Left Peg said:Balti said:We should publicly state with our final offer that this is a one-time deal. Take it or leave it. We won't be back next year as the offer is based on his ability to lead us in the next phase which starts now not next year. Perhaps 24 hours is not long enough in his case, but put a limit on it anyhow......say a week. Make the bastards sweat.
We need to know one way or t'other and move on to other targets if the answer is no.
I think you should be doing the negotiations
Cheers buddy but they can't afford me. Oh hang on.......
Seriously what's the point of letting it drag on and on and then getting a no. It's not just about possibly missing out on JT it's also the 'missed opportunity cost' elsewhere. Better to make powerful and persuasive bids but look for a quick commitment. The end result of that is that we get players who are more enthusiastic about wanting to play for the club as well.
If JT wanted to play for City he surely would have already come out and said so by now. He's playing us off against Chelsea and that puts him in control. Just like Eto'o. I would prefer City to be in the driving seat. There's plenty more fish in the sea as me mam liked to say. City's future does not depend on signing JT or Eto'o. It will be determined by recruiting the best that we can as quickly as we can. Whoever they may be. imo.