I think that idea is pretty true. I believe in the talent of the players we have and think they’re better than most equivalents in the league. But I’m confident that we could replace them pretty effectively if we had a decent amount of money available. However, to me that means that I’m not remotely scared of a situation where a few go at once. I love Clarke, Patto, Neil and Ballard but I think we could get very adequate replacements for all of them. Indeed in some cases we’ve got prospects at the club already who could grow into those roles. Ultimately I’d rather get full whack next summer than sell at half price this, if that makes sense - even if it means the road is perhaps longer and the task this summer is that much harder. That probably puts me in the minority, though!
Millar is a good player and he's probably got different attributes to Clarke, but I think Clarke is a lot better. I think if he's only cost that, he's a steal. Imagine if Clarke had gone and we'd replaced him for 1.5 mill, some people's heads would fall of. It's akin to refusing 10/1 odds for Haaland anytime.
aye but if Leeds offered me him in a straight swap with Rusyn or Hemir I’d be snapping their hands off
Jobe linked with moves away “Don’t sell him, has a lot of potential.” Clarke linked with moves away “Don’t sell him, he’s our best player.” Hume linked with a move away “Don’t sell him, he’s one hell of a defender.” Ekwah linked with a move away “Don’t sell him, he could turn into a real quality player.” Look - we realistically need one of them to go if we’re wanting to bring in the reinforcements needed for top 6. If we don’t sell one, I really think all we can do is bring in a striker on loan - and that’ll be that, and not good enough. I’ll miss whoever it is goes for big money, but it’s the only way we can make some serious moves on the transfer market.
You could make a solid argument that by retaining the likes of Neil, Rigg, Clarke (maybe) and Hume...we've spent a fortune. We certainly couldn't replace those players like-for-like. It's a huge win for us as a squad...it doesn't negate our needs though. If we don't plan on selling, or at least we refuse to sell on the cheap, which is admirable.. we then still need to spend. Said the same yesterday... the next fortnight is going to be super interesting. Retaining Jack Clarke would be huge...not ganna get us promoted on its own though... spending on top of that will be needed for a good go at this campaign. You can't have it all ways.
Someone has to go. And out of everyone I don’t mind it being ekwah. Young Lenz can cover if desperate or we sign someone with the money generated
We’re talking about simms in hindsight here after the way he played for us (yes he got goals but didn’t look brilliant) we shouldn’t have paid the up front fee and add ons Coventry did. I guarentee if we did people would be amazed at the fee
Millar is a downgrade on Clarke yes, but would getting 17m for Clarke and spending 1.5m on Millar, 4.5m on Conway then still having over 10m in banked cash not make us as a team better? Whenever we sell Clarke the direct replacement will be a worse player, it's about improving the team as a whole.
The opinion of others who think the real world is like playing the Spectrum 48k version of Football Manager
FWIW and at risk of prompting fury; I’d probably prefer Conway to Mendy *runs* I’ve been criticised for saying this before but I’m going to say it again. Under this regime we still haven’t had a signing from abroad be successful and have an extended run in the team. All our successful signings have been from British clubs. Players who know british football. Just a personal preference. I hope if Mendy signs he’s an exception to prove me wrong.
https://www.lep.co.uk/sport/footbal...vation-behind-ps15m-transfer-to-hull-4737034# https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/spo...news/hull-city-pull-huge-transfer-9471759.amp Both reporting a fee in the region of £1.5m
Basel wanted 5 million. If it’s 1.5 the rest is definitely in guarenteed add-ons. he’s not 1.5 million I know that
