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

Ashtonwurzel

Semenyo Recalled (Merged)

Recommended Posts

Just now, Davefevs said:

Eh?  Do you think Watkins has been a successful £1m recruit?

Weird thing with Watkins is he was very good for Barnsley. 11 goals in one season, and a good team player playing either wing and doing job up top when needed. Warnock tried to sign him for Cardiff. But then Norwich move was a disaster. It might help him playing in our new system, but yeah so far he has looked a poor signing and not needed when we have so many wide men. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Yet, we’d just got Djuric fit (paying a lot of medical bills in the process), and let him leave for a paltry fee, and then LJ comes out and says we are going to play more direct.  Was a strange signing at the time, and a strange sale too.

Watkins is ok in fairness, but nobody has ever paid a fee for him in his career, and we paid £1m!!

Hegeler, Giefer, Lucic, Diony, Kent etc.

As I said, that is in the past, the trend us upward, let’s hope it continues.

Bad signings with the hindsight of knowing how their time here went (Geifer wasn't bad at all, just no better than the other goalkeepers)

Hegeler- 300k or so. Lots of Bundesliga experience. Sensible signing on paper, didn't work out.

Giefer- would have been beyond us if he hadn't had such a long time out with injury. Good signing on paper, didn't perform as he perhaps could but not really any better than what we had.

Lucic- high potential, bad attitude (it seems) can understand the club signing him

Diony- had scored just once all season when he signed (0 league goals, but inaccurately repeated on here as not scored all season). Had been signed by his club for €9m(?) a gamble that could have been fantastic or awful. It was the latter.

Kent- had done well, but inconstistantly so, with a poor Barnsley side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my imaginary world, he'll come back and be a revelation for our first team, his goals and guile helping us achieve automatic promotion...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Super said:

I really hope we havent recalled him instead of bringing in a striker in the transfer market. We cant be that stupid surely?

I hope we have to be honest. Be nice to see an example being made of him in regards to the pathway for future academy stars.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shame for Newport in the middle of a cup run, but at the risk of wishful thinking, do you think the club really are just bringing him back into the first team because they've decided it would send a valuable message to the rest of our young players? If we want everyone out on loan to be motivated by the "pathway" for years to come, they need to see someone who has performed well get recalled and used.

It would be a powerful message to other players that they are on loan for a purpose and over-achievers can progress fast. Also, as others have said, it fits with sending Eisa out on loan - a win win. Perhaps I'm clutching at straws in the face of all this speculation, but just a thought. And if he does go, let's not be precious - he's not from Bristol, he hasn't come through our system, there is very little attachment. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

And if he does go, let's not be precious - he's not from Bristol, he hasn't come through our system, there is very little attachment. 

Antoine Semenyo, he's one of our own!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Premier league boys are sniffing around the lad why not bring him back and chuck him in at the deep end. Been playing regularly and up to match fitness. Many loan players surplus to their club requirements need time to get match fit and very rarely do January signings work from the outset. If he plays and impresses you could stick a 1 in front of the 2 million price tag in the current climate. Good luck to the lad. 

Share this post


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

Antoine Semenyo, he's one of our own!

Indeed! Technically he is one of South East London's own (Woolwich I think) and then after that he was one of Filton College's own, but no doubt if he does make the first team we'll overlook that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Olé said:

Indeed! Technically he is one of South East London's own (Woolwich I think) and then after that he was one of Filton College's own, but no doubt if he does make the first team we'll overlook that.

Where Semenyo's value is concerned our money's safe with the Woolwich. Right, people?

 

Edited by Curr Avon
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Well just think of last January window

Or buying Eisa and never playing him

Or signing on loan Diony and Kent

I could go on

Well...... you usually do go on and on and on

It's just unusual for you to post anything when BCFC are doing quite well- it's more often that you vent your spleen against LJ and all things BCFC.

 

Please Please call me out on this and I'll give everyone a selection of your finest.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will bang my head against the table if we sell. Having heard for years about our academy (and suspecting it was all propaganda) it appears we genuinely have one to be proud of. 

I thought, mistakenly, that when we were told we were producing players for the future I assumed that meant our future - not the future of whatever club is ready to fork out a few million. 

It feels counter-intuitive surely to be producing talent only to sell it before it's even blossomed to its full potential. With no disrespect intended, we're not Crewe. 

Why does it feel every time we take a step forward that we also take one going back or, at least, to the side. It's a little bewildering. 

That said, at this stage it's all speculation, but going on recent history, well... 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Will bang my head against the table if we sell. Having heard for years about our academy (and suspecting it was all propaganda) it appears we genuinely have one to be proud of

I thought, mistakenly, that when we were told we were producing players for the future I assumed that meant our future - not the future of whatever club is ready to fork out a few million

It feels counter-intuitive surely to be producing talent only to sell it before it's even blossomed to its full potential. With no disrespect intended, we're not Crewe. 

Why does it feel every time we take a step forward that we also take one going back or, at least, to the side. It's a little bewildering. 

That said, at this stage it's all speculation, but going on recent history, well... 

Someone who signed a couple of years ago rather than Bobby, Joe or Lloyd who came through from young ages? Flip side of the second point, if players actually see that pathway of moving on to big clubs they could be more likely to sign or stay with us, imagine if we could have held on to Maddox or Kane for longer. Third point, lad signed for nothing 2 years ago potentially being sold with 1 first team appearance for £1m - £2m, not a bad return. If he's refusing to sign a new contract then we're on a clock for how much we can get for him, some have said tribunal route but if we use him and he doesn't perform at our level then that amount will go down quickly whereas this offer is on the table, we can try to ensure good additional clauses and a big sell on if he is the real deal. Anything above 30% profit if he moves big then we'll be well off. 

Can't agree we're taking any steps back with regards to our academy its just steps forward in the last couple of seasons.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Port Said Red said:

That would explain why he didn't play on Friday, they are in the middle of the Middlesborough tie and would want a player that isn't cup tied.

But would any player need to be eligible to play in the original game of a cup tie, to play in the replay?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

Someone who signed a couple of years ago rather than Bobby, Joe or Lloyd who came through from young ages? Flip side of the second point, if players actually see that pathway of moving on to big clubs they could be more likely to sign or stay with us, imagine if we could have held on to Maddox or Kane for longer. Third point, lad signed for nothing 2 years ago potentially being sold with 1 first team appearance for £1m - £2m, not a bad return. If he's refusing to sign a new contract then we're on a clock for how much we can get for him, some have said tribunal route but if we use him and he doesn't perform at our level then that amount will go down quickly whereas this offer is on the table, we can try to ensure good additional clauses and a big sell on if he is the real deal. Anything above 30% profit if he moves big then we'll be well off. 

Can't agree we're taking any steps back with regards to our academy its just steps forward in the last couple of seasons.

logical arguments, not disputing the fundamentals you raise. As I say, the side-step / back-step I mention is just the way I personally feel, rightly or wrongly. Hopefully, in the long-term, I reassess and am proved wrong. 

Personally mind, I'm foxed that our youth strategy appears to be something along the lines of: if they're good, sell 'em fast. Can't blame the club for cashing in, especially if the player himself is want-away, but using last season as an example the suspicion is that we hardly put up a struggle to keep our assets. A couple of quid and it's cheerio. Surely, that defeats the object of having an academy, unless that is, the academy is being viewed as no-more than just another revenue stream. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

Thanks for your input.

If he's drunk, we certainly don't want his output!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

logical arguments, not disputing the fundamentals you raise. As I say, the side-step / back-step I mention is just the way I personally feel, rightly or wrongly. Hopefully, in the long-term, I reassess and am proved wrong. 

Personally mind, I'm foxed that our youth strategy appears to be something along the lines of: if they're good, sell 'em fast. Can't blame the club for cashing in, especially if the player himself is want-away, but using last season as an example the suspicion is that we hardly put up a struggle to keep our assets. A couple of quid and it's cheerio. Surely, that defeats the object of having an academy, unless that is, the academy is being viewed as no-more than just another revenue stream. 

 

If it were cash in quick we'd have sold Bobby, Joe etc in January but we kept them around till the summer. Both only had 12 months left so we couldn't put up too much of a fight or we'd have ended up losing them for nothing or very little. Was hardly a couple of quid either.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This semenyo recall, if its to sell him would only work for me if the fee is significant, ie 4-5 million. People on here often say that 1-2 million isnt a lot of money these days, and while its a no brainer for semenyo to want to go to chelsea, i cant see what the benefit would be for the club to let him go for what the cost of signing eisa was. At 1.5, he would be the kind of signing that we would usually be looking to bring in, not one we would be selling?

likewise, would semenyo with 1 appearance for us, really have sufficient value for us to say to chelsea that we swap him for da silva and/or palmer and kalas? If it was our england u21 left back and we agreed to swap him for some young kid who has only really played pro football in league 2, people would say we were crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, poland_exile said:

logical arguments, not disputing the fundamentals you raise. As I say, the side-step / back-step I mention is just the way I personally feel, rightly or wrongly. Hopefully, in the long-term, I reassess and am proved wrong. 

Personally mind, I'm foxed that our youth strategy appears to be something along the lines of: if they're good, sell 'em fast. Can't blame the club for cashing in, especially if the player himself is want-away, but using last season as an example the suspicion is that we hardly put up a struggle to keep our assets. A couple of quid and it's cheerio. Surely, that defeats the object of having an academy, unless that is, the academy is being viewed as no-more than just another revenue stream. 

 

I think Reid and Bryan are totally different scenarios to Semenyo.  They gave us over 200 appearances (might even be 300), and we got £15.4m (plus another potential £1m) for them both.

But I certainly agree with the sentiment re Semenyo if he does go.  I hope he has come back to play, but will need to wait to see if that is the case.

I don’t want to be critical of LJ here, but if I was, you may argue he’s not giving the youngsters an opportunity quick enough.  And you’d all be right to argue ‘what about Lloyd Kelly”, “what about Joe Morrell”, “what about Max O’Leary”, but of course you could also reverse that with Taylor Moore, Zak Vyner, Tyreeq Bakinson.

I’m gonna spin it positively that I’d look at it that the academy is doing very well, and there must be a point when we start to rely on these youngsters ahead of going into the transfer market for ordinary players in future.  

I haven’t seen enough of Walsh, but if you add Joe Williams (Everton rumour) too, that’s blocking Morrell and Bakinson potentially, certainly one of them, although Joe M has probably nipped in front of Walsh currrently.

It is a fine balancing act under the pressure of results, and the way we are going at the mo’, it’s hard to criticise.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

If it were cash in quick we'd have sold Bobby, Joe etc in January but we kept them around till the summer. Both only had 12 months left so we couldn't put up too much of a fight or we'd have ended up losing them for nothing or very little. Was hardly a couple of quid either.

Bobby, hindsight says good deal. That said, maybe let's wait two or three years (or longer) before making that call final.

Joe, think this is the one that sticks in the craw. A lad who seemed to genuinely click with the fans and club itself, bags of talent. A great story all round. Not privvy to the negotiations that went on, maybe we did try, but think the general feeling remains he might be the one that got away. In both cases, it's too early to tell, and that alone is a source of immense frustration. If you think we got a good fee for Joe, then fair play, myself, I think he left for a song. In today's money, it really is a couple of quid. It doesn't cover a striker from Peterborough if I'm correct. 

In terms of losing them for nothing or very little: they're academy. what did they cost us in the first place. To bastardize a phrase, it's better to have tried and lost than not tried at all. With them both, i get the impression we didn't try to see how far they could go with us. 

Edited by poland_exile
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I think Reid and Bryan are totally different scenarios to Semenyo.  They gave us over 200 appearances (might even be 300), and we got £15.4m (plus another potential £1m) for them both.

But I certainly agree with the sentiment re Semenyo if he does go.  I hope he has come back to play, but will need to wait to see if that is the case.

I don’t want to be critical of LJ here, but if I was, you may argue he’s not giving the youngsters an opportunity quick enough.  And you’d all be right to argue ‘what about Lloyd Kelly”, “what about Joe Morrell”, “what about Max O’Leary”, but of course you could also reverse that with Taylor Moore, Zak Vyner, Tyreeq Bakinson.

I’m gonna spin it positively that I’d look at it that the academy is doing very well, and there must be a point when we start to rely on these youngsters ahead of going into the transfer market for ordinary players in future.  

I haven’t seen enough of Walsh, but if you add Joe Williams (Everton rumour) too, that’s blocking Morrell and Bakinson potentially, certainly one of them, although Joe M has probably nipped in front of Walsh currrently.

It is a fine balancing act under the pressure of results, and the way we are going at the mo’, it’s hard to criticise.

think you nail it with the last point. I don't envy the position LJ is in, management is all spinning plates nowadays, so the fact we're where we are, then the bloke deserves a salute! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, formerly known as ivan said:

Don’t believe for one second in the Chelsea transfer, purely based on the fact that they are already under criticism for hoarding so much young talent and loaning them out. Wouldn’t make sense for them or Semenyo himself career wise. And I don’t think he would go there as a first team player right now!

Maybe lessons have been learned from last season and the fact the cup run took so much out of the players. With another cup run on the horizon (Wimbledon at home for example) then maybe it’s a case of having to numbers to cover the games. Semenyo to play cup games and be on the bench for league games.

Would rather this than Watkins anyway!

This sounds an excellent idea, so it is unfortunate that Semenyo is now cup-tied! 😉.

I do wonder, though, whether this might be a sort of swap for Mo Eisa, sending him out on loan to Newport to play in a division in which he did so well with Cheltanham, thus allowing Semenyo to test the waters in our Championship run-in - but not in the cup 😀.

Share this post


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

logical arguments, not disputing the fundamentals you raise. As I say, the side-step / back-step I mention is just the way I personally feel, rightly or wrongly. Hopefully, in the long-term, I reassess and am proved wrong. 

Personally mind, I'm foxed that our youth strategy appears to be something along the lines of: if they're good, sell 'em fast. Can't blame the club for cashing in, especially if the player himself is want-away, but using last season as an example the suspicion is that we hardly put up a struggle to keep our assets. A couple of quid and it's cheerio. Surely, that defeats the object of having an academy, unless that is, the academy is being viewed as no-more than just another revenue stream. 

 

It isn't though, and no actual transfers that have happened give that view any weight.

There was interest in Bryan for several years before he was sold. We rejected bids from Birmingham in 2017.

Reid went from "release at the end of the season" to worth £10m, at the age of 25ish and not signing a contract. It would have been madness to turn that bid down off the back of his first productive season.

We've been trying to tie down players with potential to longer deals. Moore got one in the summer and we activated O'Dowdas because it seems he isn't signing a new deal right now.

None of that reflects a "flog 'em as soon as they show promise" attitude.

  • Like 5

Share this post


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

The counter argument is Engvall, Djúric, Watkins, and the loans etc.  Eisa, I’ll reserve judgment until we know what is happening with him.

Lets day the trend is improving....which is good.

Harsh on Djuric Dave - not happy with our medical staff apparently.

Easily Championship standard, and a real handful when fully fit - although his move to Salernitana appears to have been a disaster!

14 games 0 goals (Tom Nichols-esque) - will we ever know (like GON) wether our medics did more harm than good?

However, this is the same guy who has scored 7 in 14 full internationals with Bosnia.......

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JamesBCFC said:

It isn't though, and no actual transfers that have happened give that view any weight.

There was interest in Bryan for several years before he was sold. We rejected bids from Birmingham in 2017.

Reid went from "release at the end of the season" to worth £10m, at the age of 25ish and not signing a contract. It would have been madness to turn that bid down off the back of his first productive season.

We've been trying to tie down players with potential to longer deals. Moore got one in the summer and we activated O'Dowdas because it seems he isn't signing a new deal right now.

None of that reflects a "flog 'em as soon as they show promise" attitude.

Eh?

Reid had, as you say, 1 good season.Then we sold him.

If that's not flog 'em as soon as they show/deliver on potential, I don't know what is!

You could argue JB's TV exposure in the cup is equally valid as I doubt too many prem clubs were following a just above average champ LB (but a potentially excellent mid).He was off to Villa, remember, just as Flint was also off to another champ club.

 

Moore 'has potential' - at £1.5 m and playing on loan for 3 years we will sell at the slightest bit of interest. Who is he going to replace in our back 4? Total waste on money

Kelly - off if the Prem bid comes in

Semenyo - off if the prem bid comes in.

Janner, Bakinson etc - who are they going to replace?

They will be sold for their POTENTIAL

COD is looking to leave. We extended his contract.He had no intention of doing so if various PM's are to be believed.

 

We are a selling club. End of.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Will bang my head against the table if we sell. Having heard for years about our academy (and suspecting it was all propaganda) it appears we genuinely have one to be proud of. 

I thought, mistakenly, that when we were told we were producing players for the future I assumed that meant our future - not the future of whatever club is ready to fork out a few million. 

It feels counter-intuitive surely to be producing talent only to sell it before it's even blossomed to its full potential. With no disrespect intended, we're not Crewe. 

Why does it feel every time we take a step forward that we also take one going back or, at least, to the side. It's a little bewildering. 

That said, at this stage it's all speculation, but going on recent history, well... 

To be fair this one fell into our lap. Some good/lucky scouting from Tinnion and Butt spotted him playing for the college about a year ago and "snapped" him up.

The amazing part is that he had somehow gone under the radar until then.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems an admission that we’re not going to get the striker we want so bring him back to bolster the squad and have a closer look at him with the first team.

We will probably get more for him at the end of the season if he’s played some Championship matches.

We could loan him to Chelsea...

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would not surprise me if sold to Chelsea but would surprise me if sold to anybody else at this stage.

Potential bigger picture here for current loan agreements and opportunity to agree end of season transfer fees and to agree future loan opportunities.

Ultimately if our relationship with Chelsea helps us reach the premier league in the next 2 to 3 seasons then letting them buy potential on a player with 18 months left at this stage could be great business.

They are a rich established premier team who we are “friends” with and have loaned us 4 quality players in last 3 years - it is an important relationship and will have a bearing on this bit of business IMO.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I reckon we’ve recalled to get a bigger fee. Makes it look like we’re prepared to play him if they don’t match our valuation.

With 18 months on his deal, and the player reluctant to sign a new one, we’d be foolish to not sell him for a million or 2 with a few decent add-ons.

Share this post


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

Wouldn’t be a bad shout - had thought Eisa played in round three, but took a look and seems he didn’t.

Eisa doesn’t seems to have a look in just now, so I’d think a loan would be wise; in the grand sheme of things, playing a million for him isn’t that much, even if it takes a year or so to get up to speed.

Sending him back down the leagues might feel like a backward step but game time is game time; he scores ten goals, he loses no value and we reassess in the summer.

He played in the previous rounds so is very much cup tied

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

He played in the previous rounds so is very much cup tied

Mo Eisa? He didn’t play against Huddersfield or Bolton, so would still be eligible for Newport in their replay/next rounds if they got through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What puzzles me is Eisa apparently isn't 'ready' for the Championship, although he scored a hatful of goals in L2 last season.

However after half a season and a few goals Semenyo is coming back to get played. 

Where is the logic in that? If MO needs a loan to L1 then where is the evidence that Semenyo is ready....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, robin_unreliant said:

What puzzles me is Eisa apparently isn't 'ready' for the Championship, although he scored a hatful of goals in L2 last season.

However after half a season and a few goals Semenyo is coming back to get played. 

Where is the logic in that? If MO needs a loan to L1 then where is the evidence that Semenyo is ready....

The logic is presumably to do with the fact that he is rated by the likes of Chelsea and Man Utd.

In any event he has been playing on the left of the attack rather than as a striker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, robin_unreliant said:

What puzzles me is Eisa apparently isn't 'ready' for the Championship, although he scored a hatful of goals in L2 last season.

However after half a season and a few goals Semenyo is coming back to get played. 

Where is the logic in that? If MO needs a loan to L1 then where is the evidence that Semenyo is ready....

It’s a fair point; I guess we have to go on what the coaching staff see away from the pitch too, not just the performances.

One other aspect to consider is that players do most of their work away from games.

Perhaps in the case of Eisa the club have wanted to have him train with them for six months to improve him, before seeing the results of that, which might be best served getting minutes elsewhere, while with Semenyo they have seen more rapid improvement over the first six months than expected, so now want more time to work with him in training/give him time on pitch with our players to see how he’s progressed.

Similar to how we’ve managed Morrell, who now looks effective for us.

Share this post


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

Eh?

Reid had, as you say, 1 good season.Then we sold him.

If that's not flog 'em as soon as they show/deliver on potential, I don't know what is!

You could argue JB's TV exposure in the cup is equally valid as I doubt too many prem clubs were following a just above average champ LB (but a potentially excellent mid).He was off to Villa, remember, just as Flint was also off to another champ club.

 

Moore 'has potential' - at £1.5 m and playing on loan for 3 years we will sell at the slightest bit of interest. Who is he going to replace in our back 4? Total waste on money

Kelly - off if the Prem bid comes in

Semenyo - off if the prem bid comes in.

Janner, Bakinson etc - who are they going to replace?

They will be sold for their POTENTIAL

COD is looking to leave. We extended his contract.He had no intention of doing so if various PM's are to be believed.

 

We are a selling club. End of.

Not that long ago, all too often we were paying big wages for journeymen, often at the tail end of their careers, so that when things didn't work out we struggled to get rid of them, and when we could there was no value left for the club. It meant that SL picked up the tab for £50m of losses. 

This, together with the impact of ffp lead to the club's current policy of sustainability so that the club lives within it's financial means.

As a result we now have two main areas for player recruitment. The first is bringing in young players with potential for the future. The second is development of our own players through the academy.

As I see it, both options are designed to develop players good enough to come in to, and benefit and improve, the first team squad.The added factor is that should they be good enough to attract interest from other (bigger) clubs, and the player concerned wants to leave to improve their careers and financial situation, then the cub benefits from the profit on the transfer fees received, and that profit can then be applied to further developed and  improve the playing squad by bringing in more young players with potential etc. etc.

One of the issues has been that if you have a squad full of players, " for the future', you will struggle to compete with other clubs able to afford experienced squads, and we have seen a shift over the last year with the likes of Kalas an Hunt coming into play alongside Kelly, Morrell, O'dowdy and Elliason. While we are, and have been, a "lesser" championship club , it will always be hard to keep hold of our better players , who have ambition and attract interest from bigger clubs , so we saw 3 of our better players leave in the summer because of that, but the transfer fees received have gone into the kitty to further improve the squad.

We now have a team challenging for the play off places, but can only play 11 on the pitch, so they are bound to be players not getting game time who will be frustrated and feel there are better, and  better rewarded, opportunities elsewhere, e.g. O'Dowda. If he should go, then I suspect it would be for a healthy profit on the fee that brought him here, and I feel much more confident now that if that happens, that the club would use the money received to further develop the playing squad.

Are we a selling club, yes, because until we can offer the wages of club's with parachute payments, or bottom end prem clubs, it will be difficult to hold on to players good enough to attract interest from clubs of that ilk. However, I don't think that means we are looking to sell, just to make a profit as an end in itself, as the ultimate aim is to build a team and squad capable of challenging for promotion.

Last summer we lost Bryan, Flint and Reid - three of our best players. Many saw their sales as evidence that we were "just" a selling club, and I read posts asking how could we ever expect to challenge for promotion by selling our best. I for one did not expect that at the end of January we would be on heels of the play off teams with what seems a stronger defence and with Palmer's addition, albeit on loan, a real possibility that we could be in with a chance of being in the mix come the end of the season. If that's us being a selling club, count me in!

 

 

Edited by downendcity
  • Like 12

Share this post


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

The logic is presumably to do with the fact that he is rated by the likes of Chelsea and Man Utd.

In any event he has been playing on the left of the attack rather than as a striker.

Chelsea like the look of him on loan, so think he will fit right in with their policy for young English players.   :)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, robin_unreliant said:

What puzzles me is Eisa apparently isn't 'ready' for the Championship, although he scored a hatful of goals in L2 last season.

However after half a season and a few goals Semenyo is coming back to get played. 

Where is the logic in that? If MO needs a loan to L1 then where is the evidence that Semenyo is ready....

Has anyone said Semenyo is first team ready?

I think this deal is so that Eisa can go out on loan so Semenyo will fill that place in the first team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Carey 6 said:

I reckon we’ve recalled to get a bigger fee.

We have to recall him if we are to sell (a loan is a temporary transfer,) so couldn't if he was still registered at Newport.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, downendcity said:

Not that long ago, all too often we were paying big wages for journeymen, often at the tail end of their careers, so that when things didn't work out we struggled to get rid of them, and when we could there was no value left for the club. It meant that SL picked up the tab for £50m of losses. 

This, together with the impact of ffp lead to the club's current policy of sustainability so that the club lives within it's financial means.

As a result we now have two main areas for player recruitment. The first is bringing in young players with potential for the future. The second is development of our own layers through the academy.

As I see it, both options are designed to develop players good enough to come in to, ad benefit and improve, the first team squad.The added factors that should they be good enough to attract interest from other (bigger) clubs, and the player concerned wants to leave to improve their careers and financial situation, then the cub benefits from the profit on the transfer fees received and that profit can then be applied to further developed improve the playing squad by bringing in more young players with potential etc. etc.

One of the issues has been that if you have a squad full of players " for the future' you will struggle to compete with other clubs able to afford experienced squads, and we have seen a shift over the last year with the likes of Kalas an Hunt coming in alongside Kelly, Morrell, O'dowdy and Elliason. While we re and have been a "lesser" championship club , it will always be hard to keep hold of our better players , who have ambition and attract interest from bigger clubs , so we saw 3 of our better players leave in the summer, but the transfer fees received have gone into the kitty to further improve the squad.

We now have a team challenging for the play off places, but can only play 11 on the pitch, so they are bound to be players not getting game time who will be frustrated and feel there are better, and perhaps better rewarded, opportunities elsewhere, e.g. O'Dowda. If he should go then I suspect it would be for a healthy profit on th fee that brought him here, and I feel much more confident now that if that happens, that the cub would use the money received to further develop the playing squad.

Are we a selling club, yes, because until we can offer the wages of club's with parachute payments, or bottom end prem clubs it will be difficult to hold on to players good enough to attract interest from clubs of that ilk. However, I don;t think that means we are looking to sell, just to make a profit , as an end in itself, as the ultimate aim is to build a team and squad capable of challenging for promotion.

Last summer we lost Bryan, Flint and Reid - three of our best players. Many saw their sales as evidence that we were "just" a selling club, and I read posts asking how could we ever expect to challenge for promotion by selling our best. I for one did not expect that at the end of January we would be on heels of the play off teams with what seems a stronger defence and with Palmer's addition, albeit on loan, a real possibility that we could be in with a chance of being in the mix come the end of the season. If that's us being a selling club, count me in!

Well explained Downend. Hopefully the less aware posters will read this thread and will understand what sustainability means within SLs strategy.

It also highlights that SL was right to stand by LJ and maintain stability when some fans and MA wanted him sacked. LJ has coped tremendously well with the departures of last season and has created a stronger squad with strength in depth and all with the restrictions imposed by SLs strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome back, Semenyo.

Surely this has to be for a sale to a Premier League development squad.  Based on our progress this season, I can't see him making our first team squad.

If he is sold to a Chelsea for example, perhaps we'll have him back on loan next season as an exciting prospect!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/01/2019 at 14:55, Alan Dicks' Barmy Army said:

@Ashtonwurzel How many times have you personally seen Semenyo play this season to be able to back up this statement?

You clearly are unable to make sense of the section you copied

Well I would agree and say YOU ARE WRONG !!

Nailed on, no idea where this odd fixation from the originator of this post comes from

1) Seen him play in matches and in training

2) Seems you were unable to make sense of the section I copied.

3) You are WRONG !!

4) I knew this was happening.

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...