Transfer Rumours The Summer Transfer Rumour Thread 2016

Im guessing a lot of panic buying in the Jan Window plus a change of manager just might be on the cards..........Not sure that will happen though. We don't have a bad squad just not the best we could have had......

 

We also just need a bit of reasonable luck...we could have beaten Watford and/or Sunderland. We had the possession and chances. A few 3 pointers and nerves will be settled. Nothing unusual about Saints having a poor start to the season.

 

Be too late then.

 

Past 3 seasons we have had good starts though.

 

My prediction, for what it's worth. We'll do just fine this season. My reasoning is that we've done pretty much what we did last summer and we did OK then. This conversation happens every September and it's been incorrect in its conclusions for a long time.

Now there is something else worth mentioning. When I'm in a casino and red has come up nine times on the trot, I watch people backing black with a sigh. Do they really think the ball knows it's due a black?

As it happens though, I also despair of people who back red, convinced there's a pattern. What they can't see is that it's random.

However, and I've argued this more than enough, I don't see what we do as in any way related to luck. We do well buying in players not because we're lucky but because we know how to look and we buy players who can't go straight to "top" clubs because "top" clubs can't afford bad signings; their fans revolt far too quickly. We (most of us) are a more patient bunch and we can get through the period where Mané always took on one man too many in his early games. We can see what's there and we wait. EDIT: except the bloke near me who will end up dumped in the Itchen one dark night.

So, we have a way of spotting players with potential (not 100% of the time but enough) and we offer them a route to riches. And, for a few years we have players playing for us who are much better than would normally play for a provincial club like us. Perhaps, rather than despairing that Mané left, we should rejoice that we had him in the first place. We will become a destination but until then, we can use players on their way up (and I say "up" with a cynical sneer).

Long may it continue. This is how we'll build a sustainable way into the top four without having to be bought by dirty money, money that can vanish as quickly as it appears.

Vin

 

Same time last season:



Vin

 

Oh my mistake, was thinking 13/14 and 14/15.

 

That's true to some extent, but it's also because things aren't going totally our way. If we were successfully executing the conveyor belt of talent thing, we would have sold Davis, Fonte, Long and maybe one of Bertand or Tadic. Instead they all got extensions and we lost the younger Mane instead.

When OL was doing this they 1) Kept their players around an extra season or two and 2) Replaced sold players with players from their academy, not players they had to buy.

Having a player around for 4 seasons and replacing him for free gives you a much larger profit margin and safety net in case of error than buying players for 10-15m, keeping them for two seasons, and selling them for 25-30m.

 

Spurs got off to a shocker!

 

Some people must have such dour, uninspiring lives to be so negative all the time.

 

Unfortunately we're not playing Norwich next though this year!

 

No point going on about the transfer window. What we need now is to start showing a bit more on the pitch. Arsenal is an incredible opportunity to lift us all because nobody expects anything. If we play well I suspect everyone here will take defeat and go into the next game with a sense of optimism. If we win Puel will be the Second Coming.

The issue so far has been our abject performances for sudden - and horribly long - spells of all three matches. I complained Koeman's side were dull, but I don't even know what this team is. After three matches we should get it, whatever it is, and I think that is why fans are so perturbed. Especially as we finished last season as one of the form teams on 2016.

 

Well Mr Onionman, I've done this loads of times & as long as you double your next bet, if you do actually lose, you'll win. It's NEVER failed me, ever. Yep, had a few tweaky moments but it's always come through. Not sure what this say about your original post but just fyi.

 

Statistically i don't think this is possible. I'm not smart enough to explain, but there's a lot of research and analysis out there by people who are...
partly due to table limits, partly due to it not being 50:50 because there's a dead slot on the wheel.
Plus, if you start with £5 and lose 10 in a row your next bet has to be £5,120 to break even. If you win...

 

Anyone who has ever gambled knows what he wrote is a crock of ****. And if that were a tactic, he should take up fishing rather than gambling!

 

Well, you're wrong with my experience HR. I don't lie & certainly would have no reason to BS on here.

 

Mathematically speaking, as long as you're playing without a house limit and an infinite bankroll, you're right (and if you had infinite money, winning an extra pound would, literally, make you no richer). Otherwise, in the absence of one or other of those provisos, it's provable that you lose bang on your expected loss of 1.35% on even bets.

Vin

 

Not doubting your experience so far. However, if your "tweaky moment" occurred at, say, betting £32 to win £1, what would have happened after three more losing spins? Would you have been happy to put on £256 to win that £1? Never forget that there was once a run of 23 reds at Monte Carlo casino. Could you have gone through that?

Vin

 

Sorry for posting something on topic. I appear to have stepped into Gamblers Anonymous.

 

Nope I certainly couldn't have gone through the Monte Carlo experience you mention but in my case, the key is in your original statement of 6,7,8 or 9 red/black sequence & I've never had to go past 3x to win. You're also right about the odds as you're betting that zero doesn't come up, so it's not 50/50 but 18/37 & a zero will break the sequence. Yep, Monte Carlo could happen but that's a rarity & thankfully I've never experienced. Oh & btw, I'm not a "real" gambler, just the occasional casino visit maybe twice a year & I never gamble to win money; it's just a couple hours entrainment. No different than paying £30 to watch SFC (in my book anyway). I think I'll leave it there or I can see this one going on a run!