Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Chuks Aneke - speculation re 2023/24 season (p60)

13567…69

Comments

  • Dazzler21
    Dazzler21 Posts: 51,361
    dajavouslagan said:
    Why sign an injury prone striker, another one we can’t rely on!  I despair! 
    P18, bench 6, GS2 - mins played 380
  • CL_Phantom
    CL_Phantom Posts: 5,522
    edited January 2022
    We didn't have to leave it until the summer to offer him a new contract though. Which I'm sure we did? 

    Wasn't one of our excuses for a slow window that we had to wait for Chucks and JFC etc to sign their offers.
  • Bedsaddick
    Bedsaddick Posts: 24,761
    What’s not to like ? It’s a great fit even if he’s just an impact sub but that won’t stop Twitter having a meltdown and the usual miserable fuckers complaining on here . 
  • Karim_myBagheri
    Karim_myBagheri Posts: 12,736
    Dazzler21 said:
    dajavouslagan said:
    Why sign an injury prone striker, another one we can’t rely on!  I despair! 
    P18, bench 6, GS2 - mins played 380
    he only scored 2 goals? 
  • cafcfan1990
    cafcfan1990 Posts: 12,811
    MrWalker said:
    Good news.
    6 months late if we had play off ambitions.
    Buying him for 300k 6 months ago really would have been strange business. 
  • EveshamAddick
    EveshamAddick Posts: 7,021
    Karim_myBagheri said:
    Dazzler21 said:
    dajavouslagan said:
    Why sign an injury prone striker, another one we can’t rely on!  I despair! 
    P18, bench 6, GS2 - mins played 380
    he only scored 2 goals? 
    Yes at Brum.
  • LargeAddick
    LargeAddick Posts: 32,600
    so we were not willing to push the boat out to keep him in the summer but willing to spend 300k fee now to get him back plus probably increase his wages. Bizarre. Why not have just offered him more in the summer to stay and at least we would have had him the last six months or so and who knows we may have been in for a shot at promotion with some vital goals scored. Shot our selves in the foot. And Birmingham must be laughing their heads off.

    Plus I'm not convinced because if he can only play 30/45 minutes as his previous time with us, and his time at Brum, would suggest then we still havn't got a Stockley replacement. However, welcome back Chuks and better option than Defoe.
  • BigRedEvil
    BigRedEvil Posts: 11,076
    Less of a gamble than a Schwartz type signing. He's proven to get goals for us but we need him fully fit 

  • Sponsored links:



  • Addick Addict
    Addick Addict Posts: 39,817
    edited January 2022
    AFKABartram said:
    I’m not really focused on the financials as none of us will know the details.

    But from a team / squad perspective, if it’s a permanent deal then is Chuks a player that will improve our squad with an eye to delivering a promotion season next year? 

    Do people think the answer to that is yes?
    His record in the various Divisions is:

    Belgium - 4 in 41
    Championship - 3 in 38
    League 1 - 49 in 158
    League 2 - 17 in 39

    As a full time super sub, Chuks might help us to survive this season and be a promotion contender next season but we have to still have to sign at least one more striker to share the burden. One more goal scorer to supplement Chuks, Stockley and hopefully a blooming Burstow and we really would be a contender 
  • SantaClaus
    SantaClaus Posts: 7,659
    Out of interest would we have had to pay Chuks a signing fee if he'd agreed to an extention last summer and would it have been in the region of fee we're now paying Birmingham?
  • Pelling1993
    Pelling1993 Posts: 6,681
    Covered_End_Lad said:
    The amount of people saying "But we released him on a free in the summer!"

    No we didnt. We offered him a deal, a club in a higher division offered him a bigger deal which he accepted. If we had our way he would never have left.
    I've heard we've knocked £50 a week off his wage for his insolence 
  • roseandcrown
    roseandcrown Posts: 7,588
    Addick Addict said:
    AFKABartram said:
    I’m not really focused on the financials as none of us will know the details.

    But from a team / squad perspective, if it’s a permanent deal then is Chuks a player that will improve our squad with an eye to delivering a promotion season next year? 

    Do people think the answer to that is yes?
    His record in the various Divisions is:

    Belgium - 4 in 41
    Championship - 3 in 38
    League 1 - 49 in 158
    League 2 - 17 in 39

    As a full time super sub, Chuks might help us to survive this season and be a promotion contender next season but we have to still have to sign at least one more striker to share the burden. 

    I agree still think we need a pacey striker who plays off the shoulder like a Bradley Wright-Philips type. Think that will be more likely in the summer. 
  • ForeverAddickted
    ForeverAddickted Posts: 94,461
    edited January 2022
    SantaClaus said:
    Out of interest would we have had to pay Chuks a signing fee if he'd agreed to an extention last summer and would it have been in the region of fee we're now paying Birmingham?
    Signing on fee... Probably

    Whether its in the region of 300k - Who knows, I reckon the signing on fee would be more around £100k at the very most; £300k does seem a lot for a League One player. But then finances in the whole Footballing world are just a little bit silly arent they
  • AFKABartram
    AFKABartram Posts: 57,834
    edited January 2022
    LargeAddick said:
    so we were not willing to push the boat out to keep him in the summer but willing to spend 300k fee now to get him back plus probably increase his wages. Bizarre. Why not have just offered him more in the summer to stay and at least we would have had him the last six months or so and who knows we may have been in for a shot at promotion with some vital goals scored. Shot our selves in the foot. And Birmingham must be laughing their heads off.
    .
    Whole lot of assumptions being made in there Large 
  • LargeAddick
    LargeAddick Posts: 32,600
    Covered_End_Lad said:
    The amount of people saying "But we released him on a free in the summer!"

    No we didnt. We offered him a deal, a club in a higher division offered him a bigger deal which he accepted. If we had our way he would never have left.
    but we are paying 300k to buy him back, why not just offer him more in the first place?
  • DOUCHER
    DOUCHER Posts: 7,909
    SantaClaus said:
    Out of interest would we have had to pay Chuks a signing fee if he'd agreed to an extention last summer and would it have been in the region of fee we're now paying Birmingham?
    in theory yes, but it may have got subsumed into a new wage deal - either way. Chucks held the upper hand coz he'd let his contract run down and wasn't injured so, as bowyer would say, 'it was what it was'   
  • Covered_End_Lad
    Covered_End_Lad Posts: 5,726
    LargeAddick said:
    Covered_End_Lad said:
    The amount of people saying "But we released him on a free in the summer!"

    No we didnt. We offered him a deal, a club in a higher division offered him a bigger deal which he accepted. If we had our way he would never have left.
    but we are paying 300k to buy him back, why not just offer him more in the first place?
    There 300K over a 2 year contract is an extra 3K per week. That would mean putting him on c.7-8K per week that would have gone towards our FFP calculation.

    At the time transfer fees do not count but wages do.
  • Covered_End_Lad
    Covered_End_Lad Posts: 5,726
    Covered_End_Lad said:
    LargeAddick said:
    Covered_End_Lad said:
    The amount of people saying "But we released him on a free in the summer!"

    No we didnt. We offered him a deal, a club in a higher division offered him a bigger deal which he accepted. If we had our way he would never have left.
    but we are paying 300k to buy him back, why not just offer him more in the first place?
    There 300K over a 2 year contract is an extra 3K per week. That would mean putting him on c.7-8K per week that would have gone towards our FFP calculation.

    At the time transfer fees do not count but wages do.
    Also, Birmingham may have been paying him 10K and in a higher division. Maybe we did offer him 8K but he wanted 10K and Championship football.

  • Sponsored links:



  • EveshamAddick
    EveshamAddick Posts: 7,021
    LargeAddick said:
    Covered_End_Lad said:
    The amount of people saying "But we released him on a free in the summer!"

    No we didnt. We offered him a deal, a club in a higher division offered him a bigger deal which he accepted. If we had our way he would never have left.
    but we are paying 300k to buy him back, why not just offer him more in the first place?
    Maybe we did offer him more but he preferred Bowyer to Adkins?
  • lancashire lad
    lancashire lad Posts: 15,631
    the fact that he left for free doesn't come into it as he was out of contract and therefore fees were not involved, the fact that he didn't want to re-sign for us does come into it.
    Poor business in the long term but might help us escape a relegation battle this season and therefore a reasonable piece of business, but I don't like it but not sure why :smile:
  • golfaddick
    golfaddick Posts: 33,649
    Everyone seems to be thinking that he will be used as an "impact" sub. Say he's not happy with that & has come here to start every game. He might get pissed off & be gone (again) come the summer.
  • SantaClaus
    SantaClaus Posts: 7,659
    TEL said:
    We need a goal scorer, he scores goals. 
    ...when fit. 
  • eaststandmike
    eaststandmike Posts: 14,956
    Leeds_Addick said:
    AFKABartram said:
    I’m not really focused on the financials as none of us will know the details.

    But from a team / squad perspective, if it’s a permanent deal then is Chuks a player that will improve our squad with an eye to delivering a promotion season next year? 

    Do people think the answer to that is yes?
    Yeah but it all comes down to fitness

    A fully fit Aneke would be this leagues top scorer, no doubt. But I would put money on him not playing more than 50% of total minutes next season. 
    I would say that is being a little disrespectful to the likes of Ross Stewart, Carl Stockton and Michael Smith who would easily give Chucks a run for his money. He will be up there that's for sure if he gets the service but "league top scorer, no doubt" is fanciful. 
  • Huskaris
    Huskaris Posts: 9,854
    edited January 2022
    We lack imagination if this is our best option. 

    Imagine feeding in all the data to the fabled black box and what comes out is a player you released on a free.
  • thenewbie
    thenewbie Posts: 11,004
    LargeAddick said:
    Covered_End_Lad said:
    The amount of people saying "But we released him on a free in the summer!"

    No we didnt. We offered him a deal, a club in a higher division offered him a bigger deal which he accepted. If we had our way he would never have left.
    but we are paying 300k to buy him back, why not just offer him more in the first place?
    We probably did. But Birmingham offered more than we did and a chance to play in the Championship.

    There's a decent chance he's taking a cut to his wages coming back. 

    I have no idea why people are presuming we lowballed him previously, he would have been and probably will be one of the higher earners if he does come back. It just wasn't as much as Birmingham could offer. 
  • Covered_End_Lad
    Covered_End_Lad Posts: 5,726
    golfaddick said:
    Everyone seems to be thinking that he will be used as an "impact" sub. Say he's not happy with that & has come here to start every game. He might get pissed off & be gone (again) come the summer.
    If he thinks his body can take starting every game then he should start every game. I don't get the point you are making.
  • Lincsaddick
    Lincsaddick Posts: 32,362
    Bowyer and Co asking for a fee is taking the piss
This discussion has been closed.

Categories

“Marketplace”