BITW Posted January 19, 2008 Report Share Posted January 19, 2008 I know his name has been mentioned before, but Freddy Eastwood cant get a game at wolves. They payed a lot for him so the chances are they wouldnt let him go on the cheap. However, he seems pretty surplus to requirments at the moment so perhaps they wouldnt mind losing out on a bit of money if they were to sell him. He was an un-used sub against s****horpe today.I take nothing away from our players this season, and accept we were promoted without a real consistant goalscorer, but IMO our strikers don't get as many as they probably should(except maybe byfield). Freddy eastwood has proved he can score goals at this level, and would surely be a worthwhile addition to this squad... 14 goals between our 3 strikers who have played (byfield 8)Would it be worth making a bid that we consider affordable and that wolves would hopefully consider.Over to you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Eamer Posted January 19, 2008 Report Share Posted January 19, 2008 Think it's been mentioned but would cost a lot more money than we'd be up to paying for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Bells left foot Posted January 19, 2008 Report Share Posted January 19, 2008 tbh i think wolves would look to get at least what they paid for him, which is far too much in my opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miketh2nd Posted January 19, 2008 Report Share Posted January 19, 2008 I wouldn't mind one of these wolves,charlton, or sheff utd striker rejects, as I think many just don't get given enough time to prove themselves or aren't suited best to the way the team plays. So I wouldn't mind GJ buying EAstwood and moulding them into our squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RyanBCFC Posted January 19, 2008 Report Share Posted January 19, 2008 I've been saying him this for ages, he'd be a great signing, he won't come cheap though. I think we could possibly go for Nathan Tyson at Forest, quick strong powerful scores goals. why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted January 19, 2008 Report Share Posted January 19, 2008 Wolves would be mad to sell us a striker.Forest won't be selling Tyson for anything less than stupid money which we can't pay and it's not a given he'd want to come anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmersonsKev Posted January 19, 2008 Report Share Posted January 19, 2008 I would fear that he and his family would park there caravans on Steve L's new piece of land and we'd never get the new stadium built. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Horsman Posted January 20, 2008 Report Share Posted January 20, 2008 I would fear that he and his family would park there caravans on Steve L's new piece of land and we'd never get the new stadium built. Quality, more chance of him signing for Twerton Squatter Dunsford FC at the minimal patch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Ass Posted January 20, 2008 Report Share Posted January 20, 2008 Agree, we surely can't consider a pikey? he is more suited to playing for the scum IMO! :noexpression: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhyde Posted January 21, 2008 Report Share Posted January 21, 2008 Anyone want Eastwood but doesn't like Trundle? look at the goal tally.Wolves i don't think will be letting us have players after McIndoe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.