Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

Nahki Wells - SIGNING CONFIRMED


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Both are primarily defensive players so I doubt it, if we replace Brownhill it'll be someone who is similar in style.

Not so sure about that. LJ has said we need a tall midfielder. And we are a centre back short now Wright has gone.

Hutchinson can do either role. Wasn't in squad for last game which makes me think he's off. And we were rumoured to be interested.

We don't have to have a Brownhill type to replace him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DownendRed97 said:

Any chance of there being a ‘gentleman’s agreement’ for him not to feature? 

Absolutely zero chance. QPR have nothing to do with the transfer. He may not be keen on playing but as a professional he will understand the need to play him, if he scores the winner that secures 3 points, that could make the difference at the end of the season.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DownendRed97 said:

Any chance of there being a ‘gentleman’s agreement’ for him not to feature? 

‘Slim ‘ and ‘  no ‘ would be my thought. 
We have eighteen games to forge a promotion push and , when signed , he is a Red . 
He will want to be promoted to the Prem more than he wouldn’t want to score against his old teammates. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BCFC Grim said:

How anyone can see this as negative is beyond me.

Indeed. Im usually as critical as the next man of our transfer dealings or lack of them but this on paper is a great signing.. just what we need.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Maddison would be a clueless signing imo. 

Paterson playing brilliantly, Palmer we spent 4 million on, Szmodics Peterborough fans think is better.

We have seen our best wins is when we have 10 very hard working out field players. 

Ok we have played well with Palmer in the side when we had Afobe. So I guess we can get away with one who doesn't work really hard.

But a typical LJ player is one that works hard off the ball. Maddison is not one of those. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BCFC Grim said:

How anyone can see this as negative is beyond me.

It shouldn’t be beyond if you are willing to listen to the reasons.

1. I cannot see Wells and Fam being a good partnership. Of course that might be wrong but who knows.  
2. If they aren’t then can we really play with a short striker leading the line?

3. The total package will be around £7m for Wells with no sell on value. This goes against our own policy. A policy I am a fan of. 

You might disagree with these points but time will tell if this is a good signing and if we can make a whole team work well that contains Nakhi Wells.  Even if you disagree with the above they are valid concerns and should not be beyond understanding 

  • Haha 1
  • Aubergine 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RedDave said:

It shouldn’t be beyond if you are willing to listen to the reasons.

1. I cannot see Wells and Fam being a good partnership. Of course that might be wrong but who knows.  
2. If they aren’t then can we really play with a short striker leading the line?

3. The total package will be around £7m for Wells with no sell on value. This goes against our own policy. A policy I am a fan of. 

You might disagree with these points but time will tell if this is a good signing and if we can make a whole team work well that contains Nakhi Wells.  Even if you disagree with the above they are valid concerns and should not be beyond understanding 

The key now is to be able to get Wells and Eliason into our starting line up

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Tipps69 said:

Walsh is staying at Coventry. Already been agreed.

Surely Walsh does whatever he's told to do and Coventry have no choice but to abide? Even if you say one thing you can do the other. All's fair in love, war and football...

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, RedDave said:

It shouldn’t be beyond if you are willing to listen to the reasons.

1. I cannot see Wells and Fam being a good partnership. Of course that might be wrong but who knows.  
2. If they aren’t then can we really play with a short striker leading the line?

3. The total package will be around £7m for Wells with no sell on value. This goes against our own policy. A policy I am a fan of. 

You might disagree with these points but time will tell if this is a good signing and if we can make a whole team work well that contains Nakhi Wells.  Even if you disagree with the above they are valid concerns and should not be beyond understanding 

I can see your point Dave. But this is clearly a here and now signing, which they hope will kick us on from the position we’re in now. 
 

We’d have all preferred the signing to be a 21 year old with Wells’ stats, but such a player would cost 5x more. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mozo said:

Surely Walsh does whatever he's told to do and Coventry have no choice but to abide? Even if you say one thing you can do the other. All's fair in love, war and football...

And Walsh will be doing what he’s told, to stay at Coventry!

The club rarely do things backhandedly & I doubt they would in this instance but on the other hand, there has been no public guarantees given to Lincoln with regards to Morrell, so there still every chance he could be recalled.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, RedDave said:

It shouldn’t be beyond if you are willing to listen to the reasons.

1. I cannot see Wells and Fam being a good partnership. Of course that might be wrong but who knows.  
2. If they aren’t then can we really play with a short striker leading the line?

3. The total package will be around £7m for Wells with no sell on value. This goes against our own policy. A policy I am a fan of. 

You might disagree with these points but time will tell if this is a good signing and if we can make a whole team work well that contains Nakhi Wells.  Even if you disagree with the above they are valid concerns and should not be beyond understanding 

Apparently he plays better with a partner so that doesnt concern me. 

Our last few Januarys have been poor and we have not pushed on because of it. This is a definite upgrade. Exactly the sort of player we are missing. Buy young  now and its unlike they will hit the ground running.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, HayBCFC said:

Just heard there’s been a wall put up in Berlin to divide Germany into east and west, more as I get it.

Yep, but you edited out my apology for putting up old news which was under the tweet you copied ... but I guess if you’d included my whole post then your ‘hilarious’ quip about Berlin wouldn’t have been as ‘funny’ ....

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BCFC Grim said:

Apparently he plays better with a partner so that doesnt concern me. 

Our last few Januarys have been poor and we have not pushed on because of it. This is a definite upgrade. Exactly the sort of player we are missing. Buy young  now and its unlike they will hit the ground running.

Time will tell I guess. See who is right or wrong sooner or later 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, RedDave said:

 

3. The total package will be around £7m for Wells with no sell on value. This goes against our own policy. A policy I am a fan of. 

 

When the '5 pillars' strategy was rolled out, it was stated very clearly by SL that although our transfer policy would be based on good, young prospects that have a sell-on value, this would not exclude us from buying in "experience" as and when it was deemed necessary. These signing would be an exception rather than a rule due to having our fingers burnt with several expensive, older signings that didn't necessarily cut the mustard.

He was very understanding that on occasions, you need that bit of extra quality/experience in a young team, even if it may cost you a bit more in fees/wages which you may not recoup. 

NH appears to be that type of signing that may give us that 'hit the floor running' boost to take us into the top six/promotion

  • Like 5
  • Flames 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, RedDave said:

It shouldn’t be beyond if you are willing to listen to the reasons.

1. I cannot see Wells and Fam being a good partnership. Of course that might be wrong but who knows.  
2. If they aren’t then can we really play with a short striker leading the line?

3. The total package will be around £7m for Wells with no sell on value. This goes against our own policy. A policy I am a fan of. 

You might disagree with these points but time will tell if this is a good signing and if we can make a whole team work well that contains Nakhi Wells.  Even if you disagree with the above they are valid concerns and should not be beyond understanding 

The value is in the goals. If he gets 15-20 goals over the next 3 years then that is money very well spent. 

You have been conditioned to believe we must sign players that we can develop and sell on. This is a here and now signing to hopefully push us over the line. You cant just buy players for the future, sometimes you need one or two who are primed to fit right into the team and deliver performances immediately. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • phantom locked and unlocked this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...