Potential Transfers

  • 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!
the £10m payment (its actually about £7m) is separate - it does not affect the original budget. they knew this money was to be paid off and left enough in reserve to cover it. the budget will be similar to last season, maybe £15m overall, including january <ok>
 
Superman wears Grant Holt pyjamas in bed said:
the £10m payment (its actually about £7m) is separate - it does not affect the original budget. they knew this money was to be paid off and left enough in reserve to cover it. the budget will be similar to last season, maybe £15m overall, including january <ok>
Click to expand...

That makes sense I suppose. Leave about £5m for January then. How do you know that Supers, if you don't mind me asking? Is the vital article a bit inaccurate then?

I would quite like them to bump the wage cap up a bit, though. If they increased all first team wages by £2.5k (they wouldn't need to do ALL obviously) that would cost about £3m. I think it would be worth it, but I'm sure they've discussed it.
 
Canary Rob said:
That makes sense I suppose. Leave about £5m for January then. How do you know that Supers, if you don't mind me asking? Is the vital article a bit inaccurate then?

I would quite like them to bump the wage cap up a bit, though. If they increased all first team wages by £2.5k (they wouldn't need to do ALL obviously) that would cost about £3m. I think it would be worth it, but I'm sure they've discussed it.
Click to expand...

the vital article is very good in layman's terms, but they didn't include some of the prize money which left a gaping hole. we are also paying far less in interest payments and they didn't include extra revenue streams from being in the top flight so there is extra money to play with. we effectively lose an extra £2m in bank payments from last season. the board aren't lying when they say the funds are similar to last season <ok>
 
Yellow Fever said:
Afternoon all.

New user here, I've been reading the forums for a while now but only just got round to signing up!

There's been a few mentions of getting cover for Fox and there's one player I can think of who I'm really surprised hasn't been linked with any transfer speculation at all this summer - Stuart Holden of Bolton.

He was out all of last season with cruciate problems and is due to be back for the new season. He was immense in the 2010/11 season and was integral to the Bolton setup before he got injured. Was voted player of the season despite his injury. In my opinion, if he can stay fit he is a real class option. He's only got one year left on his contract and must be looking for a way out of Bolton now they've been relegated. Probably doesn't play as deep as Fox but I'd love to see him at Carrow Road and the circumstances do seem right for a transfer (if he can get and stay fit).
Click to expand...

Firstly welcome to the forum Yellow Fever,

I agree, I think he is a great player.

Two possible issues though is wage demands and fitness.

I have no idea how much he is on, or how much he'll demand. Maybe he might be outside our wage cap or below I don't know it's an odd one.

Fitness, nothing worse than a talented player plagued with injuries, this is the second time he has had the same serious injury i seem to remember. I think there is so many fitness gambles you can have in a team.
 
I dont think Pilkington needs educating, just playing more regulary - I think he oozes class and is the future of our club. If he plays week in and week out next season I think he wont be with us the season after as he will have impressed other teams that much.

Looking at transfers its obvious we need cover at the fullback positions. Naughton would be perfect as he can play at both LB and RB but I think he will follow Lambert and I dont think we are paying enough in wages to attract him. I am not sure but I think we need pace in these positions and I do like the reports I have heard about Aidy White at leeds. Russ Martin can play at RB or CB but I think if we bring in a CB in then we can play him back out on the right where I am sure he wouldnt disapoint.

I think that Elliott Bennetts form had really started to pick up towards the end of the season and with him and Pilks I am not convinced we need an additional wide player of the same ilk unless they are going to be improving the starting 11.

I would draw my summer shopping list up as (in order or priority)

1.CB
2.RB (Potentially cover for LB too as I havent heard much about Tierney recently)
3.CDM
4.CF


Not sure of the ordering of 3/4 but the defense certainly needs tightening in my eyes. I hope we stick to a similar transfer policy as we did under Lambert, looking at young up and coming players where possible or players who have worked for their big chance.
 
Canary Rob said:
Yeah that's been noted a number of times, it was just the Vital football article mentioned the £10m payment, so of course there may be no truth in it, though Macca has a habit of exaggerating...

I would find it surprising if, given that suggests the budget would be £15-17m, that McNally would have told Lambert to aim for 17th- that's a huge amount of money and, tbh, not really believable. Great if true though! I just think it sounds like the author of the article has had a good look at the accounts and is quite reliable.


On transfers- how would people feel about getting Lovenkrands on a year-long contract? Decent player, good competition and education for Pilkington I think
Click to expand...

I was thinking that about Lovenkrands after reading that BBC blog, the fact he was close to signing for Birmingham makes me wonder is he will be a signing.

I don't think he will be a bad signing, not going to be first name on teamsheet but will always be decent backup.
 
pilks just needs to add some consistency while benno had the consistency but needed to add a few more goals to his game. they've both got oodles of talent <ok>

agree about lovenkrands - could be an astute signing. he's only early 30s i think! seems to have been around forever...
 
Davies, Naughton or Clyne, Bridcutt, Snodgrass and Guidetti (loan) if Holt leaves.

Would make me very happy with the summer and should come to about 12m?
 
I think the big difference with loans is:

1) Swansea WANTED McEachran, therefore had to pay a fee to loan him, and it was high!

2) Man City, due to their surplus of strikers, NEED to get those who don't play, in regular 1st team football, else they lose not only value but also their development>match ability conversion is halted. They would therefore be willing to foot the wage bill, since it is in their best interests. (E.g Guidetti).

Just my view on the costs of a loan move.
 
irdan said:
Davies, Naughton or Clyne, Bridcutt, Snodgrass and Guidetti (loan) if Holt leaves.

Would make me very happy with the summer and should come to about 12m?
Click to expand...

I would be keen for just one more RB (who has the ability to play LB), then we would have enough cover, since R.Martin is likely to be used more as a CB this coming season. Hence I suggested Gunter AND Naughton.
 
Goldeneye175 said:
I think the big difference with loans is:

1) Swansea WANTED McEachran, therefore had to pay a fee to loan him, and it was high!

2) Man City, due to their surplus of strikers, NEED to get those who don't play, in regular 1st team football, else they lose not only value but also their development>match ability conversion is halted. They would therefore be willing to foot the wage bill, since it is in their best interests. (E.g Guidetti).

Just my view on the costs of a loan move.
Click to expand...



This is very true, but equally paying for a year long loan is not actually a waste of money when you think about it:
- in a normal deal, say you pay £4m for a player on a 3 year contract, who keeps playing until you release them at the end of the 3 years
- in a loan deal, you could pay £1m for a player worth £5m and sign him for a year long deal

In the second scenario, you've essentially got a better player for a cheaper price because if you'd signed him for 3 years at that rate he would only have cost £3m. Of course, with the second option you get a player who isn't quite as committed and you don't have the chance of selling them on for a profit, but my point is that paying for a loan deal isn't actually a bad move.
 
Canary Rob said:
This is very true, but equally paying for a year long loan is not actually a waste of money when you think about it:
- in a normal deal, say you pay £4m for a player on a 3 year contract, who keeps playing until you release them at the end of the 3 years
- in a loan deal, you could pay £1m for a player worth £5m and sign him for a year long deal

In the second scenario, you've essentially got a better player for a cheaper price because if you'd signed him for 3 years at that rate he would only have cost £3m. Of course, with the second option you get a player who isn't quite as committed and you don't have the chance of selling them on for a profit, but my point is that paying for a loan deal isn't actually a bad move.
Click to expand...

All I was illustrating was that some clubs need to loan out their young players for them to gain experience in the PL (and would be willing to pay a significant proportion of their wages), and some clubs don't need to (and therefore there is a high fee involved).
 
Goldeneye175 said:
All I was illustrating was that some clubs need to loan out their young players for them to gain experience in the PL (and would be willing to pay a significant proportion of their wages), and some clubs don't need to (and therefore there is a high fee involved).
Click to expand...

Sorry, I was agreeing with you ! <ok>

I was just adding the point that even where clubs don't need to and you pay, it's not necessarily a bad deal
 
YellowLittle said:
I agree Sam, but I get the feeling he will be expensive, 18 year old who looks future England star. Oxlade- Chamberlain sold for £10 million+ last year
Click to expand...

I think he'd probably cost £4-5m judging by transfermarkt.com, given that Brum need to sell as well.

Might be a bit of a risk though.
 
Canary Rob said:
I think he'd probably cost £4-5m judging by transfermarkt.com, given that Brum need to sell as well.

Might be a bit of a risk though.
Click to expand...

If we spend money like that I think it needs to be for someone who can slot in the team this year. Not in position to make long term big signings. I think he could be around the team if we were to sign him and he'll only get better.

Regarding the valuation if they sell him for that much they would be mugs when you see how much Southampton get for promising youngsters.
 
Do you know what, I genuinely believe that the bonding of the players and the team spirit transforms any players and if you look at Man Citeh at times last year they looked lost. It took Toure and Tevez to make them gel again and a top manager can work magic with 'ordinary' players. Hughton will be fine and a couple of purchases to spice up the squad is probably all he needs. I have more faith in him as a manager and as a man and the input from the Geordies on our board has reinforced that viewpoint.
 
YellowLittle said:
If we spend money like that I think it needs to be for someone who can slot in the team this year. Not in position to make long term big signings. I think he could be around the team if we were to sign him and he'll only get better.

Regarding the valuation if they sell him for that much they would be mugs when you see how much Southampton get for promising youngsters.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure- Ox was valued at around £3.5m when Arsenal signed him on trasnfermarkt, so the price they paid is pretty par for the course.

I agree though, we shouldn't be spending this on a player who will take a year or two to fully develop- that can wait until we're secure in the prem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back