The Officially Not Official Summer Transfer Thread 2023

[TheGunnShow 5,987]

Wouldn't be surprised if Tzolis is getting readied for that number 10 spot.

[Ulfotto 641]

I would assume we will get at least a couple of loans in from premier league clubs. Given its early in pre season who is available and at what price is probably still up in the air.  It’s really important we get those signings right last season Burnley and Sheffield United got transformational loan signings.

Edited July 19, 2023 by Ulfotto

[Old Shuck 188]

Gideon Granstrom.

Djurgardens IF in Sweden.

Been on trial with us, now doing same at Sunderland apparently.

Midfielder. 17. But already played for their first team.

[ged in the onion bag 856]

On 18/07/2023 at 10:12, Branston Pickle said:

I do wonder if keeping Tzolis might not be the worst idea - he must have ‘something’ and if we can unlock it this season it would be good for both him and us.  

I hope they can but don’t think our coaches have the wherewithal or bravery  to unlock it.   We have so many youngsters in the first team group and none of them seem to be jumping out at us…. Idah, Sargent, Tzolis, Rowe, Springett, McCallum, Flynn, Riley, there’s even questions over Omo and Gibbs…

 

[pete 320]

Kamara will get the mandatory handful of games young City loanees get.  See Omotoye  last season as one example. 

[Newtopia 519]

3 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Idah, five years. Barnes in. Sargent having scored 13 last season while not at his best and out of position for half of it.

I am hopeful that Sarge will get 20 this season, if he gets pushed out wide by Wagner again I am going to sulk like a small child….

[ged in the onion bag 856]

2 hours ago, Ulfotto said:

I would assume we will get at least a couple of loans in from premier league clubs. Given its early in pre season who is available and at what price is probably still up in the air.  It’s really important we get those signings right last season Burnley and Sheffield United got transformational loan signings.

What do you think loans will do for us?   Are you thinking about promotion?   If so, what do you think about us not developing players as the loanees will be playing instead and of course this squad isn’t getting promoted anyway so what’s the point?     What inspiration will all our youngsters get from us bringing in loanees?   What’s the point of having EPL standard facilities if we have loads of players and we still loan….. where is the trust and confidence in our own players and coaches????   

… and if we did miraculously get promoted, with loans, what then?   How will we replace them?   Where will we get a competitive squad from?    
 

Just curious to find someone who can actually justify this loan route.   Skipp didn’t work since we couldn’t replace him and the promotion season was a shambles and we came back down with no money still.   

[cambridgeshire canary 6,782]

2 minutes ago, Newtopia said:

I am hopeful that Sarge will get 20 this season, if he gets pushed out wide by Wagner again I am going to sulk like a small child….

From what we have seen of pre season so far seems pairing him in a top two alongside Barnes is what we are planning to do

[Branston Pickle 3,680]

17 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

What do you think loans will do for us?   Are you thinking about promotion?   If so, what do you think about us not developing players as the loanees will be playing instead and of course this squad isn’t getting promoted anyway so what’s the point?     What inspiration will all our youngsters get from us bringing in loanees?   What’s the point of having EPL standard facilities if we have loads of players and we still loan….. where is the trust and confidence in our own players and coaches????   

… and if we did miraculously get promoted, with loans, what then?   How will we replace them?   Where will we get a competitive squad from?    
 

Just curious to find someone who can actually justify this loan route.   Skipp didn’t work since we couldn’t replace him and the promotion season was a shambles and we came back down with no money still.   

Many of us have justified it many times. You just don’t/won’t listen or agree.

Access to better players to fill gaps in your squad, that you can’t otherwise afford, is the main reason.

Otherwise, can you tell me the last side promoted into the PL without at least 1 loan?

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,851]

39 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

What do you think loans will do for us?   Are you thinking about promotion?   If so, what do you think about us not developing players as the loanees will be playing instead and of course this squad isn’t getting promoted anyway so what’s the point?     What inspiration will all our youngsters get from us bringing in loanees?   What’s the point of having EPL standard facilities if we have loads of players and we still loan….. where is the trust and confidence in our own players and coaches????   

… and if we did miraculously get promoted, with loans, what then?   How will we replace them?   Where will we get a competitive squad from?    
 

Just curious to find someone who can actually justify this loan route.   Skipp didn’t work since we couldn’t replace him and the promotion season was a shambles and we came back down with no money still.   

Last season, Burnley had Harwood-Bellis, Tella, Maatsen, Beyer, Dervisoglu and Obafemi. Those six made 160 league appearances between them.

Sheffield United had Clark, Khadra, McAtee and Doyle, who made 94 league appearances overall. 

Luton had Horvath, Drameh and Nakamba, who made 53 league appearances in total.

I doubt any of those clubs are wishing they had used their own young fringe players instead.

[Ulfotto 641]

12 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Last season, Burnley had Harwood-Bellis, Tella, Maatsen, Beyer, Dervisoglu and Obafemi. Those six made 160 league appearances between them.

Sheffield United had Clark, Khadra, McAtee and Doyle, who made 94 league appearances overall. 

Luton had Horvath, Drameh and Nakamba, who made 53 league appearances in total.

I doubt any of those clubs are wishing they had used their own young fringe players instead.

Yes this is my argument I agree with your sentiment around developing our own but it is a case if you can’t beat them then join them and we can’t afford not to be trying to be in conversation to get some of these players. Oliver Skipp was fantastic for us if we could get a CDM as good as him and a winger of similar ability are prospects ahead of next season would be greatly enhanced.

[Terminally Yellow 2,477]

55 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

Many of us have justified it many times. You just don’t/won’t listen or agree.

Access to better players to fill gaps in your squad, that you can’t otherwise afford, is the main reason.

Otherwise, can you tell me the last side promoted into the PL without at least 1 loan?

Or indeed the last side in the championship that did not have a loaner? A quick look over a big list of every championship transfer shows not only did all championship teams make a loan signing during the last summer window but all but three added loan signings in January too.

If Ged's view on loanees is shared by any other fan of any other championship team, I'd be pretty shocked.

Edited July 19, 2023 by Terminally Yellow

[Branston Pickle 3,680]

4 minutes ago, Terminally Yellow said:

Or indeed the last side in the championship that did not have a loaner? A quick look over a big list of every championship transfer shows not only did all championship teams make a loan signing during the last summer window but all but three added loan signings in January too.

If Ged's view on loanees is shared by any other fan of any other championship team, I'd be pretty shocked.

It’s an idealistic position - nothing wrong with that per se, but it just isn’t what works in the real world. Loans, both in and out, are a fact of life.

[Terminally Yellow 2,477]

5 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

It’s an idealistic position - nothing wrong with that per se, but it just isn’t what works in the real world. Loans, both in and out, are a fact of life.

No, it's unrealistic.

It's like going into politics on a manifesto promising everyone free homes, cars, food and drink and not having to pay taxes. 

Time for Ged to join us back in the real world. 

[ged in the onion bag 856]

1 hour ago, Branston Pickle said:

Many of us have justified it many times. You just don’t/won’t listen or agree.

Access to better players to fill gaps in your squad, that you can’t otherwise afford, is the main reason.

Otherwise, can you tell me the last side promoted into the PL without at least 1 loan?

You’ve never justified it.   You’ve just said the same thing that loans are important to get promotion because all teams do it. …. you haven’t answered the questions I raised and based on evidence, our loan experience hasn’t been very good.    So how do we develop a competitive team?  
 

Most teams go up and spend money, most teams have a defensive base so they can compete, most clubs have adequate recruitment personnel but we have had none of that and no money.   So what’s the point of loans since our philosophy is different to all other teams it seems.   

Burnley bought a whole new team, it wasn’t the loans alone that got them up and they discarded the ones who weren’t good enough.    You should know that.   

Notts Forest spent £300m!    

 

[Terminally Yellow 2,477]

Just now, ged in the onion bag said:

You’ve never justified it.   You’ve just said the same thing that loans are important to get promotion because all teams do it. …. you haven’t answered the questions I raised and based on evidence, our loan experience hasn’t been very good.    So how do we develop a competitive team?  
 

Most teams go up and spend money, most teams have a defensive base so they can compete, most clubs have adequate recruitment personnel but we have had none of that and no money.   So what’s the point of loans since our philosophy is different to all other teams it seems.   

Burnley bought a whole new team, it wasn’t the loans alone that got them up and they discarded the ones who weren’t good enough.    You should know that.   

Notts Forest spent £300m!    

Sheffield Utd didn't buy a whole new team, loaned in key positions and came 2nd. 

Burnley's loans were also responsible for 27 goals and 17 assists.

Literally half a dozen posters have explained the rationale and justification for loan signings over the past six months, myself included. 

Wacky has done so just five posts above the one of yours I've quoted. It's like you have amnesia to anything that doesn't match your own views.

Really quite shameful. 

[ged in the onion bag 856]

45 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Last season, Burnley had Harwood-Bellis, Tella, Maatsen, Beyer, Dervisoglu and Obafemi. Those six made 160 league appearances between them.

Sheffield United had Clark, Khadra, McAtee and Doyle, who made 94 league appearances overall. 

Luton had Horvath, Drameh and Nakamba, who made 53 league appearances in total.

I doubt any of those clubs are wishing they had used their own young fringe players instead.

We had Skipp!    We got promoted….. we couldn’t replace him, we were rank bad and came back down embarrassed and penniless!   That worked well didn’t it.     
 

Notts Forest went up, no doubt with loaned players and spent £300m.    
 

We do everything differently to other clubs and loans haven’t helped us get a squad that will make us competitive at EPL leveL where we want to be.

In my post that prompted your response, I just asked some questions…. Think they are valid… you’ll notice no one answers them.

  

[ged in the onion bag 856]

2 minutes ago, Terminally Yellow said:

Sheffield Utd didn't buy a whole new team, loaned in key positions and came 2nd. 

Burnley's loans were also responsible for 27 goals and 17 assists.

Literally half a dozen posters have explained the rationale and justification for loan signings over the past six months, myself included. 

Wacky has done so just five posts above the one of yours I've quoted. It's like you have amnesia to anything that doesn't match your own views.

Really quite shameful. 

How’s it working for us?   We aren’t Burnley or Sheff Utd.    

[RobJames 884]

4 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

You’ve never justified it.   You’ve just said the same thing that loans are important to get promotion because all teams do it. …. you haven’t answered the questions I raised and based on evidence, our loan experience hasn’t been very good.    So how do we develop a competitive team?  
 

Most teams go up and spend money, most teams have a defensive base so they can compete, most clubs have adequate recruitment personnel but we have had none of that and no money.   So what’s the point of loans since our philosophy is different to all other teams it seems.   

Burnley bought a whole new team, it wasn’t the loans alone that got them up and they discarded the ones who weren’t good enough.    You should know that.   

Notts Forest spent £300m!    

 

One tinsy winsy flaw in that guff.................how come we get promoted ? You could add how come others who do spend don't get promoted ?

What happened to Leeds, Leicester and S'oton ? Did they not spend spend spend ? What would you say was the reason why Stoke Cardiff, West Brom, Hull, Swansea etc have not been promoted ?

You don't seem to grasp that while spending big does not guarantee you staying in the PL, or even getting promoted, it does pretty much guarantee you will be lumbered with wage contracts and transfer payments if relegated.  Perhaps that is why so many former PL clubs are now pretty much fcked.

[norfolkngood 1,087]

1 hour ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Last season, Burnley had Harwood-Bellis, Tella, Maatsen, Beyer, Dervisoglu and Obafemi. Those six made 160 league appearances between them.

Sheffield United had Clark, Khadra, McAtee and Doyle, who made 94 league appearances overall. 

Luton had Horvath, Drameh and Nakamba, who made 53 league appearances in total.

I doubt any of those clubs are wishing they had used their own young fringe players instead.

It is something that can work so so well when you get players that are better and have that more skill ,

Like when we loaned Skipp fantastic for us works so well when you get it right ,

then on the other hand we loaned Marquinhos & Hayden complete waste of time ,

Hope we have learnt one thing if they get injured we can send them back ! 

Like all transfers you have to get the right player and our Recruitment was not good enough

hopefully get a couple of good loans this season 

Edited July 19, 2023 by norfolkngood

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,851]

26 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

We had Skipp!    We got promoted….. 

Job done. That's why we signed him.

The fact we failed to replace him the next summer, and instead spent the bulk of our budget on Tzolis, Sargent and Rashica, is a totally unrelated issue to the 'we should never sign a player on loan again' argument.

[ged in the onion bag 856]

1 hour ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Job done. That's why we signed him.

The fact we failed to replace him the next summer, and instead spent the bulk of our budget on Tzolis, Sargent and Rashica, is a totally unrelated issue to the 'we should never sign a player on loan again' argument.

Do you work for the Sun?       Take a titbit and run with it.   That’s cheap!

What do you mean job done.    How, it’s been a shambles ever since…

The reason we signed such poor players is that we had an inadequate squad in terms of quality and depth, hence with our limited funds we had to spread it across many players, try to get value for money and it doesn’t work…. We don’t have the funds others do and we don’t have any quality (and we never will if we don’t develop).   
 

How come you’re all happy to spout everyone else loans players and it works yet it doesn’t for us and hasn’t for us.    Skipp (and Buendia) got us promoted and since that May, it’s been downhill all the way!     Good luck with them loans.    Exactly how has it worked for us, 

 

[Dr Greenthumb 750]

2 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

Do you work for the Sun?       Take a titbit and run with it.   That’s cheap!

What do you mean job done.    How, it’s been a shambles ever since…

The reason we signed such poor players is that we had an inadequate squad in terms of quality and depth, hence with our limited funds we had to spread it across many players, try to get value for money and it doesn’t work…. We don’t have the funds others do and we don’t have any quality (and we never will if we don’t develop).   
 

How come you’re all happy to spout everyone else loans players and it works yet it doesn’t for us and hasn’t for us.    Skipp (and Buendia) got us promoted and since that May, it’s been downhill all the way!     Good luck with them loans.    Exactly how has it worked for us, 

 

Are we signing someone on loan? 

[Terminally Yellow 2,477]

2 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

Are we signing someone on loan? 

Wagner has just told Paddy Davitt we're no closer to signings than the last friendly. So doubt it. 

[ged in the onion bag 856]

3 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

Are we signing someone on loan? 

Apparently!    And we’re gonna get promoted too!    Two loans should do it as long as McLean stays fit too!    

[Dr Greenthumb 750]

Just now, ged in the onion bag said:

Apparently!    And we’re gonna get promoted too!    Two loans should do it as long as McLean stays fit too!    

Who we getting in on loan? 

[ged in the onion bag 856]

4 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

Who we getting in on loan? 

Suspect two (very experienced) 20 yr olds destined for big things who know everything about getting out the Championship and who will only cost us £20m if they are any good.    Hopefully bionic so any injuries can be fixed before the next match… 

Webber will find them!   

[norfolkngood 1,087]

13 minutes ago, Terminally Yellow said:

Wagner has just told Paddy Davitt we're no closer to signings than the last friendly. So doubt it. 

Maybe due to lack of sales to raise some cash ?

 

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,851]

25 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

What do you mean job done.  

We signed Skipp to get promoted. We got promoted. Job done. 

The fact we replaced Skipp with two loanees who didn't work out, Gilmour and Normann, doesn't change the fact that the Skipp loan was successful. 

But it does seem strange that you seem to blame all our ills on loan signings, particularly Skipp.

[BigFish 1,988]

2 hours ago, ged in the onion bag said:

We had Skipp!    We got promoted…..    That worked well didn’t it.