Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I accept the clubs strategy in relation to selling players, when the time and the price is right. For me the most important thing is that we sell at the start of the window, with the exception of Buendia where it might be worth it to drag out negotiations to see how things develop with his Argentina experience.

I don't doubt SW has contingency plans in place whatever happens.

Edited by CarrowCanario

Share this post


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

Realistically what do these 3 go for.

Buendia - 35/40

Aarons - 25/30

Cantwell - 15/20

So 80ish million plus the rumoured 20m we have to spend, thats nearly 100m. I know its not as simple as that but thats potentially 8-10 very good new players if spent wisely.

Hasn't £13/14 million already been spent on Gibson and Giannoulis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've resigned myself to us selling Buendia and Aarons. I suspect we will keep Cantwell for at least another year.

It will be a tough summer navigating the right time to sell/buy - it's already tough enough not getting ripped off when clubs know you have the prem money... It's even worse if they know you have 60m+ coming in from high profile sales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, DraytonBoy said:

Hasn't £13/14 million already been spent on Gibson and Giannoulis?

Michael Bailey was suggesting these reported £25m odd budget doesn't include those two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sgncfc said:

Well, they build 17,500 capacity stadiums. Is that really ambitious enough for you, or anyone else on here? They have lost 9 previous playoff campaigns. Hopefully on Saturday they will lose another. We, on the other hand, have provided our "cash flow" by success on the pitch; I know which I prefer.

It's interesting. Our model / owners have out-performed Brentford for how many seasons? And now suddenly their owners are the one's to have. To be fair they were around Christmas time sooo much better than us according to some. Mostly because they spent the money on Toney and we didn't. Or some such rubbish.

Share this post


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

Hasn't £13/14 million already been spent on Gibson and Giannoulis?

Pretty sure it was said they were budgeted from our parachute money so we've still got some pennies to spend

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/05/2021 at 12:03, hogesar said:

Yeah, but there's a limit.

Apparently not when it's relentlessly negative posts from DCB.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/05/2021 at 09:09, jaberry2 said:

I suppose the question is, Webber has unearthed some gems, but a number of his signings have also been turd. 

I dispute that.

All of the players we have signed have done well in their respective leagues and some at international level before coming to us. Largely people suggested that the premier league signings we made were very poor, but there is plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise.

For the most part, the players we brought in struggled to better the players we already had who further stepped up at the time. Fahrmann failed to oust Krul due to the latter's continued progress and return to the levels last seen arguably at Newcastle. Amadou found it difficult to get into the midfield, especially when we needed him more at CB. Roberts couldn't get past a much improved Cantwell or Buendia. The fact that those two players are being linked to top clubs in England and Spain suggests that their form is undeniable.

Drmic I think is judged a little harshly. Pukki was always going to be the number one striker and one of the first names on the team sheet if fit. Drmic was there to offer something different. However, it was his first season in English football and I think it's fair to say he doesn't play in the same way Pukki does and he never seemed to click with the way our team wanted to play. His previous was decent enough.

Duda and Rupp - I'm going to throw both in here. When we signed Duda on loan he was 25. He'd done well in the Bundesliga and fit the mold of what we were looking for. I think we saw enough about him to be able to fairly say that had he stayed on over the summer we would have had a much improved player on our hands. The reason I throw Rupp in with this is that I feel he is the example of that. He showed real glimpses of what he could do with his movement and energy but it was during a time when the team were already beginning to struggle.

The lesson of last time I feel was that due to financial constraints we were forced to look at cheap/young loans and mainly players from abroad who nearly always need longer to settle and get to grips with the English game.

If some of the links are to be believed, it would at least appear that we are looking at some British players this time round which should help us hit the ground running with a larger squad of players knowledgeable of playing football here.

Am I fearful that we could lose all three players? Yes. Will I panic? No. Why? At the start of the 2018-19 season there was much talk about the importance of holding onto our young gems of Godfrey, Lewis, Aarons, Cantwell and Buendia as well as the solid older pros who were just as vital in Krul and Pukki. We held onto all of them for that season and it was considered probably the best business we could expect at that time.

Last summer the same fears arose. Many would argue that whilst Lewis and Godfrey were good players for us, and Godfrey has proven how great a player he can be, they have in a way proven to be more disposable than the likes of Cantwell, Pukki and Buendia. They left so we could hold onto the others. But we know that it wasn't easy to do so. Aarons was committed and it didn't bother him but both Cantwell and Buendia had issues with their focus amidst late summer interest.

Again links resurfaced in January with the likes of Barcelona interested in Aarons.

At this point, anyone claiming a lack of ambition needs a jolly good rolling pin to the bonce. Gone are the days that clubs can hold players over a barrel and tell them they can't leave. These days if a player wants to put their 'parts on' and demand to leave their agent can get moving and it just isn't in the best interests of the club to push back too much.

Webber summed it up well in his interview. The power is all with the players. If you fight too hard against a players desires they'll refuse new contracts and push you into losing value on them. This has an impact on potential transfer targets or future transfer targets who will see how the club handles players and decide it's not for them.

Realistically, you have to accept that often we will not be able to compete with wages or consistently high levels of football - eg Champions League. And it sends a far better message to players to see that our club takes on younger players and turns them into champions league and premier league regulars.

It's part of football now. Look at Leicester. Mahrez, Kante, McGuire etc. Big big players to lose. Yet they are still top 6. 

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is an awful lot of posts on here attacking our approach before a single player has been sold or a single player signed.

 

If we end this window with only Max gone, and that money invested into 3-4 players who we can all see in principle (because there is never a certainty) are a step up from what we have got on paper, then its going to be hard to criticise the approach. It really will then just be down to that funny old game of football and a bit of luck along the way with VAR/Injuries/Meeting out of form sides at the right time. 

 

Before we know any of that, it just comes across as a hangover from the frustration of 2 years ago's summer window or a general attitude of not wanting to understand the self sustainable model. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hogesar said:

It's interesting. Our model / owners have out-performed Brentford for how many seasons? And now suddenly their owners are the one's to have. To be fair they were around Christmas time sooo much better than us according to some. Mostly because they spent the money on Toney and we didn't. Or some such rubbish.

Last summer Jimbo yearned to be Sheffield Utd. This summer it's Brentford. Are either more ambitious than being Norwich?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Red stripes on their kit Nutty. No serious team would ever play in yellow.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chicken said:

I dispute that.

All of the players we have signed have done well in their respective leagues and some at international level before coming to us. Largely people suggested that the premier league signings we made were very poor, but there is plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise.

For the most part, the players we brought in struggled to better the players we already had who further stepped up at the time. Fahrmann failed to oust Krul due to the latter's continued progress and return to the levels last seen arguably at Newcastle. Amadou found it difficult to get into the midfield, especially when we needed him more at CB. Roberts couldn't get past a much improved Cantwell or Buendia. The fact that those two players are being linked to top clubs in England and Spain suggests that their form is undeniable.

Drmic I think is judged a little harshly. Pukki was always going to be the number one striker and one of the first names on the team sheet if fit. Drmic was there to offer something different. However, it was his first season in English football and I think it's fair to say he doesn't play in the same way Pukki does and he never seemed to click with the way our team wanted to play. His previous was decent enough.

Duda and Rupp - I'm going to throw both in here. When we signed Duda on loan he was 25. He'd done well in the Bundesliga and fit the mold of what we were looking for. I think we saw enough about him to be able to fairly say that had he stayed on over the summer we would have had a much improved player on our hands. The reason I throw Rupp in with this is that I feel he is the example of that. He showed real glimpses of what he could do with his movement and energy but it was during a time when the team were already beginning to struggle.

The lesson of last time I feel was that due to financial constraints we were forced to look at cheap/young loans and mainly players from abroad who nearly always need longer to settle and get to grips with the English game.

If some of the links are to be believed, it would at least appear that we are looking at some British players this time round which should help us hit the ground running with a larger squad of players knowledgeable of playing football here.

Am I fearful that we could lose all three players? Yes. Will I panic? No. Why? At the start of the 2018-19 season there was much talk about the importance of holding onto our young gems of Godfrey, Lewis, Aarons, Cantwell and Buendia as well as the solid older pros who were just as vital in Krul and Pukki. We held onto all of them for that season and it was considered probably the best business we could expect at that time.

Last summer the same fears arose. Many would argue that whilst Lewis and Godfrey were good players for us, and Godfrey has proven how great a player he can be, they have in a way proven to be more disposable than the likes of Cantwell, Pukki and Buendia. They left so we could hold onto the others. But we know that it wasn't easy to do so. Aarons was committed and it didn't bother him but both Cantwell and Buendia had issues with their focus amidst late summer interest.

Again links resurfaced in January with the likes of Barcelona interested in Aarons.

At this point, anyone claiming a lack of ambition needs a jolly good rolling pin to the bonce. Gone are the days that clubs can hold players over a barrel and tell them they can't leave. These days if a player wants to put their 'parts on' and demand to leave their agent can get moving and it just isn't in the best interests of the club to push back too much.

Webber summed it up well in his interview. The power is all with the players. If you fight too hard against a players desires they'll refuse new contracts and push you into losing value on them. This has an impact on potential transfer targets or future transfer targets who will see how the club handles players and decide it's not for them.

Realistically, you have to accept that often we will not be able to compete with wages or consistently high levels of football - eg Champions League. And it sends a far better message to players to see that our club takes on younger players and turns them into champions league and premier league regulars.

It's part of football now. Look at Leicester. Mahrez, Kante, McGuire etc. Big big players to lose. Yet they are still top 6. 

I personally disagree. Whilst I think Webber has been a fresh breath of air to this club and the majority of his work has been excellent, his signings that particular season were pretty woeful. He is responsible for recruitment and finding ample players so we can compete, this was far from the case this season, hence why he said he got it wrong and owned up to it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Last summer Jimbo yearned to be Sheffield Utd. This summer it's Brentford. Are either more ambitious than being Norwich?

If they are more ambitious i'd argue both clubs have failed on both fronts. We've spent more time in the Premier League under our owners than they have theirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that Webber might do to add to his narrative is make an early statement signing.

A great way to keep good players is to ensure that players feel a club is moving forward. Farke - behind the scenes - will be playing the ‘Band of Brothers’ card pretty hard too. 

It wouldn’t be a surprise to see something quite interesting happen, quite quickly.

Parma 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

One thing that Webber might do to add to his narrative is make an early statement signing.

A great way to keep good players is to ensure that players feel a club is moving forward. Farke - behind the scenes - will be playing the ‘Band of Brothers’ card pretty hard too. 

It wouldn’t be a surprise to see something quite interesting happen, quite quickly.

Parma 

Could there be a risk of that backfiring though Parma? Say we do push the boat out by our standards an get a 12-15 million player through the door, do you think the fan base would see it as the club preparing them for the departure of Buendia? Would other clubs view it that way too and step up their interest know we had spent a sizeable chunk of warchest and might be more easy to deal with as we look to refill it? 

 

Not necessarily what I think, just curious as to how they might play this situation and how it could be interpreted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
57 minutes ago, birchfest said:

Could there be a risk of that backfiring though Parma? Say we do push the boat out by our standards an get a 12-15 million player through the door, do you think the fan base would see it as the club preparing them for the departure of Buendia? Would other clubs view it that way too and step up their interest know we had spent a sizeable chunk of warchest and might be more easy to deal with as we look to refill it? 

 

Not necessarily what I think, just curious as to how they might play this situation and how it could be interpreted?

I don’t know whether Parma has a specific deal in mind, but what I was going to say was that if this happened the likelihood would be that it was a player to fill a gap in the squad that we know Webber and Farke want to fill, and not a replacement for someone who might leave. So, say, a new centre-back or defensive midfielder, or even this unicornish winger-striker they apparently are as keen on as I am, rather than the next Aarons or Buendia.

Not least because, especially with Buendia, his international commitments are going to cause bureaucratic problems in sorting out a deal.

in any event if it is true that we have 30 million to spend above what we are paying for Gibson and Giannoulis and before any sales, then if, say we spend ten or twelve million on a centre-back or the next Oliver Skipp no sensible fan (!) will see that as a sign Buendia is going. All the indications are we are going to make one or two purchases like that anyway, even if no-one leaves.

 

Edited by PurpleCanary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/05/2021 at 08:46, Uncle Fred said:

Lack of ambition.com

**** as if we weren’t ambitious we wouldn’t have them in the first place 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, DraytonBoy said:

Hasn't £13/14 million already been spent on Gibson and Giannoulis?

Plus add ons (20% I believe ) owed to Getafe for profit from Emis sale = £7m approx. Not sure of the situation with any add ons for Max. Todd of course is one of our own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

I don’t know whether Parma has a specific deal in mind, but what I was going to say was that if this happened the likelihood would be that it was a player to fill a gap in the squad that we know Webber and Farke want to fill, and not a replacement for someone who might leave. So, say, a new centre-back or defensive midfielder, or even this unicornish winger-striker they apparently are as keen on as I am, rather than the next Aarons or Buendia.

Not least because, especially with Buendia, his international commitments are going to cause bureaucratic problems in sorting out a deal.

in any event if it is true that we have 30 million to spend above what we are paying for Gibson and Giannoulis and before any sales, then if, say we spend ten or twelve million on a centre-back or the next Oliver Skipp no sensible fan (!) will see that as a sign Buendia is going. All the indications are we are going to make one or two purchases like that anyway, even if no-one leaves.

 

Yes exactly this. If we made a big money (for Norwich) signing or two that would show our intent to improve our weak areas and would make a stronger case to Emi and others that sticking around with Norwich is a better idea than jumping ship to Villa for instance.

We don't need to worry about blowing the warchest because if any of our stars still left we would have more funds coming in the door to spend on their direct replacements with the other gaps in the squad already filled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Not many clubs can actually afford Emi right now. Which is why he's still here. His recent profile spike isn't going to change that. Talk of player exchange is crazy, unless Skipp is involved of course. Todd I think will stay. Max is most likely to go still as he's younger, home grown and more affordable. Norwich will have their scenario short lists at the ready. Webber may want to push at least one of the sales to activate the better transfer options.

I'm not expecting anything to happen for weeks due to covid, the euros etc.

Edited by Michael Starr
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something worth stating - vid Webber making an early statement signing and all 3 stars being retained - is that the stars we have are not ‘hot’ they are ‘good’.

This is not as trite as it sounds. Pretty much regardless of what happens to the team this season Emi and Max will have reasonable defined and realisable values.

Todd may be ‘hot and colder’ in terms of retention of value (there was a view that he could have been at peak last summer, though only needs a few eye-catching moments and he’s a great number 14 for a top-ish club).

In this context some early statement signings not only act as statements of intent vs last Prem season, not ‘just’ catalysts to keep the star trio, it would also be reasonable ‘risk-free risking’ in that it would simply shift next years sales to ‘necessary’ - at a slight deflated net cost - though not massively so.

They are (now) solid assets anyway. That is not such a common position. Good platform to be a little more aggressive from.

Parma 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/05/2021 at 14:36, chicken said:

I dispute that.

All of the players we have signed have done well in their respective leagues and some at international level before coming to us. Largely people suggested that the premier league signings we made were very poor, but there is plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise.

For the most part, the players we brought in struggled to better the players we already had who further stepped up at the time. Fahrmann failed to oust Krul due to the latter's continued progress and return to the levels last seen arguably at Newcastle. Amadou found it difficult to get into the midfield, especially when we needed him more at CB. Roberts couldn't get past a much improved Cantwell or Buendia. The fact that those two players are being linked to top clubs in England and Spain suggests that their form is undeniable.

Drmic I think is judged a little harshly. Pukki was always going to be the number one striker and one of the first names on the team sheet if fit. Drmic was there to offer something different. However, it was his first season in English football and I think it's fair to say he doesn't play in the same way Pukki does and he never seemed to click with the way our team wanted to play. His previous was decent enough.

Duda and Rupp - I'm going to throw both in here. When we signed Duda on loan he was 25. He'd done well in the Bundesliga and fit the mold of what we were looking for. I think we saw enough about him to be able to fairly say that had he stayed on over the summer we would have had a much improved player on our hands. The reason I throw Rupp in with this is that I feel he is the example of that. He showed real glimpses of what he could do with his movement and energy but it was during a time when the team were already beginning to struggle.

The lesson of last time I feel was that due to financial constraints we were forced to look at cheap/young loans and mainly players from abroad who nearly always need longer to settle and get to grips with the English game.

If some of the links are to be believed, it would at least appear that we are looking at some British players this time round which should help us hit the ground running with a larger squad of players knowledgeable of playing football here.

Am I fearful that we could lose all three players? Yes. Will I panic? No. Why? At the start of the 2018-19 season there was much talk about the importance of holding onto our young gems of Godfrey, Lewis, Aarons, Cantwell and Buendia as well as the solid older pros who were just as vital in Krul and Pukki. We held onto all of them for that season and it was considered probably the best business we could expect at that time.

Last summer the same fears arose. Many would argue that whilst Lewis and Godfrey were good players for us, and Godfrey has proven how great a player he can be, they have in a way proven to be more disposable than the likes of Cantwell, Pukki and Buendia. They left so we could hold onto the others. But we know that it wasn't easy to do so. Aarons was committed and it didn't bother him but both Cantwell and Buendia had issues with their focus amidst late summer interest.

Again links resurfaced in January with the likes of Barcelona interested in Aarons.

At this point, anyone claiming a lack of ambition needs a jolly good rolling pin to the bonce. Gone are the days that clubs can hold players over a barrel and tell them they can't leave. These days if a player wants to put their 'parts on' and demand to leave their agent can get moving and it just isn't in the best interests of the club to push back too much.

Webber summed it up well in his interview. The power is all with the players. If you fight too hard against a players desires they'll refuse new contracts and push you into losing value on them. This has an impact on potential transfer targets or future transfer targets who will see how the club handles players and decide it's not for them.

Realistically, you have to accept that often we will not be able to compete with wages or consistently high levels of football - eg Champions League. And it sends a far better message to players to see that our club takes on younger players and turns them into champions league and premier league regulars.

It's part of football now. Look at Leicester. Mahrez, Kante, McGuire etc. Big big players to lose. Yet they are still top 6. 

Bang on 

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...