Jump to content

How much is Bannan worth again?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Jim Hardie said:

Who paid £10m for him?

Well i have read 10 mill 9mill 8mill 7mill 6mill.I suppose it all depends how embarrassed the owls fan is who is telling the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it half term already?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, petcharlie said:

Well i have read 10 mill 9mill 8mill 7mill 6mill.I suppose it all depends how embarrassed the owls fan is who is telling the story.

So naturally you went with the £10m. The truth is it was UNDISCLOSED, like most transfer fees these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£8mil was widely reported, plus whatever the fee was for the 6 months  you had him on loan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, atticus said:

£8mil was widely reported, plus whatever the fee was for the 6 months  you had him on loan.

I think you mean widely guessed at. The only recent fee that we KNOW is Brooks went for £11.5m because that was disclosed - in court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Jim Hardie said:

I think you mean widely guessed at. The only recent fee that we KNOW is Brooks went for £11.5m because that was disclosed - in court.

You will be telling us next Rhodes was a freeby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Wednesday touch the ball 300 times a match, 70 or so of them are passes to, or from Bannan.

He does (or tries to do) far too much in a game. I can't make my mind up if we're better with him in at the moment, or not.

Other players look for Bannan to pass to, time after time after time. The reliance on him seems to be far too heavy in my opinion.

Bannan's mainly to blame, as he pops up all around the pitch, often going within 2 metres of the player on the ball, almost demanding that he's the one to receive the ball. Invariably, the pass comes his way. Increasingly, Bannan is moving the ball on a couple of metres, then getting it knocked back to him, so he can give it to someone else 3 metres away. More and more, he gets the ball back from the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th player he's passed to. Very often, he knocks a great 30-40 metre pass, we should do more with. Invariably, the ball's back with Bannan within 10 seconds, and we don't really get anywhere.

I'd like to see us start without Bannan for a run of  games. On the face of it, it sounds a ludicrous idea, but I think his involvement, work rate and (over) commitment needs curbing. I'd rather see him involved for 35 minutes than 95. I reckon he'd be of more use to us, and his being on the bench would force someone else to step up to the plate. We desperately need Lee to come back as he is our second Bannan (or more likely, is Bannan our second Kieran Lee?) When Lee plays, our overall impact is greatly improved. Both together are properly consistent, powerful and effective. 

Pelupessy doesn't cut the mustard. He's not the only one either. 

With everyone fit, and firing properly, we have a great strike force. Our other midfielders appear to be pretty non-descript and we only have a couple of capable defenders.

The others either can't do it (which, in my heart I can't believe) or don't want to do it.

I don't expect a great deal of impact from Steve Bruce.

I hope I'm wrong and Bruce transforms us in to top of the League challengers, but I'm not holding out much hope.

That said, I will support Bruce all the way, and wish him all the best.   

Edited by Hotmale 1954
To correct spelling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hotmale 1954 said:

If Wednesday touch the ball 500 times a match, 400 of them are passes to, or from Bannan.

He does (or tries to do) far too much in a game. I can't make my mind up if we're better with him in at the moment, or not.

Other players look for Bannan to pass to, time after time after time. The reliance on him seems to be far too heavy in my opinion.

Bannan's mainly to blame, as he pops up all around the pith, often going within 2 metres of the player on the ball, almost demanding that he's the one to receive the ball. Invariably, the pass comes his way. Increasingly, Bannan is moving the ball on a couple of metres, then getting it knocked back to him, so he can give it to someone else 3 metres away. More and more, he gets the ball back from the 2nd player he's passed to. Very often, he knocks a great 30-40 metre pass, we should do more with. Invariably, the ball's back with Bannan within 10 seconds, and we don't really get anywhere.

I'd like to see us start without Bannan for a run of  games. On the face of it, it sounds a ludicrous idea, but I think his involvement, work rate and commitment needs curbing. I'd rather see him involved for 35 minutes than 95. I reckon he'd be of more use to us, and his being on the bench would force someone else to step up to the plate. We desperately need Lee to come back as he is our second Bannan (or more likely, is Bannan our second Kieran Lee?) When Lee plays, our overall impact is

greatly improved. Both together are properly consistent, powerful and effective. 

Pelupessy doesn't cut the mustard. He's not the only one either. 

With everyone fit, and firing properly, we have a great strike force. Our other midfielders appear to be pretty non-descript and we only have a couple of capable defenders.

The others either can't do it (which, in my heart I can't believe) or don't want to do it.

I don't expect a great deal of impact from Steve Bruce.

I hope I'm wrong and Bruce transforms us in to top of the League challengers, but I'm not holding out much hope.

That said, I will support Bruce all the way, and wish him all the best.   

Fair play, valid assessment from what I have seen. 

 

I would agree with the assessment in the respect that Bannan seems to be the go to man throughout the team.

 

His Opta statistics show that he makes around 64 passes per game, with the majority of the rest of the squad only averaging about 30ppg. Again Opta stats back up what you are saying in the respect that the heat map and areas covered is pretty mininal, in fact if anything it looks very "defensive midfield" and quite narrow. 

 

Perhaps Bannan is the problem for you lot right now? Perhaps the eagerness to pass to Bannan is only producing a more defensive minded game? Perhaps teams are clued up as well that if they mark Bannan out of the game, suddenly you lot lose the flow of play and become pretty limited?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, cmonkes said:

Monkes' post shortened by me ....... it saves space.........

 

Fair play, valid assessment from what I have seen. 

Perhaps Bannan is the problem for you lot right now? Perhaps the eagerness to pass to Bannan is only producing a more defensive minded game? Perhaps teams are clued up as well that if they mark Bannan out of the game, suddenly you lot lose the flow of play and become pretty limited?

 

Cheers Monkesey!

That's just about what I'm saying really.

We don't really have anyone else behind the front 2 that needs to be 'watched'.

We need to put someone else on the treadmill and get them ticking.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.