Did we really need a £5m backup keeper...

[ged in the onion bag 855]

On 06/12/2021 at 22:43, Hank shoots Skyler said:

I think you’re overthinking my examples a bit. My point is really just that recruitment could’ve been better this season regardless of any financial constraints we have to live by. Surely you don’t disagree with that?

We don’t appear to have outsmarted the teams around us in the transfer market this most recent summer as far as I can see, and we kinda needed to after losing Buendia.

I brought up Skipp because he represents one extremely successful loan, yet this season it’s taken us 4 separate loans to find one player with close to Skipp’s input. Just trying to say again that we don’t appear to have got things as well as we would’ve hoped.

I agree it’s still fairly early days for a lot of players like Kabak so could be proven different come the end of the season 👍 

Well was it actually?    Of course, it seemed that was the case on the face of his performances and our promotion and it helped Skipp move his career to the next level but..........

It stopped Sorensen moving his career forward, 

it stopped us buying suitable players to fill that massive void.

It stopped us developing a player who could fill that gap in the Premier League, its left us no further forward in our CDM search to give us something that would be EPL ready.    Apart from a loan of Normann now, we are no further progressed than the team midfield we had on that 10 game debacle at the end of 19/20.

 

[chicken 2,624]

32 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

That's before she's had a few drinks, she's not at all fussy after that. 

Ah, that's about your level... unconscious women.

You probably need to take a look at this... 

 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

1 hour ago, ged in the onion bag said:

Well was it actually?    Of course, it seemed that was the case on the face of his performances and our promotion and it helped Skipp move his career to the next level but..........

It stopped Sorensen moving his career forward, 

it stopped us buying suitable players to fill that massive void.

It stopped us developing a player who could fill that gap in the Premier League, its left us no further forward in our CDM search to give us something that would be EPL ready.    Apart from a loan of Normann now, we are no further progressed than the team midfield we had on that 10 game debacle at the end of 19/20.

Make the same points about Williams and I would totally agree, as the team looks far better balanced to me every time Giannoulis plays and he is our own player I wish to see us develop, not a loan with no hope of actually capturing permanently!

But I can't agree for Skipp, at all, he performed a role far beyond what Sorensen would've been capable of; whom clearly does not have the physicality to cover everyone's arses like we saw Skipp do time and time again last season. There is no player in the team who would've got close to doing what Skipp did for us last season. 

And I fail to see why Skipp's loan 'stopped us buying suitable players to fill that massive void'? We had all of the summer just gone to do that? Or are you advocating that it was better to have no one at all performing that role last season as opposed to having Skipp on a temporary basis? 

I genuinely question if we'd have been automatically promoted without him, so clearly the one-season loan is more than justified. 

Fact is you could make the same argument about every single temporary loan we make (with no prospect of future purchase). If they improve the team then they are justified as far as I am concerned, if they don't then they are not. Its that simple really! 

[ged in the onion bag 855]

26 minutes ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

Make the same points about Williams and I would totally agree, as the team looks far better balanced to me every time Giannoulis plays and he is our own player I wish to see us develop, not a loan with no hope of actually capturing permanently!

But I can't agree for Skipp, at all, he performed a role far beyond what Sorensen would've been capable of; whom clearly does not have the physicality to cover everyone's arses like we saw Skipp do time and time again last season. There is no player in the team who would've got close to doing what Skipp did for us last season. 

And I fail to see why Skipp's loan 'stopped us buying suitable players to fill that massive void'? We had all of the summer just gone to do that? Or are you advocating that it was better to have no one at all performing that role last season as opposed to having Skipp on a temporary basis? 

I genuinely question if we'd have been automatically promoted without him, so clearly the one-season loan is more than justified. 

Fact is you could make the same argument about every single temporary loan we make (with no prospect of future purchase). If they improve the team then they are justified as far as I am concerned, if they don't then they are not. Its that simple really! 

Dont disagree with any of your observations and no one knows whether Lungi could be at the level even now, but what I am trying to say is, if we have players getting us promoted then leave and we can't replace them to make a competitive team then what is the point of being promoted in the first place (suffering the embarrassments, loss of confidence, manager etc...) unless we have those players ready to go............. since we don't have the funds or the will to pay in excess of £10m, then it has to be home grown, or youngsters we can buy and develop like Rashica, Tzolis and supposedly Sargent!    But we need to be doing that in the Championship so they are ready for the EPL...... as this season is evidencing, we can't develop them in the EPL environment!   

Whilst i understand your points and don't disagree with them, in my view Skipp was counter-productive. 

No point having the promotion money and parachute payments whilst all the fans of so desperate for us to do better and some of the results and performances have been embarrasing.... as proud as I am of my team, it still hurts when we can't compete!  

Edited December 8, 2021 by ged in the onion bag

[ged in the onion bag 855]

...oh, and on the main subject, our keepers, someone mentioned McGovern did well last season..... take a look at City 1 Villa 5 of two yrs ago.... absolutely diabolical, couldn't / wouldn't even kick the ball 10-20 yards to players who were free so we could play out in our style, we couldn't possibly play him regularly.    Time will tell but those suggesting Gunn was a waste have nothing to base it on!   Strange.

[BroadstairsR 2,167]

We did need a back-up 'keeper as it seemed that the youngsters were not deemed ready.

I was most impressed with Barden though, but even with him his subsequent medical issues have been a setback.

I agree with the OP to a certain extent as £5m did seem very excessive, Angus Gunn had not recently impressed and there were probably many suitable alternatives around in any case.

It all seemed at odds with the conveyor belt of young goalkeepers we have in force and the fact that that amount of money invested (plus high wages) seemed a more long-term approach, when in fact a back-up for one season might have been all that was needed ..... with Oxborough, Mair and Barden still in the pipeline.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

44 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

But we need to be doing that in the Championship so they are ready for the EPL...... as this season is evidencing, we can't develop them in the EPL environment!    

Well this is the thing...

People keep talking about us not being able to sign a top Championship striker when we get promoted as they cost £15m-£20m.

But Brentford purchased the best League One striker for £5m, when they were in the Championship, and then came up with him. We purchased Hugill, and left him behind.

Toney is doing well.

Edited December 8, 2021 by TeemuVanBasten

[ged in the onion bag 855]

3 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Well this is the thing...

People keep talking about us not being able to sign a top Championship striker when we get promoted as they cost £15m-£20m.

But Brentford purchased the best League One striker for £5m, when they were in the Championship, and then came up with him. We purchased Hugill, and left him behind.

Toney is doing well.

No sorry, have tried, what is the thing?   How's this relevant, I am saying we need to buy players of significant potential and develop them in the Championship so they are ready for the EPL when we get there!   Example/s provided..... Not loan players who won't be here (Skipp).... if we aren't ready as a club, then theres no point in going up, we have to prepare properly and having Skipp didn't allow us that opportunity.   Signing 4 loan players this season who were all expected to be starters clearly evidences we weren't ready for promotion.  

Comparing one successful signing by another club to ours of Hugill in isolation isn't relevant or justifiable.    You could argue Toney / Pukki in isolation too!   

I'm talking about the future of course and how this might work next season in hindsight, with the experience we now have .... not the decisions / transfer direction we've pursued.    Hugill was a calamitous signing, complete waste and lack of foresight, it seriously calls into question our scouting system.     Sargent's now raising more alarm in that area. 

For balance.... Pukki is doing well! 

 

[chicken 2,624]

4 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

We did need a back-up 'keeper as it seemed that the youngsters were not deemed ready.

I was most impressed with Barden though, but even with him his subsequent medical issues have been a setback.

I agree with the OP to a certain extent as £5m did seem very excessive, Angus Gunn had not recently impressed and there were probably many suitable alternatives around in any case.

It all seemed at odds with the conveyor belt of young goalkeepers we have in force and the fact that that amount of money invested (plus high wages) seemed a more long-term approach, when in fact a back-up for one season might have been all that was needed ..... with Oxborough, Mair and Barden still in the pipeline.

You need three keepers in the Prem. Two of which need to be capable of regular starts. As in, you'd be confident with them in the sticks. 

McGovern doesn't fill either of those options. As a third choice he is absolutely fine. The other keepers are nearly all out on loan to get experience which is more beneficial to them than possibly making the bench if an injury or suspension arises.

The deal for Gunn was actually quite clever. £2.5m up front, £2.5m in installments and add ons that I believe Michael Baily reported included some that were considered far fetched, that could take it as high as £10m. I think international appearances was one of them. I believe he tweeted/reported at the time that Southampton would be happy to get add ons taking it to £7-8m as they thought others unlikely.

For us though, especially at the time, he wasn't at all unknown. He had played with members of this squad before, the manager, the coaching staff. £5m isn't much for a mid-20's championship winning goal keeper. It's not much in the grand scheme of things. And what would you do with £5m otherwise? Loan a keeper in that would cost a loan fee. We did that before and it was reportedly £2-2.5m for the loan.

That's the toughest bit about all of this. The expectation is we unearth a £40m player with £5-10m purchases. When you get to the Premier League there is a premier league tax.

Take Toney for example. Brentford signed him for £5m upfront with a further £5m upon promotion. Peterborough put a bet on him. Reality is, had a premier league side tried to sign him you would have been looking at £10m plus add ons at least. Just look at the sorts of players that have moved in recent years like that.

Armstrong just cost Southampton over £15-20m.

Toney is a great example of the type of player we should have been looking at when we were in the Championship.

I think the better argument now is whether we should have hung on to one or two of last seasons players that we let go and tried to put the money saved into perhaps landing better value targets?

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

1 hour ago, ged in the onion bag said:

No sorry, have tried, what is the thing?   How's this relevant, I am saying we need to buy players of significant potential and develop them in the Championship so they are ready for the EPL when we get there!   

I know it may be difficult for you to comprehend as this is the Pink'un and it  may not happen very often, but I was agreeing with your point you donut.

And Ivan Toney was an example of Brentford doing just what you describe! It is what they did over and over again with Maupey, Benrahma, etc.

You've effectively managed to have an argument against yourself in a mirror! 

Edited December 8, 2021 by TeemuVanBasten

[ged in the onion bag 855]

3 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

I know it may be difficult for you to comprehend as this is the Pink'un, but I was agreeing with your point you donut.

And Ivan Toney was an example of Brentford doing just what you describe! It is what they did over and over again with Maupey, Benrahma, etc.

You've effectively managed to have an argument against yourself in a mirror! 

Well when you put it that way!!!  

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

On 05/12/2021 at 17:16, TeemuVanBasten said:

Surely £5m would have been better off being added to the budget to bring in somebody better than Sargent. That's my point.

How on earth was £5m rising to £10m on Gunn considered a priority this season, 

£5m could possibly get us Aguero's big toe. 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

7 hours ago, ged in the onion bag said:

Dont disagree with any of your observations and no one knows whether Lungi could be at the level even now, but what I am trying to say is, if we have players getting us promoted then leave and we can't replace them to make a competitive team then what is the point of being promoted in the first place (suffering the embarrassments, loss of confidence, manager etc...) unless we have those players ready to go............. since we don't have the funds or the will to pay in excess of £10m, then it has to be home grown, or youngsters we can buy and develop like Rashica, Tzolis and supposedly Sargent!    But we need to be doing that in the Championship so they are ready for the EPL...... as this season is evidencing, we can't develop them in the EPL environment!   

Whilst i understand your points and don't disagree with them, in my view Skipp was counter-productive. 

No point having the promotion money and parachute payments whilst all the fans of so desperate for us to do better and some of the results and performances have been embarrasing.... as proud as I am of my team, it still hurts when we can't compete!  

I see what you’re saying, and maybe Webber will agree with you in hindsight.

On Skipp I maintain that it is better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all, and the fact we’ve not replaced him this summer suggests that he was a unique option not easily replicated either through in-house development or via another signing. 

However, taking your preference another step further, you might agree that it would have made more sense to offload Buendia after relegation to the champs rather than after bouncing straight back up? With a view to rebuilding in the championship with the sale proceeds in the way you say.

But the obvious question is; would we have then brought in the same level of player in the champs that we’ve managed this season? Absolutely not. Certainly can’t see the likes of Normann, Kabak, Rashica or Tzolis joining us in the champs!

So yes it was a bit of a risk to throw what proved to be a haphazard team (in the sense it was centred around Buendia and Skipp who wouldn’t stay) to get instant promotion, only to then have to rebuild and risk potential embarrassment in the PL if the rebuild fails completely (which it sadly has a bit so far).

But the huge financial windfall from the prem, and the ability to sign this much higher calibre of player, surely puts us in the better position overall? Surely that is the stronger deciding factor here as opposed to ‘developing our own players in the champs for the prem’, or the ‘risk of being embarrassed in the PL’.

What if we’d sold Buendia in the champs knowing he wanted out soon, not brought in Skipp to develop our own players like you wish, but then failed to bring in talented enough championship players for the rebuild (perfectly believable seeing how we’ve not been able to bring in quality shopping in a better window this summer)? We’d have found ourselves in a much worse position then we do now.

Having secured the promotion now, if the worst happens this season then hopefully we can keep the bulk of these high potential / higher calibre players and develop them in the way you say. But who knows how many will want to stick it out at the lower level! 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

48 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

£5m could possibly get us Aguero's big toe. 

Because there is nothing in between Sargent and Aguero is there, christ.

ps. Aguero has a heart problem and last moved for £0.

Edited December 8, 2021 by TeemuVanBasten

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

10 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Because there is nothing in between Sargent and Aguero is there, christ.

ps. Aguero has a heart problem and last moved for £0.

It's what's known in the trade as a light-hearted quip. 🙄 

If you want a serious comment then the idea that £5 million is going to make the difference on goals is a bit daft. 

Edited December 9, 2021 by littleyellowbirdie

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

6 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

If you want a serious comment then the idea that £5 million is going to make the difference on goals is a bit daft. 

Really?

We could have chosen to meet Joshua King's wage demands, and Watford's £3.5m striker Emmanuel Dennis has 6 goals in 13 games in the Premier League.

If our recruitment was up to scratch it could, plus it isn't £5m is it, because if our recruitment was up to par we wouldn't have spent almost £9m on Sargent.... so that's £14m, not £5m, that should have been better spent. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

8 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Really?

We could have chosen to meet Joshua King's wage demands, and Watford's £3.5m striker Emmanuel Dennis has 6 goals in 13 games in the Premier League.

If our recruitment was up to scratch it could, plus it isn't £5m is it, because if our recruitment was up to par we wouldn't have spent almost £9m on Sargent.... so that's £14m, not £5m, that should have been better spent. 

All well and good until you find yourself with two injured keepers, or first keeper gets a red and second is injured. 

 

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

1 minute ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

All well and good until you find yourself with two injured keepers, or first keeper gets a red and second is injured. 

 

Exactly. We were crapping bricks when Krul was injured last season and McGovern came along. There were probably heart attacks in the River End when Barden stepped in.

[ged in the onion bag 855]

10 hours ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

I see what you’re saying, and maybe Webber will agree with you in hindsight.

On Skipp I maintain that it is better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all, and the fact we’ve not replaced him this summer suggests that he was a unique option not easily replicated either through in-house development or via another signing. 

However, taking your preference another step further, you might agree that it would have made more sense to offload Buendia after relegation to the champs rather than after bouncing straight back up? With a view to rebuilding in the championship with the sale proceeds in the way you say.

But the obvious question is; would we have then brought in the same level of player in the champs that we’ve managed this season? Absolutely not. Certainly can’t see the likes of Normann, Kabak, Rashica or Tzolis joining us in the champs!

So yes it was a bit of a risk to throw what proved to be a haphazard team (in the sense it was centred around Buendia and Skipp who wouldn’t stay) to get instant promotion, only to then have to rebuild and risk potential embarrassment in the PL if the rebuild fails completely (which it sadly has a bit so far).

But the huge financial windfall from the prem, and the ability to sign this much higher calibre of player, surely puts us in the better position overall? Surely that is the stronger deciding factor here as opposed to ‘developing our own players in the champs for the prem’, or the ‘risk of being embarrassed in the PL’.

What if we’d sold Buendia in the champs knowing he wanted out soon, not brought in Skipp to develop our own players like you wish, but then failed to bring in talented enough championship players for the rebuild (perfectly believable seeing how we’ve not been able to bring in quality shopping in a better window this summer)? We’d have found ourselves in a much worse position then we do now.

Having secured the promotion now, if the worst happens this season then hopefully we can keep the bulk of these high potential / higher calibre players and develop them in the way you say. But who knows how many will want to stick it out at the lower level! 

Those fans with the whit, wherewithal and understanding of what the club are trying to achieve will appreciate the complexities and balances of it all.   Easy to spout on here and think it’s simple but of course we are punching and openly admit that’s our way, our only way.  It’s not an easy process.

At the forefront it seemingly relies on the scouts.   On the one hand we’ve picked up some gems but inexcusably we’ve signed some lads that could never fit our system or who simply don’t have the tools.   Hugill doesn’t fit either!   Sargent will find his level and it won’t be here in either division I suspect.  

We offer a good environment to live and work for these players, development and most crucially opportunities, sadly we also offer the proviso that they can leave when they ‘outgrow’ us which I think is a promise too far.   Lewis clearly didn’t outgrow us but we got what seems very good money, and we had to do everything possible to keep Buendia….. not certain we did and we’ll never know, I guess.  Certainly it doesn’t help that we play on the fact they can leave when they get good.    We shouldn’t be so open about that….. it’s not so different to rocking up at the Etihad and saying we have no chance this week lads!

Our last EPL campaign exposed the fundamental problem - we had no engine!   Not one player capable of controlling the tempo of an EPL match…. McLean, Tettey, were the last two standing but neither were good enough for a top 26 plan.    At that point it needed addressing, yet all we did was develop Skipp for Spurs.    McLean is still our go to option and it’s not good enough, yet we get substantial numbers on here raving about him one week, despairing the next!    Meanwhile of course, we have a potential candidate in Sorensen twiddling his thumbs desperate it seems for an opportunity and we still have no idea if he’s any good.   Surely, he’s deserved a go by now if he keeps getting a sub shirt!    I don’t mind the Skipp option if we are developing something alongside but I said it then and things haven’t changed, McLean was never good enough and we needed 3 lads with pace, power, athleticism and some quality to develop that CDM role.  Godfrey would have been ideal once upon a time.  Sadly McLean, Rupp, Lees-Melou and Gilmour aren’t in that mould, they are too readily overrun / outfought / out-skilled.

Have to agree it’s more difficult bringing quality in for a Championship campaign and some of those you mention wouldn’t be interested but Hugill, Quintilla, persisting with Steipermann, McLean, Tettey, Vrancic, Platcheta, didn’t take 90 minutes viewing to see they weren’t / aren’t good enough for us to progress.   As said, scouting must be better.   Fair to say they’ve now realised sentiment is a loser mentality hence more players are moved on as they drop below the quality threshold!    Fact is recruitment has to be honed, every signing has to be with EPL potential in mind and no way is that the case in respect of Skipp, Quintilla, Hugill, Rhodes, even Sargent looks light years away, there are plenty more, none had enough of the basic skills to get to that level.  Even Tzolis (as he needs time/games to develop) etc… it was the wrong time if we expect him to contribute now.   So, if we can’t find what we need, bring a lad up from the u23s and develop that, we can’t let those listed above get in the way of development.   If we aren’t good enough then, fair enough.   We will find our place. 

We have to keep the majority of the players, it’s our only way, we control the contracts, they signed them!   
Essentially we need to avoid waste! 

[Bradwell canary 109]

It was quite obvious to us all that a proven striker should have been a massive priority. PL is not the place to bring in young ones with very poor scoring records, such as Josh.

sadly it seems the this whole clubs mantra is buying cheap, finger crossed they come good, then sell for millions. Little thought really given to keep us up.

Frankly lessons have not been learned from our last visit to the PL.

I would think Farke is glad to be out of this impossible task.

 

 

[Yobocop 1,099]

We will find out today won’t we 

[daly 501]

On 08/12/2021 at 13:19, chicken said:

Ah, that's about your level... unconscious women.

You probably need to take a look at this... 

 

Does the same apply to coffee 

[The Great Mass Debater 1,090]

Our survey says... No

[cambridgeshire canary 6,718]

McGovern would have done better let's be honest.