Jump to content
Canary Wundaboy

Tzolis to Bruges (loan to buy)

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Exactly, if we pretty much recoup our spend then it's a poor signing but we've done fantastically well to somehow retain his value (or negotiate to a point where someone is willing to pay it) - when he's looked so far short of what's required.

Especially when you compare it to genuinely poor signings like The Wolf (please let’s not have the debate again, just my - accurate 😉 - opinion) or Naismith that cost us on the pitch and for several years afterwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think some people are being a bit harsh. There are plenty of signings in the premiership that were more established in their career and cost a lot more who didn't make it. Tzolis was 19 when he joined. High risk high reward but we have to take chances to make up for the disparity of funds between us and nearly every rival.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/61809071

Interesting comments in this about the disparity of funding.

Quote

Maguire, who is also the co-host of The Price of Football podcast, says "it could be argued we have a 24 or 25-club Premier League and some of them are just taking a holiday in the Championship", and this can be put down in part to his "rule of three".

"It's partly due to the way money is distributed in the Premier League itself. Promoted clubs are going to start off on a negative compared to not just the big six clubs [but the rest of the teams in the league]," he says.

"The 'big six' in the Premier League earn on average three times the revenue of the other 14.

"The other 14 clubs in the Premier League earn roughly three times the revenue of clubs who get parachute payments. The clubs who get parachute payments get three times the revenue, on average, of the other clubs in the Championship. The other Championship clubs get approximately three times the revenue of the clubs in League One.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Seriously?
 

If I could be bothered and it wasn’t blindingly obvious I could list five worse right now. Basically we’ve had a look at him, didn’t like what we saw (or maybe he didn’t like what he saw of us) and it’s cost us his wages for a year, if we get back what we paid. 

Agree with this. Of course he's been a failure but that's football sometimes, and with our budget we have to take risks. Transfers don't work out sometimes, the fact that that we'll be getting our money back is a better outcome than I was expecting. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope we have someone different this window sorting out recruitment compared to last time otherwise it’s going to be a long season 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some you win (Buendia and a £30m+ profit), some you lose (Wolfy), and some you break even. There isn't a club in the land that doesn't experience exactly the same. This is far from a disaster. We seem well stocked with wingers at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

Especially when you compare it to genuinely poor signings like The Wolf (please let’s not have the debate again, just my - accurate 😉 - opinion) or Naismith that cost us on the pitch and for several years afterwards.

Certainly if we sell him for similar to what we paid then it isn't a disaster in a financial context.

However it terms of the general context it would be right up there for me. We blew a significant chunk of our budget on a player we apparently didn't think was ready for the Premier League, got relegated with ease with him contributing nothing and we don't even get a chance to see if he could turn it around with us longer term as we're apparently willing to cut ties with him after a season. I get 'you win some you lose some' but this one does leave me with a lot of questions. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, horsefly said:

Some you win (Buendia and a £30m+ profit), some you lose (Wolfy), and some you break even. There isn't a club in the land that doesn't experience exactly the same. This is far from a disaster. We seem well stocked with wingers at the moment.

The reality is Webber could have been given a £120 million budget, only signed £20 million players and you can guarantee one or two of them wouldn't work out. It's the same at every club but with our financial disparity we've actually been better at it than most under Webber. I appreciate some won't like to accept that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bert said:

I hope we have someone different this window sorting out recruitment compared to last time otherwise it’s going to be a long season 

I wonder if the guy responsible for recruitment in our last two Championship title winning campaigns is available?

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

I think where that position comes into scrutiny is when we spent a significant portion of a survival transfer budget on this player and he was nowhere near ready. Taking risks on players is all well and good but given the % of our budget that Tzolis cost, I don’t see how this transfer can be viewed as anything other than a massive failure.

True, but at least we bought a player that we are able to shift on, imagine if we'd gone for a ' finished article' of 30+ years with prem experience and he failed to produce.... Little or no sell on value.  It failed in that he didn't keep us up, but at the same time would an on fire tzolis( or any other player for that matter...even Emi) have been enough to do that given how poor we were?

It wasn't good business,. but I don't think it defined our season, more that it was one of many straws.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonderful piece of recruitment.. yes some transfers don't work out, but to spend what we did in a crucial window on someone who clearly wasn't ready/good enough to the point that after a handful of appearances he's being binned off is laughable... That 10m could of gotten us a decent CDM (or maybe we'd have just gotten normann permanently which is just as bad) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recouping the money if he doesn’t want to be here and/or Smith doesn’t rate him is good business for the situation.

I think people can stop claiming he was “one for the future” though now, he was clearly signed to have an impact last year and didn’t, we didn’t spend this money on a future prospect when we knew there was a extremely likely chance of relegation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if he fails to set Brugges alight, from my reading he returns to us next June (a la Cantwell & Bournemouth - have I got that right?) - let's hope by then we are back in EPL so can absorb the loss.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

So, if he fails to set Brugges alight, from my reading he returns to us next June (a la Cantwell & Bournemouth - have I got that right?)

This is the most ridiculous part of it.  There's enough belief that another club can get that value out of him, but not us? 

Even with "Homegrown" tax applied, You won't see Dowell selling for £8m+.... ever!  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to everyone who replied to set me straight on Brugge's financial situation 🙂

I guess if Tzolis has an opportunity to play in the Champions League and for a team that will be competing for a title (even if only in Belgium), that's probably a more attractive proposition than playing in the Championship. Or maybe he just hasn't settled in the UK?

If they end up getting £50m-odd for Lang and De Ketelaere, could we not press them for a straight sale rather than a loan-to-buy? Either way, if we recoup what we paid then it's as good a scenario as we could've hoped for given the season he had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WD40 said:

Webber and Webber alone if you look at the quotes when we signed him. Been tracking him since Liverpool youth. Has to go down as our worst transfer of all time given money paid and how he was exactly what we didn’t need at that time

Certainly makes RvW look like good business 😁

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Option to buy or obligation? If its the former we better hope he fairs better over there than he did here or we'll be back to square 1 with him next season 

Edited by Ken Hairy

Share this post


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

Think some people are being a bit harsh. There are plenty of signings in the premiership that were more established in their career and cost a lot more who didn't make it. Tzolis was 19 when he joined. High risk high reward but we have to take chances to make up for the disparity of funds between us and nearly every rival.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/61809071

Interesting comments in this about the disparity of funding.

 

Really insightful, thanks for that!

Agree with you that Tzolis is far from the worst signing we've made, especially if we manage to recoup our outlay. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Really insightful, thanks for that!

Agree with you that Tzolis is far from the worst signing we've made, especially if we manage to recoup our outlay. 

I can't really say Tzolis has been any worse than say, Placheta, he's still very young and could develop. The headline from Webber was always that he was one for the future, and not one for now

Share this post


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

Wonderful piece of recruitment.. yes some transfers don't work out, but to spend what we did in a crucial window on someone who clearly wasn't ready/good enough to the point that after a handful of appearances he's being binned off is laughable... That 10m could of gotten us a decent CDM (or maybe we'd have just gotten normann permanently which is just as bad) 

This.

I can't believe some on here are prepared to gloss over the opportunity cost. 

Even worse if you add on the fact we couldn't sign anyone in January because there was no money.

A **** poor signing. As was Normann and Kabak.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What cheeses me off about this is that the player was never even given a chance to show what he could do. Now that may be down to the player - perhaps he didn't want to stay after Farke bollocked him in public or perhaps he simply didn't adapt to life in the UK - but this is not RvW or Naismith who were given chance after chance to deliver and didn't.

I personally believe if Farke had stayed, he would eventually have taken Tzolis off the naughty step and we would have seen him given the opportunities to be part of the team. Would he have failed? Who knows? After Farke got the boot, Smith never seemed to show the slightest interest in him, and only time will tell whether that was due to Smith's mediocrity or Tzolis's.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have to accept that Smith doesn't like what he sees and doesn't see an immediate future with Tzolis. The situation could get worse if he flops in Belgium as well.

Edited by Capt. Pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

We have to accept that Smith doesn't like what he sees and doesn't see an immediate future with Tzolis. The situation could get worse if he flops in Belgium as well.

I watch a fair bit of Belgian football. Given the defending, he will struggle to flop completely especially in a Brugge team that were one of only two teams who looked dominant all year. 

I'm going to be very torn next season, I'll want him to do well so it's not expensive for Norwich, but not too well ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Tzolis does go I'll lose all faith in Smith's ability to work with young foreign players.  Seems if you're a Scot or English you walk straight in to the team.

I'm proper angry about this, to the point where I may go protest in the nude outside Colney.

Not a reader of the athletic, but how many of these articles appear that are just bs?

Edited by Google Bot
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not the fault of Tzolis, unfair to scapegoat him.  It's up to us as a club to scout well, ensure that new players (especially youngsters) settle as quickly as possible and give them opportunity and a chance to thrive.     Whether he was good enough or not, anyone given such a contract and chance to play in the EPL would sign it.    Not his fault either that we needed experience and players that could contribute immediately and as it happened only Normann of last seasons 9 or so signings fitted that bill. 

Not his fault that the team turned out so disfunctional that no forward players had any chance of thriving.    It was probably a definite that the expectation followed by a lack of involvement would result in him being disappointed with the experience and wanting out!  

Had we not shown interest, he might have continued a rise to stardom in Greece.   The club are responsible for this, not Tzolis.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Google Bot said:

If Tzolis does go I'll lose all faith in Smith's ability to work with young foreign players.  Seems if you're a Scot or English you walk straight in to the team.

I'm proper angry about this, to the point where I may go protest in the nude outside Colney.

Not a reader of the athletic, but how many of these articles appear that are just bs?

Very few, Michael Bailey generally speaking knows what he's talking about when he publishes something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Google Bot said:

If Tzolis does go I'll lose all faith in Smith's ability to work with young foreign players.  Seems if you're a Scot or English you walk straight in to the team.

I'm proper angry about this, to the point where I may go protest in the nude outside Colney.

Not a reader of the athletic, but how many of these articles appear that are just bs?

Thanks to Brexit our source of untried foreign players has dried up and we can't afford those which qualify. I get the feeling Smith & Shakey will prefer oven ready players who don't have to adjust to a new culture. It is what it is.

Promotion promotion promotion.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

   The club are responsible for this, not Tzolis.

The club are definitely partially responsible but you have absolutely no evidence to say Tzolis isn't responsible whatsoever. We have no idea if he's bothered training properly, if he's fallen out with other players / staff, if he's decided 2 weeks that despite telling the club he was happy to live in England he actually wasn't - there's far too much that goes on behind the scenes to be so definitive.

  • Like 1

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...