Based on yesterday's game, Hudd and Jela both have moves on the cards. I think we'll be in for a busy deadline day!
Fairly sure this isn't the case. The release clauses only became active after relegation. The contracts, as I understand them, included a wage cut if we got relegated. As a player, you wouldn't sign a deal with a guaranteed pay cut without having a definite get out clause (the buy out). The price will be lower than what we paid because it's designed in the players favour to encourage them to sign in the first place, essentially "come and play for us, if it all goes wrong you'll be paid less but you'll have a reasonable buy out to encourage other clubs to come in for you". We've struggled to attract top talent in the top division and this was a way we could encourage players to come.
We need rid of Jelavic, maybe he'll knuckle down when he doesn't get his move but I am seeing nothing that says he wants to be here. Bruce has to start Hernandez and Akpom, because the pairing of Akpom and Jela isnt going to work.
Big Mo's back this week. Partner him with Hayden against Rochdale. Maybe even Mo and Livermore in a few weeks.
My point is, we are getting some decent midfielders back within the next few months. Diame, Snodgrass, Maloney inbound and Livermore pending FA decision. I'm not really worried about getting an attacking midfielder in and hope Thudd goes if his head isn't in the championship because we can't afford to carry him because of his potential.
If our strikers had been any good we wouldn't have got relegated. I'm not laying all the blame on our strikers though. Yesterday half of our non-strikers were not even wanting to give the strikers a chance to score and then the strikers just stood around hoping we would ponderously create a chance. It was a great turnout by the fans - 2,000
I don't know why Livermore is even being entertained in discussion. He hasn't been included in our squad and the chances of him even pulling on a City shirt again, let alone this season is minimal.
It's not an argument at all, I wasn't trying to argue! I was just saying we needed a player that made the difference, using the lad I saw on Friday as an example of the type of player I meant. I'm also aware that we won't be signing anybody of his calibre anytime soon, but somebody with his type of style would be ideal.
We know they are not that good, but not hopeless; why would they take them weeks ago at premium prices when they can cherry-pick in the remaining window - it is us that is desperate for moves in and out - depending on which interview you heard last. Our public out-pouring's really do us no favours. (Not necessarily a question for you, just using your response as it is the common belief.) Okay, so let's drill down a bit into this reasoning. Bruce made it very clear he wanted to keep Hernandez, or was that just rhetoric? He (or the owners - do we speak of them as a collective?) thought that a structured loan deal with another club was not acceptable, or was it that it was more important to keep him? (I think it would be useful) But does that mean that the only striker we can let go is Jelavic? At what price would that be, £2-3M (ish)? Knowing, as does everyone, that his knees are all but shot, would it not be considered as prudent to offer him out on a reduced fee or a loan? I believe we made a firm bid for Gray, is that wrong? I thought we had made more than one bid for him and that our intent to have him was firm; it also came across that he wanted a move to us. (His reasons for moving to Burnley are hard to fathom.) Why did we make a bid we should have known was inadequate, is Bruce really so bloody naïve? Did he believe that the jump to an acceptable bid was not unreasonable, but was quickly put right. Some of his comments could lead you to think that. We have the new boy, Akpom, on loan, a good signing who I hope will do well for us, but he is not a budget buster, is he? If I consider the level of debt we have and the prize we are supposed to be ambitious to achieve, was a further stretch of the owners investment really so impractical. Before somebody says it is easy to say when it's not my money, yes it is, but is also a reasonable commercial punt.
Hernandez and Akpom to start for me with Jelavic on the bench if one of them tires. Hayden looked good on saturday when he came on. He was more direct than Huddlestone.
Doesn't matter what the FA thinks though, it's down to WADA, who as I understand it have a blanket four year ban on the use of performance enhancing drugs - of which cocaine is considered one - on matchdays.
Fez, Bruce doesn't negotiate the transfers. He may have some input but I don't think he would tell them what to offer maybe just the upper limit. Some people just have a mindset of offering half of a sensible price. They think it may work once or twice and they don't realise they are not taken seriously afterwards.
I think I saw a comment on twitter yesterday that our starting XI yesterday was far and away better than anyone in the league's. Clearly not true based on the result. I think we're looking at names on paper and being sucked into thinking that the players are the players they once were. Jela, Hudd, even Meyler particularly yesterday, are not nearly consistent enough for us if we want to push on.
No it isn't it does the opposite. If it was a performance enhancing drug, we would have been deducted points almost immediately.
Doesn't look like any of our players are on performance enhancing drugs. Most look more like Dylan from the Magic Roundabout.
