Simon Cox

andrew1957 · by **andrew1957** » 28 Oct 2009 18:49

I like Cox but he has no pedigree at this level at which Church has more goals than him. A loan for him would be too high risk a strategy so no wonder BR has ruled it out.

If we get a striker in it has to be someone with a track record or perhaps a PL highly rated youngster.

Alan Partridge · by **Alan Partridge** » 29 Oct 2009 09:08

andrew1957 I like Cox but he has no pedigree at this level at which Church has more goals than him. A loan for him would be too high risk a strategy so no wonder BR has ruled it out.

If we get a striker in it has to be someone with a track record or perhaps a PL highly rated youngster.

Not belittling what you say because the fact is Church has scored more than him, he's also played more than him...lots more.

Lots of competition at WBA up front which is why i was surprised that he chose to go there. A more middle of the road team (like us) where he'd play every week and be the main man like he was at Swindon would surely have suited him more and got the best out of him?

Harpers So Solid Crew · by **Harpers So Solid Crew** » 29 Oct 2009 09:46

WBA overpaid for Cox, imho, tho bit stuck as we had the sell on clause, Swindon had to up the price, or not worth them selling.

Royal Lady · by **Royal Lady** » 29 Oct 2009 09:58

They upped it £800k!

Hoop Blah · by **Hoop Blah** » 29 Oct 2009 10:25

Harpers So Solid Crew WBA overpaid for Cox, imho, tho bit stuck as we had the sell on clause, Swindon had to up the price, or not worth them selling.

I'm not sure they did. What's the going rate for a forward who scored 30+ goals in League 1?

Leeds have slapped a £2-3m price tag on Beckford, Jason Scotland went for £2m having only had one season at Championship level (a successful one at that mind!) and scoring less than Cox in the league below.

Goals are an expensive commodity!

Harpers So Solid Crew · by **Harpers So Solid Crew** » 29 Oct 2009 16:39

Beckford and Cox proven at Level3, many many strikers have upped a league via transfers and not made it. Which is why £2m was too much, possibly less with add ons would have been better, like i believe we did with N Hunt.

Swindon though were a bit stuck, as they had to give us a large sell on clause, would not have been worth them selling him for £1m after they had paid us, would not have made a dent in their finances.

Royal Lady · by **Royal Lady** » 01 Nov 2009 12:06

He went for a guaranteed £1.5 million with a further £400k in possible add-ons. How much did we get from that, does anyone know?

ZacNaloen · by **ZacNaloen** » 01 Nov 2009 13:34

Cox's goal yesterday was real class, no question in my mind that he can do it at this level WBA.

Ian Royal · by **Ian Royal** » 01 Nov 2009 13:49

Royal Lady He went for a guaranteed £1.5 million with a further £400k in possible add-ons. How much did we get from that, does anyone know?

40% springs to mind, but no idea if I've made it up. We certainly should have had quite a big clause as we sold him to them relatively cheap and knew he was a great prospect.

FiNeRaIn · by **FiNeRaIn** » 01 Nov 2009 15:16

He was actualyl WBA's MOM yesterday, lucky goal but a good performance all round.

Harpers So Solid Crew · by **Harpers So Solid Crew** » 01 Nov 2009 15:17

I thought it was 40% as well, but like Ian could be my memory making it up.

Either was is a decent ammount.

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 41,00.html

£1.5m plus £400k add ons, as suggested by RL

Terminal Boardom · by **Terminal Boardom** » 01 Nov 2009 18:02

What is it with this obsession about a former youth player of ours?

Ian Royal · by **Ian Royal** » 01 Nov 2009 18:29

Terminal Boardom What is it with this obsession about a former youth player of ours?

Always nice to see your acadamy players do well, and worth keeping a tab on in case they come back.

Terminal Boardom · by **Terminal Boardom** » 01 Nov 2009 19:14

Ian Royal
Terminal Boardom What is it with this obsession about a former youth player of ours?

Always nice to see your acadamy players do well, and worth keeping a tab on in case they come back.

That's as maybe. Plenty of youngsters have moved on and made careers for themselves. Adam Lockwood is one that springs to mind, another is NathanTyson. However, this thread seems to be some sort of w@nkfest about whether or not we should have let Cox go.

Ian Royal · by **Ian Royal** » 01 Nov 2009 19:39

Tyson gets plenty of mentions on here. As do others.

Cox is possibly available and a decent prospect for this level.

Terminal Boardom · by **Terminal Boardom** » 01 Nov 2009 20:37

Sounds to me as if we could do with an "old boys" board...

Ian Royal · by **Ian Royal** » 01 Nov 2009 21:04

Terminal Boardom Sounds to me as if we could do with an "old boys" board...

We've got a general football section. But this is about whether we should loan him in to ease our striking problems.

Terminal Boardom · by **Terminal Boardom** » 01 Nov 2009 21:43

Ian Royal
Terminal Boardom Sounds to me as if we could do with an "old boys" board...

We've got a general football section. But this is about whether we should loan him in to ease our striking problems.

It just feels as if Simon Cox has been talked about ad infintum.

rg6royal · by **rg6royal** » 01 Nov 2009 22:36

Ian Royal Tyson gets plenty of mentions on here. As do others.

Cox is possibly available and a decent prospect for this level.

Doubt it. He played in their 5-0 win yesterday and scored. Also got in team of the week apparently.

Ian Royal · by **Ian Royal** » 01 Nov 2009 23:26

Yeah he's done himself no harm this week, but with Brunt and Bednar on the mend will he feature regularly for long?

Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Re: Simon Cox

Who is online