'Adapting the rules of free transfer'...

[spudski]

...just listened to LJ speaking pre QPR.

He mentions about us looking for a CB in the free agent catagory...or ' adapting the rules' from the foreign markets.

Any idea how one goes about doing that...because I don't.

 

[Grey Fox]

Maybe paying foreign team x who then cancel  player x's contract making him a free agent?

 

I'm only guessing

[eastonboy]

Edit - Grey fox put it far more succinctly.

 

I wonder if the FA would allow the registration though as the player would not have been a free agent when our window closed 

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, spudski said:

...just listened to LJ speaking pre QPR.

He mentions about us looking for a CB in the free agent catagory...or ' adapting the rules' from the foreign markets.

Any idea how one goes about doing that...because I don't.

 

Suspect a player abroad, whose window hasn’t closed, could mutually terminate his contract with his current club, effectively becoming an out of contract player....eligible to bring in here.

Last summer, English clubs were using the period between the transfer window and loan window to mutually terminate players so that they could move on as out of contract either before the end of August or afterwards.

i suspect the rules abroad is a loophole we can exploit.

Before we get too excited, I don’t imagine we could have an agreement where foreign club A mutually terminates a player on the proviso we then pay them.  I think it would be an unfancied player at club A who they now have an interested club.

I mentioned this loophole a couple of weeks ago.

3 minutes ago, Grey Fox said:

Maybe paying foreign team x who then cancel  player x's contract making him a free agent?

 

I'm only guessing

 

2 minutes ago, eastonboy said:

At a wild guess, I would suggest that LJ is intimating that if an overseas player was out of contract by the time their window closed or before, then we could sign them as a free transfer?

Not too sure whether this would work with registration into our football association, as they may insist it was out of contract when our window closed 

Yes beat me to it.

[Fpcity]

Player buys out his contract and we give him that amount as a sign on fee? 

[Jerseybean]

5 minutes ago, spudski said:

...just listened to LJ speaking pre QPR.

He mentions about us looking for a CB in the free agent catagory...or ' adapting the rules' from the foreign markets.

Any idea how one goes about doing that...because I don't.

 

TBH spudski there’s quite a few things that LJ says that are not clear or immediately understandable. Usually I can get his general drift, despite the actual words he uses, however, ‘adapting the rules’ just sounds like a mistake, perhaps he meant ‘adopting the rules.’

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, Grey Fox said:

Maybe paying foreign team x who then cancel  player x's contract making him a free agent?

 

I'm only guessing

That opens many more options up for us. If that is an option then I'm not so worried anymore 

[spudski]

9 minutes ago, Grey Fox said:

Maybe paying foreign team x who then cancel  player x's contract making him a free agent?

 

I'm only guessing

For some reason I thought that loophole was closed, and all players regardless of foreign window had to be free, before the British window closed. Open to correction.

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Suspect a player abroad, whose window hasn’t closed, could mutually terminate his contract with his current club, effectively becoming an out of contract player....eligible to bring in here.

Last summer, English clubs were using the period between the transfer window and loan window to mutually terminate players so that they could move on as out of contract either before the end of August or afterwards.

i suspect the rules abroad is a loophole we can exploit.

Before we get too excited, I don’t imagine we could have an agreement where foreign club A mutually terminates a player on the proviso we then pay them.  I think it would be an unfancied player at club A who they now have an interested club.

I mentioned this loophole a couple of weeks ago.

 

Yes beat me to it.

See comment above Dave.

4 minutes ago, Jerseybean said:

TBH spudski there’s quite a few things that LJ says that are not clear or immediately understandable. Usually I can get his general drift, despite the actual words he uses, however, ‘adapting the rules’ just sounds like a mistake, perhaps he meant ‘adopting the rules.’

I listened twice on that point...I really got the impression he intended to find a 'loophole'.

[eardun]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

For some reason I thought that loophole was closed, and all players regardless of foreign window had to be free, before the British window closed. Open to correction.

See comment above Dave.

I listened twice on that point...I really got the impression he intended to find a 'loophole'.

Better recruit this guy!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Freeman

[ZiderEyed]

Offer to pay a club to release a player on a free?

[Guest]

Wouldn’t it make more sense, if the key is being a free agent before their window closes, to have the player and club agree a min fee release clause, and pay the player the fee to terminate his contract? 

[TammyAB]

[Pezo]

Imagine if we pay a club to cancel a players contract and then Leeds swoop in and take the player. Oh those gits boil my piss. 

[chowie]

Just listened to this interview and came here to ask the same, I’ve no idea but guess there must be one. Is there emergency loop holes etc

[View from the Dolman]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Suspect a player abroad, whose window hasn’t closed, could mutually terminate his contract with his current club, effectively becoming an out of contract player....eligible to bring in here.

Last summer, English clubs were using the period between the transfer window and loan window to mutually terminate players so that they could move on as out of contract either before the end of August or afterwards.

i suspect the rules abroad is a loophole we can exploit.

Before we get too excited, I don’t imagine we could have an agreement where foreign club A mutually terminates a player on the proviso we then pay them.  I think it would be an unfancied player at club A who they now have an interested club.

I mentioned this loophole a couple of weeks ago.

Sounds like that might be a goer if I'm correctly interpreting the bit about the Summer Transfer Window applicable end date being that which applies to Leagues One and Two...

'Out of Registration Player’ shall mean any Player who has not at any time been registered with a Member Club (or club), or if he has been so registered his registration (including as a Contract Player or Non-Contract Player, or equivalent registration in any other league) expired or was cancelled at any time prior to the end of a Transfer Window (and in the case of the Summer Transfer Window, the applicable end date is that applied to Clubs in Leagues One and Two in accordance with Regulation 42.2.2) and he has not since been registered with any Club (or club).

https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/section-1----general/

https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/section-6---players/

[Ska Junkie]

If this is as it reads, suddenly our defensive 'black hole' doesn't appear quite so dark. Well found VftD.

Go get a good 'un LJ /MA. 

[Harry]

16 minutes ago, View from the Dolman said:

Sounds like that might be a goer if I'm correctly interpreting the bit about the Summer Transfer Window applicable end date being that which applies to Leagues One and Two...

'Out of Registration Player’ shall mean any Player who has not at any time been registered with a Member Club (or club), or if he has been so registered his registration (including as a Contract Player or Non-Contract Player, or equivalent registration in any other league) expired or was cancelled at any time prior to the end of a Transfer Window (and in the case of the Summer Transfer Window, the applicable end date is that applied to Clubs in Leagues One and Two in accordance with Regulation 42.2.2) and he has not since been registered with any Club (or club).

https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/section-1----general/

https://www.efl.com/-more/governance/efl-rules--regulations/section-6---players/

This is indeed the rules. We can pick up any out of contract player as long as they were out of contract prior to 2nd September 2019. 

However, this will be natural wastage from clubs. I highly doubt we’d be able to convince a club to purposely release a player for us to pick him up for nothing.

If we did, I’d expect us to be investigated, fined and given a transfer ban. 

[BCFC Rich]

7 minutes ago, Harry said:

This is indeed the rules. We can pick up any out of contract player as long as they were out of contract prior to 2nd September 2019. 

However, this will be natural wastage from clubs. I highly doubt we’d be able to convince a club to purposely release a player for us to pick him up for nothing.

If we did, I’d expect us to be investigated, fined and given a transfer ban. 

I would imagine a player would pay out his contract to the club and we would give him a signing on fee to cover his expenses. 

[Lrrr]

56 minutes ago, TammyAB said:

Expect Derby will be all over it then 

[Davefevs]

32 minutes ago, Harry said:

This is indeed the rules. We can pick up any out of contract player as long as they were out of contract prior to 2nd September 2019. 

However, this will be natural wastage from clubs. I highly doubt we’d be able to convince a club to purposely release a player for us to pick him up for nothing.

If we did, I’d expect us to be investigated, fined and given a transfer ban. 

Yeah, that was my point re unfancied players.  Be interesting to see whether we or other clubs exploit this.

[Harry]

29 minutes ago, BCFC Richard said:

I would imagine a player would pay out his contract to the club and we would give him a signing on fee to cover his expenses. 

And I’d imagine were that scenario to occur, we’d be investigated for ‘tapping up’ a player who was contracted to another club. 

Why would a player buy up his contract on the off chance he might sign for us. Unless we’d already spoken to him and given that promise. 

It would be investigated and we’d end up getting nicked. 

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, Harry said:

And I’d imagine were that scenario to occur, we’d be investigated for ‘tapping up’ a player who was contracted to another club. 

Why would a player buy up his contract on the off chance he might sign for us. Unless we’d already spoken to him and given that promise. 

It would be investigated and we’d end up getting nicked. 

Would be a good time for Bailey Wright to serve a two match ban!!!

[BCFC Rich]

4 minutes ago, Harry said:

And I’d imagine were that scenario to occur, we’d be investigated for ‘tapping up’ a player who was contracted to another club. 

Why would a player buy up his contract on the off chance he might sign for us. Unless we’d already spoken to him and given that promise. 

It would be investigated and we’d end up getting nicked. 

My thoughts were the deal would actually be with the club and player. Let's imagine we want COD off the books - we've decided we're not going to play him and want him off the wage bill (obviously not saying this is the case, just an eg) Club x wants him talk to us and his representatives and he pays up his contract with us (maybe with a small penalty) his contract is canceled and he signs for club x. Everyone is happy. 

[Davefevs]

Didn’t Neymar pay his own buy-out cause when he went to PSG, and PSG paid him?

[Mr Popodopolous]

The Neymar deal maybe linked to Spanish buyout clauses in general didn't realise until recently but read it on here I think that players have to buy out their own contract to the value of the clause once the club pays the money- unique system?

Every player in La Liga has a buyout clause in their contract, I believe it's mandatory.

As for this loophole in free transfers? It could open up a lot of possibilities but I always assumed that it was players out of contract by the deadline.

One purely theoretical idea. Would it be possible to eg do this termination and sign thing, contract buyout- and then loan them to a nation whose window still open yet a decent level? Dutch League, Bundesliga II to name 2 realistic yet reasonable standards. 

That's assuming we couldn't co register them immediately...or even do the termination idea, then sign them and loan them back to their host club until January- creative and may even recoup some cash eg wages and a modest loan fee!

A further potential loophole though this one is more distant and perhaps sounds better on paper than it might be in reality?

Club A terminates Player contract freeing them up to join us.

We sign on a free- would it be possible to defer a fee until Jan- any specific and explicit regulation against?

[Mr Popodopolous]

One quick further idea to build on this, though this is the most dubious of the lot so perhaps not to be taken all that seriously.

Club A terminate the contract of Player A. Player A joins us on a free by the deadline.

In January, we then buy Player B from Club A for an inflated fee- the inflated fee covers Player A and the remaining lower balance would be for Player B. Player B is brought just because...they could be squad player, an investment opportunity ie buy to sell on quickly or perhaps someone to develop in the youth.

Again dodgy but any specific regulation expressly forbidding it?

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

One quick further idea though this is the most dubious of the lot so perhaps not to be taken all that seriously.

Club A terminate the contract of Player A. Player A joins us on a free by the deadline.

In January, we then buy Player B from Club A for an inflated fee- the inflated fee covers in large part Player A and to a small extent Player B. Player B is brought just because...they could be squad player, an investment opportunity ie buy to sell on quickly or perhaps someone to develop in the youth.

Again dodgy but any specific regulation forbidding it?

A bit different but i’m sure Chelsea made sure we paid more for Kalas to make up for getting Dasilva so cheap!

[Phileas Fogg]

These new rules on loans and the date the transfer window shuts just inhibit smaller clubs further down the food chain, like us.

Ultimately, with the Webster chain, United get Maguire.. then there's the domino effect of other transfers - but us, as the smallest club in that chain, lose out. If the window shut at the end of August or the loan rules were as before - we'd probably be ok. I don't think the rule changes are much good really.

Interesting to see if there is anything LJ can exploit.

[Davefevs]

Someone in another thread suggested staggering the window, e.g.

Prem

Champ 1week later

Lg1 1 week later

Lg2 1 week later

i think there is a lot of sense in that.

[Phileas Fogg]

13 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Someone in another thread suggested staggering the window, e.g.

Prem

Champ 1week later

Lg1 1 week later

Lg2 1 week later

i think there is a lot of sense in that.

Think that would work better - current system just inhibits clubs lower down the pecking order. Can't really see much benefit to it really, same with the new loan rules. The old ones rules were perhaps a bit too free - but they're too restrictive now. 

[Red Skin]

4 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Think that would work better - current system just inhibits clubs lower down the pecking order. Can't really see much benefit to it really, same with the new loan rules. The old ones rules were perhaps a bit too free - but they're too restrictive now. 

Agree.  The current rules just mean clubs hoard players 'just in case'.  Players don't get the experience they needs, and fringe player become disgruntled. 

Unfortunately, we decided to loan out players to give experience, and had our fingers burnt with these injuries.

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

A bit different but i’m sure Chelsea made sure we paid more for Kalas to make up for getting Dasilva so cheap!

Reckon so. I did wonder at one point if the Palmer deal might have been bundled in as well but seems to have been a different transaction entirely.

I bet there are some good loopholes out there...MA and SL I would trust to find them! Thought of another possible variant earlier but have forgotten it now...

[Riaz]

14 hours ago, ZiderEyed said:

Offer to pay a club to release a player on a free?

Thats a transfer fee. Literally.

[Mr Popodopolous]

8 minutes ago, Riaz said:

Thats a transfer fee. Literally.

1. Club A releases Player A.
2. Signs for us (Club B) on a free, now out of contract.
3. In January, we sign Player B from Club A for an inflated fee- this fee covers Player A and a lesser, maybe a younger Player in Player B.
4. We then look to flog Player B, if we think they're no good. Or develop/keep around the squad/loan out to be developed if some promise

Therefore we find a possible workaround which can help to strengthen us in a necessary position and Club A gets adequately recompensed for Player A who presumably was a priority in the form of the fee which covers both Players A and B- Player B may not be a priority for either club. Just that recompense is deferred.

Non related parties- how can the EFL/FA tell us and Club B that Player A and Player B are not worth the fee in question- especially if from abroad, though that latter point maybe a red herring.

Whether we would even look at this as a club who appear to stick to regs letter and spirit is a different debate.

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

1. Club A releases Player A.
2. Signs for us (Club B) on a free, now out of contract.
3. In January, we sign Player B from Club A for an inflated fee- this fee covers Player A and a lesser, maybe a younger Player in Player B.
4. We then look to flog Player B, if we think they're no good. Or develop/keep around the squad/loan out to be developed if some promise

Therefore we find a possible workaround which can help to strengthen us in a necessary position and Club A gets adequately recompensed for Player A who presumably was a priority in the form of the fee which covers both Players A and B- Player B may not be a priority for either club. Just that recompense is deferred.

Non related parties- how can the EFL/FA tell us and Club B that Player A and Player B are not worth the fee in question- especially if from abroad, though that latter point maybe a red herring.

Whether we would even look at this as a club who appear to stick to regs letter and spirit is a different debate.

The problem is Club A would want some enforceable right to ensure they get funded in January. That would require some form of document, and that document would give away the game and might enable the whole thing to be cancelled as a sham. 

However, paying a player's own min fee release clause to release themselves from their own contract and make themselves a free agent, that would be quite easy to construct - signing on fee - whilst protecting the financial interests of each party. 

If the rule is really PL and EFL clubs can register any player out of contract before the close of the League 1 and 2 window, there isn't really much creativity needed. 

My only concern with us doing something like this is that the FA simply refuse to register the player until January and dig their heels on any appeal against that. 

[spudski]

It would have to be Gentleman's agreement surely? No paperwork involved.

Or we do a swap with a player.

Make one of our own a free agent, they do the same, both Clubs sign free agent.

[Mr Popodopolous]

19 minutes ago, 29AR said:

The problem is Club A would want some enforceable right to ensure they get funded in January. That would require some form of document, and that document would give away the game and might enable the whole thing to be cancelled as a sham. 

However, paying a player's own min fee release clause to release themselves from their own contract and make themselves a free agent, that would be quite easy to construct - signing on fee - whilst protecting the financial interests of each party. 

If the rule is really PL and EFL clubs can register any player out of contract before the close of the League 1 and 2 window, there isn't really much creativity needed. 

My only concern with us doing something like this is that the FA simply refuse to register the player until January and dig their heels on any appeal against that. 

Interested in the detail here.

Player would pay their release clause- said release clause is equal to the value of their remaining contract?

Said signing on fee would be equal to the buyout.

Is this roughly a correct interpretation?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Interested in the detail here.

Player would pay their release clause- said release clause is equal to the value of their remaining contract?

Said signing on fee would be equal to the buyout.

Is this roughly a correct interpretation?

That's right. With the release clause, unless the contract term says otherwise, it can be payable by anyone. It can be set at a profit level for the selling club and makes the player a free agent. 

Neymar Jr is the best example. His was set at something around 200m. PSG transferred that sum to the player's representatives, who paid it on behalf of Neymar to the Spanish authorities (who in turn pay to Barcelona). Neymar became a free agent and then signed for PSG, rather than PSG agreeing a transfer fee with Barcelona and payment being directly between the clubs. Legally, it would have been quite straightforward for PSG to protect the 200m they have handed over. 

Rather than a club having to get their hands dirty, I'm sure you could structure it almost exactly how the Neymar deal happened above. 

All in, I still think any club trying to get around the transfer window will probably have a lot of difficulty in getting the player registered and cleared to play before January 2020 anyway. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

19 minutes ago, 29AR said:

That's right. With the release clause, unless the contract term says otherwise, it can be payable by anyone. It can be set at a profit level for the selling club and makes the player a free agent. 

Neymar Jr is the best example. His was set at something around 200m. PSG transferred that sum to the player's representatives, who paid it on behalf of Neymar to the Spanish authorities (who in turn pay to Barcelona). Neymar became a free agent and then signed for PSG, rather than PSG agreeing a transfer fee with Barcelona and payment being directly between the clubs. Legally, it would have been quite straightforward for PSG to protect the 200m they have handed over. 

Rather than a club having to get their hands dirty, I'm sure you could structure it almost exactly how the Neymar deal happened above. 

All in, I still think any club trying to get around the transfer window will probably have a lot of difficulty in getting the player registered and cleared to play before January 2020 anyway. 

That's how it works in Spain, and it was within the transfer window period too- unsure it's directly comparable. Legally checks out though as you say!

Every player in La Liga has a buyout clause though- not sure how widespread it is outside of Spain. Outside the window I mean- as you say though a lot of difficulty unless a bona fide already free agent though I'd agree.

[Guest]

51 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

That's how it works in Spain, and it was within the transfer window period too- unsure it's directly comparable. Legally checks out though as you say!

Every player in La Liga has a buyout clause though- not sure how widespread it is outside of Spain. Outside the window I mean- as you say though a lot of difficulty unless a bona fide already free agent though I'd agree.

I think that's the way I would do it, to try and be cleanest. Agree re prevalence of release fee clauses and that as they are mandatory in Spain some work needed from a different league, but only of course that the player signs a new contract today with a release clause on the exact same terms and tomorrow exercises that clause. 

I think the 'loophole' is that in the rules posted above you could register a free agent at any point, so long as they were a free agent before the end of the reference period and had not signed for another club. The reference period was the close of the League One and Two window. So if a player was a free agent before that window 'slams shut' we'd be able to sign. 

Whilst that is how I would envisage a deal could be struck in the cleanest possible way, I still don't believe it would be effective. I think any club trying this would be left with an unregistered player picking up wages, like Brum were last year trying to get around their transfer embargo. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, 29AR said:

I think that's the way I would do it, to try and be cleanest. Agree re prevalence of release fee clauses and that as they are mandatory in Spain some work needed from a different league, but only of course that the player signs a new contract today with a release clause on the exact same terms and tomorrow exercises that clause. 

I think the 'loophole' is that in the rules posted above you could register a free agent at any point, so long as they were a free agent before the end of the reference period and had not signed for another club. The reference period was the close of the League One and Two window. So if a player was a free agent before that window 'slams shut' we'd be able to sign. 

Whilst that is how I would envisage a deal could be struck in the cleanest possible way, I still don't believe it would be effective. I think any club trying this would be left with an unregistered player picking up wages, like Brum were last year trying to get around their transfer embargo. 

Let's assume for argument's sake that the unregistered player was picking up wages and splinters from the bench for the next few months here having signed in the proposed manner but been unable to be registered as you say? Obviously between now and January.

What would then be to stop us or another club in that position loaning him out say- maybe to a Bundesliga II club and even charging a loan fee? At the very least even disregarding a loan fee, it would help with match fitness and the club in q could get a decent player on loan for half a season until say January for the mere cost of his wages. Recoup some costs while keeping them sharp at a decent level.

Club 1- the one who releases him. Club 2- us but with registration difficulties- Club 3, for half a season the notional loan recipients- does that fit with 3 Club rule?

Quite frankly, part of me thinks clubs such as us who stick to letter and spirit are mugs- because let's face it certain nameless Championship clubs show that letter and spirit on certain regs is a mug's game, let's push this free agent thing and the transfer system to its limits in a creative sense while sticking just within the regs!

[Silvio Dante]

For a real life example of how this could work, see Otzumer. Slight nuance here in that he’s left Bolton by giving notice due to administration (had 1 year left on deal), but left post deadline and immediately signed for Charlton.

I expect any action re overseas incomings to happen close to the respective countries deadlines as managers know who’s surplus and work out how the wages can be saved. That won’t mean the players aren’t decent but I expect any incoming where a contract is cancelled to be an unwanted player who is in the last year of current deal - on that basis the “selling” team save on wages for at least four months and the potential lost sale value in January isn’t as high

[INCRED]

On 15/08/2019 at 19:52, Grey Fox said:

Maybe paying foreign team x who then cancel  player x's contract making him a free agent?

 

I'm only guessing

I thought the same, not sure if that’s a legal loophole but for me that’s the only way we are going to get a decent quality CB outside of the window.

[pride of the west]

5 minutes ago, INCRED said:

I thought the same, not sure if that’s a legal loophole but for me that’s the only way we are going to get a decent quality CB outside of the window.

Paying a team to cancel a players contract is essentially a transfer fee isn't it? 

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 minutes ago, pride of the west said:

Paying a team to cancel a players contract is essentially a transfer fee isn't it? 

Reckon so.

Only way maybe to defer payment until January?

Creative workarounds maybe the solution- I'm happy for us to test the regs to the limit provided we stay just the right side of the line.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Let's assume for argument's sake that the unregistered player was picking up wages and splinters from the bench for the next few months here having signed in the proposed manner but been unable to be registered as you say? Obviously between now and January.

What would then be to stop us or another club in that position loaning him out say- maybe to a Bundesliga II club and even charging a loan fee? At the very least even disregarding a loan fee, it would help with match fitness and the club in q could get a decent player on loan for half a season until say January for the mere cost of his wages. Recoup some costs while keeping them sharp at a decent level.

Club 1- the one who releases him. Club 2- us but with registration difficulties- Club 3, for half a season the notional loan recipients- does that fit with 3 Club rule?

Quite frankly, part of me thinks clubs such as us who stick to letter and spirit are mugs- because let's face it certain nameless Championship clubs show that letter and spirit on certain regs is a mug's game, let's push this free agent thing and the transfer system to its limits in a creative sense while sticking just within the regs!

Like you say subject to 3 club rule, don’t see why not as the ban applies to incoming not outgoing. 

Is our position made more difficult with Mark Ashton being on the EFL? You’d presume so, given how SL spoke re Leeds, I don’t think so. He had no hesitation. 

[Redandwhitescarf]

40 minutes ago, INCRED said:

I thought the same, not sure if that’s a legal loophole but for me that’s the only way we are going to get a decent quality CB outside of the window.

Perhaps we should look at  our under 23 players - Aden Baldwin?

[INCRED]

18 minutes ago, Redandwhitescarf said:

Perhaps we should look at  our under 23 players - Aden Baldwin?

I am all for bringing through our U23s but I thought the club were going to push for top 6 this season

No disrespect to Baldwin but he lacks experience and know how at this level albeit he may be a good player 

[Mr Popodopolous]

9 minutes ago, INCRED said:

I am all for bringing through our U23s but I thought the club were going to push for top 6 this season

No disrespect to Baldwin but he lacks experience and know how at this level albeit he may be a good player 

He certainly does at this stage.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aden_Baldwin

Assuming Wiki correct, he doesn't have much experience at all! Not that he couldn't become a good player but perhaps another year or so?

[YorkshireSection]

15 minutes ago, INCRED said:

I am all for bringing through our U23s but I thought the club were going to push for top 6 this season

No disrespect to Baldwin but he lacks experience and know how at this level albeit he may be a good player 

No target man, no first choice ball playing CB, I don't think it'll be a top 6 finish this season.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, YorkshireSection said:

No target man, no first choice ball playing CB, I don't think it'll be a top 6 finish this season.

Dunno if we wholly need a target man but we need to adapt how we play to compensate. Look to go through the thirds more, possession play- which I believe is plausible with current personnel. Shorter passing, and more of it.

Lack of a clear Webster replacement is a bigger issue granted. 3 CBs or 3 CMs can help get us the central superiority required for such an approach.

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, YorkshireSection said:

No target man, no first choice ball playing CB, I don't think it'll be a top 6 finish this season.

Why the insistence of a target man?  How many teams in this league are playing one?  His many pushing for promotion are playing one?

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Dunno if we wholly need a target man but we need to adapt how we play to compensate. Look to go through the thirds more, possession play- which I believe is plausible with current personnel. Shorter passing, and more of it.

Lack of a clear Webster replacement is a bigger issue granted. 3 CBs or 3 CMs can help get us the central superiority required for such an approach.

Agree, our best football in LJs time here has been with Kodjia / Tomlin and Abraham on his own in the main and Reid / Paterson...none of those names constitute a target man in the traditional sense.

Also, plan b doesn’t have to be ‘put it in the mixer’ either.

[YorkshireSection]

Just now, Davefevs said:

Why the insistence of a target man?  How many teams in this league are playing one?  His many pushing for promotion are playing one?

Agree, our best football in LJs time here has been with Kodjia / Tomlin and Abraham on his own in the main and Reid / Paterson...none of those names constitute a target man in the traditional sense.

Also, plan b doesn’t have to be ‘put it in the mixer’ either.

Not my idea, thought LJ had come out and said they were after such a player but again were unable to bring one in.

[Davefevs]

8 hours ago, billywedlock said:

Best transfer window ever some fools were claiming. Hilarious. Sell the kingpin for your style of play and don't replace him. Amateur in extreme. 

What we need to see is whether Baker or Moore can fill the gap sufficiently enough, and that the midfield and attacking options we’ve recruited give us a better balance. 

Our goal difference (not an often enough used piece of data) wasn’t good enough.  Of course there are exceptions  Huddersfield?  Yep.

59 goal for 53 against last season was probably 6 goals short of being nailed on playoffs.  

You could achieve that in many ways.  

I suspect LJ is hoping that Nagy can protect the defenders in a different way that Pack did whilst allow us to play Palmer and two up top.

Will this work? No idea.

We have to give it time.  We also haven’t really seen the team style yet.  Two league games, one with the old guard 4411 (let’s call it the Pack and Diedhiou formation) and one with 3412 wingbacks.

No idea what we’ll see today but I think LJ has a better group of technical players and we may see a different way of playing.

I want to wait til game 10 before I really judge, but their were encouraging signs last Saturday v Brum in a team with 4 debutants, 3 of which had been here a total of a week between them!

Also, I think we genuinely have a player in Massengo who is gonna put pressure on JB for his place in CM.  Want to watch JB specifically today to see how he plays.  On Robinstv last Saturday I saw a better performance alongside “A-Dam-Nohj”, but never as good as watching live.

Two games either side of a transfer window is too early to form a full opinion (imho ).