Will Aquilani be the worst EPL signing of the noughties?

I guess this is the answer

abundance wrote:I guess this is the answer

The answer to what?

The answer to why the hell you should spend big money for signing a player which just can't stay three months without injuring himself, for how talented he may be.
If Benitez thought about signing Woodgate in 2004, it clearly shows he's got some problem in assessing the risk.
That time he was saved by a dumber club anticipating him, this time he wasn't that lucky.
I feel sorry for Aquilani, he's the best talent of his generation Italy has produced in his position, but he's just too frail for top level football. Exactly like Woodgate ;-)

Will Aquilani be the worst EPL signing of the noughties?

No.

Walcott's done more in his EPL career than Aquilani has, and comes in at roughly half the price

12 isnt half of 19.

Walcott cost about 9.5 million in the end. Saints settled up early to try to avoid administration.

Tweesus wrote:Walcott's done more in his EPL career than Aquilani has, and comes in at roughly half the price

Has Aquilani been playing in the EPL for as long as Walcott(2006) has?

Well no, but if he's sold on in the summer, as rumours seem to be suggesting, then that doesn't really matter, does it?

Even by the agenda standards of this board, to pretend Walcott is somehow a bigger flop than Shevchenko is pretty laughable

How come the obvious answer isn't even part of the list?

I give you Michael "made a career out of ONE GOAL in 1998 against the Argies" Owen, when Newcastle paid insane amounts for an EX-PLAYER.

IF you look at how much Newcastle paid for him, AND what they got in return, they got royally fucked by Owen.

Even then, IF he could've just put away just a couple of the dozens of sitters he missed, Newcastle wouldn't have been relegated, AND that also cost Newcastle millions and millions of money.

So, taking EVERYTHING into account, Michael Owen is EASILY the worst signing of the noughties. I'm sure Kimbo is convinced of that.

Allez les rouges wrote:Even by the agenda standards of this board, to pretend Walcott is somehow a bigger flop than Shevchenko is pretty laughable

5 starts (0 subs) 2 goals, 2 assists in the KO stages of the CL.

You can't expect change from £30 mil when you're bringing in that sort of class

3 years of a knackered old Sheva is worth more than 3 x Walcott's whole career so Sheva was a bargain in comparison.

Puro wrote:How come the obvious answer isn't even part of the list?

I give you Michael "made a career out of ONE GOAL in 1998 against the Argies" Owen, when Newcastle paid insane amounts for an EX-PLAYER.

IF you look at how much Newcastle paid for him, AND what they got in return, they got royally fucked by Owen.

Even then, IF he could've just put away just a couple of the dozens of sitters he missed, Newcastle wouldn't have been relegated, AND that also cost Newcastle millions and millions of money.

So, taking EVERYTHING into account, Michael Owen is EASILY the worst signing of the noughties. I'm sure Kimbo is convinced of that.

Well I must have missed him having a pretty successful career as a Liverpool player!

You have a point about his move to Newcastle,

however for a 3-4 years Owen was a top class player

Owen was only a flop signing because of the injuries, i would say flop signings are those which play reguraly put look terrible and not worth the money. The likes of Rebrov and Jeffers, ones where big money was spent and they just looked out of their depth when playing.

Pierre Littbarski wrote:

Allez les rouges wrote:Even by the agenda standards of this board, to pretend Walcott is somehow a bigger flop than Shevchenko is pretty laughable

5 starts (0 subs) 2 goals, 2 assists in the KO stages of the CL.

You can't expect change from £30 mil when you're bringing in that sort of class

3 years of a knackered old Sheva is worth more than 3 x Walcott's whole career so Sheva was a bargain in comparison.

Have another guess

Yes, I can't think of anything Theo's ever done in the knockout stages of the CL

UK_Andy wrote:Owen was only a flop signing because of the injuries, i would say flop signings are those which play reguraly put look terrible and not worth the money. The likes of Rebrov and Jeffers, ones where big money was spent and they just looked out of their depth when playing.

WRONG!

Hoddle ruined him in the same way Redknapp is threatening to do to Pavlyuchenko.

Rebrov had a very decent1st season at Spurs.

So far he's done less than Veron and Sheva.

sorry Tweedle but subcategory d) clearly stipulates:

players are deemed to be exempt from flop status if the manager who signs them leaves the club within 12 months

Like he'd have played him anyway.