JohnnyL 10:00 Tue May 17
Reece to be sold
|
|
(nt)
|
|
|
Replies - Newest Posts First ( Show In Chronological Order)
kylay
2:35 Thu Jun 2
Re: Reece to be sold
|
Why not keep him and give him a regular run out in Europe? It's not as though we risk losing much by keeping him. If he performs well it will drive his price up. Unless he has no place in the team, I can't see why we're under pressure to sell, and if that's the case, what use is he to a big club?
|
Eerie Descent
1:02 Thu Jun 2
Re: Reece to be sold
|
Sydney_Iron 12:22 Wed Jun 1
Couldn't agree more, Bradford player of the year without playing a single game for them, the lad must be fucking dynamite.
|
The Ghost of Braderz
12:58 Thu Jun 2
Re: Reece to be sold
|
Guys chill the fuck out and stop letting unconfirmed rumours mould your opinions
|
Eddie B
11:32 Wed Jun 1
Re: Reece to be sold
|
Potentially good news:
http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/675979/Manchester-United-West-Ham-Reece-Oxford-Jose-Mourinho-Transfer-News-Rumours-Gossip
|
Private Dancer
4:12 Wed Jun 1
Re: Reece to be sold
|
Fwiw I don't think Manu have bid 10 large for the kid.
|
Sydney_Iron
12:22 Wed Jun 1
Re: Reece to be sold
|
Player of the year at Bradford, young player of the year for us the season before.
Why are we selling?????
|
scott_d
2:37 Tue May 31
Re: Reece to be sold
|
There are obvious comparisons to be made between Rio and Reece aside from their playing style and position.
Both players have been coveted from a young age from most of the top clubs in the Premier League.
There is a reasons why Leeds paid £18m for Rio and there is a reason why Man Utd are prepared to pay £10m+ for a 17 year old and why Chelsea, Man City, Arsenal and Liverpool are all keeping a close eye on him and that is the belief that he has the potential to reach the very top.
They were right about Rio and chance are they will be right about Reece too so personally, I would do everything I could to keep him.
Firstly he'll save us a signing for next season but more importantly he could develop into a player that we would never be able to afford to buy.
|
Scraper
1:06 Tue May 31
Re: Reece to be sold
|
andyd12345 9:55 Tue May 31
I see. If others have access to his account, the 'dg' would indeed fill a purpose. I feel calmer. Why lower case though?
|
Crassus
10:45 Tue May 31
Re: Reece to be sold
|
Two years left on his deal and refusing to sign another, parents and agent looking to punt him on, as I said long ago the lad is off
If we get £15m for a lad that plays in a position we have cover for and who will likely get little football there next season, leaving him 6 months from a free, let him go and use the proceeds for now and in a position we need players
|
Lily Hammer
10:16 Tue May 31
Re: Reece to be sold
|
Well, 18 million from back then is about 26 million in today's money.
As I said, Rio should have only been sold if the offer was even more crazy than it was back then, so if Rio shouldn't go for 26 million these days, then Oxford's price should be knocking on £20 million, especially with the silly TV money coming in now.
We should play hard ball these days. Make Levy's balls seem like marshmallow.
|
andyd12345
10:07 Tue May 31
Re: Reece to be sold
|
Apart from the fact Rio had a couple of years of playing first team top flight football in his preferred position. Oxford has played about 20 minutes of first team football in his preferred position. Really can't compare the 2 as they are at different stages of their development
|
Lily Hammer
10:02 Tue May 31
Re: Reece to be sold
|
*Any economists who can work out an index linked price, based on that logic????????
?
|
Lily Hammer
10:02 Tue May 31
Re: Reece to be sold
|
We sold Rio for £18 million nearly 20 years ago, and we shouldn't have, unless it was twice or three times as much.
Any economists who can work out an index linked price, based on that logic.
Even £25 million is a joke. Whether he goes on to be a player like Rio is another thing and not the point, because as he has the potential, we should fuck all offers off, bar the most outrageously huge deals.
|
Haz
9:58 Tue May 31
Re: Reece to be sold
|
Chirpy chirpy TWEET TWEET
TWIT ter
|
andyd12345
9:55 Tue May 31
Re: Reece to be sold
|
Christ some people really are petty
Some celebrities use their Twitter account as a marketing tool and multiple different people from their entourage have access to it, in addition to the celebrity himself. In Golds case, other people around him may or may not also have access to his Twitter account. Him signing DG is his way of confirming a tweet has been written by him personally. If it isn't signed DG, it will have been sent by someone else.
|
norwaytips
9:44 Tue May 31
Re: Reece to be sold
|
Does it matter, FFS?
|
Haz
9:26 Tue May 31
Re: Reece to be sold
|
TWITTER experts?
Says it all really.
Cunts. The lot of 'em.
|
Scraper
12:36 Tue May 31
Re: Reece to be sold
|
I'm no TWITTER expert. Can someone explain the purpose of signing your posts, so that I can stop thinking of him in derogatory terms? What is the point of the signature?
|
Sniper
12:26 Tue May 31
Re: Reece to be sold
|
I wouldn't ever criticise someone for not using Twitter properly
It's shit and for cunts
*pulls duck face selfie to add to Facebook account*
#facebookforlife
#socialmediaisasteamingbucketofcompletedogshit
|
fraser
12:23 Tue May 31
Re: Reece to be sold
|
Fans wanting our chairmen to die because he signs tweets with his initials is far more embarrassing
|
Scraper
12:21 Tue May 31
Re: Reece to be sold
|
the 'dg' signature is the most embarrassing thing about our club at the moment.
guess that's a good sign really. s
|
| 
