This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
LeChuck Posted December 1, 2010 Posted December 1, 2010 He was "the next big thing".Capped by England at 21. Dalglish knew it and Fergie knew it. That's why it was a record price at the time and a record price now is not 22M. Who's talking England Under 21's? I give up. You seem to think I'm doing Shearer/Rovers an injustice when it's completely not the case.
bluebruce Posted December 1, 2010 Posted December 1, 2010 Jeez. Shearer was THE hottest prospect in English football. English players are even more overpriced these days due to the foreign influx. Yes, Shearer was well short of the world record at the time- just as Rooney's sale is well short of the world record now. Also, Rooney's sale was some years back now, and we all know the market has inflated since then. RE: goalscoring records, I posted them earlier up and Shearer's was better by the time he was sold. And Everton were not a mega team. I'm not one of these ignoring the fact we are talking about the Shearer of the time rather than his peak. You raised a clever point about the relative strength of the English league back then, but I think you're missing the big factors here. Although the most surprising thing for me is why I'm still talking about this.
tony gale's mic Posted December 1, 2010 Posted December 1, 2010 Jeez. Shearer was THE hottest prospect in English football. English players are even more overpriced these days due to the foreign influx. Yes, Shearer was well short of the world record at the time- just as Rooney's sale is well short of the world record now. Also, Rooney's sale was some years back now, and we all know the market has inflated since then. RE: goalscoring records, I posted them earlier up and Shearer's was better by the time he was sold. And Everton were not a mega team. I'm not one of these ignoring the fact we are talking about the Shearer of the time rather than his peak. You raised a clever point about the relative strength of the English league back then, but I think you're missing the big factors here. Although the most surprising thing for me is why I'm still talking about this. Rooney had become famous on the international stage. He was England's star player in the Euros. That alone would double someone's price as compared to someone who had done okay against average defences. This is by far the biggest factor. Comparing goalscoring records is silly since Rooney has always been more of a forward and Shearer more of an out and out striker. Transfer fees in this country have barely inflated since 2004. Ferdinand was sold to United for £30 million in 2002. The British transfer record is £32 million for Robinho to City. Granted you're not arguing what Shearer's done since though.
47er Posted December 1, 2010 Posted December 1, 2010 If anything it's more of a compliment to Rovers to say the Shearer we signed wasn't a top level player, WE turned him into one. Yep---within 90 minutes! And it really isn't worth arguing about anymore is it? I think we are missing the takeover thread!
S15 Posted December 1, 2010 Posted December 1, 2010 Or maybe you should have said 'learned'. Hammer time.
den Posted December 1, 2010 Posted December 1, 2010 I don't think anyone disagrees that Shearer is the best English striker in the past two decades or so, but we're discussing his ability/reputation when we signed him. When we signed him: Ability - second to none. Technically brilliant, not a weakness anywhere. That's why Dalglish and Ferguson wanted him so badly. Reputation - best young striker in the country by a mile. England international and tipped to be the next Gary Lineker. Huge potential.
BPF Posted December 1, 2010 Posted December 1, 2010 A player like Shearer in today's market would be worth: One Billion Pounds
Exiled_Rover Posted December 1, 2010 Posted December 1, 2010 Yep---within 90 minutes! And it really isn't worth arguing about anymore is it? I think we are missing the takeover thread! Bingo. He was clearly already brilliant at the time. We surrounded him with better players.
The Gull Posted December 1, 2010 Posted December 1, 2010 Just spoken to the author, Paul Tomkins, on twitter to let him know his work was being discussed. He wanted to highlight the fact that his book actually backs up the argument, at several points, that Rovers did NOT "buy" the title. Those who automatically jump on the "everyone is anti-Rovers" bandwagon should really read the book first before jumping to conclusions.
tony gale's mic Posted December 1, 2010 Posted December 1, 2010 Bingo. He was clearly already brilliant at the time. We surrounded him with better players. Hindsight is a wonderful thing...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.