The Officially Not Official Summer Transfer Thread 2023

[jaberry2 556]

1 hour ago, Well b back said:

But as shown last year we wouldn’t have been getting promoted with what we had. This is much more of a ‘ get promoted squad ‘. 
 

I think you are bright enough to know what I mean

[Branston Pickle 3,686]

59 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

I am not disappointed with the window per se. I was just disappointed with yesterday's dealings.

We didn't sign players, IMO, who have a future here. We just temporarily fixed the hole in the bucket.

And I think its perfectly fair to feel disappointed that we have people saying AO was just fourth choice. That is just nonsense. Forest obviously think he is good enough to play in the EPL. Our coach, for his or the Boards own reasons, wasn't selecting him.

You did see Omob last season, didn’t you?  He’d obviously not come on that much, if at all, and was very ordinary on the run-in when we needed people to step up to the plate….like it or not it is an indesputable fact that he was currently 3rd or 4th choice cb in the squad, and whether it would be different with a different manager is a moot point.  Webber made it perfectly clear that he was extremely unlikely to be here when the window closed, though obviously it falling quite so late wasn’t necessarily in the plans.

I don’t get the ‘it was a bad last day of the window’: we sold a player who everyone expected to leave, replaced him (possibly with a stopgap, but we have 3-4 others coming through) and also found a short-term cover for Sargent.  We’ve had a lot worse days.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

59 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

So the board and management deserve no credit for identifying Rowe and aiding his development? I suppose Godfrey, Aarons, Emi, the Murphys, Maddison etc we’re all just strokes of luck as well, rather than a well run academy 

Read what I said again. I never mentioned the playing management,. I said the Board. And only the Murphys were strictly our finds from the beginning. Other clubs managed to nurture the others for us at the beginning.

To me, the Board have had several chances when we have been in the Prem, to establish ourselves. Sales in 2005 onwards of our best players have meant the playing management have had to pull rabbits out the hat time after time.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

28 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

You did see Omob last season, didn’t you?  He’d obviously not come on that much, if at all, and was very ordinary on the run-in when we needed people to step up to the plate….like it or not it is an indesputable fact that he was currently 3rd or 4th choice cb in the squad, and whether it would be different with a different manager is a moot point.  Webber made it perfectly clear that he was extremely unlikely to be here when the window closed, though obviously it falling quite so late wasn’t necessarily in the plans.

I don’t get the ‘it was a bad last day of the window’: we sold a player who everyone expected to leave, replaced him (possibly with a stopgap, but we have 3-4 others coming through) and also found a short-term cover for Sargent.  We’ve had a lot worse days.

From memory, Gibson was the CB who came in for the most bad comments from supporters on this site. And the constant talk of him not being here at the close of the window is either testament to his ablility or the will of the Board to sell him on regardless.

Yes, he wasn't starting matches and that has been due to the good start by the two incumbents. They were selected first and until they were dropped, it was unlikely he would start. But we have already had comments that we sold him cheaply at £10M plus. So obviously many think he had the talent, including the Forest playing management.

Do you not think it looks, at the moment, that we are not attempting to buy anyone for a fee? The wages may even be less considering that many of the bigger earners have all gone. 

 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

55 minutes ago, Big O said:

I think the logic is that we already have the young players that present our future coming through but temp stop gaps and educators are required to bring them through safely. It is in effect the strategy, bring in lots of youngsters and coach at least a few of them through to the first team.

there are enough let go by the big clubs to gamble on some being later developers 

It does appear that we are almost back to 2019 and the surprise of promotion and the unreadiness for that promotion.

Have we changed tack and are now hoping to bring through youngsters for a couple of seasons and rely on the old lags to keep us steady? So are we saying we haven't planned for promotion? Somebody better tell the players then.

[horsefly 4,310]

1 hour ago, keelansgrandad said:

So why do people harp on about us being a well run club?

I think it's because in the utterly insane financial world of UK football NCFC is one of a very few clubs that has a sustainable model, and still has a team that are contenders for promotion to the PL.

[Essjayess 307]

2 hours ago, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

...now 1 week on....and we still dont know the extent of Sargent's injury

All a bit weird

Not really..Hwang  has been brought in as a whole season long loan, not just until January...so while Josh has presumably not seen a specialist yet...presumably because his ankle is so bad the swelling still has not receded enough..the early prognosis , as stated by DW, is that its a months long injury...whether its 3 months or 5 or 7 months etc..yes im presuming but wouldnt  be surprised if its along these lines.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

5 minutes ago, horsefly said:

I think it's because in the utterly insane financial world of UK football NCFC is one of a very few clubs that has a sustainable model, and still has a team that are contenders for promotion to the PL.

Obviously the emergence of the House of Saud has put a different complexion on the EPL which will inevitably trickle down to the Chamionshp. Hopefully it will mean the bigger clubs may have to buy from our leagues more often and we can sustain ourselves under this model by carrying on selling.

Personally I am between a rock and a hard place. While I do not wish to see us docked points we cannot pay the players, I always want to see us being an ambitious Championship club chasing the EPL.

[horsefly 4,310]

2 hours ago, jaberry2 said:

My general view all the signings have been all good short term options. Wang is a quality player who will add goals and assists. The new CB should displace Gibson at some stage too. My only concern is that this only fills a short term void really and that if we did get promoted we would need quite a few players. A big IF of course

Agreed! But surely that is precisely the model we should be following. I can't imagine a scenario in which we were going to be able to bring in PL ready players. Our purchases are very much about getting promotion this season. If that is achieved then we can consider acquiring players that give us the best chance of staying up. It's worth noting that newly relegated Leicester coughed up £7m for a player who couldn't get in the first team of the PL's bottom club.

[cambridgeshire canary 6,794]

3 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Obviously the emergence of the House of Saud has put a different complexion on the EPL which will inevitably trickle down to the Chamionshp. Hopefully it will mean the bigger clubs may have to buy from our leagues more often and we can sustain ourselves under this model by carrying on selling.

Personally I am between a rock and a hard place. While I do not wish to see us docked points we cannot pay the players, I always want to see us being an ambitious Championship club chasing the EPL.

This is it. The mega rich ultra billionaires club is slowly becoming the only way to grab a place in the top five of most top leagues. Our club model of self funding is moraly good, and I have always admired it.. But for good or bad it is rather outdated by about two decades and I think most people can agree with that

Edited September 2, 2023 by cambridgeshire canary

[horsefly 4,310]

2 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Our club model of self funding is moraly good, and I have always admired it.. But for good or bad it is rather outdated by about two decades and I think most people can agree with that

It's got **** all to do with being "morally good", it's about making sure the club has a business model that ensures it can survive. What is outdated is the model that combines reckless spending with praying that you don't get relegated. Go ask the fans of QPR, Charlton, Bolton, Portsmouth, Derby, etc, etc what the results of that so-called ambition can yield. The only genuine alternative to our current business model is to find a beneficent billionaire willing to gift the club multiple tens of millions with no strings attached. I see no evidence that one of those has ever reared his head at CR.

[Danke bitte 967]

1 minute ago, horsefly said:

It's got **** all to do with being "morally good", it's about making sure the club has a business model that ensures it can survive. What is outdated is the model that combines reckless spending with praying that you don't get relegated. Go ask the fans of QPR, Charlton, Bolton, Portsmouth, Derby, etc, etc what the results of that so-called ambition can yield. The only genuine alternative to our current business model is to find a beneficent billionaire willing to gift the club multiple tens of millions with no strings attached. I see no evidence that one of those has ever reared his head at CR.

Right now, the evidence of our model working is plain to see - we slumped last year and after a few games this season we’re second having scored the most. Obviously a long way to go but if things were outmoded in terms of approach we probably would be continuing our poor form from last season. 

[Branston Pickle 3,686]

40 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

From memory, Gibson was the CB who came in for the most bad comments from supporters on this site. And the constant talk of him not being here at the close of the window is either testament to his ablility or the will of the Board to sell him on regardless.

Yes, he wasn't starting matches and that has been due to the good start by the two incumbents. They were selected first and until they were dropped, it was unlikely he would start. But we have already had comments that we sold him cheaply at £10M plus. So obviously many think he had the talent, including the Forest playing management.

Do you not think it looks, at the moment, that we are not attempting to buy anyone for a fee? The wages may even be less considering that many of the bigger earners have all gone. 

 

Gibson was indeed criticised, but at least he was fit to play - AO had spells injured and when he played didn’t really look on it.  There’s obviously a decent player there, my point is that Norwich are a bit damned if they sell him and damned if they didn’t (we get the Cantwell scenario).

The fee is also a bit of a moot point - those who want to belittle it will say it’s £10m, which it isn’t, but nor is it £20m (yet).

It is interesting that we have had minimal outlay on players - though free these days doesn’t mean a crap player who was released, it’s far more likely to be one who is letting his contract run down.  I imagine the contracts for these guys are commensurately higher (and many have come from PL sides or with PL experience), but It does show that if you are astute you can mix things up.  

Edited September 2, 2023 by Branston Pickle

[Big O 225]

43 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

It does appear that we are almost back to 2019 and the surprise of promotion and the unreadiness for that promotion.

Have we changed tack and are now hoping to bring through youngsters for a couple of seasons and rely on the old lags to keep us steady? So are we saying we haven't planned for promotion? Somebody better tell the players then.

I’m sure there will be plans in place should we be promoted but as we have seen in this window, Luton and Sheffield Utd haven’t really been able to add much.

I think our model (whether we personally like it or not) is entirely based on bringing through good young players into a team of championship level players and the hope to unearth a diamond (I.e someone like a buendia, pukki or even a Sara) that can make a difference.

 

[GodlyOtsemobor 2,384]

Another minor outgoing. 

[cambridgeshire canary 6,794]

13 minutes ago, GodlyOtsemobor said:

Another minor outgoing. 

He does seem better than that but hope he does well

[Son Ova Gunn 165]

1 hour ago, horsefly said:

I think it's because in the utterly insane financial world of UK football NCFC is one of a very few clubs that has a sustainable model, and still has a team that are contenders for promotion to the PL.

The thing is, it’s not a sustainable model is it!   Trying to compete at the bottom end of the Prem and top end of the Champs means we spend what little money we have plus a bit more and then fire sale our best talent to cover debts and are unable to push when really needed. It’s a model that either requires regular trips to the Premiership or rebuilding from league 1. We are some distance from the goal of a sustained period in the top flight. At this point I would rather we just actually lived within our means (as our board said we would) rather than this one foot in one foot out as I think it would effect some proper change.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,800]

2 games for S.Korea coming next week

Wales ,7th Sept at Cardiff,  S.Arabia on 12th at Newcastle

Early chance to see Hwang on BBC Wales highlights on Thurs

[horsefly 4,310]

42 minutes ago, Son Ova Gunn said:

The thing is, it’s not a sustainable model is it!   Trying to compete at the bottom end of the Prem and top end of the Champs means we spend what little money we have plus a bit more and then fire sale our best talent to cover debts and are unable to push when really needed. It’s a model that either requires regular trips to the Premiership or rebuilding from league 1. We are some distance from the goal of a sustained period in the top flight. At this point I would rather we just actually lived within our means (as our board said we would) rather than this one foot in one foot out as I think it would effect some proper change.

Sorry but that's just nonsense. It is the ONLY sustainable model for us, sans a beneficent billionaire willing to regularly chuck 100m+ at the club. Sustainability is about the viability of the club as a going concern, NOT simply sustainability in the PL alone. Of course that's where we would like to consolidate, but first and foremost we need to be solvent and able to get there in the first place. It's called reality. We didn't design the current corrupt financial mire of the PL but like it or not we have to live with it. Like many similar clubs (WBA, Stoke, Swansea, etc) that reality makes it extraordinarily hard to maintain a prolonged spell in the PL. Thus it was not a casual remark when Webber described our main objective as sustaining ourselves as a top 26 team. So yes, a realistic model is indeed likely to require regular visits to the PL in search of the financial rewards that keep the club going. If you know of the name of a willing billionaire or the location of a magic money tree do let the club know. Otherwise just what does your model for sustainability consist?

[Pyro Pete 1,918]

Question:

Did Jonathan Tomkinson go out on loan, or not?

I can't find any confirmation of his proposed Bradford loan anywhere.

Edited September 2, 2023 by Pyro Pete

[GodlyOtsemobor 2,384]

2 hours ago, Pyro Pete said:

Question:

Did Jonathan Tomkinson go out on loan, or not?

I can't find any confirmation of his proposed Bradford loan anywhere.

Doesn't look like it. 

[S_81 842]

Clarke-Harris deal from Posh to Bristol Rovers collapsed at the last minute. He was going for around 800k. He’d have been a useful signing for us at that kind of cost. 

[Jim Smith 2,339]

After seeing today the biggest concern is not whether we’ve replaced Andy O adequately, it’s whether we’ve got cover in for Sargent. Idah won’t cut it so it’s whether Hwang is good enough.

Forest fans seem to think he’s awful but 2-3 seasons starting at Bordeaux and 1 goal in 3 there would suggest otherwise so we will have to see. Im stereotyping, no doubt, but I always associate South Korean players (as with other players from that region of the world) with being mobile and with a very strong work ethic. Hopefully he is of that ilk because that’s what Sargent gave us that Idah doesn’t. 

[AJ 1,224]

7 hours ago, Pyro Pete said:

Question:

Did Jonathan Tomkinson go out on loan, or not?

I can't find any confirmation of his proposed Bradford loan anywhere.

Appears not and makes sense to keep him here with Hanley still out and Lungi not fit either. Perhaps it was on the cards if Andy's deal didn't go ahead

[PurpleCanary 5,580]

42 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

After seeing today the biggest concern is not whether we’ve replaced Andy O adequately, it’s whether we’ve got cover in for Sargent. Idah won’t cut it so it’s whether Hwang is good enough.

Forest fans seem to think he’s awful but 2-3 seasons starting at Bordeaux and 1 goal in 3 there would suggest otherwise so we will have to see. Im stereotyping, no doubt, but I always associate South Korean players (as with other players from that region of the world) with being mobile and with a very strong work ethic. Hopefully he is of that ilk because that’s what Sargent gave us that Idah doesn’t. 

Not sure how Forest fans would know, since he has never played for the club…

[Creedence Clearwater Couto 1,297]

7 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

Not sure how Forest fans would know, since he has never played for the club…

The question is, why? I don’t think I’ve seen a reason for forest buying him then immediately loaning him out.. he’s not a young player so makes no sense! 

Not fair to judge, but he did play some pre-season games for them so they’ve seen some of him. 

[Capt. Pants 4,276]

13 minutes ago, Creedence Clearwater Couto said:

The question is, why? I don’t think I’ve seen a reason for forest buying him then immediately loaning him out.. he’s not a young player so makes no sense! 

Not fair to judge, but he did play some pre-season games for them so they’ve seen some of him. 

A more valid question might be why did he only play 5 games on loan for Olympiacos before going back to Seoul. 

Hopefully he still has fire in his belly and Korean's don't normally have attitude problems.

He could rip up the Championship but equally might struggle to settle. I see good evidence of individual skill but will also need to 'fit' in our team and how Wagner wants us to play. An interesting one!

[PurpleCanary 5,580]

1 hour ago, Creedence Clearwater Couto said:

The question is, why? I don’t think I’ve seen a reason for forest buying him then immediately loaning him out.. he’s not a young player so makes no sense! 

Not fair to judge, but he did play some pre-season games for them so they’ve seen some of him. 

It was pretty obvious, despite the initial "we're covered" spin that Webber and Wagner decided early on that Sargent would be out for long enough for a replacement to be necessary.

Given that we probably could easily have got in a non-Sargent, such as Kieffer Moore or similar, and sealed the deal quite quickly. But we held out for Hwang despite that meaning we were gambling on Forest getting a replacement very late on.

What that suggests to me is that W&W thought Hwang was the closest they could get to a Sargent in terms of style, as opposed to a six foot five Moore.

[Samwam27 532]

I was surprised it took until the last embers of the window to secure Hwang, when he was "our top target" the entire window.

Having never played for Forest, and they have so many players, it wasn't like they needed replacements in first, so why wait so long, especially when we'd got our other transfers in so early. 

 

[Soldier on 162]

He only became a live target once Sargent injured.