Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

numbeast

The Building Process

Recommended Posts

In his after match interview LJ again mentioned building a team capable of challenging at the top end of the league. I was wondering who you think is

A) Essential to the finished article player we build around

B) Players who need replacing to progress

C) Players we have to accept we'll lose

D) Where do we really need to strengthen.

I'm interested in your thoughts.

Share this post


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

Just typical LJ bullshit, he has signed 47 players already, enough to build 4 teams!

Although this isn't about LJ but about the philosophy the club have adopted (and would be the same for any incoming manager) Perhaps you'd like to see Johnson replaced by a young manager with a record of promotions?  I hear there's a manager available with such a C.V.

Darrell Clarke anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, old_eastender said:

Just typical LJ bullshit, he has signed 47 players already, enough to build 4 teams!

Of that 47 how many were/are capable of playing in the Championship straight away and how many were part of the development set up?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, numbeast said:

In his after match interview LJ again mentioned building a team capable of challenging at the top end of the league. I was wondering who you think is

A) Essential to the finished article player we build around

B) Players who need replacing to progress

C) Players we have to accept we'll lose

D) Where do we really need to strengthen.

I'm interested in your thoughts.

His mention of building is quite right. That must he the aim.

However, his actions in pursuance of that aim is what let's him down. He changes formations to suit the opposition rather than make them worry about us. So many more parts of our game are arrived at on the hoof during games.

A planned building of a squad and the "style/identity" of Bristol City FC is only a dream with him in charge.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

47 players in 5 windows is patently too many.

However, it is worth noting that the figure includes all loanees, all development players, all players brought with the future in mind.

Too high yes, too much churn? Most definitely but it does include all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d be very interested to know how many people all the teams in this league have signed over same period and see how many were development etc too. Suspect comparable and just the norm these days.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 47 number for transfers is highly open to being abused, first up 9 of those were loans so only really bolster the number he signed, takes it down to 38. You then need to account for those who have been signed for the 23's rather than 1st team. According to transfermarkt we've made 26 first team permanent signings under LJ if you include the likes of Lucic as they were around the first team squad. So almost halves the amount of transfers and on average takes it from just over 9 transfers per window to just over 5 per window. Another part to factor in is LJ was left with a first team squad of around 17 after Cotts so how many of his transfers in his first window were bolstering the squad to a workable level? Potentially having a certain budget and needing to spread it over more players than quality because needs must. Sure you can just spout 'LJ has signed 47 players' but the real detail should be how much its costing us which will involve amortisation of fees etc.

  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, hodge said:

The 47 number for transfers is highly open to being abused, first up 9 of those were loans so only really bolster the number he signed, takes it down to 38. You then need to account for those who have been signed for the 23's rather than 1st team. According to transfermarkt we've made 26 first team permanent signings under LJ if you include the likes of Lucic as they were around the first team squad. So almost halves the amount of transfers and on average takes it from just over 9 transfers per window to just over 5 per window. Another part to factor in is LJ was left with a first team squad of around 17 after Cotts so how many of his transfers in his first window were bolstering the squad to a workable level? Potentially having a certain budget and needing to spread it over more players than quality because needs must. Sure you can just spout 'LJ has signed 47 players' but the real detail should be how much its costing us which will involve amortisation of fees etc.

Nice bit of perspective, and at the risk of defending LJ I think it has to be mentioned that (maybe) not all signings were at his nod.
Who ever has been in charge of incomings I really hope they are more selective in January.  I think I would rather sign no one than sign another Diony/Woodrow/Engvall etc etc.
Two 'good' signings could propel us on to a challenge for 6th possibly, but a) I don't think we'll spend big and 2) I don't trust our recruitment to supply 2 players good enough to make the difference. May be a case of slowly slowly catchy monkey.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, numbeast said:

In his after match interview LJ again mentioned building a team capable of challenging at the top end of the league. I was wondering who you think is

A) Essential to the finished article player we build around

B) Players who need replacing to progress

C) Players we have to accept we'll lose

D) Where do we really need to strengthen.

I'm interested in your thoughts.

A. Pack

B Weinmann

C. Kallas

D Striker

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Aubergine 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People will say 47 to try and make LJ look as bad as possible. 

In reality, when it comes to first team ready, permanent signings it’s much less than that. And of those, only a handful can be said to be ‘failures’

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
  • Aubergine 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You all know I love a spreadsheet.

Here’s the list of Johnson signings (ignoring loans).  31 players.  A mix of squad status.388E1465-62C8-471E-B1B4-5405E4240366.thumb.jpeg.9e140e163f4113b0f1e0b236ce675b86.jpeg

Let the debate begin.

Edited by Davefevs
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d shift most of, if not all of, our centre midfield. Save maybe Brownhill. They don’t get anywhere near enough goals and clearly aren’t stopping us from conceding either. We need a decent playmaking CM (or AMC) that can lay on goals and score them. We’ve barely replaced Bobby’s goals from last year let alone all the assists he got. 

We need more backup up top too. Taylor works hard but his scoring record is, frankly, atrocious. 

As far as signings go I’d love someone like Jackson Irvine at the club. Or, going further afield, Luciano Acosta from DC Utd or Hector Villalba from Atlanta. Just a bit of flair, y’know. Eliasson can’t jazz the entire team himself. Him and Kelly are ones I think I’m resigned to losing within a few years. 

Edited by Wade Wilson
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, hodge said:

@DavefevsWhere did you find Tomlin's fee? Remember at the time I remember reading we essentially got our money back for him

The fee we paid or received?  Or both?

Combination of things.  Neither is official, but the accounts show transfer losses too.  SL said Kodjia was our most expensive signing, so not at large as suggested, especially when LT was giving it “record signing” shit.  I get the impression that it was somewhere between what Warnock said and what we said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taylor is a support striker I think- very hard work, capable of some assists- but ultimately not enough goals. 

However whether we keep him? Different debate, probably hasn't done enough- have him (wages depending) as a cheap 4th striker maybe, perhaps worth pondering.

Tomlin fees? From memory, accounts suggested a small profit on player registrations so I can only assume by that we in amortisation terms made a small profit on Tomlin. Will look it all up properly Monday.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Taylor is a support striker I think- very hard work, capable of some assists- but ultimately not enough goals. 

However whether we keep him? Different debate, probably hasn't done enough- have him (wages depending) as a cheap 4th striker maybe, perhaps worth pondering.

Tomlin fees? From memory, accounts suggested a small profit on player registrations so I can only assume by that we in amortisation terms made a small profit on Tomlin. Will look it all up properly Monday.

Yes, 1 year into a 3 year contract, amortised to 2/3rds of £2.5m (£1.66m) so £1.9m a small amortised profit.

Whatever the fees, we didn’t sell him for £2.9m as suggested imho.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

You all know I love a spreadsheet.

Here’s the list of Johnson signings (ignoring loans).  31 players.  A mix of squad status.388E1465-62C8-471E-B1B4-5405E4240366.thumb.jpeg.9e140e163f4113b0f1e0b236ce675b86.jpeg

Let the debate begin.

So 4 Development ones out on loan, Hinds in the u23's, Eisa and Adelukan were never going to feature much this season I feel, their in the situation Eliasson was last season.  Tomlin was brought because of his performances on loan, no one could have known it would go backwards so much.

Out of the other 23 players, he's signed a few who haven't worked out (like most clubs) and lost money on them but then you've got Eliasson, O'Dowda (if he signs a new contract), Webster and Brownhill who will, or have the potential to, return a Profit.

31 permanents isn't too bad (don't forget he had to bulk the squad up after he took over a thin squad from Cotterill) over 5 windows when a number were brought to be developed over several seasons.  I think when you are taking our approach in buying potential to develop your always going to have an above average number who don't work out, can't settle or aren't looking like they can make the grade (you can scout players from other leagues all you want but you won't know 100% if the can make it or not until you bring them in, foreign signings especially are always a gamble).  

Edited by Bristol is red
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Engvall goes to Belgium 2nd division side and has scored 7 in 17.

Lower standard - but they only paid £250K

I wonder if he'd never been here if some people would be saying look, - a Swedish International, young, playing in Belgian League 2 for a previously prestigious club (European Cup Winners in the 80's I think). Scores for fun.

 

I have to wonder what the hell went wrong with Gustav Engvall when he was here, because he certainly knows where the back on the net is.

 

I guarantee if we paid £1.5m for him now, (if the past had not happened) then not many would complain - I'd love to know the true story of Gustal Per Fredrick Engvall.

I doubt any of us ever will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SX227 said:

Engvall goes to Belgium 2nd division side and has scored 7 in 17.

Lower standard - but they only paid £250K

I wonder if he'd never been here if some people would be saying look, - a Swedish International, young, playing in Belgian League 2 for a previously prestigious club (European Cup Winners in the 80's I think). Scores for fun.

 

I have to wonder what the hell went wrong with Gustav Engvall when he was here, because he certainly knows where the back on the net is.

 

I guarantee if we paid £1.5m for him now, (if the past had not happened) then not many would complain - I'd love to know the true story of Gustal Per Fredrick Engvall.

I doubt any of us ever will.

I think going back to Sweden on loan probably didn't help, yes he got first team football but wasn't adapting to our system. Look at Eliasson, O'Dowda, Brownhill etc all struggled a bit in their first season with us but given time to settle and train with some game time their second seasons have been much better.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Bristol is red said:

So 4 Development ones out on loan, Hinds in the u23's, Eisa and Adelukan were never going to feature much this season I feel, their in the situation Eliasson was last season.  Tomlin was brought because of his performances on loan, no one could have known it would go backwards so much.

Out of the other 23 players, he's signed a few who haven't worked out (like most clubs) and lost money on them but then you've got Eliasson, O'Dowda (if he signs a new contract), Webster and Brownhill who will, or have the potential to, return a Profit.

31 permanents isn't too bad (don't forget he had to bulk the squad up after he took over a thin squad from Cotterill) over 5 windows when a number were brought to be developed over several seasons.  I think when you are taking our approach in buying potential to develop your always going to have an above average number who don't work out, can't settle or aren't looking like they can make the grade (you can scout players from other leagues all you want but you won't know 100% if the can make it or not until you bring them in, foreign signings especially are always a gamble).  

Fair enough - but if Adel was £1m as suggested - then £4.3m on 3 players who aren't playing regularly, if at all, is madness.

You could argue - forget those 3, add on another £1.7m and buy a quality winger/striker who will play 35+ games a season for £6m?

It's a habit of spending poorly that's concerning - too many £250,000 - £1.5m 'potentials'

Why not buy a couple of £6-8 m proven players instead?

 

2p

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SX227 said:

Fair enough - but if Adel was £1m as suggested - then £4.3m on 3 players who aren't playing regularly, if at all, is madness.

You could argue - forget those 3, add on another £1.7m and buy a quality winger/striker who will play 35+ games a season for £6m?

It's a habit of spending poorly that's concerning - too many £250,000 - £1.5m 'potentials'

Why not buy a couple of £6-8 m proven players instead?

 

2p

I think that was the sentiment of a list I made yesterday.

For example - Jack Hunt....could we have saved sending Zak Vyner out on loan, save £1.7m plus signing-on fee, plus undoubtedly higher wages, and said to Eros and Zack to fight it out?

We could’ve spent that £1.7m on top of the £1.5m for Eisa, and got a very different striker.  Take Weimann too, and you’re probably talking be able to get a £5m man in.

For me, it’s that sort of efficient recruitment that we lack.  It’s a bit scattergun.

Maenpaa on a free....fantastic.  Were there others that we could’ve brought in?

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I think that was the sentiment of a list I made yesterday.

For example - Jack Hunt....could we have saved sending Zak Vyner out on loan, save £1.7m plus signing-on fee, plus undoubtedly higher wages, and said to Eros and Zack to fight it out?

We could’ve spent that £1.7m on top of the £1.5m for Eisa, and got a very different striker.  Take Weimann too, and you’re probably talking be able to get a £5m man in.

For me, it’s that sort of efficient recruitment that we lack.  It’s a bit scattergun.

Maenpaa on a free....fantastic.  Were there others that we could’ve brought in?

Agree Dave, can't believe I'm going to (sort of ) defend LJ and recruitment again but. We were going to start the season with 2 U21's at LB maybe he/they thought to have Vyner striating the season at RB was a step too far. Pisano's injury record hasn't been great so young kids at FB may have been a worry with 2 new CB's too. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

47 players in 5 windows is patently too many.

However, it is worth noting that the figure includes all loanees, all development players, all players brought with the future in mind.

Too high yes, too much churn? Most definitely but it does include all.

You say that 47 signings is too many in 5 windows but go on to explain that the figure includes all signings.........explain why you think that’s ‘too many?’        

  • Aubergine 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there’s a degree here of not fully appreciating the model, or what the market is.

£1m at this level is a punt a lot of the time. It’s not as simple as saying “don’t buy the punts, and use the money for one better player” - why? Because the “better” player isn’t guaranteed either. If we had bought Diony (extreme example), that would have been £8m - so, to give a mix, Engvall, Eisa, Moore, Eliasson, Walsh and O’Dowda. It’s likely the net wage wouldn’t have been much different and we’d be relying on him coming off - the collective of the above has more net value and if 1 or 2 of the 6 come off, the strategy works.

I think the money thing is a poor stick to beat LJ with. He’s spent more money as that’s the current market - see higher up, Joe goes to Fulham as a squad player for £6m, Mousset to Bmuff for the same. We’re not playing Nicky Morgan and Junior Bent for £30k each any more...

I think when you align the strategy above and the market, the turnover/cost isn’t awful. Where I do criticise is I’m not sure as many players have developed as could - and when you’re following that strategy, that’s a must 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

47 is 47.

Albeit the failure of a 'development player' (whatever that is,) may not be as bad as the failure of a Pearsonalike but spending millions on the likes of Taylor-Moore is **** business. Note, too, that many of these so-called development players are in their early to mid 20s, they're not exactly spring chickens to be developed. There are also the development players we've let slip.

Loanees should not be exempt either as many come at a high price. Many lay the blame at Diony when it was patently obvious his playing style was diametrically opposite of that WeeLee deployed, so why the hell sign him?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

47 is 47.

Albeit the failure of a 'development player' (whatever that is,) may not be as bad as the failure of a Pearsonalike but spending millions on the likes of Taylor-Moore is **** business. Note, too, that many of these so-called development players are in their early to mid 20s, they're not exactly spring chickens to be developed. There are also the development players we've let slip.

Loanees should not be exempt either as many come at a high price. Many lay the blame at Diony when it was patently obvious his playing style was diametrically opposite of that WeeLee deployed, so why the hell sign him?

I think you and BobbobSuperBob don’t quite understand SLs blueprint/strategy......and that’s a pity as all the transfer deals under LJ are based within that strategy.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Robbored said:

I think you and BobbobSuperBob don’t quite understand SLs blueprint/strategy......and that’s a pity as all the transfer deals under LJ are based within that strategy.

Is that the load of pillars ****?

I could quote several examples but the only 'strategy' the likes of Pearson might fulfill would be one designed to get us relegated.

As to players going out on development loan, how the hell do they improve given few ever come back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We sold 3 key players to balance the books, a lot of promising young talent coming through, an absolute gem in Kelly, comfortable mid table in a League where we can’t compete financially with the larger clubs. Things aren’t that bad right now.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Robbored said:

Of that 47 how many were/are capable of playing in the Championship straight away and how many were part of the development set up?

We have had this discussion before and I gave you the full list. Only a few players were under this development setup. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

As to players going out on development loan, how the hell do they improve given few ever come back?

Ummm...................:facepalm:

Share this post


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

We have had this discussion before and I gave you the full list. Only a few players were under this development setup. 

If I remember rightly RW the list you created was well..............unclear......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Robbored said:

If I remember rightly RW the list you created was well..............unclear......

I don't think somehow Rob. It provided the name of each individual categorised into the development club, successful loan, currently playing regular football for us and those who have moved on/failed during their time here. Drawing up the list was not pleasant at all. It showed just how wrong we have got it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, SX227 said:

Engvall goes to Belgium 2nd division side and has scored 7 in 17.

Lower standard - but they only paid £250K

I wonder if he'd never been here if some people would be saying look, - a Swedish International, young, playing in Belgian League 2 for a previously prestigious club (European Cup Winners in the 80's I think). Scores for fun.

 

I have to wonder what the hell went wrong with Gustav Engvall when he was here, because he certainly knows where the back on the net is.

 

I guarantee if we paid £1.5m for him now, (if the past had not happened) then not many would complain - I'd love to know the true story of Gustal Per Fredrick Engvall.

I doubt any of us ever will.

I think that the bottom line is that he didn't do enough to force his way into the first team.

If he had been knocking in goals for fun either on loan or in the second stream then no way would the coaching team have left him out .

The same can be said of every player , Eisa , Abdelakun ... 

Share this post


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

We sold 3 key players to balance the books, a lot of promising young talent coming through, an absolute gem in Kelly, comfortable mid table in a League where we can’t compete financially with the larger clubs. Things aren’t that bad right now.

But that's not the argument. The test is whether, given the resource at his disposal, WeeLee should have done better? 

You quote a lot of promising young talent but Kelly aside who else? Do we really have decent youngsters? Given we've Dasilva warming a bench in Greville Smythe you'd think so but who and where are they?

In the cup at Watford last year Edwards and Lemondrizzle-Cake both put in decent performances so obscurity beckoned. When we were so desperate for a striker Hinds and McCloskey weren't given a chance and please don't respond they were too inexperienced, they couldn't have been worse than Engvald for God's sake and WeeLee arguably has taken decent money punts on two similar prospects. Why?

Taylor-Moore across his contract is likley to have cost us £3m, for what?

WeeLee should be judged against teams who've spent similar to or less than us and yet punch above our standing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Ummm...................:facepalm:

It's a serious point.

Go through the list of players we've signed for development these past 5 years and having seen them peddle their trade at a lower or non-league level have been cut once their contracts expire. I think at one point we had 21 or more players out on loan so even allowing for the fact they're not all going to come good how many will end up playing for us? We shouldn't be funding £3m for a player to see his days out at Bury and Cheltenham.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Moments of Pleasure said:

I'd like to see Somerset resident Kevin McCloud involved in monitoring the building process, popping in every now and then to see how the builder's getting on...

Que big, dramatic project threatening issue just before the last ad break. (usually resolved!) 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

Que big, dramatic project threatening issue just before the last ad break. (usually resolved!) 

Followed by the icey voiceover saying that they have completely run out of money and everything is doomed, only for the final visit to show not just the completed house, but about 40k worth of new furniture tastefully scattered about the place.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Red_Wizard said:

I don't think somehow Rob. It provided the name of each individual categorised into the development club, successful loan, currently playing regular football for us and those who have moved on/failed during their time here. Drawing up the list was not pleasant at all. It showed just how wrong we have got it.

Have you still got the list? 

Share this post


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

I don't think somehow Rob. It provided the name of each individual categorised into the development club, successful loan, currently playing regular football for us and those who have moved on/failed during their time here. Drawing up the list was not pleasant at all. It showed just how wrong we have got it.

If I remember correctly wasn't there quite a lot of dispute about the category you put some players into?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I think you and BobbobSuperBob don’t quite understand SLs blueprint/strategy......and that’s a pity as all the transfer deals under LJ are based within that strategy.

All of them? Can't deny there's a handful that have been failures. 

Unless I'm getting this wrong (I'm reading this slightly out of context) and you mean MA is signing players LJ hasn't 100% agreed to? 

Edited by Sturny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

Agree Dave, can't believe I'm going to (sort of ) defend LJ and recruitment again but. We were going to start the season with 2 U21's at LB maybe he/they thought to have Vyner striating the season at RB was a step too far. Pisano's injury record hasn't been great so young kids at FB may have been a worry with 2 new CB's too. 

Yes, it was more of an analogy rather than example, but you are right re Pisano injury record.  We also should’ve expected BW to have been fit by now too. That should’ve given coverage too. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

All of them? Can't deny there's a handful that have been failures. 

Unless I'm getting this wrong (I'm reading this slightly out of context) and you mean MA is signing players LJ hasn't 100% agreed to? 

Of course there are failures - that happens at every club. Some you win and some you lose.

My understanding is that MA is chief negotiator who deals with agents. LJ and his assistants meet regularly with the coaches and any potential players are discussed. It might well be that MA is in some of those meeting - he has various contacts within the game who may recommend players.

I’d be surprised if MA was signing player behind LJs back.......

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always feel managers mention 'development' as some sort of excuse. I'm not saying LJ needs an excuse. Development in squad is an obvious thing that should be given for every team. What team isn't developing or buying youngsters for the future? Just seems obvious to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, hodge said:

I think going back to Sweden on loan probably didn't help, yes he got first team football but wasn't adapting to our system. Look at Eliasson, O'Dowda, Brownhill etc all struggled a bit in their first season with us but given time to settle and train with some game time their second seasons have been much better.

For certain sending him back to Sweden was always a hindermant to him settling here!

Plus his refusal to accept a league one loan on the table must have soured relationships with the coaching staff.

Share this post


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

It's a serious point.

Go through the list of players we've signed for development these past 5 years and having seen them peddle their trade at a lower or non-league level have been cut once their contracts expire. I think at one point we had 21 or more players out on loan so even allowing for the fact they're not all going to come good how many will end up playing for us? We shouldn't be funding £3m for a player to see his days out at Bury and Cheltenham.

Comments like these simply reflect what I posted just now - that you obviously don’t understand SLs strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks @Davefevs for the spread sheet.

So of the 31 players- 8 have been released/sold on/OOC.

This does not include players that were sold but not signed by LJ from the first team e.g Flint, Bryan & Reid or the Development players released.

So we come to a net figure of permanent signings of around 20 new players since Feb 2016. Some good, some bad and some indifferent.

However this is not the 47 players as stated by @old_eastender so on this occasion at least, the 'typical bullshit' is not from LJ but from a fan with an agenda.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...