Diony

[ScottishRed]

2 hours ago, cider-manc said:

Who would you have bought in?

No idea, but then I don't work in the talent acquisition / scouting department of a professional football club.

Maybe they have a better chance than you or I in sourcing a few candidates.

[BobBobSuperBob]

5 minutes ago, ScottishRed said:

No idea, but then I don't work in the talent acquisition / scouting department of a professional football club.

Maybe they have a better chance than you or I in sourcing a few candidates.

Not so sure about that Scottish

[LondonBristolian]

10 minutes ago, ScottishRed said:

Maybe a PL club with a player who wanted game time and wasn't getting it there.

Maybe a youngster at a PL club who wasn't quite ready for them..........I think we did that rather successfully last season

If I remember correctly, Barnsley did it pretty well last season with a lad from Liverpool called Ryan Kent. He looked a good prospect for them. Perhaps we should have got him on loan?

In essence, you seem to be expecting the scouts to either find a player who is struggling to get games or who lacks first team experience but, despite that, is guaranteed to be a success at this level. And one that no bigger club wants so we do not get usurped. And you want the scouts to have 20:20 hindsight and know exactly how each signing will workout. It seems to me the major flaw in your argument is that you are demanding the impossible.

Yes, we got Tammy last season and maybe we were spoiled by that but there will always be an element of luck and an element of risk with loan signings. There is no way around that.

[alexukhc]

Just seen his Instagram, 6hrs ago was on a train looking like he was ready to hit the town somewhere

[spudski]

Bit of a joke thread?

Do all footballers work out at Clubs?

The one's that haven't worked out, have all done well at other clubs.

So many players do well at one club, but don't work out at others.

We're dealing with human beings, not Xbox.

How many fans called for tomlin to be signed...well that worked out didn't it.

Easy to slate the club...so many reactionary posts with hindsight.

Some work. some don't....regardless of due diligence.

How many of you have excelled at every job?

[ScottishRed]

2 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

If I remember correctly, Barnsley did it pretty well last season with a lad from Liverpool called Ryan Kent. He looked a good prospect for them. Perhaps we should have got him on loan?

In essence, you seem to be expecting the scouts to either find a player who is struggling to get games or who lacks first team experience but, despite that, is guaranteed to be a success at this level. And one that no bigger club wants so we do not get usurped. And you want the scouts to have 20:20 hindsight and know exactly how each signing will workout. It seems to me the major flaw in your argument is that you are demanding the impossible.

Yes, we got Tammy last season and maybe we were spoiled by that but there will always be an element of luck and an element of risk with loan signings. There is no way around that.

Looking back on your contributions to this thread you clearly fall into the ' we are a small club' camp.

If the people running this club have your attitude then that is all we ever actually will be.

There is a need to show ambition, show desire - Diony was neither.

As for Kent, he did show up well for Barnsley last season however the fact that he went to play in Germany at the start of this one and hardly kicked a ball should have maybe caused more than a little concern to the club in January.

Then of course we have Letto, my, what an impact he made along with of course Woodrow.

Add the cost of all of those loans up and maybe we could have used that cash to pay someone £40k per week for 5 months and maybe they might have made an impact - no guarantees clearly, but they would struggle to be less worthwhile than the loans we have had.

[Fordy62]

Ordinarily I’d be pretty worried about a player of ours being arrested. But I can make an exception for Diony as he’s been so unbelievable shit. It’s hardly going to make him worse!

[The Constant Rabbit]

56 minutes ago, ScottishRed said:

Looking back on your contributions to this thread you clearly fall into the ' we are a small club' camp.

If the people running this club have your attitude then that is all we ever actually will be.

There is a need to show ambition, show desire - Diony was neither.

As for Kent, he did show up well for Barnsley last season however the fact that he went to play in Germany at the start of this one and hardly kicked a ball should have maybe caused more than a little concern to the club in January.

Then of course we have Letto, my, what an impact he made along with of course Woodrow.

Add the cost of all of those loans up and maybe we could have used that cash to pay someone £40k per week for 5 months and maybe they might have made an impact - no guarantees clearly, but they would struggle to be less worthwhile than the loans we have had.

This.

Plus the fact Diony hadn't scored for what, a year?

Both player had "problem" written all over them.

Even Walsh was alleged to have been invoved in trainingg ground fisticuffs at least once.

 

If you are going to brag about recruiting the right "DNA" - then these 3 had the wrong type in spades - although I'll be happy to give Walsh the benefit of the doubt.

 

The other 2 - no, the writing was on the wall for all to see that there were issues of some sort with both of them.

 

Can someone itk actually say what Diony was nicked for?

[cider-manc]

2 hours ago, ScottishRed said:

Looking back on your contributions to this thread you clearly fall into the ' we are a small club' camp.

If the people running this club have your attitude then that is all we ever actually will be.

There is a need to show ambition, show desire - Diony was neither.

As for Kent, he did show up well for Barnsley last season however the fact that he went to play in Germany at the start of this one and hardly kicked a ball should have maybe caused more than a little concern to the club in January.

Then of course we have Letto, my, what an impact he made along with of course Woodrow.

Add the cost of all of those loans up and maybe we could have used that cash to pay someone £40k per week for 5 months and maybe they might have made an impact - no guarantees clearly, but they would struggle to be less worthwhile than the loans we have had.

In comparison to most of the top 8 in the championship... We are a small club. They all have a better top flight record and have actually won major honours at some point (or at least played in Europe).The people running our club may not be thinking like that but they will have to battle against others thinking it when it comes to transfers. Remember zack cloughs dads response to our approach of his son?

So kent not being able to break into a Bundesliga side means we shouldnt of signed him... Yet people are suggesting we take players on loan who can’t get into premier league sides (which he also is)? He had proven himself at championship level with Barnsley.. Isn't that also along the lines of what you were asking for?

Diony scored 11 in the french top flight last year. Playing a divison above kodja ever managed and scoring more goals than Dedhiou scored in that same divison the same season. He was worth a punt. It didn’t work out - sometimes it does sometimes it doesn't. 

leko again fills your want for taking premier league players on loan. Hes a prospect if he can ever learn a positional sense. Something anyone who watched derby get demolished by him will testify to.

woodrow is an interesting one. But he was decent in a poor burton team scoring 5 goals in 14 games. At the time we had just spent a record fee on a centre forward, so who ever came in was unlikely to start. We required back up and woodrow was available.

My point is that you make it sounds like we have gone out and got a load of players on loan from rovers. In fact there is some logic behind all of the signings. I am disappointed by them as they havent worked out but that happens in football... Just as it could happen with an established player as you have alluded to.

[Chappers]

Apparently Brum nearly spent a heap of cash on him during the summer, and we tracked him for a while, so we clearly didn't see the best of him. We just saw a guy shot on confidence who made Bas look like Messi in comparison.

[CotswoldRed]

Diony is so, so poor. If we hadn't taken the punt we could all have had season ticket reductions, not increases (joke). 

I'm amazed any scout would think him worth signing. He must be properly Jekyll and Hyde. 

[LondonBristolian]

7 hours ago, ScottishRed said:

Looking back on your contributions to this thread you clearly fall into the ' we are a small club' camp.

If the people running this club have your attitude then that is all we ever actually will be.

There is a need to show ambition, show desire - Diony was neither.

As for Kent, he did show up well for Barnsley last season however the fact that he went to play in Germany at the start of this one and hardly kicked a ball should have maybe caused more than a little concern to the club in January.

Then of course we have Letto, my, what an impact he made along with of course Woodrow.

Add the cost of all of those loans up and maybe we could have used that cash to pay someone £40k per week for 5 months and maybe they might have made an impact - no guarantees clearly, but they would struggle to be less worthwhile than the loans we have had.

I think the fact your only remaining ‘argument’ is to take potshot guesses at my attitude speaks volumes, as does the fact you do not seem to be able to name a single player who you think would have been available and you think we should have gone for instead. Yes, the scouts will know players we do not but, if a player was worth spending £40k a week to bring in, and could command that kind of wage, I suspect we would have heard of them. As it stands, you are in effect saying we should have brought in a player who does not exist. Players that do not exist tend not to impact that much on a team.

But again, the point remains that you are mixing up foresight and hindsight. Why do you think loaning in a player tracked by Premier League clubs, in is division’s Team of the season last year, who moved for £8 million in the summer with a view to buy shows a lack of ambition or desire?

With Kent, you argue we should have known he was a bad player because he was not getting games in a higher division but also argue elsewhere we should loan in young players not getting a game in a higher division.

With Leko, at the time we signed him, he was seen as one of the most exciting young prospects in the Premier League. Again you do not seem to make any argument against the signing that does not depend on hindsight.

You don’t make any argument beyond hindsight about Woodrow either but I actually think there are reasons why that was a poor decision at the time. For the other three though, I still cannot see what argument you are making. The club signed highly-tipped youngsters seeking experience and big money signings not getting games for their clubs - the exact sort of players you are suggesting they should have signed - and you cannot name alternatives you think would have worked better.

Our loan signings were poor and we need to either do better - or have more luck with them - next season but you seem to be complaining about what the club did but with no suggestions as to what you would have done differently beyond somehow guaranteeing a type of signing that will always be a risk will definitely work in hindsight.

[Port Said Red]

9 hours ago, ScottishRed said:

 

As for Kent, he did show up well for Barnsley last season however the fact that he went to play in Germany at the start of this one and hardly kicked a ball should have maybe caused more than a little concern to the club 

I can't help thinking that something went seriously wrong for him in Germany, the lad has real ability  and showed some nice touches at times. But I have never seen a player so lacking in confidence and concentration, he looked like he had forgotten he was playing at times. The fastest he moved in the Brentford game was when he was subbed. He looked like he couldn't get off the pitch fast enough.

I don't know if it's personal problems or what, but at this point his career is going one way. I wouldn't be surprised to see him crop up on tv in 3 or 4 years time, putting in a good cup performance for a plucky North West non-league team. You can just hear the pundits wondering why he is not playing at a higher level.

[Major Isewater]

10 hours ago, ScottishRed said:

Maybe a PL club with a player who wanted game time and wasn't getting it there.

Maybe a youngster at a PL club who wasn't quite ready for them..........I think we did that rather successfully last season

Or a player into the last months of his contract and could leave for free but likes the idea of possible promotion and to be fixed up with his new club before the season ends.

There are many configurations.

If the deal is right it's right .

[sglosbcfc]

Lots of people being wise after the event with regards Kent. He was outstanding for Barnsley last season including against us. There was much positivity on here from posters when he signed, some of them now saying 'who scouts these players? Why did we sign him?' 

[BobBobSuperBob]

1 hour ago, sglosbcfc said:

Lots of people being wise after the event with regards Kent. He was outstanding for Barnsley last season including against us. There was much positivity on here from posters when he signed, some of them now saying 'who scouts these players? Why did we sign him?' 

Not according to the Barnsley fans he wasnt

I think a lot ,including LJ were swayed by what many described as his best or one of his better games, against us

He has ‘ability’ but when you sign someone you also have to work out how they fit into your plans 

[Olé]

Based on his Instagram, Diony is on a GWR train - so I assume he is off shopping in London.

[Mr Popodopolous]

In hindsight, it was a shocking signing.

He made no impact at St Etienne...he had good attributes on paper and his form last year was promising. His confidence also seems like it was on the floor...Engvall, is he worse than this iteration of Diony?

Regards the three strikers...

Afobe when Wolves were in for him, always a no brainer he would have gone back there.

Grabban a decent chance, he did well at Sunderland.

Looking at it, Mitrovic best chance. We were still above Fulham at this time and they perhaps still seen as promotion outsiders at this stage, whereas Wolves top and seemingly nailed on and Villa deemed rather likely. Wages a possible stumbling block though.

[Midred]

Unless It's  a lower league London team I think that they will always win over us as a location for young players.

[Londoner]

Sorry but if you don' give players a run how are they expected to have consistency.

Diony elliason Woodrow Engvall when have any of them had the opportunity to get some consistency.

Simple. They haven't

 

[Davefevs]

15 hours ago, BigTone said:

Kent, Diony & Woodrow have not been the best loan signings ever made. Who on earth looked into them beforehand. Add to that the signing of Engval and you have to admit our recruitment is not very good.

I’m really disappointed that Woodrow hasn’t been given a chance.  Thought he’d really fit alongside either Reid or Diedhiou.

I think that what we see too often in our recruitment is:

- LJ saying Player X is really good, got all the attributes, we’ve scouted him intensively, etc

- Player X doesn’t name the impression LJ hooes

- Player either is then reclassified as "not for now" or left to rot

15 hours ago, Ser Davos Ciderworth said:

Why take the risk though? And what a risk - his club couldn’t get him out the door fast enough despite paying €€€ six months earlier. Don’t need to be on Mastermind to work that one out. We could’ve had Mitrovic or Grabban if we went for them. Fuming over the January shambles. 

our model is not to pay £40-50k per week wages....

15 hours ago, Ser Davos Ciderworth said:

I can see that with Villa but why do you hold Fulham in such high esteem? 

.....because they have massive staff budgets compared to ours.  Fulham’s is £37m, Villa’s £53m....ours £18m.  So Fulham have £350k our week more to play with that us!  Staggering.

12 hours ago, ScottishRed said:

Looking back on your contributions to this thread you clearly fall into the ' we are a small club' camp.

If the people running this club have your attitude then that is all we ever actually will be.

There is a need to show ambition, show desire - Diony was neither.

As for Kent, he did show up well for Barnsley last season however the fact that he went to play in Germany at the start of this one and hardly kicked a ball should have maybe caused more than a little concern to the club in January.

Then of course we have Letto, my, what an impact he made along with of course Woodrow.

Add the cost of all of those loans up and maybe we could have used that cash to pay someone £40k per week for 5 months and maybe they might have made an impact - no guarantees clearly, but they would struggle to be less worthwhile than the loans we have had.

We are a small club in the Championship.  We are in the bottom third financially.  I do think the club are ambitious, but also naive if they think that "sustainability" will eventually get us to the Prem.  It might happen, but parachute payments tell me that the likes of Brighton (who we aspire to be) and Huddersfield, if they return to the Champ, will be in a different ball-park to us.

26 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

In hindsight, it was a shocking signing.

Yep, in hindsight, but 15-20 minutes v QPR on debut, he looked good....that was as good as it got.

He made no impact at St Etienne...he had good attributes on paper and his form last year was promising. His confidence also seems like it was on the floor...Engvall, is he worse than this iteration of Diony?

Regards the three strikers...

Afobe when Wolves were in for him, always a no brainer he would have gone back there.

Yep, he’s probably the one i’d Have liked.

Grabban a decent chance, he did well at Sunderland.

But on considerable wages, and with clubs after him, very unlikely that AFCB would accept a small proportion of his wages as our contribution, when Villa might be paying all of it.  He’ll be on £40-50k pw 

Looking at it, Mitrovic best chance. We were still above Fulham at this time and they perhaps still seen as promotion outsiders at this stage, whereas Wolves top and seemingly nailed on and Villa deemed rather likely. Wages a possible stumbling block though.

Wages definitely a stumbling block.

 

[Major Isewater]

23 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’m really disappointed that Woodrow hasn’t been given a chance.  Thought he’d really fit alongside either Reid or Diedhiou.

I think that what we see too often in our recruitment is:

- LJ saying Player X is really good, got all the attributes, we’ve scouted him intensively, etc

- Player X doesn’t name the impression LJ hooes

- Player either is then reclassified as "not for now" or left to rot

our model is not to pay £40-50k per week wages....

.....because they have massive staff budgets compared to ours.  Fulham’s is £37m, Villa’s £53m....ours £18m.  So Fulham have £350k our week more to play with that us!  Staggering.

We are a small club in the Championship.  We are in the bottom third financially.  I do think the club are ambitious, but also naive if they think that "sustainability" will eventually get us to the Prem.  It might happen, but parachute payments tell me that the likes of Brighton (who we aspire to be) and Huddersfield, if they return to the Champ, will be in a different ball-park to us.

 

Wages being a ' stumbling block ' is really something that we need to address if we want to advance.

We need to find a way to compete or we will forever be, at best, ' treading water ' .

Our better players will leave systematically for other clubs and new players will sign elsewhere before we're left with the ' dregs ' .

How do we do it ? 

We are well on our way with the youngsters but we cannot simply rely on the Academy filling every position we need .

We seem to have gone a bit mad with the windfall we had from the sales of Kodja , Bolasie and Adomah and paid big fees for the likes of Engvall, Walsh , Elliasen...

I would have preferred quality over quantity.

 

[bristolcitysweden]

LJ and his staff use some computer programme (they can use computers). The programme they massively have overpaid tells them Eliassons goalscoring passing record sticks out. The pay £2,000,000. Their programme don't tell them Eliasson was sold from AIK Solna less than a year before for £100,000. The way you treat other peoples money. Piss poor.

[Mr Popodopolous]

52 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’m really disappointed that Woodrow hasn’t been given a chance.  Thought he’d really fit alongside either Reid or Diedhiou.

I think that what we see too often in our recruitment is:

- LJ saying Player X is really good, got all the attributes, we’ve scouted him intensively, etc

- Player X doesn’t name the impression LJ hooes

- Player either is then reclassified as "not for now" or left to rot

our model is not to pay £40-50k per week wages....

.....because they have massive staff budgets compared to ours.  Fulham’s is £37m, Villa’s £53m....ours £18m.  So Fulham have £350k our week more to play with that us!  Staggering.

We are a small club in the Championship.  We are in the bottom third financially.  I do think the club are ambitious, but also naive if they think that "sustainability" will eventually get us to the Prem.  It might happen, but parachute payments tell me that the likes of Brighton (who we aspire to be) and Huddersfield, if they return to the Champ, will be in a different ball-park to us.

 

See, I agree with a lot of your post, but Sunderland got one hell of a deal regarding their Grabban loan. They only had to chip in a third of his wages, only a third. I don't know if Villa got a similar privilege let alone Fulham with Mitrovic or Wolves with Afobe.

@Major Isewater

Perhaps LJ didn't utilise Walsh, and to an extent, Kent to their full potential? Walsh the best is yet to come, Kent not suitable for us.

Your quality v quantity point. Agree in principle... However, the flipside of that is look at the number and type of injuries this year- to both first team players and squad players, aka 'first reserve' players.

Had we gone down that route, would we have had the depth to keep ticking over? Unsure.

[EstoniaTallinnRed]

17 hours ago, BigTone said:

Kent, Diony & Woodrow have not been the best loan signings ever made. Who on earth looked into them beforehand. Add to that the signing of Engval and you have to admit our recruitment is not very good.

Quite right Tone, the scouting system both here and in Europe needs to be looked at and overhauled. Heads should roll!

[Chairman Mao]

He is clearly a decent player with 0 confidence. Cost us 2 points in the Sunderland match mind you.

[Chairman Mao]

59 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

Wages being a ' stumbling block ' is really something that we need to address if we want to advance.

We need to find a way to compete or we will forever be, at best, ' treading water ' .

Our better players will leave systematically for other clubs and new players will sign elsewhere before we're left with the ' dregs ' .

How do we do it ? 

We are well on our way with the youngsters but we cannot simply rely on the Academy filling every position we need .

We seem to have gone a bit mad with the windfall we had from the sales of Kodja , Bolasie and Adomah and paid big fees for the likes of Engvall, Walsh , Elliasen...

I would have preferred quality over quantity.

 

Walsh is clearly a good player who needs to settle in. And he only cost £1.5m max, not a lot in today's market. He will turn into a good signing next season 

 

[Red-Robbo]

18 hours ago, Cider-Head23 said:

Well he got arrested in town on Saturday night which didn’t help. 

 

weird.

 

I've seen him play and didn't think he could get arrested.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

14 hours ago, spudski said:

Bit of a joke thread?

Do all footballers work out at Clubs?

The one's that haven't worked out, have all done well at other clubs.

So many players do well at one club, but don't work out at others.

We're dealing with human beings, not Xbox.

How many fans called for tomlin to be signed...well that worked out didn't it.

Easy to slate the club...so many reactionary posts with hindsight.

Some work. some don't....regardless of due diligence.

How many of you have excelled at every job?

I would normally have sympathy but the rap sheet is long, Hegeler, Tomlin, Magnusson, Engvall, Oneil, Giefer, Kent, Diony, Woodrow and Matthews + Eliasson and according to you Golbourne.

[Red-Robbo]

2 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

I would normally have sympathy but the rap sheet is long, Hegeler, Tomlin, Magnusson, Engvall, Oneil, Giefer, Kent, Diony, Woodrow and Matthews + Eliasson and according to you Golbourne.

 

Well, I'd remove Magnusson and O'Neil from that list. Just because they are squad players rather than first XI doesn't mean they have brought no value to City. Plus with Tomlin, we got one decent season, before ego, complacency and off-field shenanigans meant he had to be jettisoned.

TBH we could write a list of players that haven't worked out here that could be virtually endless over the years. In years gone by, many of them got far longer in the team than they should have.

I suspect you could at any club: 

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/788332/Premier-League-transfers-flop-XI-mistakes-sportgalleries