Kingswoodactor Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 7 minutes ago, Big C said: He isn’t featuring at Watford because he is currently injured I said 'barely' features, which is true. Even when fit, he's only played 90 mins once all season, and is very much a sub option for them. Now that Success has really come on well this season, and the fact that Watford usually play with one up top, I'd say Grey is very much 3rd choice in that lone striker role now. Can't see him getting much game time between now and May, especially now that Deulofeu is back fully fit, in form, and plays pretty much as a supporting striker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sephjnr Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 Me: £2.5m is a sensible sum of money to spend on someone that could potentially get us into the playoff places Also Me: Hijack the Abraham deal with £20m and finish 2nd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headhunter Posted January 2, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 34 minutes ago, RedDave said: Can’t see us signing someone on £50k per week Why not - it's the going rate for quality; I said £40k in the OP How about Vydra who's warming the bench at Turf Moor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headhunter Posted January 2, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 24 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said: Still 3 of those is 4.5m. A lot of money for 6 months but if those take us from a 1 goal to 2 goal a game side without disrupting shape it would probably make us a playoff side. You can see why it is a difficult window. It's not 6 months its 18 weeks! Could stretch it by paying 50% of 3 £60k per week players - 3 x £60k x 50% x 18 weeks = £1.6M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
And Its Smith Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 8 minutes ago, headhunter said: Why not - it's the going rate for quality; I said £40k in the OP How about Vydra who's warming the bench at Turf Moor? You think we should sign someone on £50k per week with an average squad salary of circa £10k and a top earner of less than £20k? It doesn’t really work like that! Vydra was asking for £50k per week around time Burnley signed him so assume he is on £40k at least. Not going to happen and should not happen. Can’t just disrupt a whole wage structure ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 1 hour ago, TomF said: Pretty sure Diony probably cost us over £1.5m last season and look how that panned out Panned is the right word there. Money down the toilet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturny Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 4 minutes ago, RedDave said: You think we should sign someone on £50k per week with an average squad salary of circa £10k and a top earner of less than £20k? It doesn’t really work like that! Vydra was asking for £50k per week around time Burnley signed him so assume he is on £40k at least. Not going to happen and should not happen. Can’t just disrupt a whole wage structure ! Why not? IF we actually did do something like that it'll show we mean business and can afford players like that. It's highly unlikely, but imagine... I'd like us to get to a point where we could pay players that much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 13 minutes ago, headhunter said: Why not - it's the going rate for quality; I said £40k in the OP How about Vydra who's warming the bench at Turf Moor? Because FFP is a thing. We also couldn't expect to pay those kinds of wages without various other players suddenly saying "Hey, he's getting double what I am and I'm just as important". The only way we'd get Kalas is with promotion to the Prem and even then the transfer fee would go up and so would many of the wages our current players on as they'd want new deals etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
And Its Smith Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 5 minutes ago, Sturny said: Why not? IF we actually did do something like that it'll show we mean business and can afford players like that. It's highly unlikely, but imagine... I'd like us to get to a point where we could pay players that much A wage structure is in place, that’s why. Name me one club who has ever disrupted a whole squad by buying one player on 3/4 times average wage and double highest paid player Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeAman08 Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 14 minutes ago, headhunter said: It's not 6 months its 18 weeks! Could stretch it by paying 50% of 3 £60k per week players - 3 x £60k x 50% x 18 weeks = £1.6M It is just for simplification purposes with 20k a week being 1m per season. Half a season makes that 500k. Plus think the loans usually end at the end of May or 1st of June even though many will go back before that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoons Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 30 minutes ago, hodge said: Problem being our best 23's are out on loan, the guys who play for the 23's are the best of the rest and is often made up of a decent amount of under 18's. Agreed but let's recall them and get them in squad. Rather that than take a £2.5 million punt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 13 minutes ago, RedDave said: You think we should sign someone on £50k per week with an average squad salary of circa £10k and a top earner of less than £20k? It doesn’t really work like that! Vydra was asking for £50k per week around time Burnley signed him so assume he is on £40k at least. Not going to happen and should not happen. Can’t just disrupt a whole wage structure ! In a nutshell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturny Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 7 minutes ago, RedDave said: A wage structure is in place, that’s why. Name me one club who has ever disrupted a whole squad by buying one player on 3/4 times average wage and double highest paid player Juventus Potentially Wolves too with Neves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 9 minutes ago, Sturny said: Juventus Potentially Wolves too with Neves Juve got financial benefits to pay for theirs, Wolves probably did the same but with a promotion to the Premier League they'll be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturny Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 1 minute ago, Spike said: Juve got financial benefits to pay for theirs, Wolves probably did the same but with a promotion to the Premier League they'll be fine. Yeah... That's what I mean, if we pulled some player out at 50k a week it'll show we're totally going for immediate success. It's not the Bristol City way but I was saying imagine.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBFC II Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 Vydra and Gray are obviously top players who could push us in to the play offs. But if they were to become available would they really want to come here? No chance imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 7 minutes ago, Sturny said: Yeah... That's what I mean, if we pulled some player out at 50k a week it'll show we're totally going for immediate success. It's not the Bristol City way but I was saying imagine.. The difference is that Wolves had a lot in place before they went for it and had their venture backfired they could be where Bolton are now, I don't see that as something SL is willing to take a risk on, especially off of the back of recent performances. Last season I totally could have seen us making a risky investment to try and push for the prem come January as we were right up there and playing some entertaining and impressive football, we had the national media paying attention and were riding a wave of success... instead we didn't invest and things didn't go so well. This season we're still 5 points behind the 6th position, the league has become much tougher again, we aren't performing well and we're 13 points off Leeds at the top of the league. It would make no sense at all to make a big investment this window if we didn't do it in the last January window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headhunter Posted January 2, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 1 minute ago, JBFC II said: Vydra and Gray are obviously top players who could push us in to the play offs. But if they were to become available would they really want to come here? No chance imo Why wouldn't they want to come? Would look good on CV: "scored 10 goals in 18 games and helped BCFC secure promotion via play-offs from a mid-season mid-table position" In response to others viz. disrupt the wage structure, it's a temporary arrangement - if successful everyone is a winner, if it fails no permanent damage done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBFC II Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 6 minutes ago, headhunter said: Why wouldn't they want to come? Would look good on CV: "scored 10 goals in 18 games and helped BCFC secure promotion via play-offs from a mid-season mid-table position" In response to others viz. disrupt the wage structure, it's a temporary arrangement - if successful everyone is a winner, if it fails no permanent damage done Because I'd imagine there would be 10 much bigger clubs vying for their signature at the same time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturny Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 4 minutes ago, Spike said: The difference is that Wolves had a lot in place before they went for it and had their venture backfired they could be where Bolton are now, I don't see that as something SL is willing to take a risk on, especially off of the back of recent performances. Last season I totally could have seen us making a risky investment to try and push for the prem come January as we were right up there and playing some entertaining and impressive football, we had the national media paying attention and were riding a wave of success... instead we didn't invest and things didn't go so well. This season we're still 5 points behind the 6th position, the league has become much tougher again, we aren't performing well and we're 13 points off Leeds at the top of the league. It would make no sense at all to make a big investment this window if we didn't do it in the last January window. Did they? Wolves finished 14th and 15th the seasons before. I agree its highly unlikely but If SL would turn around and let us spend ££££ this January I would see it as him not wanting to make the same mistake twice (I could see no other reason for him to give us millions this January). Fulham were in a similar position to us last season and turned the table right round. It's not impossible for us in this position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natchfever Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 41 minutes ago, headhunter said: Why wouldn't they want to come? Would look good on CV: "scored 10 goals in 18 games and helped BCFC secure promotion via play-offs from a mid-season mid-table position" In response to others viz. disrupt the wage structure, it's a temporary arrangement - if successful everyone is a winner, if it fails no permanent damage done I would imagine if either were available, they would have better options than us in the Championship to be fair. As for the so called wage structure (whatever it may be does anyone know?) there must already be a big discrepancy between the relative earnings of squad members so anyone in the squad upset about the club bringing in someone even temporarily on much higher wages needs to consider why they earn what they do and the best chance they have of increasing it. Fact is, I don't think SL would sanction such spend even if his head coach lobbied for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 58 minutes ago, Spike said: The difference is that Wolves had a lot in place before they went for it and had their venture backfired they could be where Bolton are now, I don't see that as something SL is willing to take a risk on, especially off of the back of recent performances. Last season I totally could have seen us making a risky investment to try and push for the prem come January as we were right up there and playing some entertaining and impressive football, we had the national media paying attention and were riding a wave of success... instead we didn't invest and things didn't go so well. This season we're still 5 points behind the 6th position, the league has become much tougher again, we aren't performing well and we're 13 points off Leeds at the top of the league. It would make no sense at all to make a big investment this window if we didn't do it in the last January window. I reckon the biggest difference is that Wolves had/have that relationship between owner, manager & agent, which was questioned by a number of championship clubs. It did seem that they were able to attract players that would normally have been off the radar ( and finances) at this level. That the manager and said players were clients of the agent seems to indicate that a unique and "special" relationship exists - one that no other club could match or compete with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 1 hour ago, Spoons said: Agreed but let's recall them and get them in squad. Rather that than take a £2.5 million punt But at the same time there's a reason they were sent to those standards, so really the only one to bring back would be Vyner. Imagine if we brought back Bakinson and wasn't to the standard we wanted and couldn't send him back out on loan again. Pointless him being around to just have to play in the 23's again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhistleHappy Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 2 hours ago, Big C said: He isn’t featuring at Watford because he is currently injured Gawd, I know how he feels, I was injured myself last Shrove Tuesday, ate my pancake and almost choked to death on a bloody currant... that was a painful affair I can tell ya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 I don’t think Wolves spent loads of fees, they got some loans and sacrificed investing in assets until they got to Prem. I think it was a one season gamble, they spent c£20m and raised £6m....knowing they could sell Neves if needed to balance the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 33 minutes ago, downendcity said: I reckon the biggest difference is that Wolves had/have that relationship between owner, manager & agent, which was questioned by a number of championship clubs. It did seem that they were able to attract players that would normally have been off the radar ( and finances) at this level. That the manager and said players were clients of the agent seems to indicate that a unique and "special" relationship exists - one that no other club could match or compete with. Got it on one. Either very clever or very slippery depending on your POV but considering what say Grealish is touted for, Neves (a Portugal international, Porto's youngest ever captain, good CL experience...) at £15m age 20 was an absolute steal. Not sure they broke any rules but seems a unique relationship as you say. Players like him and some of the others? Just not open to the average Championship club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 3, 2019 Report Share Posted January 3, 2019 16 hours ago, Davefevs said: I don’t think Wolves spent loads of fees, they got some loans and sacrificed investing in assets until they got to Prem. I think it was a one season gamble, they spent c£20m and raised £6m....knowing they could sell Neves if needed to balance the books. Plus, because of a profit of several million in 2015/16, they were in a strong FFP position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.