Will Grigg

[Ericsladkilnhurst]

Because if player a is available and you have to sacrifice the squad place of player b (who isn't as good) to get him, you do it.
I did say may, all depends on who is or isn't attainable.
And he was a freebie, we didn't buy him.

What about the signing on fee

[MillersTime]

What about the signing on fee

I'd imagine in the grand scheme of things it would be pretty nominal and wouldn't be a justification for keeping Kelly if someone better comes along.

[Masbroughstreet]

Why buy Kelly to loan him out, no sense & false economy.

I think it could make sense, he was signed on a free on a three and a half year deal. He's had 6 months to get up to fitness standards of a pro footballer, he might have six months on loan at a lower level to get used to league football, that still leaves 2 and a half years that he could be banging in the goals for us, in which case the phased introduction would be worth it.

Obviously it's a big 'if' that he even goes on loan, he might already be ready to start up front for us, none of us know yet.

[MillerBill]

Grigg is not the answer.He's been injured, he's in his thirties,he's not the fastest,lives in the south midlands and will want too big a wage.Leave well alone.We need a bit of pace up front.

[avondalemiller]

Grigg is not the answer.He's been injured, he's in his thirties,he's not the fastest,lives in the south midlands and will want too big a wage.Leave well alone.We need a bit of pace up front.

.....i agree. i think that just about sums it up MB...........