If Emi leaves in January or end of season

[Midlands Yellow 3,984]

Look no further than Hamer at Coventry. 2nd only to our maestro at this level and improving all the time. I get West Midlands coverage of football here and this lad is very, very good. They’d want decent money for him but we would have the funds in this scenario. 

[cambridgeshire canary 6,717]

Orrrr by the time he leaves we will have Placheta and Hernandez.

 

I mean, I don't want him to leave obviously but sadly I think we all know he's going.

[CDMullins 436]

2 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Orrrr by the time he leaves we will have Placheta and Hernandez.

 

I mean, I don't want him to leave obviously but sadly I think we all know he's going.

What have I missed?

 

Why is he so obviously going? And where?

Edited December 13, 2020 by CDMullins

[Midlands Yellow 3,984]

1 minute ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Orrrr by the time he leaves we will have Placheta and Hernandez.

 

I mean, I don't want him to leave obviously but sadly I think we all know he's going.

You can never have enough quality, keep your eye on him now Coventry have started improving. 

[Beefy is a legend 224]

If we are top of the league come the new year I'd be very surprised if we allow any of our top assets to leave in January. Any business much more likely to be done in the summer. If by that stage we are back in the PL it also makes our bargaining position so much stronger as we can offer top level football to our players. We would only really need to consider selling to the top 6 or 7 PL clubs and, if so, you could see £35m-£40m price tags on Emi and Max. 

 

[overthebordercanary 141]

1 minute ago, CDMullins said:

What have I missed?

 

Why is he so obviously going? And where?

Heavily linked with Arsenal....probably all coming from Emi's agent.

[Midlands Yellow 3,984]

4 minutes ago, Beefy is a legend said:

If we are top of the league come the new year I'd be very surprised if we allow any of our top assets to leave in January. Any business much more likely to be done in the summer. If by that stage we are back in the PL it also makes our bargaining position so much stronger as we can offer top level football to our players. We would only really need to consider selling to the top 6 or 7 PL clubs and, if so, you could see £35m-£40m price tags on Emi and Max. 

 

Imagine £70/80m in the coffers plus full Sky money if promoted. Even taking the Covid hit into account surely decent funds would be available to at last have a go at stopping up. 

[Mr Tea 105]

I was only discussing this with my lad yesterday.

Stating the obvious but should we be in a strong position in January it’s going to limit people wanting away and make it a much easier draw bringing others in.

Makes January less of a stressful time perhaps.

[city4eva 209]

2 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Imagine £70/80m in the coffers plus full Sky money if promoted. Even taking the Covid hit into account surely decent funds would be available to at last have a go at stopping up. 

IMO there will never be enough/decent funds available while Delia is in charge as her pockets are not deep enough and Covid plus the increase in wages will take care of most of the profits from sales..

I am not advocating a change as I love Delia but we are where we are. Most owners in the champs have more money than Delia

[Beefy is a legend 224]

2 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Imagine £70/80m in the coffers plus full Sky money if promoted. Even taking the Covid hit into account surely decent funds would be available to at last have a go at stopping up. 

Agreed although once we do go up, there is then the possibility of retaining those players for a season at least. Whatever we got in for Max, we would never be able to replace him with better. That lad is going right to the very top of the game. 

Whatever we do re. player sales, it would appear that we will have much more clout this time to bring players in, having now dealt with the 'sins of the past'.

 

 

[Mr.Carrow 376]

I'm starting to think that we're in a good position with Emi in that I think he's too good for us, but not good enough to attract the kind of bids we'd take seriously. His set pieces are poor and he is still regarded as a bit of a loose cannon. Last season he made a lot of costly mistakes. Top clubs notice these things.

I also think he looks bouncy and happy right now so I doubt he'll be angling for a move when he must be pretty confident of promotion with us.

[Jersey Canary 143]

Neither, if we get promoted he’ll stay another season. 

[Beefy is a legend 224]

2 minutes ago, city4eva said:

IMO there will never be enough/decent funds available while Delia is in charge as her pockets are not deep enough and Covid plus the increase in wages will take care of most of the profits from sales..

I am not advocating a change as I love Delia but we are where we are. Most owners in the champs have more money than Delia

This is why we have made the academy our top priority. We can't buy top PL players, but we can make them. And we have done so.

Let's not forget that we stayed in the PL for three seasons not that long ago under the present owners. And we did that without anywhere near the quality of players or playing style that we have now, IMHO. In fact, it was the year that we loosened the purse strings and invested heavily that it went wrong.  

It's difficult, but by no means impossible to establish ourselves at that level. If we trust our playing philosophy, continue to promote our best youth, and recruit wisely, it can be done. 

[cambridgeshire canary 6,717]

12 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Imagine £70/80m in the coffers plus full Sky money if promoted. Even taking the Covid hit into account surely decent funds would be available to at last have a go at stopping up. 

Not sure how you're unaware of this but there is more chance of Luke Chambers joining us than us spending 70-80 million on incoming players

[Mr Tea 105]

I would argue that Vrancic has made better and more telling passes over the last few games than Emi ?

Thats not a pop at the little fella but more a statement that we have several players who can turn a game.

not wanting to tempt fate but I feel this squad is possible stronger in depth our title winning team two years ago. 

[Midlands Yellow 3,984]

2 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Not sure how you're unaware of this but there is more chance of Luke Chambers joining us than us spending 70-80 million on incoming players

I agree, but I’d be excited if we just spent half of it including wages rather than just cross fingers again. 

[Bill 1,788]

19 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Imagine £70/80m in the coffers plus full Sky money if promoted. Even taking the Covid hit into account surely decent funds would be available to at last have a go at stopping up. 

as with West Brom

[birchfest 397]

I think the best possible thing we can do as a club is be in top spot in time for the start of January, I think its likely Webber will say to him 'stick with us and I will promise you top flight football, one way or another, next season'. He really is a key component and I think an essential part of getting Pukki playing (and scoring) at his best. 

 

If we go up I also think, due to the length of his contract, he would be with us until the next january window depending on position and who might be coming in for him. I cant see anyone out of the classic top 6 side being able to afford him at any rate! 

[Indy_Bones 441]

1 hour ago, Beefy is a legend said:

In fact, it was the year that we loosened the purse strings and invested heavily that it went wrong. 

It wasn't because we spent money, it was because we had a manager that had no clue how to use the players he'd agreed to bring to the club, and who was happy to bring on defensive mids when we were 2-0 down rather than actually try to get something from the game.

Some of the worst, most turgid dross I've ever witnessed as a fan, respected the guy for how he conducted himself in a professional manner and spoke well, but absolutely clueless in terms of attractive attacking play and utilising the talent available to him, preferring instead to play for 0-0 and hope to squeeze a goal somewhere if lucky, just awful to watch.

[seanthecanary 168]

5 minutes ago, Indy_Bones said:

It wasn't because we spent money, it was because we had a manager that had no clue how to use the players he'd agreed to bring to the club, and who was happy to bring on defensive mids when we were 2-0 down rather than actually try to get something from the game.

I still to this day feel bemused by Hughton. The club had let him sign not one but two strikers at a cost not seen before. With the ink barely dry on their contracts and without a ball kicked in anger, he was telling the press that he didn't think RVW and Hooper could play together and that wasn't the plan. Over £13m spent on two players was unheard of for City but no intention for them to be on the pitch at the same time. 

[Nuff Said 5,140]

2 hours ago, overthebordercanary said:

Heavily linked with Arsenal....probably all coming from Emi's agent.

“Heavily” - source? All I’ve seen is highly speculative nonsense, largely based on an Arsenal fan asking him to sign for them.

[splendidrush 700]

5 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Not sure how you're unaware of this but there is more chance of Luke Chambers joining us than us spending 70-80 million on incoming players

Luke Chambers..... nooooooo!

[Beefy is a legend 224]

5 hours ago, Indy_Bones said:

It wasn't because we spent money, it was because we had a manager that had no clue how to use the players he'd agreed to bring to the club, and who was happy to bring on defensive mids when we were 2-0 down rather than actually try to get something from the game.

Some of the worst, most turgid dross I've ever witnessed as a fan, respected the guy for how he conducted himself in a professional manner and spoke well, but absolutely clueless in terms of attractive attacking play and utilising the talent available to him, preferring instead to play for 0-0 and hope to squeeze a goal somewhere if lucky, just awful to watch.

Agreed - we spent money on players that would never fit the Hughton style of play. We bought ourselves two goal poachers, both talented players with good records, but who were going to get very limited chances inside the box given the tactical set up. We were never going to play to their strengths.

In the Hughton style what we actually needed were a couple of target man, battering ram type strikers in the Andy Carroll mould, to help our two banks of four to get up the pitch. The huge outlay on RVW and Hooper, in that context, made no sense. 

At the time, I was very much in Hughton's corner. I argued to my mates that getting results was the be all and end all, especially in the PL. But Farke has, I think, proven me wrong. It is possible to both win and play attractive football. I suppose Farke still has to demonstrate that at PL level, but he has given me the belief to say that it can be done. 

[Mat McGauley 2]

11 hours ago, Indy_Bones said:

It wasn't because we spent money, it was because we had a manager that had no clue how to use the players he'd agreed to bring to the club, and who was happy to bring on defensive mids when we were 2-0 down rather than actually try to get something from the game.

Some of the worst, most turgid dross I've ever witnessed as a fan, respected the guy for how he conducted himself in a professional manner and spoke well, but absolutely clueless in terms of attractive attacking play and utilising the talent available to him, preferring instead to play for 0-0 and hope to squeeze a goal somewhere if lucky, just awful to watch.

Still he was ten times the manager Glenn Roeder was, rather have two forwards that can’t play together than playing NO forwards in some games. I utterly despised the bloke by the end of his tenure.

[Indy_Bones 441]

3 hours ago, Mat McGauley said:

Still he was ten times the manager Glenn Roeder was, rather have two forwards that can’t play together than playing NO forwards in some games. I utterly despised the bloke by the end of his tenure.

Roeder was awful and his attitude stank, but in his defence, he had a much weaker squad to start with and he wasn't given club records amounts of money to spend on players to change this, instead he was forced into searching bargain bins and hoping loan players might make an impact which is a far cry from the situation Hughton inherited from Lambert.

Hughton was an absolute professional in his manner and at least kept us up for another season before his total failure which is better than Roeder managed (although the football wasn't any better), but he had the easier job out of the two situations IMHO, and I can appreciate a man coming in to a poor squad with no support and struggling to make an impact (Roeder), I can't as easily accept someone taking over a side that off the back of double promotion had then stayed in the PL, provided good financial support for the new man, who blew the lot on players he refused to utilise correctly and who then played for 0-0 and brought defensive subs on when we were losing...

[Beefy is a legend 224]

It tends to be glossed over but Roeder actually did very well in his first season. Came in with us rock bottom and kept us up comfortably. I imagine he rattled some cages and shook off the malaise, but that as time wore on, his inability to man manage cost him. 

[king canary 7,606]

19 hours ago, Indy_Bones said:

It wasn't because we spent money, it was because we had a manager that had no clue how to use the players he'd agreed to bring to the club, and who was happy to bring on defensive mids when we were 2-0 down rather than actually try to get something from the game.

Some of the worst, most turgid dross I've ever witnessed as a fan, respected the guy for how he conducted himself in a professional manner and spoke well, but absolutely clueless in terms of attractive attacking play and utilising the talent available to him, preferring instead to play for 0-0 and hope to squeeze a goal somewhere if lucky, just awful to watch.

That year it didn't even go that badly wrong in terms of finances- we were able to shift the high earners, made long term profits on Fer, Redmond and Olsson and bounced straight back up. 

[jaberry2 550]

Arsenal are in trouble at the minute with their desperate fans calling for them to sign anyone and everyone who is in the slightest bit creative. I'm not sure whether Emi would be the answer to their problems, plus would be we sell him in January in our current position? Probably not. I may think differently if Dowell had been playing and scoring regularly, but he's been injured. Hopefully we will retain him until next season, with any luck, we'll be in the Prem and we can keep our existing talent and build on this team. We will see.

Edited December 14, 2020 by jaberry2

[BigFish 1,986]

21 hours ago, Mr.Carrow said:

I'm starting to think that we're in a good position with Emi in that I think he's too good for us, but not good enough to attract the kind of bids we'd take seriously.

This hits the nail on the head. As some have brought up Roeder, Emi is what he would call the classic "inbetweener". Awesome at this level, Ok in the lower Prem and benchwarmer at top six. Value on market c£20nmillion + add ons. Value to us priceless. He would take a move if he could get it, largely just to double or triple his money but difficult to see where the deal would land.

[Yorkshire Canary 118]

Now we have got into such a good position i neither see him wanting  to leave, nor the club allowing it, he is such a key part of our jig saw. Still lots of games to go if we do not go up then yes he may be off, if we go up he will stay until the inevitable relegation