-one in any real position to know, that Surman is off to Reading for £3.25m, and Lallana probably to Fulham or Sunderland.

 

Wherever they go, £3.25m for Surman would be a good price in the current climate for a player I'd rather we kept.

 

 

According to todays Telegraph Surman is only going on loan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how big any loan fee would be? I don't see much benefit to us in loaning Surman out. Sounds like someone is taking the **** knowing we are financially crippled. Mind you the Telegraph gets as many predictions wrong as the rest of the papers.

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
×
×
  • Create New...