The Officially Not Official Summer Transfer Thread 2023

[Capt. Pants 4,331]

The issue with Omo he's the only player with any market value that could be used to strengthen the squad. It was probably right to turn down an offer for him last Jan (definitely after the injury to Hanley) but it seems as though that buyer has gone. Whether there are others who knows.

In my opinion the club needs to be looking at the bigger picture. Omo needs to be in the team learning off the likes of Duffy, Hanley and Gibson. We need to be developing him and increasing that value.

It's a balance between the here and now and developing young players. 

[KiwiScot 1,491]

Should we not have squad numbers by now? Are Max and Andy stuffing this up

[By Hook or Ian crook 926]

2 hours ago, Creedence Clearwater Couto said:

Despite most of us realising that, we are the fans. We should always try to oppose selling our best players. That’s the job of fans. We shouldn’t be ‘passive’ and make the decision easy. The commercial hat is for those employed at senior and director levels within the club.

We could’ve kept Buendia. It made business sense, but not football sense. 

Every club is a ‘selling club’ doesn’t mean we have to advertise ourselves that way. I think it just plays further into the little, passive old Norwich media perception. That’s why I enjoyed McNally’s stint, his mentality bucked that trend and gave our club some teeth.
 

I agree with this. 
 

I also don’t subscribe to the maths that financially we are better off having to sell our best players. When ever we sell players we have to buy to replace them. When you take in to account for transfer fee, wages, agent fees ect it’s usually adds up to more than we would have spent had we given the player a better contract on more money. When we sold Buendia (35mil) we essentially brought in 3 players to replace him in Rashica, Tzolis and Sargent (all roughly 8million a pop). Our average weekly wage bill that season was 45k a week. So when you take in to account that we spent 24 million roughly on transfer fees, and a total wage outlay of 7 million per season on those three players wages. Our total spend after a 4 year contract would be 52 million. Which is actually 17 million more than we got for Buendia in transfer fees. It would have made more financial and football sense to pay Buendia the 80k a week he was being offered at Villa for 4 years as we would have been half a million better off financially over those same 4 years. 

[By Hook or Ian crook 926]

1 hour ago, Ulfotto said:

Horses for courses but I actually like the fact that Stuart Webber specifically says we are a selling club and is honest about who we will sell. It adds a much needed clarity it is much better that making big promises about player x will be here next season when you don’t have much control over it.
 

As for Buendia there is a world where we could have kept him maybe but giving him 120k a week without a relegation wage reduction and then bought the rest of the squad in line with this new figure. This would be gambling the club’s future on staying in the premier league something again Webber said we were not prepared to do. Again agree or disagree but I like the fact he said what the club was and wasn’t prepared to do.

I’ve said this before I don’t see the arguement that just because you pay one exceptional player a record wage that everyone else’s wages have to be affected. It’s like me having to charge more for a painting because a Picasso sold for millions. Just because one artists work sells for me doesn’t mean I deserve more as a result. 

[Haus 260]

15 minutes ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

I’ve said this before I don’t see the arguement that just because you pay one exceptional player a record wage that everyone else’s wages have to be affected. It’s like me having to charge more for a painting because a Picasso sold for millions. Just because one artists work sells for me doesn’t mean I deserve more as a result. 

Yeah, Ronaldo doesn't get paid the same as his teammates does he 

[Creedence Clearwater Couto 1,325]

1 hour ago, horsefly said:

It was widely claimed at the time that Buendia had made it very clear he wanted a move and would not play another game for the club if it resisted a reasonable offer. That the club had managed to get him to remain for another season in the Championship is truly remarkable, and it is also widely claimed that he did so on the promise he would get his move the following season. Even Manchester City and Liverpool (et al) have found themselves selling star players because they wanted a move.  It is naïve to think City fans should always oppose selling our best players. Arguably, the club has managed to attract very talented players to the club in the first place precisely because we have a record for developing their potential and not standing in their way when they have a chance to progress to a bigger club. Until we find an investor willing to pump £100m+ into the playing squad that's the reality of where we are as a club. 

I think as football fans, we must demand that our best players stay at our football club first and foremost. Of course there are situations where a player must still be sold, thinking otherwise is naive. But we should always make the club have a difficult decision to make.  

The only claims regarding Buendia came from the man selling him. Theoretically we could have matched Villa’s contract offer and not bought Rashica or Tzolis. If the fanbase had made the decision harder, would it have made a difference? Who knows. It’s a moot point now. But denying players transfers to the benefit of the footballing side of the club, is not unheard of. 

Edited August 1, 2023 by Creedence Clearwater Couto

[By Hook or Ian crook 926]

21 minutes ago, Creedence Clearwater Couto said:

I think as football fans, we must demand that our best players stay at our football club first and foremost. Of course there are situations where a player must still be sold, thinking otherwise is naive. But we should always make the club have a difficult decision to make.  

The only claims regarding Buendia came from the man selling him. Theoretically we could have matched Villa’s contract offer and not bought Rashica or Tzolis. If the fanbase had made the decision harder, would it have made a difference? Who knows. It’s a moot point now. But denying players transfers to the benefit of the footballing side of the club, is not unheard of. 

As a Norwich fan I’ve no complaint if someone leave us because they want to go win things. We will never now sadly be Man City or a PSG but people don’t go to Villa to win things they go because they offer them more wages than we have done. If we’d matched Villas wage offer that season I doubt Emi would have shown the same desire to leave unless a top top side comes in for him. As a side who wants to establish themselves in the top 20 sides in the country you really have to only sell to the top 25 clubs in the world say the AC Milan’s, Barcelonas, Manchester clubs ect, If not you’re just making your competition stronger such as if we sold Aaron’s to Southampton it may make financial sense in that he’s got a year left on his contract but football wise it’s madness 

[cambridgeshire canary 6,874]

Remember when we were linked to him for about a week?

 

[Ernie Wise 73]

Buendia wanted to move after we were relegated in 2019/20. Farke left Buendia and Cantwell out of the team when we played at Bournemouth at the start of the 2020/21 season stating that they were not in the right frame of mind or something similar. It’s pretty clear that Buendia was unsettled and probably wanted a move and it was smoothed over by promising him a move at the end of the season.

Money was probably part of the reason but also he wanted to go to a ‘bigger club’, who were more likely to stay in the premier league.

[shefcanary 2,503]

1 hour ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

I agree with this. 
 

I also don’t subscribe to the maths that financially we are better off having to sell our best players. When ever we sell players we have to buy to replace them. When you take in to account for transfer fee, wages, agent fees ect it’s usually adds up to more than we would have spent had we given the player a better contract on more money. When we sold Buendia (35mil) we essentially brought in 3 players to replace him in Rashica, Tzolis and Sargent (all roughly 8million a pop). Our average weekly wage bill that season was 45k a week. So when you take in to account that we spent 24 million roughly on transfer fees, and a total wage outlay of 7 million per season on those three players wages. Our total spend after a 4 year contract would be 52 million. Which is actually 17 million more than we got for Buendia in transfer fees. It would have made more financial and football sense to pay Buendia the 80k a week he was being offered at Villa for 4 years as we would have been half a million better off financially over those same 4 years. 

On Agent's fees. It really pisses me off that Norwich is always top of the spend (c. £5m on average) on such parasites in the Championship. 

Edited August 1, 2023 by shefcanary

[jaberry2 558]

5 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

On Agent's fees. It really pisses me off that Norwich is always top of the spend (c. £5m on average) on such parasites in the Championship. 

A necessary evil. Just like recruitment consultants

[shefcanary 2,503]

Just now, jaberry2 said:

A necessary evil. Just like recruitment consultants

It "may" be necessary, but why do we pay more than anyone else.

[jaberry2 558]

1 minute ago, shefcanary said:

It "may" be necessary, but why do we pay more than anyone else.

Probably because we're mugs

[7HAR1980 115]

10 hours ago, canarybubbles said:

That's the problem, isn't it? It's really hard to adapt to a new situation where we are a bog standard Championship club with a bunch of largely mediocre players led by a manager who is already on thin ice and a SD who has resigned but is hanging around like a bad smell.

 

None of that is factual reality though is it?

All conjecture by you.

[7HAR1980 115]

8 hours ago, Creedence Clearwater Couto said:

Despite most of us realising that, we are the fans. We should always try to oppose selling our best players. That’s the job of fans. We shouldn’t be ‘passive’ and make the decision easy. The commercial hat is for those employed at senior and director levels within the club.

We could’ve kept Buendia. It made business sense, but not football sense. 

Every club is a ‘selling club’ doesn’t mean we have to advertise ourselves that way. I think it just plays further into the little, passive old Norwich media perception. That’s why I enjoyed McNally’s stint, his mentality bucked that trend and gave our club some teeth.
 

Good luck opposing the sale of our players. What do you actual think the club will do about you opposing sales? 

[canarybubbles 1,965]

2 minutes ago, 7HAR1980 said:

None of that is factual reality though is it?

All conjecture by you.

I'll accept that it's conjecture, but IMO reasonable conjecture. At least we can measure it against reality. Let's see how things stand by Christmas.

[CANARYKING 644]

PinkUn saying Omo to Milan for £7.5 m, way, way too cheap

[rock bus 875]

4 minutes ago, CANARYKING said:

PinkUn saying Omo to Milan for £7.5 m, way, way too cheap

Cheap compared to what Webber said the offer was in January.

If I'm honest though, I'd take £7.5M upfront with the caveat that a deal is structured with loads of add ons including sell on %, international call up. appearances etc.

I know plenty rate him but I remain unconvinced. He certainly has potential but I think that is as much due to his build and athleticism. A  bit like Godfrey and Lewis before him I think he lacks a 'footballers brain'. I think he will always come up short in terms of positioning and game management so not sure he will ever fulfill that potential.

I should say I hope I'm wrong and that we either benefit from having a top player in the side or from the suggested contract terms.

[Terminally Yellow 2,492]

21 minutes ago, CANARYKING said:

PinkUn saying Omo to Milan for £7.5 m, way, way too cheap

Need to be careful, because it says 7.5m euros. Which is £6.4m. 

[Danke bitte 967]

Wait, is this the same article from a few days ago or an entirely confirmed new bid for Omobamidele??

[Terminally Yellow 2,492]

Just now, Danke bitte said:

Wait, is this the same article from a few days ago or an entirely confirmed new bid for Omobamidele??

It's come from Italian press who have said that Milan have entered into negotiations within the last few days in the hopes we'll halve our asking price. 

Edited August 1, 2023 by Terminally Yellow

[By Hook or Ian crook 926]

12 hours ago, canarybubbles said:

That's the problem, isn't it? It's really hard to adapt to a new situation where we are a bog standard Championship club with a bunch of largely mediocre players led by a manager who is already on thin ice and a SD who has resigned but is hanging around like a bad smell.

 

Shouldn’t be too hard for a vast majority of the past 30 years that’s been the norm 

[Branston Pickle 3,743]

45 minutes ago, Danke bitte said:

Wait, is this the same article from a few days ago or an entirely confirmed new bid for Omobamidele??

I can’t see any new article since yesterday?  

[Capt. Pants 4,331]

1 hour ago, CANARYKING said:

PinkUn saying Omo to Milan for £7.5 m, way, way too cheap

Indeed, way too cheap. 

Even with add-ons that's a fire sale sell to survive price. I'd rather keep him as it too little by way of finding a replacement or strengthening the squad elsewhere. They can have Gibbo for £7.5m.

 

[Creedence Clearwater Couto 1,325]

5 hours ago, 7HAR1980 said:

Good luck opposing the sale of our players. What do you actual think the club will do about you opposing sales? 

I don’t know. Fan power doesn’t work does it. 

(Huckerby)

[Canary dwarf 221]

So big Andy is only worth a 1/3 or 1/4 what he's was worth in Jan , what's that all about ?

[jaberry2 558]

Surely we're in a strong position and no need to sell for the Milan money touted. Either pay up or clear off. 

[Branston Pickle 3,743]

3 minutes ago, jaberry2 said:

Surely we're in a strong position and no need to sell for the Milan money touted. Either pay up or clear off. 

I’ve not seen/heard anything other than the initial thing, not sure why people suddenly seem to think it’s done and at £7m or whatever.  

[City 101 85]

6 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

I’ve not seen/heard anything other than the initial thing, not sure why people suddenly seem to think it’s done and at £7m or whatever.  

There was an article out last night saying Milan wanted him for 7.5 but we want double , so the clubs are miles apart on valuation

[Branston Pickle 3,743]

13 minutes ago, City 101 said:

There was an article out last night saying Milan wanted him for 7.5 but we want double , so the clubs are miles apart on valuation

Yes, that’s the one - it seems there’s been nothing more, just the way people were talking was as if there had been.

Edited August 1, 2023 by Branston Pickle
Removing a load of blank lines