Is Rashica our biggest big money flop?

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

And if not, what makes RVW a bigger one? At least he only flopped in the top tier, Rashica is currently flopping in the second tier!

[Canary Wundaboy 1,359]

Rashica was even playing in a team apparently more setup to his strengths, unlike poor Ricky…

[Mason 47 1,379]

RvW I have a degree of sympathy for as he meant well and even Grant Holt was aghast trying to play for Hughton. Just not a strikers manager.

He's 3rd. Rashica and Naismith for me are tied for top spot on outlay and outcome. Young challenger Tzolis waiting in the wings if he ends up never contributing more for us.

[Mason 47 1,379]

Just now, Mason 47 said:

RvW I have a degree of sympathy for as he meant well and even Grant Holt was aghast trying to play for Hughton. Just not a strikers manager.

He's 3rd. Rashica and Naismith for me are tied for top spot on outlay and outcome. Young challenger Tzolis waiting in the wings if he ends up never contributing more for us.

 Now I say that, I recall Naismith apparently being a **** with his contract as he got a better deal on a free. I don't believe Milot is vindictive, just suffering from the Interesting Foreign Country syndrome 

[The Bunny 309]

I wouldn't give up on him just yet. He's been poor this season so far, but he was one of our best attacking players last season (though admittedly the bar wasn't high), one of the only players prepared to run at the opposition and make things happen. I think it could go either way TBH. 

[Worthy Nigelton 1,048]

Naismith is the worst ever.

[Dean Coneys boots 1,400]

Naismith was much worse. Disinterested, on a massive contract, did nothing and nearly bankrupt the club for the privilege. 

[cambridgeshire canary 6,720]

7 minutes ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

Naismith was much worse. Disinterested, on a massive contract, did nothing and nearly bankrupt the club for the privilege. 

And only reason he joined was due to him being mates with Alex Neil, yet it felt more like he had been blackmailed into coming

[GodlyOtsemobor 2,310]

Naismith 

Rashica 

Fer 

RVW

Edited August 31, 2022 by GodlyOtsemobor

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

1 minute ago, GodlyOtsemobor said:

Naismith 

Rashica 

Fer 

RVW

Fer was certainly inconsistent but on his day was a cut above the rest of the side. But sold him for a profit! Not a waste of money at all. 

[Ulfotto 634]

It depends how it ends at the moment I would imagine we may be able to get the transfer fee back.

 

[Greavsy 2,415]

16 minutes ago, Ulfotto said:

It depends how it ends at the moment I would imagine we may be able to get the transfer fee back.

 

Hope Webber can find the receipt! 

[Walcombe canary 69]

Agree. Naismith the worst

[Ken Hairy 3,772]

I'm hoping there's a player in there somewhere with Rashica, I think he's suffering a massive confidence crisis its up to the management to shake him out of that and the player himself to pull his socks up, shoulders back and give it the beans 😀

If he carries on failing at this level, then it's hard to argue with him being up there as one of our biggest flops. 

[Newtopia 517]

I like RvW and Rashica, I think they try hard, and although we (fans) might not rate them they are good professionals and we (ncfc) just never got the best out them, so either they did not fit into our system or were unlucky.

Naismith had a bad attitude he was a poor signing, but I always felt he was a desperate signing.

Personally I think the worst signing we made was Wildshut, I really could not work out the logic and in relative terms I believe he was the most expensive of all the signings.

Edited August 31, 2022 by Newtopia

[Greavsy 2,415]

4 minutes ago, Newtopia said:

Personally I think the worst signing we made was Wildshut, I really could not work out the logic and in relative terms I believe he was the most expensive of all the signings.

I think its been regularly stated that the public figure quoted for his fee was way off the mark. 

Maybe its one of those where when the signing is made club wants to appear progressive and spending the big bucks, then when it doesnt work out for a particular player - they say, oh he wasnt actually an £XM signing, it was only 1/4 of that, so we havent made a big loss, type  things. 

[Petriix 2,835]

It's a complicated question because there are lots of considerations.

The Naismith signing was certainly the biggest in purely financial terms because of the ridiculous decision to sign him with no wage reduction on relegation. A reported £2M per year on top of the £8M transfer fee was unsustainable in the Championship even for a top player, let alone a journeyman.

RVW just seems like a bad dream. He looked like an amateur then was quietly shipped out the back door.

For me the Rashica failure is more about the bigger picture. Going from the highs of winning the Championship with Skipp and Buendia to the lows of the Premier League with a new system featuring Gilmour and Rashica was a stark contrast.

Sticking with Rashica and watching his aimless runs and total failure to link up with Pukki for a whole season compounded things. Overall, his presence on the pitch made us worse overall. We could have played any of Mumba, Martin, Hernandez or Sinani.

Tzolis maybe has potential or maybe he's a total flop but at least he didn't occupy a starting position to the detriment of the team.

Let's not forget Klose who spent a long time injured and never consistently performed. His heart was in the right place but his body wasn't really up to it. 

All of our other big signings at least recouped their fees when we sold them. 

[Newtopia 517]

1 minute ago, Greavsy said:

I think its been regularly stated that the public figure quoted for his fee was way off the mark. 

Maybe its one of those where when the signing is made club wants to appear progressive and spending the big bucks, then when it doesnt work out for a particular player - they say, oh he wasnt actually an £XM signing, it was only 1/4 of that, so we havent made a big loss, type  things. 

Agreed, the transfer fee with adds and wages are often not comparible.  Yet it does help fuel an interesting discussion 

[canarydan23 4,060]

4 minutes ago, Petriix said:

Let's not forget Klose who spent a long time injured and never consistently performed. His heart was in the right place but his body wasn't really up to it. 

That goal v Ipswich alone was worth every penny expended on Klose.

[Newtopia 517]

2 minutes ago, Petriix said:

It's a complicated question because there are lots of considerations.

The Naismith signing was certainly the biggest in purely financial terms because of the ridiculous decision to sign him with no wage reduction on relegation. A reported £2M per year on top of the £8M transfer fee was unsustainable in the Championship even for a top player, let alone a journeyman.

RVW just seems like a bad dream. He looked like an amateur then was quietly shipped out the back door.

For me the Rashica failure is more about the bigger picture. Going from the highs of winning the Championship with Skipp and Buendia to the lows of the Premier League with a new system featuring Gilmour and Rashica was a stark contrast.

Sticking with Rashica and watching his aimless runs and total failure to link up with Pukki for a whole season compounded things. Overall, his presence on the pitch made us worse overall. We could have played any of Mumba, Martin, Hernandez or Sinani.

Tzolis maybe has potential or maybe he's a total flop but at least he didn't occupy a starting position to the detriment of the team.

Let's not forget Klose who spent a long time injured and never consistently performed. His heart was in the right place but his body wasn't really up to it. 

All of our other big signings at least recouped their fees when we sold them. 

Last season was a huge mess up.  I felt the recruitment was structured around us shifting to a 4 3 3, with Pukki, Rashica, and Cantwell spearheading a fast breaking side which would exploit the high press the Premiership teams were likely to use against us.  The problem was we lost the ball too easily at the back and / or in midfield.  Consequently we never used our attacking breaking players.  

We then became more defensive in the approach, then Rashica did not fit in quite as well.

Ho hum that is in the past now.

[king canary 7,607]

Think it tough to look beyond Naismith for the financial carnage his contract caused, combined with the inability to shift him even on a free.

RvW was a victim of the club deciding to heap huge pressure on him and make him the central piece of our marketing strategy. An £8m striker not working out isn't good but I don't think it would have been quite as bad if we hadn't had all that 'big bad wolf' **** over the summer. All a bit tinpot.

 

[HertsCanary93 222]

I'm in the Naismith camp.

Rashica I feel we could move on fairly easy if we need/want to. Even if we take a bit of a loss.

[cambridgeshire canary 6,720]

2 minutes ago, HertsCanary93 said:

I'm in the Naismith camp.

Rashica I feel we could move on fairly easy if we need/want to. Even if we take a bit of a loss.

Much as he did go on to do well at Hearts the fact he went and retired at 33 does rather show that perhaps his heart (pun not intended) was not really in football much while he came to us, which would rather explain things

[Branston Pickle 3,659]

52 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

I think its been regularly stated that the public figure quoted for his fee was way off the mark. 

Maybe its one of those where when the signing is made club wants to appear progressive and spending the big bucks, then when it doesnt work out for a particular player - they say, oh he wasnt actually an £XM signing, it was only 1/4 of that, so we havent made a big loss, type  things. 

Quite - I recall the Wildschut figures being quoted at something like £7m, but the real figure was meant to be half of that (…which even then would be high).  People rather fell into the trap of the selling club having included every possible add-on in the figure they quoted, but I think none of them were triggered.

It is odd when you think of our ‘big money’ transfers, few of them have really come off. The players we’ve got most ££ for when they’ve moved on seem to have mostly been younger guys (Godfrey, Jamal) coming through the ranks or players we’ve taken a bit of punt on (Emi). Madders was bought as an extremely promising youngster, it’s a shame we didn’t see more of him.

[Greavsy 2,415]

Also - dont forget the players dont decide their fees / wages. Yes they negotiate (wages etc) but its the club who agrees to pay them or not. 

With Naismith there was never going to a significant sell on clause because of his age. That doesnt excuse him not being ar$ed though, and I seem to recall refusing a pay cut / loan deal when it was obvious it wasnt working out. That said would any of us? I know we will go 'Well yea if i was earning £x000's a week', but its all relative. 

Different rules for football/ers. 

Edited August 31, 2022 by Greavsy

[Robert N. LiM 4,356]

1 hour ago, Ken Hairy said:

I'm hoping there's a player in there somewhere with Rashica, I think he's suffering a massive confidence crisis its up to the management to shake him out of that and the player himself to pull his socks up, shoulders back and give it the beans 😀

 

I think we have to hope that the closing of the transfer window has a positive effect on him. I wonder if he's been hoping for a move and a fresh start. When it's clear he's not getting a move, and has to make the fresh start here, it might help him out. Not saying it's the same situation, but it worked for Emi two years ago.

[Robert N. LiM 4,356]

52 minutes ago, king canary said:

An £8m striker not working out isn't good but I don't think it would have been quite as bad if we hadn't had all that 'big bad wolf' **** over the summer. All a bit tinpot.

Agree. Not too keen on this for the same reason.

 

[Ken Hairy 3,772]

5 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

Agree. Not too keen on this for the same reason.

 

Agree with you here, I said when they put that up it was nonsensical and had all the hallmarks of 'who's afraid of the big bad Wolf?' 

Massive pictures of players outside the ground should be limited to players who have achieved something. Pukki would have been a better choice if they needed anyone. 

[......and Smith must score. 1,343]

1 hour ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Much as he did go on to do well at Hearts the fact he went and retired at 33 does rather show that perhaps his heart (pun not intended) was not really in football much while he came to us, which would rather explain things

Didn't want to come here in the first place but Alex Neil was so infatuated that he dangled a huge ( for us ) contract in front of him and he signed reluctantly. Already set for life from all his years in the PL he screwed us for anything he could get. Always whining that all he wanted to do was play football he never was willing to sacrifice a penny of his contract and even got a promotion bonus of £1m at the end of his contract when he hadn't played for us for months and months. A greedy b*stard.

I think we can lay the blame for this catastrophe very firmly at Alex Neil's door

 

 

[GodlyOtsemobor 2,310]

1 hour ago, Ken Hairy said:

Agree with you here, I said when they put that up it was nonsensical and had all the hallmarks of 'who's afraid of the big bad Wolf?' 

Massive pictures of players outside the ground should be limited to players who have achieved something. Pukki would have been a better choice if they needed anyone. 

Absolutely, it should be legends up there. Take your pick who.