Jump to content
Bill

Official transfer rumour thread

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, Justin time said:

I know I am getting on a bit but it amazes me that people think that 20 / 30 million to flush down the toilet just like that is something that has become expected.

And that spending money always results in success. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Justin time said:

I know I am getting on a bit but it amazes me that people think that 20 / 30 million to flush down the toilet just like that is something that has become expected.

And just think, it was only about three or four months ago that football's entire financial system had allegedly collapsed, large transfer fees and wages were a thing of the past, and we were the only ones doing it right by being sustainable and living within our means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Justin time said:

I know I am getting on a bit but it amazes me that people think that 20 / 30 million to flush down the toilet just like that is something that has become expected.

Well i Agree but it is not flushing it down the toilet if you are gaining in sky money and Players Value 

I Agree it is a silly amount of money 20/30 million To the man in the street but the Richer owners it is Peanuts

but i did not mean every season i did mean when the club needed it 

But i also know nothing is Guaranteed But a owner who could inject some Money at Key times would help the club 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Justin time said:

I know I am getting on a bit but it amazes me that people think that 20 / 30 million to flush down the toilet just like that is something that has become expected.

It’s not flushing it down the toilet if you purchase assets that will retain or appreciate in value and we’d stayed up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am reminded of the story about advertising. They say that 50% of advertising works - the trouble is that nobody knows which 50%. Spending that sort of money is no guarantee of success. We could have spent that on Amadou and Duda.

I suspect that the Board and Webber/Farke realised last summer that spending 320/30 million was too great a risk and was unlikely to make enough of a difference.

We must remember that getting players to want to come to CR is not easy in the first place, especially when we can't entice them with big wages.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

It’s not flushing it down the toilet if you purchase assets that will retain or appreciate in value and we’d stayed up.

But it's worse than flushing it down the toilet if those "assets" turn out to be not very good but remain on long term contracts costing millions. It would greatly reduce our chances of being competitive moving forwards - as we have seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Times are reporting Chilwell to Chelsea, which has been picked up by the local Leicester papers, so it does sound like Lewis to Leicester could be a real goer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Badger said:

But it's worse than flushing it down the toilet if those "assets" turn out to be not very good but remain on long term contracts costing millions. It would greatly reduce our chances of being competitive moving forwards - as we have seen.

So let’s never spend any money, that’ll bring success! What there is is a balance to be found, between not spending money on has-been a with exorbitant wages (Naismith) and spending zero money and relying on loans that don’t really give a stuff if we succeed or not. There has to be a middle ground somewhere and that’s where we went wrong this season, we were too conservative.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

So let’s never spend any money, that’ll bring success! What there is is a balance to be found, between not spending money on has-been a with exorbitant wages (Naismith) and spending zero money and relying on loans that don’t really give a stuff if we succeed or not. There has to be a middle ground somewhere and that’s where we went wrong this season, we were too conservative.

Who is suggesting never spending money? When we bought Naismith, we didn't expect that he was a "has been," although he was clearly past his best. He was bought because he was the best available and he had enough about him to guarantee that we would be playing premier league football the next season. Only he didn't, did he?

Had we not spent the money on him and been relegated, the club would have been criticised by people like you for "not trying" or "being too conservative." However, if we hadn't we hadn't have bought him, we would have been in a better place in the years afterwards.

The sensible way is only spend money that  won't damage you in the medium to long term and don't spend it just because you have it - iy you can't attract the right player - keep the money.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, vlad666 said:

5E49A06C-E3FF-44E6-865F-D9DDFF279AC1.png

Would be a good move for Lewis as he will get good game time if Chilwell leaves. I think as they guy say Lewis doesn’t have any outstanding attributes but is ‘solid’.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/08/2020 at 12:58, norfolkngood said:

Well i Agree but it is not flushing it down the toilet if you are gaining in sky money and Players Value 

I Agree it is a silly amount of money 20/30 million To the man in the street but the Richer owners it is Peanuts

but i did not mean every season i did mean when the club needed it 

But i also know nothing is Guaranteed But a owner who could inject some Money at Key times would help the club 

 

I see where you are coming from but it was when you said that 20/30 million was not crazy money that got me.👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/08/2020 at 13:05, Canary Wundaboy said:

It’s not flushing it down the toilet if you purchase assets that will retain or appreciate in value and we’d stayed up.

Unfortunately we have a lot of form when we spend big by our standards of flushing money down the loo. Our outstanding buys have been youth and bargain basement players. The cloud of Naismith and RVW haunts and to a much lesser degree Klose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference there though is that Naismith didn't really want to come but accepted based on a chunky wage without a relegation clause and then proceded to play like garbage whilst berating his younger teammates, whereas RvW DID want to be here and gave us 100% but was let down by a clueless manager and distinct lack of supply.

I can't understand any complaints about Klose besides his injury issues, as he's been a total professional throughout, has had some outstanding games and brings excellent experience and quality to help our younger players as well. He may have gone past his best at this point, but he's been a good servant since joining regardless.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Billyboybunters said:

Would be a good move for Lewis as he will get good game time if Chilwell leaves. I think as they guy say Lewis doesn’t have any outstanding attributes but is ‘solid’.

I've got so much time for Lewis, I think he's a fantastic player and would be more than happy for him to stay. However, I think he's the one player from our 'youth stars' where we already appear to have signed his replacement, and a ready to go one at that (if the Coventry fans are anything to go by). 

 

Good move for Lewis, he will play there and with the fee about to be received for Chilwell it would seem unlikely Leicester would mess around low balling us if Jamal is the number one target, they will want to get him in ASAP. For us that means picking up at least £20 million, with potentially more with add ons or a sell on clause for later down the line.

 

For me it then puts us in an extremely strong position with regards to holding onto our other key players, we will have gone from not needing to sell, to now not having to sell with an additional 20 million buffer. I think that pushes everyone else prices up, we will sell if the right amount comes in but for example we only let a Max or Emi go for 30-35 million now. Whats more, its will allow us to put that extra 2-3 million into any of our 'marquee signings' if need be. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheGoogler said:

This bloke suggesting Ben Gibson doesn't fancy a move to Carrow Road. No clue if he's reliable or not.

Suggestion is that Forest are looking at him now on a permanent deal involving a swap for Worrall.

Does sound like this isn't going to happen anymore - could become something later in the window if other opportunities don't work for both parties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't say as I care if the suggested Gibson option has fizzled out, always thought he was overrated, couldn't get into the Burnley backline ahead either Mee or Tarkowski (neither of whom are exactly world class), and now appears to be extremely picky about where he goes despite being frozen out at Burnley and letting his career slowly disappear in the process.

Wasn't worth the money they paid for him (much like Mings wasn't worth anywhere near the 20 mil Villa paid), and not only would I rather play any of our existing CB's over him if they are fully fit, I'd rather sign half a dozen other possible options, all of whom would likely be on far less wages and have actually played in the past year or two...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard whispers that we're looking at Ivan Toney the Peterborough United striker. He was the outstanding League One player last season and scores hatfuls of goals. He's a big target man and with him and Pukki upfront I think we'd be OK for goals. Posh say they want £10m but they say that about everyone they're looking to sell.

Interestingly the local paper, the Peterborough Telegraph, has owner Darren MacAnthony this week claiming that they'd accepted an offer from an unnamed club two weeks but nothing has progressed since. They turned down a bid of £5m from Celtic earlier this month branding it an ' insult '.

Of course any club that boasts MacAnthony and Barry Fry as mouthpieces is always going to be best known for hyperbole and bulls*it but I wonder, just wonder.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ivan Toney reminds me of a better version of Jason Lee from Forest in the mid 90's.

Good with his head, fairly strong, maybe not the best technically but a real handful at times.

We could do worse, but 10 million seems a pretty hefty price tag for a guy who's only had 2 decent seasons in League One.

I'd argue there's better value elsewhere if that's what they're looking for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Indy_Bones said:

Can't say as I care if the suggested Gibson option has fizzled out, always thought he was overrated, couldn't get into the Burnley backline ahead either Mee or Tarkowski (neither of whom are exactly world class)

While not world class - how many defenders are in the Premier League? - both Mee and Tarkowski had decent seasons. Burnley finished second top for clean sheets, and it really wasn't thanks solely to Nick Pope. Gibson didn't play for a number of reasons but, let's be honest, if he was starting in one of the strongest defences in the top tier we wouldn't be anywhere near signing him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Newcastle are said to be front runners for Rob Dickie, still think this lad would be perfect for us.

As above Gibson is not rally any improvement on what we have and not exactly in the young and improvement category.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Legend Iwan said:

While not world class - how many defenders are in the Premier League? - both Mee and Tarkowski had decent seasons. Burnley finished second top for clean sheets, and it really wasn't thanks solely to Nick Pope. Gibson didn't play for a number of reasons but, let's be honest, if he was starting in one of the strongest defences in the top tier we wouldn't be anywhere near signing him.

So why was it when Mee was out for the last 6 games of the season, they replaced him with Kevin Long and Gibson wasn't even named in the squad?

This season just gone, Gibson was on the bench a mere 11 times and made a single cup appearance. Doesn't show a level of confidence in his ability does it, certainly not after paying 15 mil for him and him having made just ONE PL appearance in those two seasons, with a grand total of 6 games played in 2 years.

Even Klose who was injured for most of this season played more games this year alone than Gibson has since joining Burnley FFS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We conceded a hatful in the Championship and even more last year. Maybe we should be looking at other areas rather than just endlessly talking about new CB's all the time. And maybe the tactics as a reason as well.

I think the four CB's we have are good enough for a challenge next season. I think with our marauding full backs, the CB's just need more protection in front of them.

While we neglect a solid proper defensive midfielder not just one of two, then I think we still won't find an answer.

Teams in the Championship will be more likely to cross it in earlier than EPL teams who try and work it around the box.

The argument about set pieces will continue because I think DF is stubborn and will not alter his zonal marking tactic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not too bothered if we get Gibson or not - he’s obviously a decent enough player but there’s enough question marks if he was so under-used at Burnley; if he doesn’t want to come then we move on, I’m sure there’s others out there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Indy_Bones said:

The difference there though is that Naismith didn't really want to come but accepted based on a chunky wage without a relegation clause and then proceded to play like garbage whilst berating his younger teammates, whereas RvW DID want to be here and gave us 100% but was let down by a clueless manager and distinct lack of supply.

I can't understand any complaints about Klose besides his injury issues, as he's been a total professional throughout, has had some outstanding games and brings excellent experience and quality to help our younger players as well. He may have gone past his best at this point, but he's been a good servant since joining regardless.

Whilst they are rightly 3 separate cases and very different individuals the end result so far as our outlay of big money by Norwich standards was the same. Naismith big wages,big fee, played for us for about 25% of his contract and we received no fee at the end. RVW big fee and wages and again only played for us for about 25% of his contract. Klose decent chap but would we ever do that deal again, i suspect not. He cost about £10m he has been injured best part of 50% of his Norwich career, has had IMO less impact that Zimmermann who cost pea nuts and what will we get for him at the end of the day at his age probably nothing. So 3 players costing between  £20 to £30 m in total,  goodness knows how many millions in wages, nothing back in transfer fees and all three added together probably averaged about 30% playing time for our club. This is in very sharp contrast to to our excellent recent record of investing in youth and lesser known players. Spending shed loads of cash often does not work and in Norwich recent history definitely does not work. As well as results this is a business buy young and develop is not only good now it was good in the past particularly during our most successful spell in the late 1980s and early 1990s

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Indy_Bones said:

So why was it when Mee was out for the last 6 games of the season, they replaced him with Kevin Long and Gibson wasn't even named in the squad?

Well, Ben Mee, Burnley’s captain, was out injured for the end of the season, he wasn’t replaced. That’s why Kevin Long came in.

42 minutes ago, Indy_Bones said:

This season just gone, Gibson was on the bench a mere 11 times and made a single cup appearance. Doesn't show a level of confidence in his ability does it, certainly not after paying 15 mil for him and him having made just ONE PL appearance in those two seasons, with a grand total of 6 games played in 2 years.

Even Klose who was injured for most of this season played more games this year alone than Gibson has since joining Burnley FFS!

In terms of Gibson, as I’m sure you spotted when researching his 12 appearances, all but one came in the first half of the season, the final one before the end of the January transfer window. He was, as Bethnal made clear earlier on in this thread (page 28), desperate for a move away and had been for some time due to the lack of opportunities. He was meant to be Mee’s successor, however Mee’s been so good for Burnley that hasn’t happened. Mee, for instance, played every minute of the 2018/19 season, one of only three outfield players to do so in the League. Combine that with Dyche’s reluctance to change his backline - Burnley had the fewest line-up changes last season until their injury crisis hit post restart - and it’s easy to see why Gibson’s not been involved that much.

Frustration understandably grew and Burnley broke their promise that Gibson would be allowed to leave in the January window, after rejecting multiple Watford loan offers, and thus the club and player had a huge falling out and he was not seen again.

Whether he's the right option for us is a different matter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Legend Iwan said:

Well, Ben Mee, Burnley’s captain, was out injured for the end of the season, he wasn’t replaced. That’s why Kevin Long came in.

In terms of Gibson, as I’m sure you spotted when researching his 12 appearances, all but one came in the first half of the season, the final one before the end of the January transfer window. He was, as Bethnal made clear earlier on in this thread (page 28), desperate for a move away and had been for some time due to the lack of opportunities. He was meant to be Mee’s successor, however Mee’s been so good for Burnley that hasn’t happened. Mee, for instance, played every minute of the 2018/19 season, one of only three outfield players to do so in the League. Combine that with Dyche’s reluctance to change his backline - Burnley had the fewest line-up changes last season until their injury crisis hit post restart - and it’s easy to see why Gibson’s not been involved that much.

Frustration understandably grew and Burnley broke their promise that Gibson would be allowed to leave in the January window, after rejecting multiple Watford loan offers, and thus the club and player had a huge falling out and he was not seen again.

Whether he's the right option for us is a different matter. 

In regards to the first point, Gibson SHOULD have been first choice to replace Mee when injured rather than Long, which leads us to your second point.

Dyche may not like to change his backline (like many managers don't), but Gibson was an expensive signing who was as you say expected to take over from Mee. Clearly he didn't impress enough in either training or in his limited game time (getting booked 3 times and sent off in his first 3 games wasn't exactly a good start either), and then instead of working hard and being patient, he started throwing his teddy out of the pram and demanding a move away.

Maybe Burnley irritated the situation by not letting him leave in Jan, but the problem was seemingly instigated by Gibson, and he's still being awkward at present despite having done basically nothing for the past 2 years.

At one point Gibson was being tipped for England, yet he couldn't supplant either of Mee or Tarkowski from the centre of the Burnley defence, and has shown a real lack of determination to change this situation either.

As I said earlier in the thread, I think he's overrated, clearly thinks he's better than he is, will be a pain in the rear if things aren't going his way and would likely cost far more in wages etc than he's actually worth, and certainly more than alternatives who have actually played regularly in the past 2 seasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...