criticalanalysis
Full Member
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2015
- Messages
- 7,560
I agree. I also think that both options weren't great and rather a choice between two subpar options than between a good and a bad one. I guess, the thing that is triggering me is that so many posters in here acted as if there was no alternative at all. But yeah, if the extention has been done to get a fee, than I will be happy to admit my mistake in this regard.
Yes, I don't see it like that but I can see the rationale behind it. I guess, my approach would be more crass(?), I would have offloaded him long ago and thats why I consider this an "hanging thread" that needs to cut finally. I think, the mindset of "who would be a good player to have around?" isn't forceful enough for what we have to do (in my opinion).
If there was a 'what we should have done as a club' list, extending Maguire would be far down that. The issue isn't what's happened before, it's what happening right now under INEO. They weren't decisive enough in the summer to get rid of ETH (which Ashworth paid the price for) and probably didn't want to sell Maguire given the choices. So knowing what INEO know now, the extension was probably the only logical choice even if it means him seeing out the contract with us here. It's kicking the can down the road but at least it's with some thought and hopefully planning as compared to previous 'protecting the value' bollocks of before.
Of course I'd love to bring another defender if finances permitting for a 'cheap' 10-30m athletic prospect from France or Germany and have him there instead of Maguire but that would be a gamble in the board's eye. Heck, we bought the most talented and hyped teenage French defender of a generation and he's look like a fish out of water in his starts for us.