Summer 2014 Transfers Mega-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!
Premier league bid for Tettey rejected, apparently.
Which club remains private, but the comments beneath mention Burnley, which sounds fairly feasible.
But what if Burnley's stay in the top flight is very brief, à la QPR last time around :emoticon-0112-wonde
 
Superman wears Grant Holt pyjamas in bed said:
i can't see why some people have a problem with him. keeps the ball well, gets stuck in, experienced in the championship and premier league, free... ticks all the boxes for me <ok>
Click to expand...

Agree - I think it was just the suggestion that he would be part of an exchange deal for Fer, which was just a bit of confusion.

On a free, I doubt anyone would object to someone with his experience joining. For all our creativity struggles, one of the biggest things I felt we missed last season was solid experience that would not let heads drop, which disappeared with Holt. Too many of our key players - Snodders, Fer, Bassong, and more, were too young, too quiet or too liable to lapses in concentration.
 
The way his agent has been spouting off seems like he's personally desperate to get him out the door. What agent says, were even looking at the loan option. That slaps of desperation!
 
I just can't see anyone wanting RVW after last season.

He has been openly and totally slated in the press for his lack of goals and I can't see us getting rid on the cheap. The only alternative I can see is a season long loan to try and raise his stock value.
 
I think abroad his stock is still fairly high, wouldn't make our money back but he could probably find something. He'd probably be better off trying to have a good season with us.
 
What makes you laugh is that he says the championship isn't the scene he plays on .... Yet it's more watched and full of better teams than the majority of the 2 leagues he's played in in the past.
 
While I would prefer RvW stays, a loan deal for him could work very well for us - it would take a large chunk off our wage bill and allow him to regain form and confidence which would either allow us to sell him for a decent price next year still with 2 years remaining on his contract or, if we manage to get promoted, persuade him to come back
 
I_Clean_holtys_boots said:
What makes you laugh is that he says the championship isn't the scene he plays on .... Yet it's more watched and full of better teams than the majority of the 2 leagues he's played in in the past.
Click to expand...

The trouble is without the likes of Cove, we've no idea what the reporter said as it is such a poor translation it's impossible. He could well be saying Ricky's never played in the Championship, which would be true. He could also be suggesting that the style of the Championship doesn't suit him, which might well also be true.
 
I think what he's saying is he doesn't mind RvW staying contracted to Norwich but doesn't want to play in the championship. Tbh I think that's how most players feel but they're prepared to put a shift in apart from the odd one or 2. Also I think he is saying if he's to leave the other club has to take on his full salary and pay a loan fee which should be the case anyway. I will be suprised if he is still here come September tbh but I don't see how loaning him would benefit anyone.
 
I_Clean_holtys_boots said:
I think what he's saying is he doesn't mind RvW staying contracted to Norwich but doesn't want to play in the championship. Tbh I think that's how most players feel but they're prepared to put a shift in apart from the odd one or 2. Also I think he is saying if he's to leave the other club has to take on his full salary and pay a loan fee which should be the case anyway. I will be suprised if he is still here come September tbh but I don't see how loaning him would benefit anyone.
Click to expand...

Why?

I think it would benefit us - we don't have to pay his wages (and possibly don't have an unhappy/unused player on our hands), with his style in Europe we have a much better chance of him regaining his form and us actually recouping some of the transfer cost OR we get promoted and he comes back a more experienced player in better form. Alternatively, he fails in Europe too, and he leaves for very little, but that's no difference from him leaving for little now and we won't have had to pay his wages for a year. That sounds like win-win to me. Or at least win-neutral.

The alternative is that he stays - if he stays and is a success, then great that's a win, but we also have the chance that he fails again and we have to pay him for a season, which is a big lose.

Ideally, we would sell him for £8.5m. But I just don't think that's going to happen. And I'm not convinced selling him for £2m now, taking the hit, and watching him recover his form and value to be back to £8.5m next year is really a good idea when we still have a three year contract so could loan him out as a no-lose punt
 
Canary Rob said:
Why?

I think it would benefit us - we don't have to pay his wages (and possibly don't have an unhappy/unused player on our hands), with his style in Europe we have a much better chance of him regaining his form and us actually recouping some of the transfer cost OR we get promoted and he comes back a more experienced player in better form. Alternatively, he fails in Europe too, and he leaves for very little, but that's no difference from him leaving for little now and we won't have had to pay his wages for a year. That sounds like win-win to me. Or at least win-neutral.

The alternative is that he stays - if he stays and is a success, then great that's a win, but we also have the chance that he fails again and we have to pay him for a season, which is a big lose.

Ideally, we would sell him for £8.5m. But I just don't think that's going to happen. And I'm not convinced selling him for £2m now, taking the hit, and watching him recover his form and value to be back to £8.5m next year is really a good idea when we still have a three year contract so could loan him out as a no-lose punt
Click to expand...

The problem with that is we paid £8.5m for him on a 4(?) year contract - he can leave for nothing after that. That works out at over £2m a year. We might get some of his wages paid but what do we get for the £2m if we send him out on loan?
 
1950canary said:
The problem with that is we paid £8.5m for him on a 4(?) year contract - he can leave for nothing after that. That works out at over £2m a year. We might get some of his wages paid but what do we get for the £2m if we send him out on loan?
Click to expand...


I understand, but "after that" is in three years time. I'm talking about a season long loan this year. The difference in his value with three years left and two years left is negligible.

I do agree that if he returns from his loan spell in a year's time without having made any impact, then we cut our losses and take what little transfer fee we can get. The idea of sending him on loan is that (a) we don't pay his wages (or at least not the majority of them) which prevents the unpleasant situation of a player sitting on the bench being paid but never playing and (b) there is a chance that he recovers form and value on his loan spell, such recovery going straight into OUR pockets because we have the cushion of a three year contract, rather than the pockets of whichever club we sell him for pittance to now.


There is little difference in sending RvW out on loan to recover confidence and sending out, say, Morris to gain experience. Because he still has three years on his contract, sending RvW on loan is a no-lose scenario. If he only had two years or one year on his contract, then I agree we would need to think a bit more carefully about the best way of rescuing value
 
1950canary said:
The problem with that is we paid £8.5m for him on a 4(?) year contract - he can leave for nothing after that. That works out at over £2m a year. We might get some of his wages paid but what do we get for the £2m if we send him out on loan?
Click to expand...

If his wages are £30k p/w, over 12 months that's over £1.5m saved, and I can see his contract being worth more than that. If he doesn't want to be here, and Adams doesn't want him for the championship, then saving that money could be pretty important.

So if he's not going to be a Norwich player next season, let's say we sell. I can't see us recouping more than £4m right now. And we save £4.5m in 3 years wages. (£8.5m saved versus having him sit in our reserves and run out his contract)
But if we loan him, there's a chance his loan goes well and his value increases. Even if we'd get £6m next summer, then we've profited against selling now. (£6m sell, same amount of wages saved = £10.5m saved)

So yes, for me there's a better chance of getting that £2m figure back if we loan him out rather than selling. His value isn't really going to drop much lower (unlikely to do so badly again, whatever league he's in), but more game time and scoring at a decent level will increase his value. Personally I'd rather he stays and sticks half a dozen past Ipswich this season, but if he doesn't want to be here, or the club don't want him, a loan is probably the most prudent option.
 
I tend to agree with Rob if RvW is not willing to stay and play in the Championship. Saving his wages for a year and a loan fee as well would make sense and perhaps allow us to keep other players.
 
Cheers DH - that's what I was trying to say. It works if you do the financials even though it's not immediately clear!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back