George Tanner

[Super]

1 minute ago, AppyDAZE said:

It is worth pointing out that the keeper saved Wells' effort, when you see it again on Sky. The replay shows it clearly.

It was a superb save.

[AppyDAZE]

And thinking back, I maybe wrong, we didn't get a corner from it. Poor officials last night.

Edited October 20, 2021 by AppyDAZE

[Fuber]

12 hours ago, watkins1983 said:

Bang on. Atkinson is another example of this. Great signing.  Massengo coming on at a rate of knots. You would think with the balance we have of youth and experience brought in we would be lighting up the league……

We have good potential players in defence and midfield, such as the above.

However for each prospect playing well, the more experienced squad members are letting them down.

[Sturny]

I hope we put on a release clause. Reckon he's gonna play in the prem someday.

Feels like it's been aaaaages since we've had a right back with high potential. 

Edited October 20, 2021 by Sturny

[brad blit]

People talking about January buys but I’m presuming that FFP rules won’t change in Jan, and it would still be the case that City have limited funds - unless revenue from start of season to Jan (with gate receipts etc) can be used and give us a transfer kitty? Any idea @Davefevs

[James54De]

20 minutes ago, Sturny said:

I hope we put on a release clause. Reckon he's gonna play in the prem someday.

Feels like it's been aaaaages since we've had a right back with high potential. 

Why

[Super]

16 minutes ago, brad blit said:

People talking about January buys but I’m presuming that FFP rules won’t change in Jan, and it would still be the case that City have limited funds - unless revenue from start of season to Jan (with gate receipts etc) can be used and give us a transfer kitty? Any idea @Davefevs

Probably loan signings.

[Sturny]

19 minutes ago, James54De said:

Why

To make sure we get enough dough if we sell

[Fuber]

3 minutes ago, Sturny said:

To make sure we get enough dough if we sell

That doesn't make sense.

Release clauses are dodgy unless your aim is to keep a player and you set it to a hugely unrealistic level. Let's say hypothetically we out on a release clause of say £8m.

All that does is mean if he's worth £10m (assuming that could happen) we'd be losing profit.

With respect Sturny, I'm glad you aren't in charge of contract clauses. 

Trust the Club. Selling players is one area where I'd argue we've conducted good business the past 5 years.

[Sturny]

8 minutes ago, Fuber said:

That doesn't make sense.

Release clauses are dodgy unless your aim is to keep a player and you set it to a hugely unrealistic level. Let's say hypothetically we out on a release clause of say £8m.

All that does is mean if he's worth £10m (assuming that could happen) we'd be losing profit.

With respect Sturny, I'm glad you aren't in charge of contract clauses. 

Trust the Club. Selling players is one area where I'd argue we've conducted good business the past 5 years.

But on the other side of the argument let’s say he’s worth 5m and it pushes them to 8m? I see your point though and fair enough, I won’t send my CV over 

Edited October 20, 2021 by Sturny

[Fuber]

Just now, Sturny said:

But on the other side of the argument let’s say he’s worth 5m and it pushes them to 8m? I see your point though and fair enough 

My understanding is that said release clauses tend to be up front. Which is less useful from an FFP standpoint.

I.e. Webster was £19m rising to £24m with clauses, said £19m was split in three equal installments.

Similar with Kelly.

Whereas if we wanted money up front we likely would have got less.

[Sturny]

Just now, Fuber said:

My understanding is that said release clauses tend to be up front. Which is less useful from an FFP standpoint.

I.e. Webster was £19m rising to £24m with clauses, said £19m was split in three equal installments.

Similar with Kelly.

Whereas if we wanted money up front we likely would have got less.

Didn’t know that tbh, fair doo’s 

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, brad blit said:

People talking about January buys but I’m presuming that FFP rules won’t change in Jan, and it would still be the case that City have limited funds - unless revenue from start of season to Jan (with gate receipts etc) can be used and give us a transfer kitty? Any idea @Davefevs

Both Gould and Pearson have come out recently and said there is not likely to be much activity in January….unless we sell.  I’d say we might get another “one for the future” like Tanner type signing, but not expecting much more, maybe a loan?

2 hours ago, Sturny said:

But on the other side of the argument let’s say he’s worth 5m and it pushes them to 8m? I see your point though and fair enough, I won’t send my CV over 

Not having a go at you, just adding my thoughts.  I don’t think as a Championship club you sign a 21 year old from Lg2 for £300k on a 3yr contract (plus 1 year option) and slap a whopping release fee in the contract.  What benefit does it really serve at this point for either player or club?  It might be a consideration the next time his contract is discussed, but likely to be on player’s agenda not ours, i.e. he might think he’s gonna outgrow us and doesn’t want us restricting him if a better club comes in.

With Josh Brownhill, the release fee was for his benefit not City’s at the time Burnley came knocking.  City having to sell when they didn’t want to, in the market of the time, he’d outgrown his release fee in reality….and we had to twist rather than stick.

Think it’s less common at our level, very useful for PL players fearing being kept at a relegated club.  All a bit Football Manager to me.

2 hours ago, Fuber said:

My understanding is that said release clauses tend to be up front. Which is less useful from an FFP standpoint.

I.e. Webster was £19m rising to £24m with clauses, said £19m was split in three equal installments.

Similar with Kelly.

Whereas if we wanted money up front we likely would have got less.

Correct, pretty much fee agreed, then payment terms discussed.  If you wanna make staged payments, the total paid will be more (generally).

Staged payments make no difference to FFP, the fee is fee pretty much.

[Bazooka Joe]

Tanner is the sort of player who offers hope of better things and a brighter future for our club.

He knows what is expected of him and he delivers as best he can. Hard-working, commited and energetic.

Attackers find it hard to get any change out of him.

If we had eleven Tanners, we'd have five shillings and sixpence.

He is definitely going to worth a fair few bob more than we paid for him.

[22A]

20 hours ago, REDOXO said:

Tanner was great. Utterly exposed by waht was in front of him. The ball was constantly coming down that side but he did everything he could have done. 

Not just last night either; he's playing consistently well.