It might be one of those Simon's type scenarios where we see enough to hold on to him with a view to the future. I still think we would benefit from a 3rd experienced CB though. Hughes is out for a while and is impressive but has an error in him . Just re watched the Leeds game. To be honest I think there's an argument there for better distribution from the keeper there also. It was a bit Jekyll and Hyde from Ivor in the Leeds game for me. Made some great saves but was the weak point playing out a few times, could have done better on the second too I thought. Then redeems himself from thee obvious 3rd with that header. He's a great prospect, but he's far from the finished article for me.
I don't think we are particularly desperate to trigger it early. Not because we don't want him, just we need to ensure survival this January to be able to afford him.
It might be but you run the risk of pissing players off by not giving them a sniff, there's also players in the squad who could've been moved on to open a pathway for him. I'm quite surprised by the calibre of CB we're targeting. The ones we've been linked with will be coming in to start and the fact we've been looking for a left-sided one, shows that the club aren't as sold on Hughes as the fanbase is (certainly not in the short-term). I don't think a centre half is a priority this month, I'd be looking for a proper left back a lot more urgently. I don't really understand the keeper situation either. Ivor is ours and has been as good as anyone this season. Yes, he's not perfect with his feet but Rushworth will be gone in the summer and we'll be back to square 1. I think dropping him is ridiculous but then again we did spend £1m on a third choice keeper, so we aren't exactly the beacon of logic.
It's funny, isn't it? Acun always said he didn't like FFP because it stopped him from spending as much as he wanted, yet now we can't afford Puerta if we go down, yet there's no FFP in that league.
I think think Maccas long term future would be in doubt more than Hughes. You bring in an experienced one to bring the youngsters on and compete with. Same as the keeper situation. Pandur is ours long term, he's had a longer run in the team than probably planned when we brought Rushworth in. 20 games competing with someone more established for the shirt won't have any negative long term effect on Pandur at all. Yeah he might be pissed off, but he'll be pissed off knowing he has to work on aspects of his game to keep his place. That's not a bad thing with a young player, and in keeper terms he is still a young one. I've no doubt he'll be our №1 long term. And he'll be better for it competing with Rushworth.
I don't think it's quite as simple as that. You still have a form of PSR but it's around wage bill as a proportion of income, not overall losses. We'd be carrying a huge wage bill if we got relegated to League 1. So I. That scenario it wouldn't be the transfer fee that would be a problem in PSR, it'd be underwriting his contract.
Hughes won't be here long term. He'll be gone in 18 months, he's still error prone but someone will take a punt on him at PL level because of how good he is on the ball. Rushworth isn't more established though, he's younger and Ivor's played more games at a better level. It's replacing one young player with another.
It's a soft cap unless it's changed and it's nothing to do with transfer fees but % of wages compared to revenue. We'd sell a number of players so it would be an easy workaround. You can spend an absolute fortune at that level My point was that Acun isn't being transparent *again
Bold statement for someone who hasn't seen him play. The only argument for replacing Pandur at this point would be distribution. Time will tell if Rushworth comes in and makes a positive difference to the team in that respect. If Pandur proves the better then all the more kudos, But Rushworth is going to be given an opportunity and it's up to Pandur to overcome that challenge. He'll be a better player for it.
I think it's more likely that the hamstring injury is more of a concern than previously thought rather than any judgement on his ability.
So why not try and loan one? I thought if anyone that's what we'd do. Gibson & Porteous are proper signings at this level.
I don't necessarily think it's as easy as that without huge losses, and if we get promoted we still have to comply on promotion again, as Birmingham might find difficult. Acun has money, or access to finance for it not to be a huge issue at championship income levels. But he's not a consortium of American billionaires.
Based on what? I think we're planning on getting a fee for Macca. Before his contract runs out - and we want someone to be an improvement in the short term and provide long term competition for Hughes when he's available.
You only have to comply with the rules of the division when you're in the division. So Birmingham's spending this year has to comply with L1 rules, but if/when they're promoted they'll only have to comply with PSR rules in the Championship from next season. Ipswich were in a very good position when they came up despite spending a fortune in L1. Birmingham will be in a really good position
Why would we let Macca go this month? He's playing well and is a really solid CB at this level, just not the easiest on the eye. Should the worst happen, he'd also be a really good CB in L1.
Yeah, I don't see Porteus as anything other than a long shot and I doubt the club would too, although they've been big admirers for a while they'd probably make strategic adjustments elsewhere in order to do so. But I can't see that happening, to be fair.
Maybe if that's true but they went for Gibson and maybe Porteous if it's true so we clearly want long term
