Blues look to move on seven players

[Rob Noxious]

If they didn't make the bench last night (other than the injured trio of strikers) then I think they'll go.

1. Paterson (Transfer, Loan until Jan. or contract terminated by mutual consent)
2. Crawford (Long loan, or free transfer)
3. Nesbitt (BSP/BSS loan - Braintree or Chelmsford)
4. MJL (BSP Loan - Braintree perhaps?)
5. Stevens (BSP/BSS loan)
6. Woodyard (BSP/BSS loan)
7. Asante (loan - but not until 2 out of Corr, Dickinson and Blair are fit)

I hope this lad sticks around for a while. I only saw him for a few minutes towards the end of the game at Torquay last season, but he looks sharp - on the deck and in the bonce.

 

[lost in cyber space]

No, he has a 12 month contact.

When did Blair Sturrock move from a monthly to 1 year contract?

 

[MCBROWN]

When did Blair Sturrock move from a monthly to 1 year contract?

Lets be honest Paul isn't going to release his son.

 

[Good feet for a big man]

Be good for all the youth players (James-Lewis, Stevens, Woodyard and Nesbitt) all out on loan getting competitive football.

Inevitably when we have injuries at least these youngsters would be match sharp when asked to be involved in the sqaud

 

[Tampa Blue]

I expect one of them to be either Grant or Ferdinand :0( let's not assume that it will only be the poorer or less experienced players going

 

[dan_mays]

Ive heard through a friends down in southampton that paterson is on 1400 per week if this is the case im sure from a business point of view he will be released or paid off i think,

Paterson - released
MJL - loan to braintree
Asante - loan to great wakering / canvey
Crawford - possible loan to braintree or maybe a loan move to lincoln
Nesbitt and Stevens both out on loan

Not sure who the other one is but ill put money on a deal been met for ferdinand

 

[dannyboy25]

more like 2k per week plus his flat

 

[sufclee]

£1700 a week which is why we need to shift him on

 

[Nigel Blue]

I expect one of them to be either Grant or Ferdinand :0( let's not assume that it will only be the poorer or less experienced players going

Well, as I have expressed over he last couple of weeks, there is interest in Grant, and another player (inform given previously) is being over consumed by his Agents opinion, so I agree with you.

 

[Ayrshire Blue]

When did Blair Sturrock move from a monthly to 1 year contract?

He never had a monthly contract.

 

[Cricko]

He never had a monthly contract.

Said who, Blair himself?

 

[rlb999]

Paterson
Grant
Ferdinand
Asante
Crawford
and 2 others.

 

[Pak Power]

Could be one off the list.
Matt paterson on trial at Gills;
Link;
http://www.southendunited-mad.co.uk...gets_a_trail_at_gillingham_689660/index.shtml

 

[Murkey_Mouse]

If we going to sell Grant, how come he played almost every game for us in Pre-Season, don't look like we are shipping him out - the players who cannot get into our squad, never mind be on the bench, are the one need to be out on loan or prem.

 

[Tampa Blue]

If we going to sell Grant, how come he played almost every game for us in Pre-Season, don't look like we are shipping him out - the players who cannot get into our squad, never mind be on the bench, are the one need to be out on loan or prem.

Might be because Ferdinand is away? Personally I'd prefer to sell Kane rather than Grant for the following reasons:

1. Grant will score more than him
2. Kane will command a higher fee and they'll be add ons
3. Kala is ready made to replace Kane

Having said that I wouldn't want either of them to go but I wouldn't be surprised if both went.

Also, it's all well and good trying to get rid of the poorer players but you've got to find someone to want them and with so many out of contract players available, clubs can be very choosy

 

[shrimpfan]

What surprises me is this line, “Financially it’s not an issue as we are still around the playing budget that I committed to but we know the squad is too big,” so even with a squad of 29 we aren't over budget, not bad at all is it, considering with the players we have signed and already have!?

wot price some nice young onions next week off yur,Im on a tight budget or im financially sound ****ed if i no if you sort of no wot i meen .......hip

 

[DTS]

Might be because Ferdinand is away? Personally I'd prefer to sell Kane rather than Grant for the following reasons:

1. Grant will score more than him
2. Kane will command a higher fee and they'll be add ons
3. Kala is ready made to replace Kane

Having said that I wouldn't want either of them to go but I wouldn't be surprised if both went.

Also, it's all well and good trying to get rid of the poorer players but you've got to find someone to want them and with so many out of contract players available, clubs can be very choosy

Intersting comment about Granty scoring more than Kane. I think Kane is great in the air and from corners and set peices he will be a real threat. I also think with JJ and Hally on the wings we will bomb a lot of balls into the box so Kane could be valuable here too.

 

[Pubey]

Intersting comment about Granty scoring more than Kane. I think Kane is great in the air and from corners and set peices he will be a real threat. I also think with JJ and Hally on the wings we will bomb a lot of balls into the box so Kane could be valuable here too.

Scored a couple of good goals last year. Granty can score goals too which is important, because it means they can work together and take turns pushing on/sitting back. Balls coming from wide will be teed up by Harris for players like Kane and grant running from deep (at least, that's what I hope!)

 

[Smiffy]

There have been no offers for Grant. Unless theres a last minute rush for his signature, he'll be here till the end of his contract. He's got less than a year left. Why would anyone pay a fee for him, when he is available for nothing next summer!

 

[BrettieAngell]

wot price some nice young onions next week off yur,Im on a tight budget or im financially sound ****ed if i no if you sort of no wot i meen .......hip

whaaaaaaaaaaa? :nope: