COX & MACKIE FOR SALE

[Mitesh]

LINK: - view external link

[Romanis]

Cox is surplus to requirements, but pity Mackie, always liked him, but just doesn't seem to work for him here.

I think we paid 2 million for the pair, so if we can recoup that or part it would okay.

[Polish_ForestMad]

Cox is surplus to requirements, but pity Mackie, always liked him, but just doesn't seem to work for him here.

I think we paid 2 million for the pair, so if we can recoup that or part it would okay.

we paid 2 for cox and 1 for mackie.would like mackie to stay as he is a good player,is he on high wages though?qpr wanted him to stay and we pinched him so why i he not needed now?

[Trickytreesreds]

Cox is surplus to requirements, but pity Mackie, always liked him, but just doesn't seem to work for him here.

I think we paid 2 million for the pair, so if we can recoup that or part it would okay.

we paid 2 for cox and 1 for mackie.would like mackie to stay as he is a good player,is he on high wages though?qpr wanted him to stay and we pinched him so why i he not needed now?[/quote]

Two reasons-
1. We have to cut costs ie wages. Mackie is a drain on resources.
2. Mackie plays in a position, where we need him to contribute more goals. He doesn't.

SP said he was re evaluating the squad and it's flexibility. Mackie should take up long distance running, he has endurance but no aim as to how it contributes.
As I said, he doesn't score much, but he doesn't create much either.

[Polish_ForestMad]

cant remember how much he created last year and we wont as we had cox up front missing chances.how many chances did mackie set up for cox to miss?

[woolwhacker]

http://t.co/NsBwqU1Jtv

Don't know if it's true but it's still double what their worth. - view external link

[dam617]

Cox is surplus to requirements, but pity Mackie, always liked him, but just doesn't seem to work for him here.

I think we paid 2 million for the pair, so if we can recoup that or part it would okay.

we paid 2 for cox and 1 for mackie.would like mackie to stay as he is a good player,is he on high wages though?qpr wanted him to stay and we pinched him so why i he not needed now?[/quote]

Two reasons-
1. We have to cut costs ie wages. Mackie is a drain on resources.
2. Mackie plays in a position, where we need him to contribute more goals. He doesn't.

SP said he was re evaluating the squad and it's flexibility. Mackie should take up long distance running, he has endurance but no aim as to how it contributes.
As I said, he doesn't score much, but he doesn't create much either.[/quote]

Not much fussed about either of these lea

[Trickytreesreds]

Cox is surplus to requirements, but pity Mackie, always liked him, but just doesn't seem to work for him here.

I think we paid 2 million for the pair, so if we can recoup that or part it would okay.

we paid 2 for cox and 1 for mackie.would like mackie to stay as he is a good player,is he on high wages though?qpr wanted him to stay and we pinched him so why i he not needed now?[/quote]

Two reasons-
1. We have to cut costs ie wages. Mackie is a drain on resources.
2. Mackie plays in a position, where we need him to contribute more goals. He doesn't.

SP said he was re evaluating the squad and it's flexibility. Mackie should take up long distance running, he has endurance but no aim as to how it contributes.
As I said, he doesn't score much, but he doesn't create much either.[/quote

[dam617]

He not wired up right

[essexred52]

Cox don't score enough and Mackie has a bad attitude I hear, see ya