We've attracted much better players than we did last summer so I'd say we're on the improve. Out of interest, which non parachute clubs do you think have done better?
Whilst we could have done (and still could do) better I get the impression that both Twine and Philogene were first choices, weren’t they?
I Think Vinagre was. Twine and Morton have been bubbling all summer by all accounts just waiting for other business to be done and I can't imagine were spunking 5m Philogene as a panic buy either. Obviously we didn't land all our initial targets but name a club outside the big European clubs that do.
Sorry but I think this just seems like such a biased version of events. I don't have any insider info but I find it very hard to believe that players would be refusing to come here because we play passing football from the back; that's the style that players want to play! And if they didn't want to play this style, why on earth would we be going for them? We know how committed Rosenior is to his style and that he's only interested in players who can play out, so the idea we'd be turned down by players because of our style is so far-fetched that I just don't believe it. It screams of City fan narrative. Because it's popular in our echo chambers to reject the playing style, some people are drawn to a version of reality where players don't like it either. But all I see in the neutral world is people praising our way of playing and the progress we're making. I don't realistically think every signing will have been our first choice, but I certainly think Twine, Philogene, Vinagre were and I don't think any of them are exactly scraping the barrel. Lokilo is probably the lowest profile one but even he tore up the Turkish Super Lig last season. How many other clubs' least important signing is coming off the back of such a good season?
i don't get all this 'won't sign for LR' or 'don't like our style of play' etc etc etc. If a player is approached by Hull City, or any other club for that matter and a better offer comes along, more money, cash upfront, longer contract and so on from another club, and it could be in the middle of the desert for all it matters then that is who they will sign for.
Cardiff and Bristol City. come on mate.. Cov jury is out, Simms has looked poor so far. Other two are the two I'd put us neck and neck with although Brum pulling ahead with late business.
I once had a taxi ride like that, I overslept for catching the bus in Baker Street for a City away game. I offered the taxi driver an extra tenner if he got me there on time, he floored the bleedin' thing! The views expressed in my posts are not necessarily mine.
Then it's a bullshit question then. How well a club does in the transfer market is relative to their position and finances. You already prefaced the question by saying 'other than the parachute payment clubs' so you know this. Given the owner's ambitions and how vocal he has been about it, it's an underwhelming transfer window imo.
Is twine better then tufan or Adama? Who's come in that's better then seri? Allsop better then darlow? ( Ok that wasn't summer ) Is delap better then Oscar or tetteh? Is lokilo better then sinak or ally or pelkas? Vinagre improves us at LB if he stays fit We've lost a CB who admittedly was poor but we haven't replaced him, we are hoping Smith steps up Woods has gone and not replaced as of yet. All of those signed this season may turn out to be better. But I'd say they are more players that LR wants to have rather then players that are better.
And turned us down at least once claiming his wife didn't like the area. So what happend to change his mind I wonder? More money on the table, and that is the bargaining/sticking point in 99% of transfers. Most players couldn't give a toss which club they play for as long as the coin is good.
