Which do you fear more?

[eskimo joe]

You're probably correct but I think that getting rid of your best players is just self defeating. To me that's not strengthening the team, it's just shuffling the pack to give the supporters the illusion that they are trying to move us forward.

True, and i wouldnt want to sell them for the sake of selling them to make an extra buck or two anyway. And it could be self defeating , buy a player for the same price doesnt mean you get a similar or better player at all, But Sullivan is what he is, and hes happy to shuffle the pack to create an illusion to mug us off.

But being forced into selling one, then Lanzini over Arnie for me,

[Newmarket]

Until Sullivan proves he has changed his spots I refuse to believe the money would be reinvested at all let alone wisely.

I’m sorry if that sounds moany but it’s how I feel .

[Hammershark]

Selling our best players gives me more fear than not reinvesting because your best players are known to be doing the business for your club and even if you reinvest it doesn’t guarantee the replacements will fit in and give you the same level of performance as the players they are replacing no matter how good they are supposed to be.

[mkhammer]

Until Sullivan proves he has changed his spots I refuse to believe the money would be reinvested at all let alone wisely.

I’m sorry if that sounds moany but it’s how I feel .

Yes mate,it's hard to believe he's gonna sit back and let people get on with the job who know
what they're actually doing...just can't see it..

Don't care if we get a Euro quali next year.........

Still want him gone.....he goes Brady goes anyway...

[Broga81]

What does "being re-invested " mean anyway. Selling your best players and then buying someone inferior but having some money left over ? Presumably to replace your best players you would have to pay out all the money to get someone of comparable ability whilst all the time ignoring the real problem which is to get rid of the players who are not PL class. I can't see why anyone would be happy with that scenario even if it had to happen.

Reinvestment for me means bringing another player in the same position, with the same style of play who is younger and maybe not quite hitting their full potential. But weather that's the same as what the others see I cant say.

[Clayton]

What does "being re-invested " mean anyway. Selling your best players and then buying someone inferior but having some money left over ? Presumably to replace your best players you would have to pay out all the money to get someone of comparable ability whilst all the time ignoring the real problem which is to get rid of the players who are not PL class. I can't see why anyone would be happy with that scenario even if it had to happen.

Reinvestment for me means bringing another player in the same position, with the same style of play who is younger and maybe not quite hitting their full potential. But weather that's the same as what the others see I cant say.

I would go along with that as long as they are as good as the one they are replacing , hopefully with the potential to get better .

[andyginbrasil]

Reinvestment for me means bringing another player in the same position, with the same style of play who is younger and maybe not quite hitting their full potential. But weather that's the same as what the others see I cant say.

I would go along with that as long as they are as good as the one they are replacing , hopefully with the potential to get better .

If you look at in in a different aspect, selling a player and replacing him with another is similar to buying a car... If you sell your car do you put the money down on another a little bit more expensive but newer, upgraded, better specs and pay a little more, or do you go out with that money and buy the exact same car, year mileage etc. or go out and buy a cheaper car, hoping to change it, but nowhere near as good as your old one.

For me if I sold Arnie I would look to improve, buy a better player, the price for that type of player has now been set by the buyer, to improve that position you need to use all of his transfer fee, plus more, otherwise we are just standing still teamwise. Look at Payet, sold for 25m, and replaced with a 12m player. What should of happened is he should of been replaced with a 30m player, that to me is reinvestment.

[Broga81]

I would go along with that as long as they are as good as the one they are replacing , hopefully with the potential to get better .

If you look at in in a different aspect, selling a player and replacing him with another is similar to buying a car... :i am genuinely amused: If you sell your car do you put the money down on another a little bit more expensive but newer, upgraded, better specs and pay a little more, or do you go out with that money and buy the exact same car, year mileage etc. or go out and buy a cheaper car, hoping to change it, but nowhere near as good as your old one.

For me if I sold Arnie I would look to improve, buy a better player, the price for that type of player has now been set by the buyer, to improve that position you need to use all of his transfer fee, plus more, otherwise we are just standing still teamwise. Look at Payet, sold for 25m, and replaced with a 12m player. What should of happened is he should of been replaced with a 30m player, that to me is reinvestment.

It is much easier for bigger teams to replace their best players.

If we sell Arnie for £70m, we could potentially blow the full lot on getting someone else in. But name a player costing this much, as good as Arnie is now (in his prime) that will want to play for West Ham?

That's why we should go after youth. Bring in the next Arnie and give them a stage to shine. If then we need to sell him, go out and do it all over again until we reach the stage where we can get the best players in the world.

[andyginbrasil]

If you look at in in a different aspect, selling a player and replacing him with another is similar to buying a car... :i am genuinely amused: If you sell your car do you put the money down on another a little bit more expensive but newer, upgraded, better specs and pay a little more, or do you go out with that money and buy the exact same car, year mileage etc. or go out and buy a cheaper car, hoping to change it, but nowhere near as good as your old one.

For me if I sold Arnie I would look to improve, buy a better player, the price for that type of player has now been set by the buyer, to improve that position you need to use all of his transfer fee, plus more, otherwise we are just standing still teamwise. Look at Payet, sold for 25m, and replaced with a 12m player. What should of happened is he should of been replaced with a 30m player, that to me is reinvestment.

It is much easier for bigger teams to replace their best players.

If we sell Arnie for £70m, we could potentially blow the full lot on getting someone else in. But name a player costing this much, as good as Arnie is now (in his prime) that will want to play for West Ham?

That's why we should go after youth. Bring in the next Arnie and give them a stage to shine. If then we need to sell him, go out and do it all over again until we reach the stage where we can get the best players in the world.

I agree totally, go after youth, look at young Declan, quality quality player, hes been with us 4 years, and now getting a deserved run in the starting line up, can you name another on par with him. He is an exception, and will in the future become a very expensive world class player, if he carries on the same way. He was an investment, over the last 4 years. If you sell Arnie, it would only be to bring in an upgrade and that would cost. We have currently 7 players in our first team squad, supposedly our best players who last season each spent more than 15 games out injured, this is what we should be reinvesting in, get rid of the glass players and upgrade them at the same time, if Reid is worth 7m, go and get a player who is not injury prone on par or better than Reid and spend a little extra on him, that way the position is filled with a better player and one that will be available throughout the season to play. So youth by all means, but not at the expense of the strength of the first team, hoping you might of picked up a gem in a couple of years time, until he is pushing the likes of Arnie for a first team place I say buy quality proven players now.

[Shortshanks]

If we sold say one of our best players to one of the so-called big clubs wouldn't it then be very difficult to replace him with a comparable player ? If he was that good surely the so-called big club would sign him and if he was that good wouldn't he be put off by seeing we had just sold one of our best players and have a look and think mmm Hugill ? no thanks.