If Emi leaves in January or end of season

[dylanisabaddog 4,875]

1 hour ago, BigFish said:

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.

He was the most expensive of our players in the summer. Can't help thinking that Webber and Farke know more than anyone on this forum. 

[repman 634]

To come back to the original point, isn't Hamer a central midfielder? He's an excellent player but I'm not sure he is exactly an Emi replacement.

[BigFish 1,986]

2 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

He was the most expensive of our players in the summer. Can't help thinking that Webber and Farke know more than anyone on this forum. 

I don't believe we received any offer, and there didn't seem to be any interest either. He may have had the highest price tag but it was one that no one wanted to do business at which is rather the point. I think my point stands, at least until someone, anyone, shows a genuine interest.

[GJP 79]

14 hours ago, Indy_Bones said:

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...

Hughton was and still is an incredibly defence minded and risk-averse manager.

 

However, he is also clearly a thoughtful, intelligent and sensible chap. So I don't think it really stacks that he would blow money on players in the first place and then "refuse" to utilise them correctly.

 

 

[Midlands Yellow 3,943]

7 hours ago, repman said:

To come back to the original point, isn't Hamer a central midfielder? He's an excellent player but I'm not sure he is exactly an Emi replacement.

He is full of flair and will be picked up sooner rather than later by a bigger club. For a third of what I’d imagine Norwich will get for Buendia we could do a lot worse. That said our club are scared  of  spending £5/10m on any player these days. 

[hogesar 9,618]

3 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

He is full of flair and will be picked up sooner rather than later by a bigger club. For a third of what I’d imagine Norwich will get for Buendia we could do a lot worse. That said our club are scared  of  spending £5/10m on any player these days. 

We literally signed Hugill this summer for what could be £5m. So you're wrong.

[Midlands Yellow 3,943]

9 hours ago, hogesar said:

We literally signed Hugill this summer for what could be £5m. So you're wrong.

What could be being the key words. What actually will be may be different. 

[king canary 7,580]

11 hours ago, GJP said:

Hughton was and still is an incredibly defence minded and risk-averse manager.

 

However, he is also clearly a thoughtful, intelligent and sensible chap. So I don't think it really stacks that he would blow money on players in the first place and then "refuse" to utilise them correctly.

 

 

Watching his team in that season suggests otherwise.

Hooper and RVW were poacher types stuck in a team that needed a striker who could hold the ball up and play with back to goal. 

[king canary 7,580]

22 hours ago, BigFish said:

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.

To me an 'inbetweener' is a player who struggle in the Premier League which isn't how I see Emi.

Last season he did well but he was (like most others) hindered by our inability to give him a solid defensive base to play from. I think you put him in an Everton or Wolves type team that is playing on the front foot, he'd be a star.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

1 hour ago, king canary said:

To me an 'inbetweener' is a player who struggle in the Premier League which isn't how I see Emi.

Last season he did well but he was (like most others) hindered by our inability to give him a solid defensive base to play from. I think you put him in an Everton or Wolves type team that is playing on the front foot, he'd be a star.

Agreed Buendia is comfortably of a prem standard. As you say I have no doubts that he would thrive under a team which sees more of the ball, as he showed in the (albeit limited) games where we did enjoy a bit of control last season. 

IMO the team deserves a completely fresh slate after the abomination of those final 10 or so games, I feel too many players are now underrated off the back of that. Everyone was ****. We lost the plot. We have moved on and we're not the same team now! 

And that's not to say I think everyone is of a prem standard at all (Stiepermann, Hanley and McLean cannot be regular starters in the prem). I just think if we recruit better this time round I expect Pukki, Buendia and Cantwell to flourish.

On Buendia - I do not feel like one summer transfer window during a global pandemic, where we didn't receive significant interest in him, is enough evidence to prove anything about his ability.

It seems the general consensus is that his temperament may be deterring the big clubs, but IMO that doesn't really take away from his ability as a player at all - in fact we often see the best of him 'on edge'. I'm not sure what else could've stopped the interest, the man is head and shoulders the best creative player in the championship - he's showing himself to be a freak at this level and he's not even been playing as well as he could.. 

When I look at the pros and cons, the temperament issues are certainly a notable con - but one that is far outweighed by the pros. His problem is simply borne out of over eagerness and too much emotion... The man loves football and wants his team to win, and sometimes it spills over and he gets carried away, so what? He's still got a much better head on his shoulders than half of the Arsenal team at the minute!

More fool those teams for missing out on him I say, I'm sure a few are regretting it now seeing the rate he is churning out goals and assists already this season. 

Rather than using the fact he's still an NCFC player to question his ability, we should simply just be enjoying the player while we have him. We are very fortunate to have been able to keep him IMO and let's hope we get another season or more in the prem out of him after this one.

[hogesar 9,618]

3 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

What could be being the key words. What actually will be may be different. 

Of course, but for the deal to be made we had to be willing to pay that amount.

[Midlands Yellow 3,943]

34 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Of course, but for the deal to be made we had to be willing to pay that amount.

I think we will end up paying around £3m tops. Promotion would trigger an extra payment but he’s not going to score a hatful or get an England cap this season. 

[hogesar 9,618]

28 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

I think we will end up paying around £3m tops. Promotion would trigger an extra payment but he’s not going to score a hatful or get an England cap this season. 

Hopefully, but it still disproves what you're saying. We didn't buy him because we thought he WOULDN'T score goals - therefore we had to commit to potentially paying £5 million for a player.

[BigFish 1,986]

1 hour ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

 I'm not sure what else could've stopped the interest,

I'll start you off, his goal scoring record

[ged in the onion bag 854]

On 13/12/2020 at 15:25, Mr Tea said:

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. 

Vrancic, nor any other player other than Pukki, occupies opponents minds and tactical direction like Buendia does.... there's a lot more to this lads affect on games that people don't see.   Give Buendia time and space and he's likely to take advantage so opponents naturally condense the play to stop Buendia dribbling by defenders whereas Vrancic can be closed down and forced back / sideways more often...  

Vrancic isn't capable to step up next season if we go up....  - we have to keep Buendia, as we're very unlikely to replace his vision and guile at EPL level.     The best option we have is the hope that Martin develops quickly....

Separate to that, do clubs think there is a risk to signing his temperament.... will they pay what we will ask?    Possibly not in this market.

The squad may be stronger but its difficult to judge if it would survive in the EPL any better.... we are weaker at left back, still have no adequate central midfield (I only see Rupp and perhaps Sorensen as potential EPL players ignoring Skipp whose not ours) and neither of those two are anywhere near proven..... Tettey, McLean, Vrancic, Trybull, Leitner have all failed at that level.. and defensively we  may be stronger, more experienced and better aerially but we've lost pace with Lewis and Godfrey leaving.    Up front, Teemu still has it but its about this time in a career when the speed starts to ebb away but Hugill may be able to do some job for us, not so sure if we were to get promoted and he doesn't seem to suit our style of play.   

Still lots of work to do to improve this squad, the last thing we need now is more top players leaving.

 

[Midlands Yellow 3,943]

31 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Hopefully, but it still disproves what you're saying. We didn't buy him because we thought he WOULDN'T score goals - therefore we had to commit to potentially paying £5 million for a player.

Ok, break down your guess how it might add up to £5m. 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

9 minutes ago, BigFish said:

I'll start you off, his goal scoring record

By goalscoring 'record' I presume you are solely referring to last season? As I said in my post, hardly fair to use that against him in a team which struggled to create meaningful changes for the majority of the season! 

He got 8 goals in the season before In the championship, and what 5/6 goals already this season? So he's on course to get 15+ goals from attacking midfield this time round - pretty darn good if you ask me..

Not to mention his assists tally, 12 in the champs 18/19, 7 in the prem 19/20 and at least 6 so far in the champs this season already (again that's going to wind up being 15+ assists if he keeps it up). 

So on course for 30 plus goal contributions this campaign, from the wide right position. 

I'd say that's pretty overwhelming in comparison to one disappointing goal scoring season during which the entire team was absolutely ****e! 

I don't think he's anything close to a natural goal scorer such as Maddison, but the amount of chances he creates is more than enough to rectify this. The fact he seems to be adding more goals to his game this season is the icing on the cake. 

Actually think its a bit disappointing some of our fans don't seem to rate him anywhere near as much as they should!

[ged in the onion bag 854]

15 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

That said our club are scared  of  spending £5/10m on any player these days. 

...this is another debate.... the club are no doubt realising that their way of developing the club is posing more and more questions as to how it can work... on the one hand, a team of similar players scouted, coached, given opportunity and the associated reasonable salaries.... then when it goes so well, the better players want to progress, we sell.... or at least become under pressure to sell.   

the fans demand equivalent replacements, even improvements and the call for £10m signings etc....    problem is those players want 'unreasonable' and out of club context wages... the club wants team harmony but to avoid issues of financial risk that put us in trouble before....

Question - how can they sign a £5-£10m player without it affecting the wage structure and team harmony?   

Not sure it is practical in this market. 

[BigFish 1,986]

36 minutes ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

By goalscoring 'record' I presume you are solely referring to last season? As I said in my post, hardly fair to use that against him in a team which struggled to create meaningful changes for the majority of the season! 

He got 8 goals in the season before In the championship, and what 5/6 goals already this season? So he's on course to get 15+ goals from attacking midfield this time round - pretty darn good if you ask me..

Not to mention his assists tally, 12 in the champs 18/19, 7 in the prem 19/20 and at least 6 so far in the champs this season already (again that's going to wind up being 15+ assists if he keeps it up). 

So on course for 30 plus goal contributions this campaign, from the wide right position. 

I'd say that's pretty overwhelming in comparison to one disappointing goal scoring season during which the entire team was absolutely ****e! 

I don't think he's anything close to a natural goal scorer such as Maddison, but the amount of chances he creates is more than enough to rectify this. The fact he seems to be adding more goals to his game this season is the icing on the cake. 

Actually think its a bit disappointing some of our fans don't seem to rate him anywhere near as much as they should!

No, not just last season over his career, 28 goals in nearly 200 first team games (13 in 88 for us) as far as I can tell, including penalties. Don't get me wrong he is priceless to us, the point I am making is he didn't move because no one who could pay the price thought he was worth it.

[Midlands Yellow 3,943]

38 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

...this is another debate.... the club are no doubt realising that their way of developing the club is posing more and more questions as to how it can work... on the one hand, a team of similar players scouted, coached, given opportunity and the associated reasonable salaries.... then when it goes so well, the better players want to progress, we sell.... or at least become under pressure to sell.   

the fans demand equivalent replacements, even improvements and the call for £10m signings etc....    problem is those players want 'unreasonable' and out of club context wages... the club wants team harmony but to avoid issues of financial risk that put us in trouble before....

Question - how can they sign a £5-£10m player without it affecting the wage structure and team harmony?   

Not sure it is practical in this market. 

I was talking hypothetically if promoted again to the Premiership. Picking up unpolished gems and unbelievable free transfers is great but will only get you so far. 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

2 minutes ago, BigFish said:

No, not just last season over his career, 28 goals in nearly 200 first team games (13 in 88 for us) as far as I can tell, including penalties. Don't get me wrong he is priceless to us, the point I am making is he didn't move because no one who could pay the price thought he was worth it.

I see makes sense, I do think he is on an upward curve though. Some info was shared on the Athletic- I believe Farke is trying to utilise him in more advanced positions this season whereas before he had a tendency to drift deep in search of the ball and as a result not pop up in goal-scoring positions. 

This can be reflected in the goals against Bristol away and Stoke away (I think) where he was running off the last man and trying to get in behind. 

I still generally find the goal-scoring aspect for a potentially interested club almost a moot point, yes he's not the greatest in this area but his assist making is extremely good and as I said more than makes up for it IMO. Surely a club would rather have someone who assisted 15 goals without scoring at all, over someone who scored 5 and assisted 5 - etc. So what's really important? 

You're probably right RE clubs not wanting to pay up to get him during summer. I think it'll prove to be a huge mistake on their part though, if we get promoted and stay up next season (or even if we go down) we should be looking at a £40mil player or more. He wouldn't have been anywhere near that over the summer!

[ged in the onion bag 854]

39 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

I was talking hypothetically if promoted again to the Premiership. Picking up unpolished gems and unbelievable free transfers is great but will only get you so far. 

I know!   hence, its a real dilemma as to how the club plays this out.   Once we start signing players (it will inevitably mean on more money than others), it will potentially create an disharmony in the squad, especially if that player doesn't perform or work hard (when he's on more money) etc....   .... but then again, if we don't, as you say, there is only so far we can go (or is there) unless our scouting system can continue to work wonders, which has just been made more difficult by Brexit!   

Trust you recognise the point I'm making though.   How do the club strike the right balance?   Suspect, even Webber is unsure on that one. 

As I said elsewhere (think it was this thread) we will have to find two or three central midfielders if we go up.... as someone else said, if Buendia and the like don't have the defensive back up behind them, then how can they excel (and we don't have central midfield defensive backup to EPL level).   Do we scout, do we buy?    For sure, we can't step up without CDM replacements with pace, power, ability and energy, and thats why we need to get Sorensen in there at some point to see if he has enough potential.

This next step isn't easy for the club to navigate, get the impression they are doing everything step by step and hoping that they can continue to raise the bar in small increments..... but we are now saturated with players and so they are going to have to find some way of offloading those that are unable to cope with the level we aspire too (Trybull, Leitner, Drmic, Stiepermann, Vrancic, McLean, even Tettey for example), we can't continue to keep them all and of course there will be others as the next broom sweeps....

[GJP 79]

11 hours ago, king canary said:

Watching his team in that season suggests otherwise.

Hooper and RVW were poacher types stuck in a team that needed a striker who could hold the ball up and play with back to goal. 

But why would Hughton, a cautious type, chuck money at strikers who don't fit what he wants? 

I think it's possible he may have wanted one of them. I doubt he really wanted both.

[Indy_Bones 441]

18 hours ago, GJP said:

But why would Hughton, a cautious type, chuck money at strikers who don't fit what he wants? 

I think it's possible he may have wanted one of them. I doubt he really wanted both.

He'd scouted RVW when he was still at Newcastle, and everybody with half a brain in football knew exactly what type of player he was, so even if he'd not agreed or wanted Hooper (which I don't believe was the case), there's still ZERO excuse for his complete misuse of RVW, so regardless of whether or not RVW may have turned out far better or not, he wasn't given the chance with such dire supply and being asked to play a role he'd NEVER be able to in any meaningful way.

I still don't understand WHY Hughton did what he did, particularly in that 2nd season, but the fact is that he didn't use half our players correctly (remember that Holt and other strikers had their goal tallies HALVED under Hughton), he set out for 0-0 results and brought on defensive subs when losing, and provided us with some of the worst football I've ever seen as a City fan, and even if we can disagree over RVW, I don't think there's any argument about the rest...

[GJP 79]

40 minutes ago, Indy_Bones said:

He'd scouted RVW when he was still at Newcastle, and everybody with half a brain in football knew exactly what type of player he was, so even if he'd not agreed or wanted Hooper (which I don't believe was the case), there's still ZERO excuse for his complete misuse of RVW, so regardless of whether or not RVW may have turned out far better or not, he wasn't given the chance with such dire supply and being asked to play a role he'd NEVER be able to in any meaningful way.

I still don't understand WHY Hughton did what he did, particularly in that 2nd season, but the fact is that he didn't use half our players correctly (remember that Holt and other strikers had their goal tallies HALVED under Hughton), he set out for 0-0 results and brought on defensive subs when losing, and provided us with some of the worst football I've ever seen as a City fan, and even if we can disagree over RVW, I don't think there's any argument about the rest...

I would suggest he was never totally sold on RVW.

 

It's not unheard of in football for clubs to sign players the managers don't really fancy.

[Indy_Bones 441]

23 hours ago, GJP said:

I would suggest he was never totally sold on RVW.

It's not unheard of in football for clubs to sign players the managers don't really fancy.

Yes, we clearly paid the most we ever had for a player that the manager didn't fancy, then threw another 5 mil at Hooper who clearly wasn't intended to play just off from RVW (and Hughton probably didn't fancy either).

So 13+ million on two strikers that seemingly our manager didn't fancy either of, sounds like great business and a sensible approach to transfers doesn't it...

[GJP 79]

5 hours ago, Indy_Bones said:

Yes, we clearly paid the most we ever had for a player that the manager didn't fancy, then threw another 5 mil at Hooper who clearly wasn't intended to play just off from RVW (and Hughton probably didn't fancy either).

So 13+ million on two strikers that seemingly our manager didn't fancy either of, sounds like great business and a sensible approach to transfers doesn't it...

Don't bet against it.