The theory yes, makes very much sense. But I don't see it with Osvaldo specifically, far too volatile a character to put up with just accommodate him as a 3rd choice. Really not worth the potential hassle.NQCitizen said:ACMilan said:argyle said:A compromise perhaps that if he signs for us, he isn't a terrible player and will likely get goals for us, but nor likely will he set the premiership on fire.
Your 3rd choice striker arent meant to "set the prem on fire". Theyre meant to fill in when needed and provide as good as possible cover for the first 2 choices if unavailable... and possibly even more if the mood is right.
no top tier striker is going to sit on the bench and rot as 3rd choice - you guys tried that, and it didnt work.
you NEED osvaldos and the like on your team
This sums the whole transfer up nicely.
no hes notBlueband Brother said:Jo is better than Osvaldo.
Tancredi Palmeri @tancredipalmeri 1h
As supposed. Roma turned down Manchester City bid for Osvaldo as it was only 14m €, according to Sky Italy
that´s right, good player, bad temper and every season he lost a lot of games due his injuries, delicate as crystal glasspee dubya said:The theory yes, makes very much sense. But I don't see it with Osvaldo specifically, far too volatile a character to put up with just accommodate him as a 3rd choice. Really not worth the potential hassle.NQCitizen said:ACMilan said:Your 3rd choice striker arent meant to "set the prem on fire". Theyre meant to fill in when needed and provide as good as possible cover for the first 2 choices if unavailable... and possibly even more if the mood is right.
no top tier striker is going to sit on the bench and rot as 3rd choice - you guys tried that, and it didnt work.
you NEED osvaldos and the like on your team
This sums the whole transfer up nicely.
Anyway, doesn't look like we'll be getting him.
Blueband Brother said:Osvaldo is the wrong answer.