January transfer thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Simple fact is, we're not at a stage in our new model where we're setting fees to scare off clubs. We're setting a fee that we think extracts maximum profit.

We all know Stewart is excellent but from a business perspective, what are the benefits of holding on to him until the summer (assuming he doesn't want a new contract)?

We're not likely to go up with him and we're unlikely to go down without him. So there's likely a financial downside to holding on for an extra 6 months with the potential for him to be unsettled. Another factor is that players with massive upside have joined us in the last couple of years with an understanding that we're a stepping stone for them. If we start playing hardball, then it's harder to persuade those players to join us in future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Norman Stanley Fletcher, TopCat., Robertson and 6 others
Flash Gordon said:
Simple fact is, we're not at a stage in our new model where we're setting fees to scare off clubs. We're setting a fee that we think extracts maximum profit.

We all know Stewart is excellent but from a business perspective, what are the benefits of holding on to him until the summer (assuming he doesn't want a new contract)?

We're not likely to go up with him and we're unlikely to go down without him. So there's likely a financial downside to holding on for an extra 6 months with the potential for him to be unsettled. Another factor is that players with massive upside have joined us in the last couple of years with an understanding that we're a stepping stone for them. If we start playing hardball, then it's harder to persuade those players to join us in future.
Click to expand...
We will probably face the same situation in the summer with Cirkin/Neil/Patto/Ballard/Clarke (delete as appropriate). This new model will piss fans off at times but it has been explained by the hierarchy that this is the way we are going. Wage structures won't be broken.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nomad cat, TopCat., Robertson and 4 others
LD19SAFC said:
I’d be gutted with that deal. Simms isn’t that good imo.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree. Am not a big fan of his personally. Time is on his side of course, but I do think if Stewart goes we are going to need more than a prospect to fill the gap. It is a big challenge for the club, sure they have plans though, they are a well oiled machine these days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cumbrianmackem, Charley Farley, Hudson92 and 1 other person
Flash Gordon said:
Simple fact is, we're not at a stage in our new model where we're setting fees to scare off clubs. We're setting a fee that we think extracts maximum profit.

We all know Stewart is excellent but from a business perspective, what are the benefits of holding on to him until the summer (assuming he doesn't want a new contract)?

We're not likely to go up with him and we're unlikely to go down without him. So there's likely a financial downside to holding on for an extra 6 months with the potential for him to be unsettled. Another factor is that players with massive upside have joined us in the last couple of years with an understanding that we're a stepping stone for them. If we start playing hardball, then it's harder to persuade those players to join us in future.
Click to expand...
Great post mate. I am a little less confident on the unlikely to go down without him bit. We would definitely need another 1 in, probably 2. Also depends on whether Pritchard is away as some are suggesting, plus of course Embo's return. I think you are right and we probably end up somewhere between 7th and 21st with or without him, but personally think the difference in position could be significantly different without him, or without a very good replacement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Robertson and DELETED ACCOUNT 1234
Flash Gordon said:
Simple fact is, we're not at a stage in our new model where we're setting fees to scare off clubs. We're setting a fee that we think extracts maximum profit.

We all know Stewart is excellent but from a business perspective, what are the benefits of holding on to him until the summer (assuming he doesn't want a new contract)?

We're not likely to go up with him and we're unlikely to go down without him. So there's likely a financial downside to holding on for an extra 6 months with the potential for him to be unsettled. Another factor is that players with massive upside have joined us in the last couple of years with an understanding that we're a stepping stone for them. If we start playing hardball, then it's harder to persuade those players to join us in future.
Click to expand...

Absolutely spot on
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hudson92
FellTop said:
I tend to agree. Am not a big fan of his personally. Time is on his side of course, but I do think if Stewart goes we are going to need more than a prospect to fill the gap. It is a big challenge for the club, sure they have plans though, they are a well oiled machine these days.
Click to expand...
We need at least 3 strikers
 
FellTop said:
Great post mate. I am a little less confident on the unlikely to go down without him bit. We would definitely need another 1 in, probably 2. Also depends on whether Pritchard is away as some are suggesting, plus of course Embo's return. I think you are right and we probably end up somewhere between 7th and 21st with or without him, but personally think the difference in position could be significantly different without him, or without a very good replacement.
Click to expand...
Embo will not return this season, just my opinion
 
With the news about Embo I think we have a challenge to overcome. The lads who get inside info seem confident Pritchard is away in Jan (in this case I hope they have the wrong end of the stick). Embo is the obvious cover for Pritch in the squad, so even if he doesnt go we may need to dip into the market (Pritch picks up injuries and rarely completes 90). His assists and goals match up favourably with Pritch over the last season and a half (obviously not saying he is as good) and dont see another 10 as we play it in our squad. An extra move we probably all hoped we wouldnt have to make in Jan.
 
FellTop said:
With the news about Embo I think we have a challenge to overcome. The lads who get inside info seem confident Pritchard is away in Jan (in this case I hope they have the wrong end of the stick). Embo is the obvious cover for Pritch in the squad, so even if he doesnt go we may need to dip into the market (Pritch picks up injuries and rarely completes 90). His assists and goals match up favourably with Pritch over the last season and a half (obviously not saying he is as good) and dont see another 10 as we play it in our squad. An extra move we probably all hoped we wouldnt have to make in Jan.
Click to expand...

Maybe with Embo out and Pritchard injured, we could change shape slightly. But Ba, Matete or Michut alongside Evans, push Neil ever so slightly forward, not as a 10 but as a CM to use his passing then Clarke and Amad / Roberts wide and a lone stiriker.

The other option is Amad in the 10 and Roberts and Clarke wide. Yes I'm aware it didn't really work for 1 game, but what's to say the next time it wouldn't
 
  • Like
Reactions: nomad cat, Robertson, vic9 and 1 other person
Chunksafc said:
Maybe with Embo out and Pritchard injured, we could change shape slightly. But Ba, Matete or Michut alongside Evans, push Neil ever so slightly forward, not as a 10 but as a CM to use his passing then Clarke and Amad / Roberts wide and a lone stiriker.

The other option is Amad in the 10 and Roberts and Clarke wide. Yes I'm aware it didn't really work for 1 game, but what's to say the next time it wouldn't
Click to expand...
I would be tempted to go 433. Matete in alongside Evans and Neil. Like you suggest a bit more freedom for Neil to push higher.

One of my worries about pushing a wide player into the middle is I think it is much harder to play in the middle. You need awareness on both sides, always scanning, danger and opportunities both sides. I just think playing central is something takes a lot of learning and is hard to be as effective on the inside if you have spent years as a wide man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nordic and Chunksafc
Chunksafc said:
Maybe with Embo out and Pritchard injured, we could change shape slightly. But Ba, Matete or Michut alongside Evans, push Neil ever so slightly forward, not as a 10 but as a CM to use his passing then Clarke and Amad / Roberts wide and a lone stiriker.

The other option is Amad in the 10 and Roberts and Clarke wide. Yes I'm aware it didn't really work for 1 game, but what's to say the next time it wouldn't
Click to expand...
Amad in the 10 is what me and my son have been saying for months
 
  • Like
Reactions: nomad cat and Chunksafc
FellTop said:
I would be tempted to go 433. Matete in alongside Evans and Neil. Like you suggest a bit more freedom for Neil to push higher.

One of my worries about pushing a wide player into the middle is I think it is much harder to play in the middle. You need awareness on both sides, always scanning, danger and opportunities both sides. I just think playing central is something takes a lot of learning and is hard to be as effective on the inside if you have spent years as a wide man.
Click to expand...
True.

I'd be happy seeing a midfield 3 as I think that would help us more than a 10
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nacho, FellTop and clockstander
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back