Andy Carroll - Best Striker in the World

[TheElephantMan]

That's some very strange logic. Chelsea didn't put a clause in the contract that said they would only buy Torres for £50m if we spent £35m on Carroll.

Chelsea gave us 50 million pounds for Torres and we subsequently spent 35 million of that on Andy Carroll. It's enough to make you cry isn't it?

It's perfectly logical. Carroll + £15m = Torres. How much is Torres worth? I can't be bothered worrying about how much Chelsea wasted on Torres and the subsequent transaction with Newcastle. Chelsea bought a dud and we did too. Our dud still has time on his side.

[kris90210]

It's perfectly logical. Carroll + £15m = Torres. How much is Torres worth? I can't be bothered worrying about how much Chelsea wasted on Torres and the subsequent transaction with Newcastle. Chelsea bought a dud and we did too. Our dud still has time on his side.

What's the point in talking about intangible figures like worth, when we have cold hard facts to go on.

Carroll = £35m
Torres = £50m

There's no need for any formulas mate. We had that £50 mil and we ****ing blew £35m of it. No amount of mathematics is going to change that. I've read Comolli and Dalglish's take on it, but it's just propaganda really isn't it?

[Shaggy]

We blew £35m on Carroll, that's a fact. He did not cost -£15m

If we sold him for £10m to Newcastle, would we be selling him for -£25m?

[el matador]

if carroll was signed for 5m we would all think he looks like a 5m signing. usually produces very little because he looks out of his depth but occasionally does something really good.

reality is he is a 5m.player that we spunked 35 on and despite kenny calling him the minus 15m man he was a complete waste of money.

I would take the bent deal and get rid. nobody in their right mind is going to offer that sort of money again.

[TheElephantMan]

I'm not going to worry about it, it was Chelsea's money. We could have held onto it for a while and spent it more wisely. We didn't. It doesn't matter to me what we spent Chelsea's money on, Torres clearly didn't want to play for us any longer. I'll criticise Carroll for his performances, but I don't blame him for the transfer fiasco which ridiculously labelled him a £35m striker.

[kris90210]

I reckon we'd get about £15 mil for him. He's still got potential to be awesome, and I think there are a few managers who would back themselves to get the best out of him.

[Lee]

I'd go as far as to say that Ngog is better than Carroll.

[truefan999]

I'm not going to worry about it, it was Chelsea's money. We could have held onto it for a while and spent it more wisely. We didn't. It doesn't matter to me what we spent Chelsea's money on, Torres clearly didn't want to play for us any longer. I'll criticise Carroll for his performances, but I don't blame him for the transfer fiasco which ridiculously labelled him a £35m striker.

It doesnt matter what we spent Chelsea's money on?

Good lord.

We could have had a decent striker and be sitting comfortably in the top four...

[Vermilion]

It doesnt matter what we spent Chelsea's money on?

Good lord.

We could have had a decent striker and be sitting comfortably in the top four...

Or we could have bought a different (apparently decent) striker and be in exactly the same position, wondering why we didn't go for someone like Andy Carroll!

[Bender]

i think dalglish knows he's cocked up on this and is trying to find a way to off load him .........also dare say the owners are too impressed with the transfer dealings

[Bender]

Or we could have bought a different (apparently decent) striker and be in exactly the same position, wondering why we didn't go for someone like Andy Carroll!

i would rather have bought barren bent for at least £15million cheaper knowing we bought a striker who has prem experience

[Fredo]

I'd go as far as to say that Ngog is better than Carroll.

Ngog contributed far more and fitted into our play unlike Carroll. And his conversion rate was decent as well. How is he faring at Bolton?

[TheElephantMan]

Or we could have bought a different (apparently decent) striker and be in exactly the same position, wondering why we didn't go for someone like Andy Carroll!

If you had some furry strawberries and someone offered you 50p for them then you spent 35p on some unripe bananas you would have 15p and some fruit for later. I don't understand why our own fans are so hung up about the amount of money Chelsea purchased Carroll for? Newcastle were the big winners in all this and Chelsea the big losers. We've still got an under-performing striker, but at least this one has potential to develop.

[Lee]

Ngog contributed far more and fitted into our play unlike Carroll. And his conversion rate was decent as well. How is he faring at Bolton?

When you think about it Ngog was faster, had a better touch, more skillfull, worked harder and was more of a goal threat imo.

Not sure about how he's doing at Bolton as I've only seen them play two or three times this season. He's scored a couple but made most of his appearances from the bench I think.

[Fredo]

I'd take him back atm