"Sanchez's Less-than-Magnificent Seven"

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/column...t=england&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab3pos1&cc=5901

I'll Give you a topic.

Everyone else isn't convinced with Fulham's summer moves...

Talk amongst yourselves.

 

RE: "Sanchez

i read that too. who the hell is Norman Hubbard?

 

Re: RE: "Sanchez

Exactly...not a Fulham fan, I'll tell you that. He has the same concerns all of us do, that the new players won't all perform but we all must trust Sanchez and who is to argue. He brought in hard working, young players some of who he has personal experience with. Now its up to him to make them gel.

 

A little harsh for my own taste. Negative Nancy is not even this negative. Although he could be right in the end.

I am actually impressed with Sanchez's signings. The key signing being Chris Baird, becuase Baird could have opted for a wealthier club in Sunderland and Roy Keane. If Baird had ended up a Mackem, I would have been really worried about Sanchez's ability to get players into Fulham. What the author doesn't point out is that it is hard to bring players in to a side who's destiny will always be to be middle of the road in the Premiership. Sanchez has done well so far and we'll see if it works out. I am not sure he's building a UEFA Cup quality team, but he should have a nice little team that might could finish in the top 10, and it'll be made up of mostly British players. That's not so bad I think.

 

I agree with you Lyle, ie Baird, but I think one of the key signings is Davis from Villa. He has proven himself in the Prem and brought Villa back from the brink on his own. And he's only 22...

 

Davis was the best player that signed for Fulham, but Baird, Hughes and Konchesky will go the furthest to improve the side. Defense, IMO, was the biggest hole in the side. They will go a long way to solidify the backline.

Agree that this guy is even more of a negative nancy than Lyle. (Just winding you up Lyle) I guess this writer is the counter balance to the large amount of optimism surrounding the club.

 

i like all of our signings...even if they don't end up being world beaters, I don't think anyone can argue that they don't at least provide solid depth...something that we were lacking last year. having that depth undoubtedly would have led to not being so close to relegation last year....and can only improve our form this year IMO.

 

I couldn't agree with you more TMB. And in addition I think a healthy Bullard and Duece having last year under his belt might help even more.

 

American Mike,

I definitely think Davis is the "biggest" or "best" signing. He has a lot of promise and he is going allow Fulham to not rush bringing Jimmy Bullard back to soon. Davis might even be better than Bullard.

I think at Astov Villa he just didn't fit in to O'Neill's formation and style of play. I don't think it was for a lack of quality, but a lack of versatility maybe.

 

Does anyone know if Konchesky was part of the gambling problem at West Ham?

 

Ehhhhh... I think Norman Hubbard is a pseudonym of Nick Bateman.

What any guy isnt going to get into in an article like that are the dreaded intangibles, meaning how these guys are going to play as part of a team.

And that's what I'm interested in.

One good thing, he didnt enquire after Jeff Cunningham.

 

The only player we've paid over the odds for is Kamara, and he still could end up being a very useful player. He's now fully "acclimatized" to English football, and should be much-improved in the Prem this time around.

Lawrie really said that we could qualify for European football as early as next season? That's pretty optimistic, if you ask me. He maybe getting a bit ahead of himself...

 

Don... I couldn't agree more. This article was rubbish. I view the signings as steps in the right direction and LS is assembling a side that will assuredly improve on last season's woeful form.

Only if Cookie could of had this type of financial backing...

 

At a glance he looks to be correct, seeing how much money we've spent and the players we've obtained. However if anyone cares to look a tad bit deeper they'll see otherwise, the fact that we've got seven players in is amazing. For what it worth heres my take......

Kamara- yes 6mil seems a bit steep but this guy has pace, premiership pace, and we were so desperate for that. I don't see who we could have got for less. Besides the Witch said he looks brilliant, what fool would question that womans judgment??

Hughes- wait and see, but at 1 mil there really is no downside

Konchesky-will be similar to Q, so if Franck must go then Konchesky will be a good replacement

Healy- this is one I agree with this guy on, I don't really see him being an upgrade over Heidar (I really liked HH but seem to be alone on that) but if anyone can get him to play it'll be LS

Davies- 2 time player of the year at villa as voted on by the fans, good enough for me

Cook- I'm excited about this one, he looks quick and cockey, Dempsey on the right Cook on the left, its gonna be awesome you wait and see!

Baird- early reports aren't good and I don't expect this will turn out well, I continue to worry about the back line. All I can do on this point is trust LS's and for that matter Roy Keane's judgment

Lastly this guy slags Lawire for having European ambition. I'm sooo relived to see the ambition, its one aspect in which CC drove me nuts. Lawire is sticking his neck out and I appreciate it.

 

Wow that article was lame. Talk about raining on a parade. I think it's hard to dispute that the team has made steps in the right direction when one of last year's captains isn't even on the squad anymore and the other captain is now a 5th or 6th stringer!

COYW make guys like Hubbard STFU.

 

I wasn't as outraged by the column as most people seem to be. I could kind of understand where the author was coming from.

That being said, I don't buy his arguments. His central point seemed to be that Fulham spent £20 million but failed to land a truly established Premiership player. All of the players have question marks. Well, that is the kind of club Fulham is. We are not Chelsea or Liverpool or Man U. In order to be successful, we need to take chances with young and unproven players. To me, LS has made good gambles.

Another point that he makes is that many of our targets weren't even pursued by other Premiership teams. Well, to me that says that LS avoided bidding wars and searched for diamonds in the rough which could be acquired cheaply. Why get into a bidding war for a £4+ million winger when you can take a flyer on Cook for £2.5 million?

Also, he's quick to point out how much they spent, but at less than £3 million per player, I think they got good value for most of their guys (the one possible exception being Kamara).

At worst we've added considerable depth at every position (except goalkeeper), which should see us through the multitudinous nagging injuries that hurt the side last season. At best, we've added a promising crop of young players who will immediately improve the side and who still have their best football ahead of them. To me, that's good business for a club like Fulham.

 

Only time will tell, not worth going nuts over it. I think the Healy argument is suspect because we're talking about a guy who didn't score many goals in a team that was relegated to League One, probably didn't get the service he needed there to do his job. On the other hand, playing for the national team, he did, and he flourished. What can you say about that.

Only time will tell.

 

What I think is brilliant is that we will be a good side without having to sign overpaid world "superstars" (guess what team I'm looking at here ). The fact that we can get that many players to a side like Fulham speaks well of LS (meaning, a side who traditionally finishes in the bottom 10). I can't help but be optimistic like everyone else. I don't think every single signing will turn out aces but I think many will and we'll be a better club than last year.

 

im 50/50 on it he does speak some truth, but over all i hope and trust LS has made the right choices