Jump to content
Jersey Canary

McLean to Rangers in January?

Recommended Posts

59 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Bit of a unique situation, without the pandemic I reckon both Drmic and Leitner would have clubs.

100% true.

The likely market for these players is virtually dormant.

Share this post


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

100% true.

The likely market for these players is virtually dormant.

1 hour ago, wcorkcanary said:

Not only that Hoggo, but I believe  the main thrust of Webber complaints  was that none of the players had relegation clauses  when he arrived....  they sure do now.  So, though still ' deadwood ' they are relatively  inexpensive compared to pre Webber  days.Still not ideal but I'm sure SW and co have done everything they could to offload above mentioned  players. 

Interesting that we / they couldn't even find clubs on a free.    Would suggest that even at the lower Champs salary, no one could offer similar and these players don't have much desire to lower their income in order to play.    Wonder why we don't negotiate deals to release them.... might suggest we could bring them back in if injuries force it, but the club have said they don't want to hinder the progress of our young talent!    

Maybe reputations precede them and clubs are now only interested in good people, honest, hard workers who are low maintenance..... isn't that one of our prerequisites!    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, wcorkcanary said:

Not only that Hoggo, but I believe  the main thrust of Webber complaints  was that none of the players had relegation clauses  when he arrived....  they sure do now.  So, though still ' deadwood ' they are relatively  inexpensive compared to pre Webber  days.Still not ideal but I'm sure SW and co have done everything they could to offload above mentioned  players. 

I thought we'd had 40% pay cuts under McNally, and that this is now 50% under Webber? 

There were strong rumours that we'd agreed that Steven Naismith wouldn't have the usual relegation wage drop clause though, and if Webber did ever mention that then he may have been having a little dig about that. 

But Webber was also critical of us having lots of attacking midfielders but insufficient full back cover, which is somewhat ironic now isn't it! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

I thought we'd had 40% pay cuts under McNally, and that this is now 50% under Webber? 

There were strong rumours that we'd agreed that Steven Naismith wouldn't have the usual relegation wage drop clause though, and if Webber did ever mention that then he may have been having a little dig about that. 

But Webber was also critical of us having lots of attacking midfielders but insufficient full back cover, which is somewhat ironic now isn't it! 

Somewhat mitigated by in practice having the third lowest goals against count in the division - it's as if the club looked at the options available and decided what we have is sufficient, and were right.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could well be right, either way, I reckon the current deadwood situation is a result of the current health situation, not any failing on SWs part. Tough times all round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/11/2020 at 08:50, TeemuVanBasten said:

I believe that Drmic and Leitner are still training with the U23's but told that their game time will be limited (in U23 games) because they don't want to hinder the progress of any of our youngsters.

Its funny because I recall Webber being somewhat critical of the club accruing a bit of expensive deadwood when he arrived, but we've had our fair share of it under Webber haven't we.... Heise is still contracted as well. I suppose this happens to every club.

It does, and conversely, better to have a few too many players than where we're in trouble for not enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

I thought we'd had 40% pay cuts under McNally, and that this is now 50% under Webber? 

There were strong rumours that we'd agreed that Steven Naismith wouldn't have the usual relegation wage drop clause though, and if Webber did ever mention that then he may have been having a little dig about that. 

But Webber was also critical of us having lots of attacking midfielders but insufficient full back cover, which is somewhat ironic now isn't it! 

There were the years in-between McNally and Webber. Namely with Alex Neil where we just didn't insist on relegation clauses. Hence we had the likes of Dorrans, Klose, Mulumbu, Naismith, Jarvis, Pinto, Wildschut etc all on contracts without them and I suspect more. It's what crippled us and forced our hand in terms of having to sell players to fill a hole.

I also point to that when people say Alex Neil was a great manager for us. I believe he did well to get us promoted, but after that, he spent more money than any manager in our history. That January alone he spent £15million+ on Klose and Naismith, and as much as I like Klose in terms of his personality, teamsmanship and for the games he performed really well in, I'm not convinced we ever really saw the £7.5million player we paid for consistently. In fact, I don't think a single one of his signings remains at the club do they? The best two signings were Maddison and Godfrey and I'm not sure how much he had to do with those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

Somewhat mitigated by in practice having the third lowest goals against count in the division - it's as if the club looked at the options available and decided what we have is sufficient, and were right.

Well don't be jinxing it now, 11 games between today and the point at which we can recall Famewo or McCallum.... our lack of depth could yet be exposed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, chicken said:

There were the years in-between McNally and Webber. Namely with Alex Neil where we just didn't insist on relegation clauses. Hence we had the likes of Dorrans, Klose, Mulumbu, Naismith, Jarvis, Pinto, Wildschut etc all on contracts without them and I suspect more. It's what crippled us and forced our hand in terms of having to sell players to fill a hole.

Your history may be a little skewed there. Or rather, very skewed.

McNally left in May 2016, Webber arrived April 2017, it wasn't ''years'' but rather 11 months, during which Moxey was in charge for a significant chunk of that.

Klose, Mulumbu, Naismith, Jarvis, and Pinto were all signed whilst McNally was here.

The only one who was signed under Moxey was Wildschut, but we signed him in the Championship so clearly a relegation wage cut is irrelevant there as we didn't go down to League One. All of the other players signed under McNally, who had previously revealed that our players were on 40% relegation wage cut clauses. 

I do believe the rumour that Naismith didn't have one, as the negotiation was very protracted and he finally arrived at desperation stage. 

Where is your evidence that McNally abandoned relegation wage cut clauses at some point in his tenure though? If true then it was only right that he should have walked in 2016, but I seriously doubt it and can't find anything anywhere to back up this claim! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Your history may be a little skewed there. Or rather, very skewed.

McNally left in May 2016, Webber arrived April 2017, it wasn't ''years'' but rather 11 months, during which Moxey was in charge for a significant chunk of that.

Klose, Mulumbu, Naismith, Jarvis, and Pinto were all signed whilst McNally was here.

The only one who was signed under Moxey was Wildschut, but we signed him in the Championship so clearly a relegation wage cut is irrelevant there as we didn't go down to League One. All of the other players signed under McNally, who had previously revealed that our players were on 40% relegation wage cut clauses. 

I do believe the rumour that Naismith didn't have one, as the negotiation was very protracted and he finally arrived at desperation stage. 

Where is your evidence that McNally abandoned relegation wage cut clauses at some point in his tenure though? If true then it was only right that he should have walked in 2016, but I seriously doubt it and can't find anything anywhere to back up this claim! 

I thought Naismith was the only person who didn’t have a reduction clause. 
The problem with Jarvis, Klose etc was they were on very large wages even for the Championship after the reduction so that’s probably where the confusion has come about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sell if the price/situation falls into place. Money into the coffers is always necessary for stability on the accountancy front and for expansion into the market. We are NCFC.

He's useful and has had his moments. Certainly a stalwart of our success two seasons ago.  Those near post headers have been notable.

Players are ephemeral, replaceable and have other loyalties.

When he was signed I had thoughts that his was the best piece of business that Summer. I revelled in thoughts of those great Scottish midfielders of the distant past.

He never quite commanded a game, whilst proving to be a totally good player in the fact that he did a reliable job and had his moments.

I would regret his loss and would need a decent fee but, as we now have options which would not diminish us and would probably improve things, it seems that cashing in is  more or less sensible.

Edited by BroadstairsR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, I think if promotion is achieved this season with or without McLean in the starting 11; we have seen he can't be what we need in the EPL.

Apparently Moyes sees something different but if we were to go up we would need to buy a player with premiership experience of 3-4 years or a very able top European equivalent. It would be one of our biggest investments and was needed last season.

McLean, I felt, was the weakest link in the midfield that finished the promotion season. He was surrounded by players on top form and filled his role well, but flaws that were seen that season have been reminiscent through to this day. He came in as injuries had come into that position, but I would say he was complimentary to the better players.

Certainly when Emi was out we saw how it affected the group as a whole, but also our weakest player in the attacking third was more on show.

At times his passing got us in trouble, players could drive past him, his marking and spatial awareness at defending were concerns. I think it is when he doesnt have the ball that I see his weaknesses, in not tracking runners etc.

Agree with much on here if an offer comes in and discussions behind closed doors from 2 sides (Rangers and McLean) are wanting a move, then if the fee works brilliant.

The key is with his sale and if we stay in the championship will we miss him or can we replace him. I am of the view we can, because Rupp and Lungi should be less unknown at this level by then. Secondly if they are good enough in January it also means that McLean would be 4th or 5th choice when we would bring in a key midfielder and potential Skipp back on loan, as some have suggested.

McLean will be looked back as a good signing, however I do not feel it would be with any regret that we sold when we do. But while he is here he will push our group and the fact that he is part of the first team squad shows he can certainly provide at this level. If we had invested in the central midfield areas last summer or Leitner or Vrancic could have more physicality then he would have been a squad player.

Jack of all trades is a tough one to have in a starting 11 but a good one to have at this level in the squad and review if an offer was forthcoming in January.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Your history may be a little skewed there. Or rather, very skewed.

McNally left in May 2016, Webber arrived April 2017, it wasn't ''years'' but rather 11 months, during which Moxey was in charge for a significant chunk of that.

Klose, Mulumbu, Naismith, Jarvis, and Pinto were all signed whilst McNally was here.

The only one who was signed under Moxey was Wildschut, but we signed him in the Championship so clearly a relegation wage cut is irrelevant there as we didn't go down to League One. All of the other players signed under McNally, who had previously revealed that our players were on 40% relegation wage cut clauses. 

I do believe the rumour that Naismith didn't have one, as the negotiation was very protracted and he finally arrived at desperation stage. 

Where is your evidence that McNally abandoned relegation wage cut clauses at some point in his tenure though? If true then it was only right that he should have walked in 2016, but I seriously doubt it and can't find anything anywhere to back up this claim! 

Yup, correct. I thought it was longer. Still, it was unusual for McNally even. But that season has to be one of the poorest in terms of player signings that we have had.

5 hours ago, Jersey Canary said:

I thought Naismith was the only person who didn’t have a reduction clause. 
The problem with Jarvis, Klose etc was they were on very large wages even for the Championship after the reduction so that’s probably where the confusion has come about.

Could be this. Either way, our wage bill was far higher than we had the means to deal with. And clearly a break away from what we had seen before with signings under Lambert and Hughton.

Again, the reason we were given for the likes of Ruddy and Bennett leaving was that we had offered them new contracts but on reduced terms and they decided to go elsewhere for more. Which may well have been due more to not having loads of money because of hefty contracts for others.

I've also heard it suggested that Zimmermann was on very little, comparatively, when he was first signed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are now on the verge of starting a huge long run of matches, just no let up, so we will need every player given our penchant  for injuries. Also even if not injured, some players will likely need a rest from a match or two so i can see Kenny being needed at various  times in the coming weeks and months.

Always looks nice when guys rattle off a bag of names in some area of the pitch but  you just  need 2 or 3 injuries in a certain area and suddenly having plenty of cover becomes  threadbare...but the two games a week wont stop for that. I like Kenny, think hes a decent Champs player so why the heck  anyone should  want to see him go in the most congested fixture pile up i can ever recall is beyond me.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In January, sell him to the mugs up north and buy a proper midfielder  and a proper defender who can play in the Premier League.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Number9 said:

In January, sell him to the mugs up north and buy a proper midfielder  and a proper defender who can play in the Premier League.

 

And we'd  buy them out of the money we get from selling Kenny? That would be  some stunt !!!Cos i very much doubt we'll be spending much until we're  promoted  or this covid shoite goes away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Number9 said:

In January, sell him to the mugs up north and buy a proper midfielder  and a proper defender who can play in the Premier League.

 

If he’s as bad as you say then we’re not getting much money for him are we ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think Kenny is a big character at the club. He is positive and probably a good person to calm the nerves. I imagine he makes good company. It's a weird one, because he can score unlikely goals out of the blue. Yet, for me just not so consistent. At his age he isn't getting better at what he does. For £3 or £4m, it would be similar to a Bradley Johnson move.

We will have other irons in the fire for January. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankfully it will be down to Webber and Farke whether we sell Kenny, not the Pinkun forum. I still think that if the price is right, in the current climate, we would sell him.

Of course injuries can happen and we have to accept that should the likes of Krul, Pukki, Hanley, Max get injured then to sustain a promotion challenge money would be needed for a replacement. £3-£4m would be useful.

Share this post


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

And we'd  buy them out of the money we get from selling Kenny? That would be  some stunt !!!Cos i very much doubt we'll be spending much until we're  promoted  or this covid shoite goes away.

 

1 hour ago, FenwayFrank said:

If he’s as bad as you say then we’re not getting much money for him are we ? 

We're not skint, we haven't spent much past few windows. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to get better players to cope with the Premier League, not hanging on to the ones who haven't or can't improve. 

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...