Liam Pre Wolves - Not Expecting Business

[Silvio Dante]

Not a huge amount here today - the biggest news is in the expected ins/outs (minimal) - but you don’t know how much is under the hat there - and the intent not to recall the loanees.

Notes:

- Dickie was ill before the game and has been ill this week, is a doubt for Wolves

- Naismith in contention for the weekend as is Sykes, both on the grass. Armstrong and Williams close but a bit further behind. Campbell-Slowey out for a while with calf injury

- In terms of team selection, will go into it trying to win but we have the depth to make tweaks and changes - won’t make wholesale changes though

- Possibly outgoings in next few days/weeks. Dont need to do major business but don’t expect any in. Many factors into that - size of squad already, finances, wage bill. Thinks the way they work players improve over the course of the season

- LM believes Rob Atkinson needed the loan for minutes and game volume. In respect of Mayulu, he wants to do well - he is making progress in training and getting better. There shouldn’t be any demands that he does it straight away and he’d rather keep him at the club under the coaching teams watch

- Yeboah - needs a lot of work, but attitude good, doing extra sessions, needs work to be in and around the first team

- No intent to recall Stokes, SPH or JKL

[And Its Smith]

So with no incomings the club either (a) thinks we have enough to get top six, or (b) doesn’t want to spend the money to help try to ensure top 6 as it will be too expensive. 
 

They could spend £1m on a 6 month loan of a good striker to help push for top 6 if they wanted too.  Maybe they think that money is best off being spent in the summer to push next season.  There’s always next season after all…..maybe that’s written on the changing room walls! 

[ExiledAjax]

2 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

So with no incomings the club either (a) thinks we have enough to get top six, or (b) doesn’t want to spend the money to help try to ensure top 6 as it will be too expensive. 
 

They could spend £1m on a 6 month loan of a good striker to help push for top 6 if they wanted too.  Maybe they think that money is best off being spent in the summer to push next season.  There’s always next season after all…..maybe that’s written on the changing room walls! 

It's a bit of A and a bit of B. And I can understand the argument even if I don't agree with them on A.

[Jose]

4 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

So with no incomings the club either (a) thinks we have enough to get top six, or (b) doesn’t want to spend the money to help try to ensure top 6 as it will be too expensive. 
 

They could spend £1m on a 6 month loan of a good striker to help push for top 6 if they wanted too.  Maybe they think that money is best off being spent in the summer to push next season.  There’s always next season after all…..maybe that’s written on the changing room walls! 

If we are really counting on Wells to stay fit and fire us to the top 6 we are screwed. Be nice to actual hear the thinking behind it. The fall off when he gets replaced is absolutely scary. 

[sh1t_ref_again]

12 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

So with no incomings the club either (a) thinks we have enough to get top six, or (b) doesn’t want to spend the money to help try to ensure top 6 as it will be too expensive. 
 

They could spend £1m on a 6 month loan of a good striker to help push for top 6 if they wanted too.  Maybe they think that money is best off being spent in the summer to push next season.  There’s always next season after all…..maybe that’s written on the changing room walls! 

Who is the £1m good striker? as sure loads of clubs will be lining up for, or do you mean a gamble and punt on a prem kid and hope he does a Tammy

[mozo]

38 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Not a huge amount here today - the biggest news is in the expected ins/outs (minimal) - but you don’t know how much is under the hat there - and the intent not to recall the loanees.

Notes:

- Dickie was ill before the game and has been ill this week, is a doubt for Wolves

- Naismith in contention for the weekend as is Sykes, both on the grass. Armstrong and Williams close but a bit further behind. Campbell-Slowey out for a while with calf injury

- In terms of team selection, will go into it trying to win but we have the depth to make tweaks and changes - won’t make wholesale changes though

- Possibly outgoings in next few days/weeks. Dont need to do major business but don’t expect any in. Many factors into that - size of squad already, finances, wage bill. Thinks the way they work players improve over the course of the season

- LM believes Rob Atkinson needed the loan for minutes and game volume. In respect of Mayulu, he wants to do well - he is making progress in training and getting better. There shouldn’t be any demands that he does it straight away and he’d rather keep him at the club under the coaching teams watch

- Yeboah - needs a lot of work, but attitude good, doing extra sessions, needs work to be in and around the first team

- No intent to recall Stokes, SPH or JKL

It was funny watching LM try to sidestep the question asking if his preference was to keep Mayulu and not send him on loan. Then he was pressed a second time (well done journo), and gave a half-hearted response of "yes, as it stands". 

[mozo]

15 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

So with no incomings the club either (a) thinks we have enough to get top six, or (b) doesn’t want to spend the money to help try to ensure top 6 as it will be too expensive. 
 

They could spend £1m on a 6 month loan of a good striker to help push for top 6 if they wanted too.  Maybe they think that money is best off being spent in the summer to push next season.  There’s always next season after all…..maybe that’s written on the changing room walls! 

He's blatantly not being given any budget

[Jose]

4 minutes ago, mozo said:

He's blatantly not being given any budget

And this where it gets awkward. Because the money spent on the other two looks poor business. So can he be trusted with more? Or were they Tinnions signings. I’d say a mixture of the two. So can you blame SL for not giving them anymore? 
 

We do need it, but you can see what the argument would be not to give him anymore. 

[frenchred]

20 minutes ago, mozo said:

He's blatantly not being given any budget

Can you blame the powers that be for that with what he wasted in the summer!

[Alan Dicks]

Boring mid table Bristol City showing their ambition once again.

 We know the story, we know the routine, we’re used to it now ,you can predict it as well as a late goal against us.

[FNQ]

17 minutes ago, Jose said:

We do need it, but you can see what the argument would be not to give him anymore. 

Agreed.. but there again where does SL gat any confidence that things will improve at anytime in the future, not just this window? If he’s lost respect or confidence then he should make a change…. Back or Sack.

[fly in the air]

really don't understand why we are not after a striker. so no ins then what does the recruitment team plus Tinnion do on a daily basis. 

[Sandhurst Red]

I think this is smoke and mirrors. Lessons learned from over promising before.

With 3 likely departures before end of window (including Atkinson) I would be amazed if we don't strengthen and add at least 1, if not 2 players.

[petehinton]

I’m a broken record on this, but he in no way should be given more money in January, regardless of where we are. 
 

The squad is big, and unbalanced. He was allowed to sign 7 players and spend close to £8-9m in the summer window. 
 

Say we sign another striker in the hope he gets to the play offs and don’t make it, then what for the summer? We have 5 strikers in a team that want to only play 1. 
 

You can tell in an ideal world he would ship Fally out and get someone else in, but that clearly isn’t gonna happen. 
 

“it’s up to us to coach what we’ve got to improve them” - was his quote 4 weeks ago. 

[Mikjizzle]

2 minutes ago, petehinton said:

I’m a broken record on this, but he in no way should be given more money in January, regardless of where we are. 
 

The squad is big, and unbalanced. He was allowed to sign 7 players and spend close to £8-9m in the summer window. 
 

Say we sign another striker in the hope he gets to the play offs and don’t make it, then what for the summer? We have 5 strikers in a team that want to only play 1. 
 

You can tell in an ideal world he would ship Fally out and get someone else in, but that clearly isn’t gonna happen. 
 

“it’s up to us to coach what we’ve got to improve them” - was his quote 4 weeks ago. 

I still don't understand the logic in not wanting to spend the money that enables us to be more likely to compete with the top 6? Currently we still spend below that and struggle to fully compete. Why wouldn't you want a signing that might push us into that level? If we can afford it, why wouldn't we?

Players can move on in the summer if the squad is too big. 

[spudski]

Imo, LM is definitely playing down any transfer business and doesn't want to give anything away. 

Every question regarding it, is slightly deflected and done with a smile that says ' I'm not telling you anything'. And followed with ' as it stands'. 

No football club in it's right mind would be that blase about transfers/ loans in and out...and just waiting to see if anything happens. 

Even with the comments re Fally...it's ended with ' as it stands'. 

I can't believe we are just being ' reactionary ' in this window. 

All Clubs plan miticuosly. 

We have one striker in Wells and slightly lesser so Bell, that fit in with our way of playing and don't need developing.

You can't rely on those two to see out the rest of the season. 

Are we going to leave it down to luck with injuries? 

Only needs Wells being injured and we are screwed up front. 

Fally and Sinclair are miles off what we need. 

Can you imagine the scenario of Wells being injured, and Fally playing instead, and putting in performances like he has, for the rest of the season? 

The excuse of ' you hope a player hits the ground running'...is so far from the amount of development needed on him. He's miles off. 

Imo...they should be looking to get a loan striker in, and continue developing Fally. Then see if he's developed enough during this season. Then if not...get rid in the Summer. 

 

 

 

 

[petehinton]

20 minutes ago, Mikjizzle said:

I still don't understand the logic in not wanting to spend the money that enables us to be more likely to compete with the top 6? Currently we still spend below that and struggle to fully compete. Why wouldn't you want a signing that might push us into that level? If we can afford it, why wouldn't we?

Players can move on in the summer if the squad is too big. 

Who’d be out there that’s feasible money wise, and markedly better than what we have? We already overspent in the summer. We’d be going back to throwing money at our short term problems / issues. 
 

Getting players out the door isn’t as simple as just ‘letting them go’ either, as we’ve found out in recent years. 
 

If we were 1st / 2nd I’d absolutely understand the logic, but we aren’t exactly in some unmissable, generational opportunity atm. 

[ExiledAjax]

Just now, petehinton said:

Getting players out the door isn’t as simple as just ‘letting them go’ either, as we’ve found out in recent years. 

Just look at Cornick for an example of that!

[ExiledAjax]

I had a cursory look at some of the recent teams who did manage to go from mid table on 1 Jan to top 6 by the end of game 46.

I didn't see any examples where that climb was caused by signing a striker.

Norwich went from 13th to 6th last season, but not because of a January striker. They brought in a loan striker in van Hooijdonk...who played 10, scored 0, and got 1 assist.

Coventry likewise went from 13th to 5th the in 22/23. In January they signed 4 free transfers, with Maguire coming in as a CF and scoring 0 goals. They found their difference in defensive signings (including one Mr. L McNally) as they went from conceding 26 goals before 31 Jan to conceding only 11 goals after the window closed.

Forest did bring in Surridge for £2m in January 2022, and he got 7 goals, but that was because Taylor left - and we've not got anyone leaving I don't think.

I've not the time to do a proper dive on this, and so stand ready to be corrected. But my hypothesis is that signing a striker in January is an expensive and often unsuccessful gamble.

I maintain that I'd rather we focused on the other end of the pitch, and it's a shame if we're not bringing someone in there.

[Mikjizzle]

20 minutes ago, petehinton said:

Who’d be out there that’s feasible money wise, and markedly better than what we have? We already overspent in the summer. We’d be going back to throwing money at our short term problems / issues. 
 

Getting players out the door isn’t as simple as just ‘letting them go’ either, as we’ve found out in recent years. 
 

If we were 1st / 2nd I’d absolutely understand the logic, but we aren’t exactly in some unmissable, generational opportunity atm. 

why do you think we have 'overspent'? Surely you want the club to spend money as it's more likely to bring success and push us on from being a mid-table team. I don't think spending a bit of extra money to compete with the teams above you financially and on the pitch is deemed as 'throwing money at short term problems'. There isn't a 'problem' -  I think we will comfortably see 3 or 4 players leave at the end of the season. 

The main route to success in football is by spending money - if we can afford to do so without putting ourselves at risk, why wouldn't we. It's about trying to push the team to the next level.  

We haven't even spent that much comparative to lots of teams in the division - so do you think all of those teams are spending money on short term problems? 

Ideally Fally and Armstrong would be doing better but no one gets every signing right, the club can learn from it - I'm sure we could move them on if we felt it was appropriate and as above, others will move on. 

I've no idea who's available, as I don't work in the game and I'm not a scout but there's over 100,000 pro footballers and it would be crazy to say that some of them couldn't add some value to our team. 

Edited January 9 by Mikjizzle

[fly in the air]

o well if Tinnion and Manning  think Fally and Armstrong can take us to the play offs than on there head be it. I do wonder if steve does not trust them to spend anymore money. only my thoughts. 

[KegCity]

We're within touching distance of the play-offs without either of the strikers we brought in this summer finding their shooting boots. Better off trying to get one of them going and spending any available money getting new deals for Mehmeti and Wells.

[GrahamC]

1 hour ago, petehinton said:

I’m a broken record on this, but he in no way should be given more money in January, regardless of where we are. 
 

The squad is big, and unbalanced. He was allowed to sign 7 players and spend close to £8-9m in the summer window. 
 

Say we sign another striker in the hope he gets to the play offs and don’t make it, then what for the summer? We have 5 strikers in a team that want to only play 1. 
 

You can tell in an ideal world he would ship Fally out and get someone else in, but that clearly isn’t gonna happen. 
 

“it’s up to us to coach what we’ve got to improve them” - was his quote 4 weeks ago. 

Agree 100%.

Only caveat would be an unexpected big sale, but can’t see that.

Still think Cornick will be gone once Armstrong is fit but that might be it.
 

[MythikRobins]

Realistically, if enough go out we'll sign someone. However, based on the rumours and supposed lists it won't be anyone who massively pushes us on it'll be similar signings to as we have been doing.

[westonred]

I dont think we will get a better opportunity of reaching the top six so it will show the clubs lack of ambition if they dont try on build on what we have by bringing in a decent striker.

Maybe as people have said the board don't trust the recruitment team after they spunked lots of cash on two league one standard strikers

We seem to always buy for the future hoping it'll turn out to be another Kodjia type player we can sell for vast profits It's time we buy for the Now and not the future 

[Silvio Dante]

54 minutes ago, petehinton said:

Who’d be out there that’s feasible money wise, and markedly better than what we have? We already overspent in the summer. We’d be going back to throwing money at our short term problems / issues. 
 

Getting players out the door isn’t as simple as just ‘letting them go’ either, as we’ve found out in recent years. 
 

If we were 1st / 2nd I’d absolutely understand the logic, but we aren’t exactly in some unmissable, generational opportunity atm. 

Indeed - not three weeks ago the forum consensus was “Manning Out” and as I’ve said, for me the whole since isn’t enough to move that dial - post WBA we though the season was dead and we’d be mid table at best. Three wins and a draw against four struggling teams is welcome, but it’s not enough to say “Well we’re a real contender” - because we’re not. We’re eighth. We’ve beaten one team above us. We’re not - as xG shows - missing loads of gilt edged chances a striker would finish. We need to have a sustained improvement over H2 to make the playoffs statistically- god, even Ian Gay said yesterday it was unlikely. And one player will not move that dial!

And most pertinently of all, the most key player in our system at the moment is Wells. You need to sign a striker who not only can finish better than him, but has the intelligence to run the channels and work the defence as well. We’re talking about replacing (or rotating but a top notch striker isn’t coming for that) one of our best players this season in a high cost position. That - at a January window - is silly money and probably not attainable.

Work with what we have. That has to be the stance.

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

Imo, LM is definitely playing down any transfer business and doesn't want to give anything away. 

Every question regarding it, is slightly deflected and done with a smile that says ' I'm not telling you anything'. And followed with ' as it stands'. 

No football club in it's right mind would be that blase about transfers/ loans in and out...and just waiting to see if anything happens. 

Even with the comments re Fally...it's ended with ' as it stands'. 

I can't believe we are just being ' reactionary ' in this window. 

All Clubs plan miticuosly. 

We have one striker in Wells and slightly lesser so Bell, that fit in with our way of playing and don't need developing.

You can't rely on those two to see out the rest of the season. 

Are we going to leave it down to luck with injuries? 

Only needs Wells being injured and we are screwed up front. 

Fally and Sinclair are miles off what we need. 

Can you imagine the scenario of Wells being injured, and Fally playing instead, and putting in performances like he has, for the rest of the season? 

The excuse of ' you hope a player hits the ground running'...is so far from the amount of development needed on him. He's miles off. 

Imo...they should be looking to get a loan striker in, and continue developing Fally. Then see if he's developed enough during this season. Then if not...get rid in the Summer. 

Wells - Love the guy top top professional

Bell - Good players, good striker when he gets going but he needs a run of games to find his shooting boots.

Fally - He needs to adjust to the Championship and what the coaching staff want of him, which will take time.

Armstrong - He's not the next Semenyo he lacks the finesse that Semenyo always had, he has power and pace, and I think he needs a lot of work, I fear he is close to his ceiling and wont get much better.

Yeboah - Has bags of potential, but he needs to be with us I think not a L2 loan.

 

 

[maxjak]

If we plan meticulously, as was stated by someone earlier, we were not very meticulous in the summer?  However, perhaps LM is being coy regarding any incomings , as it might be dependent on outgoings?  I can understand SL's  caution, as our striker signing's have been piss poor, but  it would not cost the earth,  or be any kind of long term financial commitment to bring a young Premier striker in?    A six  month loan signing of a player on the fringe of a Prem squad would cover Nakhi getting injured, and perhaps create a few more goals?  We are in eighth, so do we more or less write off a top six finish this season, and plan for next season, or do we bring in a young hungry striker who is looking for game time?   It all comes down to that word meticulous  again,   and trusting our recruitment analysts to find someone suitable..............so I'm not holding my breath?

Another season in the Championship beckons for season 25/26, but at least the football is a little more entertaining?

Edited January 9 by maxjak

[Tony Tootle]

Fully expecting Mayulu to start based on the amount of minutes he was given against Derby. Great opportunity for him.

[westonred]

4 minutes ago, Tony Tootle said:

Fully expecting Mayulu to start based on the amount of minutes he was given against Derby. Great opportunity for him.

Manning has said he will pick a team to try and win so that wont include Fally surely

Edited January 9 by westonred

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Who is the £1m good striker? as sure loads of clubs will be lining up for, or do you mean a gamble and punt on a prem kid and hope he does a Tammy

It would be more like, covering wages, loan fee..might cost £1mish for 6 months.

Edited January 9 by Mr Popodopolous

[spudski]

52 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

I had a cursory look at some of the recent teams who did manage to go from mid table on 1 Jan to top 6 by the end of game 46.

I didn't see any examples where that climb was caused by signing a striker.

Norwich went from 13th to 6th last season, but not because of a January striker. They brought in a loan striker in van Hooijdonk...who played 10, scored 0, and got 1 assist.

Coventry likewise went from 13th to 5th the in 22/23. In January they signed 4 free transfers, with Maguire coming in as a CF and scoring 0 goals. They found their difference in defensive signings (including one Mr. L McNally) as they went from conceding 26 goals before 31 Jan to conceding only 11 goals after the window closed.

Forest did bring in Surridge for £2m in January 2022, and he got 7 goals, but that was because Taylor left - and we've not got anyone leaving I don't think.

I've not the time to do a proper dive on this, and so stand ready to be corrected. But my hypothesis is that signing a striker in January is an expensive and often unsuccessful gamble.

I maintain that I'd rather we focused on the other end of the pitch, and it's a shame if we're not bringing someone in there.

Maybe it's not so much about goals perse in our case. 

We look to spread goals throughout our team. 

For me, it's about not carrying a player. 

You've only got to watch when Wells plays. It allows everyone to play with freedom. They aren't having to worry about him. 

Fally and Armstrong disrupt our flow. 

They aren't in sync with the rest of our team. 

Tbh...Sykes and Bell would be better suited to the forward position over those two at the moment. 

Whilst we've ballsed up in recruitment on those two...we somehow find ourselves 3/4 points off 6th in January. 

If the Club have any ambition, and see our prospect of ever going up, is via the play offs, then this is as good as any.

If they don't recruit anyone, then imo, it will show they don't trust the coach and BT.

Or they purely need to release players to free up potential wages. 

'They' being SL and JL. And obvious consultation with our Finance director. 

Sadly that's the position we find ourselves in. 

I don't trust any of their judgement though. 

[Silvio Dante]

5 minutes ago, maxjak said:

If we plan meticulously, as was stated by someone earlier, we were not very meticulous in the summer?  However, perhaps LM is being coy regarding any incomings , as it might be dependent on outgoings?  I can understand SL's  caution, as our striker signing's have been piss poor, but  it would not cost the earth,  or be any kind of long term financial commitment to bring a young Premier striker in?    A six  month loan signing of a player on the fringe of a Prem squad would cover Nakhi getting injured, and perhaps create a few more goals?  We are in eighth, so do we more or less write off a top six finish this season, and plan for next season, or do we bring in a young hungry striker who is looking for game time?   It all comes down to being meticulous,  and trusting our recruitment analysts to find someone suitable..............so I'm not holding my breath?

Another season in the Championship beckons for season 25/26, but at least the football is a little more entertaining?

I think the problem with a “Young, Hungry” Premier League striker  is many fold (and in all cases this isn’t Club Tropicana - there will be loan fees, penalty fees and wages)

- If they’re established (eg Evan Ferguson - and I’m not suggesting him!) they cost the earth and are outside our price range and with better suitors

- If they’re not established then (a) they’re a punt and (b) The clubs will want to send them somewhere to play as opposed to sitting as cover for Wells. 
 

It all rolls back to this - we play one striker. That striker has played very well this season. Replacing him in this window would be a huge cost and I’m yet to see a realistic name thrown into the frame that could either “share the load” (and be willing to do so) or gives us the 8-10 more points we need without resulting in inordinate additional costs

[ExiledAjax]

25 minutes ago, spudski said:

Whilst we've ballsed up in recruitment on those two...we somehow find ourselves 3/4 points off 6th in January. 

So maybe we can carry them?

 

25 minutes ago, spudski said:

For me, it's about not carrying a player. 

You've only got to watch when Wells plays. It allows everyone to play with freedom. They aren't having to worry about him. 

Fally and Armstrong disrupt our flow. 

They aren't in sync with the rest of our team. 

Tbh...Sykes and Bell would be better suited to the forward position over those two at the moment. 

Whilst we've ballsed up in recruitment on those two...we somehow find ourselves 3/4 points off 6th in January. 

I'd just rotate Wells and Bell up top, with Fally as the third option. Mayulu is struggling in front of goal, but he does put himself about a bit. Not as dynamically as Wells, but far more than Armstrong.

We've had ten goals from the sole centre forward position so far, that's fine, it's annoying that it's taking the wages of 3 or 4 players to get that. That is inefficient, but it's inefficiency in the accounting books rather than on the pitch.

Then I'd invest at the back/defensive centre mid. 

I agree that if nothing is done we aren't going up, but ultimately "all" we need to stand a chance is goal difference of about +12 over the next 20 games. With a system that plays one up top, the best chance of doing that is getting goals conceded down.

Edited January 9 by ExiledAjax

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, mozo said:

He's blatantly not being given any budget

And I think yesterday’s presser was him giving out a plea to those above (a carefully worded plea) that actually he does want some new players in.

He used the “I’m ambitious” phrase (again) which he tends to use at the first opportunity of him feeling in a better position of strength (10 pts in 4 games this season and end of last season when he got a few results) to push what he wants.

Personally I think he should be a bit more “grateful” (can’t think of the right word) to what he’s had already.

I’m not a fan of solving problems by recruiting, especially when you’ve been brought in to improve what is here.

 

[Old Spot1]

Haven't had time to watch it yet, but any mention that Earthy is available?

If the loanees are staying out then that'd indicate Stokes not being considered to come in as cover for him so West Ham, new coach and all that, aren't considering a recall!

If West Ham weren't happy with his time here they could consider sending him elsewhere, and wouldn't want him cup tied!

[Tony Tootle]

33 minutes ago, westonred said:

Manning has said he will pick a team to try and win so that wont include Fally surely

All managers have to say they will pick a team to win

[spudski]

6 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

So maybe we can carry them?

 

I'd just rotate Wells and Bell up top, with Fally as the third option. Mayulu is struggling in front of goal, but he does put himself about a bit. Not as dynamically as Wells, but far more than Armstrong.

We've had ten goals from the sole centre forward position so far, that's fine, it's annoying that it's taking the wages of 3 or 4 players to get that. That is inefficient, but it's inefficiency in the accounting books rather than on the pitch.

Then I'd invest at the back/defensive centre mid. 

I agree that if nothing is done we aren't going up, but ultimately "all" we need to stand a chance is goal difference of about +12 over the next 20 games. With a system that plays one up top, the best chance of doing that is getting goals conceded down.

I guess we've carried them with no injuries. 

Bare in mind Fally has only started 3 games. 

It's the scenario of Wells being injured that worries me..

When I say ' worry'...I mean if this club has any ambition. 

How near to the play offs do we need to be, before they feel ' this is the season' to try?

Or do we need to be in that top six and more consistent?

As for conceding goals verse scoring them...I understand your sentiment, however the way we set up and play really doesn't lend itself to that imo. 

It's definitely a conundrum. 

[And Its Smith]

3 hours ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Who is the £1m good striker? as sure loads of clubs will be lining up for, or do you mean a gamble and punt on a prem kid and hope he does a Tammy

No idea but I’d imagine a 6 month loan of a £5-6m valued striker for £1m isn’t impossible. Won’t happen though 

[ExiledAjax]

32 minutes ago, spudski said:

As for conceding goals verse scoring them...I understand your sentiment, however the way we set up and play really doesn't lend itself to that imo. 

If that's true then I don't think the way we set up lends itself to promotion.

[LondonBristolian]

I've a few thoughts around this.

1) I don't necessarily think Manning saying he's not expecting business means that we're not expecting business. I don't think we're going to spend loads but I also think Manning would play down any signings before we made them in any case.

2) Much as I'd like us to strengthen the squad, I find it very difficult to think of examples at our level of strikers that have come in during January at a price we might pay and have an immediate impact. As exceptional as Wells has been this season, he didn't settle immediately when we signed him and I think it's unusual that strikers do at our level.

3) I think the best signings we can make are low value, high potential players but - if we do that - they are probably not going to have an immediate impact. Even we if we could spend £1 million loaning a £6 million striker, it doesn't guarantee an impact or success but does guarantee we've not invested in the event that the striker does not deliver promotion.

4) I think we've lost sight of the pathway to the first team for the academy team and I don't want us to buy a load more first team players. 

[fly in the air]

A bit of a concern in my opinion that Pamer Holden has not been recalled. if they think fally is a better option than what does that say about seb but then do u trust tinnion and Mannings judgement when it comes to strikers.

[And Its Smith]

1 minute ago, fly in the air said:

A bit of a concern in my opinion that Pamer Holden has not been recalled. if they think fally is a better option than what does that say about seb but then do u trust tinnion and Mannings judgement when it comes to strikers.

Recalling Seb for 10-15 mins here and there would be naive in my opinion. Keeping him on loan means there a chance he is ready for next season 

[fly in the air]

I understand what you are saying but wells can't play every week. 

[IAmNick]

The issue isn't really scoring goals as others have said.

Of the teams above we've scored more than 3 of them, less than 4 of them. However we've conceded more than 6 of the 7! And markedly more in some cases (21 more than Burnley, 13 more than Sheff U, 11 more than Leeds, 9 more than WBA, 8 more than Sunderland, and 7 more than Blackburn).

Conceding 7 more than Blackburn might not sound a lot, but when it's 30 against 23 that's a 30% increase! So we're pretty average at scoring, but we're conceding too many, reflected in our GD.

I'm with @ExiledAjax, the stats show what we need to do, and we'd also get more value for money if we looked at the back. The challenge for Liam and co is to improve the goals conceded without compromising us going forwards.

The main counter argument I have is Wells age/fitness, and by extension the risk he gets injured - but I don't think we can likely/realistically sign a better player right now, and do we want to sign someone else to just come on at 60m or whatever? It's a risk, but also the best option we have most likely I think.

Edited January 9 by IAmNick

[spudski]

13 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

If that's true then I don't think the way we set up lends itself to promotion.

We set up like many teams. 

Only 7 teams have conceded less than us.

And only 8 teams have scored more.

Hence our position in the league. 

It comes down to better players, or better coached and drilled. And recruitment. 

Imo, we need to see out games better. Have better on field management. And not have to carry players. All those affect results.

From winning to drawing.

Or drawing to losing.

This season, imo, we have definitely missed experience on the pitch at vital times. 

I don't think we would have lost results in certain games if we had the likes of Matty Taylor's experience in the side when up against it. 

 

 

[Simon bristol]

14 minutes ago, fly in the air said:

A bit of a concern in my opinion that Pamer Holden has not been recalled. if they think fally is a better option than what does that say about seb but then do u trust tinnion and Mannings judgement when it comes to strikers.

Agreed that he should be an option if we arent looking to sign anyone else! Realistically though, no one should really be saying oh yes, weve just bought 2 young strikers who cant score, so have another few million and try again… though id be interested in seeing louie barry in the championship.

[redsquirrel]

they are prepared to work with fally and yeboah, why not try and tweak cornicks game, hes miles ahead of them in experience. i appreciate people saying fally needs minutes but its a lot of pressure on a young bloke to carry that can on his own, cornick is quite capable of putting himself about being a nuisance even if he dont score.

[Mr Popodopolous]

32 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

The issue isn't really scoring goals as others have said.

Of the teams above we've scored more than 3 of them, less than 4 of them. However we've conceded more than 6 of the 7! And markedly more in some cases (21 more than Burnley, 13 more than Sheff U, 11 more than Leeds, 9 more than WBA, 8 more than Sunderland, and 7 more than Blackburn).

Conceding 7 more than Blackburn might not sound a lot, but when it's 30 against 23 that's a 30% increase! So we're pretty average at scoring, but we're conceding too many, reflected in our GD.

I'm with @ExiledAjax, the stats show what we need to do, and we'd also get more value for money if we looked at the back. The challenge for Liam and co is to improve the goals conceded without compromising us going forwards.

The main counter argument I have is Wells age/fitness, and by extension the risk he gets injured - but I don't think we can likely/realistically sign a better player right now, and do we want to sign someone else to just come on at 60m or whatever? It's a risk, but also the best option we have most likely I think.

Leeds are in a bit of a League of their own for aggregate XG and XPts data but Burnley are very interesting, 12-15 better off than their underlying xGD by one site. Burnley habe a rock solid defensive structure though even if xG against is 11 worse than actual- Trafford?

Don't think Sheffield United look amazing in some ways..but again they get it done.

Blackburn, Sheffield Wednesday, Watford, West Brom and by some metrics Middlesbrough are our big competition. Could argue Swansea and Norwich too, the latter have a lot of Goals at both ends.

It does feel like the League is more open this time.

Edited January 9 by Mr Popodopolous

[spudski]

5 minutes ago, redsquirrel said:

they are prepared to work with fally and yeboah, why not try and tweak cornicks game, hes miles ahead of them in experience. i appreciate people saying fally needs minutes but its a lot of pressure on a young bloke to carry that can on his own, cornick is quite capable of putting himself about being a nuisance even if he dont score.

Tbh...Imo, I think they want him gone. 

And he wants to stay here for the wage. 

 

[redsquirrel]

13 minutes ago, spudski said:

Tbh...Imo, I think they want him gone. 

And he wants to stay here for the wage. 

 

i quite agree with you Spud not that i can think of any reason why. i wouldnt have thought he was bad in the dressing room, (i was thinking maybe until he appeared on the bench again last week)they still have to pay his wages so why not use him until there is interest? 

i just think hes a better option than what weve got apart from Bell.  (pretty poor all round being the bar other than bell and wells)

edit, if its a case of not wasting time on him to use it on the others then that to me says they arent bothered about top 6 

Edited January 9 by redsquirrel

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, Mikjizzle said:

why do you think we have 'overspent'? Surely you want the club to spend money as it's more likely to bring success and push us on from being a mid-table team. I don't think spending a bit of extra money to compete with the teams above you financially and on the pitch is deemed as 'throwing money at short term problems'. There isn't a 'problem' -  I think we will comfortably see 3 or 4 players leave at the end of the season. 

The main route to success in football is by spending money - if we can afford to do so without putting ourselves at risk, why wouldn't we. It's about trying to push the team to the next level.  

We haven't even spent that much comparative to lots of teams in the division - so do you think all of those teams are spending money on short term problems? 

Ideally Fally and Armstrong would be doing better but no one gets every signing right, the club can learn from it - I'm sure we could move them on if we felt it was appropriate and as above, others will move on. 

I've no idea who's available, as I don't work in the game and I'm not a scout but there's over 100,000 pro footballers and it would be crazy to say that some of them couldn't add some value to our team. 

Budgets are budgets. Liam says that they did their work in the summer. It’s not Football Manager!

[Mr Popodopolous]

I doubt Cornick is on anything major by Championship standards at all. £10-12k per week maybe?

Sure he isn't a starter in most circs but a useful first reserve, high energy and of course the crucial long throw. Think he can contribute to a cohesive side, yet if the right striker on a permanent came up now and by right I mean mid 20s or so, decent record- someone who we could seriously envisage leading the attack for a few years and was at a competitive price we'd be daft to overlook it on the proviso that it would impact upon the Summer budget.

What you can't do is go for a pricy yet risky Loan, don't go up then keep the full Summer budget anyway.

Edited January 9 by Mr Popodopolous

[Sleepy1968]

4 hours ago, mozo said:

He's blatantly not being given any budget

They were given money to strengthen in the Summer, and have seriously f'd striker recruitment.

Based on that, I wouldn't let them have one red cent for January recruitment.

 

 

 

[maxjak]

2 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

I think the problem with a “Young, Hungry” Premier League striker  is many fold (and in all cases this isn’t Club Tropicana - there will be loan fees, penalty fees and wages)

- If they’re established (eg Evan Ferguson - and I’m not suggesting him!) they cost the earth and are outside our price range and with better suitors

- If they’re not established then (a) they’re a punt and (b) The clubs will want to send them somewhere to play as opposed to sitting as cover for Wells. 
 

It all rolls back to this - we play one striker. That striker has played very well this season. Replacing him in this window would be a huge cost and I’m yet to see a realistic name thrown into the frame that could either “share the load” (and be willing to do so) or gives us the 8-10 more points we need without resulting in inordinate additional costs

Just hope Nakhi stays fit.?...........I am sure there are a few fringe strikers at some of the twenty Prem Clubs, and we have a plethora of Recruitment analysts apparently  ...........but then again i am wasting my breath, as it won't happen..............and 8th will eventually become 12th ?   Ha!

[fly in the air]

sleepy ij tend to agree with u. if they don't trust them then Tinnion who is head of football needs to go. 

[Son of Fred]

3 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

Just look at Cornick for an example of that!

[Mikjizzle]

24 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Budgets are budgets. Liam says that they did their work in the summer. It’s not Football Manager!

don't really know what you are trying to say by telling me budgets are budgets? We don't know what the budget is or how moveable it is as we don't work for the club. But every business can constantly adapt and change a budget. 

I would love for someone to explain what the issue is with bringing in a player if it adds value to the team. I don't think we buy for the sake of buying but if the right player was available then it's a no brainer for me - even if that one player is a slight gamble. One player can make a difference. I've not read anything coherent about the reason it would be bad if we signed a good player that could make us better. 

Edited January 9 by Mikjizzle

[Leabrook]

25 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Budgets are budgets. Liam says that they did their work in the summer. It’s not Football Manager!

There are budgets in football manager 

1 minute ago, Mikjizzle said:

don't really know what you are trying to say by telling me budgets are budgets? We don't know what the budget is or how moveable it is as we don't work for the club. But every business can constantly adapt and change a budget. 

I would love for someone to explain what the issue is with bringing in a player if it adds value to the team. I don't think we buy for the sake of buying but if the right player was available then it's a no brainer for me - even if that one player is a slight gamble. One player can make a difference. I've not read anything coherent about the reason it would be bad if we signed a good player that made us better. 

Completely agree. 

[maxjak]

2 minutes ago, Mikjizzle said:

don't really know what you are trying to say by telling me budgets are budgets? We don't know what the budget is or how moveable it is as we don't work for the club. But every business can constantly adapt and change a budget. 

I would love for someone to explain what the issue is with bringing in a player if it adds value to the team. I don't think we buy for the sake of buying but if the right player was available then it's a no brainer for me - even if that one player is a slight gamble. One player can make a difference. I've not read anything coherent about the reason it would be bad if we signed a good player that made us better. 

I wonder if Bournemouth ever adhered to the Budgets are Budgets philosophy?

[Mikjizzle]

2 minutes ago, maxjak said:

I wonder if Bournemouth ever adhered to the Budgets are Budgets philosophy?

yep - although I have a feeling they couldn't have got away with that now with FFP. But similarly, Brentford spent a lot on their way to the premier league. Bottom line is, if you want to get promoted more often than not you have to spend some money. We have spent a little bit this summer but nothing like most clubs that go up.

Fans on here complain about us not being good enough whilst we sit pretty much where our spending/wages would have us in the table, but at the same time strangely don't want us to spend money to keep improving.  

[Mr Popodopolous]

23 minutes ago, Mikjizzle said:

don't really know what you are trying to say by telling me budgets are budgets? We don't know what the budget is or how moveable it is as we don't work for the club. But every business can constantly adapt and change a budget. 

I would love for someone to explain what the issue is with bringing in a player if it adds value to the team. I don't think we buy for the sake of buying but if the right player was available then it's a no brainer for me - even if that one player is a slight gamble. One player can make a difference. I've not read anything coherent about the reason it would be bad if we signed a good player that could make us better. 

I'm going to be dull here but one such rule is that if Clubs lose between X and Y in 2 years actual, present year Forecast- so 2021-22, 2022-23 actual and 2023-24 Predicted, they have to submit Future Predicted FFP Numbers for 2024-25 and 2025-26 to the League by 31st March 2024. This represents  an element of external control too on top of what Dave said. (Have to do it in PL too but that seems altogether looser).

The League will already have our Forecasts for 2024-25 and 2025-26. Key thing is that you're compliant at all times.

19 minutes ago, maxjak said:

I wonder if Bournemouth ever adhered to the Budgets are Budgets philosophy?

They're a Club that really need looking into. The media seem to completely ignore elements of their rise and spending patterns. It's odd.

The initial cheat helped to pave the way for the current success...I won't go chapter and verse.

Edited January 9 by Mr Popodopolous

[Natchfever]

5 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

So with no incomings the club either (a) thinks we have enough to get top six, or (b) doesn’t want to spend the money to help try to ensure top 6 as it will be too expensive. 
 

They could spend £1m on a 6 month loan of a good striker to help push for top 6 if they wanted too.  Maybe they think that money is best off being spent in the summer to push next season.  There’s always next season after all…..maybe that’s written on the changing room walls! 

Could be a smokescreen for another Centre half central midfielder and winger coming in 

Take your point entirely. If Manning is genuine this demonstrates Lansdowns lack of interesr and I mean the chairman.

[cidercity1987]

We're a midtable team with midtable results , nothing about beating Luton, Portsmouth, Derby screams play offs and we will revert back to the norm position wise once we play harder teams.

Now if we somehow beat Coventry, Sheff Wed and Blackburn or at least seven points then it might be worthwhile to use budget this season (meaning we have less to spend in future seasons due to FFP)

Not gonna happen though

[1960maaan]

54 minutes ago, Mikjizzle said:

don't really know what you are trying to say by telling me budgets are budgets? We don't know what the budget is or how moveable it is as we don't work for the club. But every business can constantly adapt and change a budget. 

I would love for someone to explain what the issue is with bringing in a player if it adds value to the team. I don't think we buy for the sake of buying but if the right player was available then it's a no brainer for me - even if that one player is a slight gamble. One player can make a difference. I've not read anything coherent about the reason it would be bad if we signed a good player that could make us better. 

The £10m was probably more than most of us thought we would spend , so I imagine the budget is done. Maybe if we were solidly 4th or 5th then SL might loosen the purse strings , but if we don't trust our recruitment why would they ?

Problem is Tinnion seems bulletproof . He said Manning has last say on signings , Manning said he is involved all the way through the process , basically the buck stops with LM .

As for bringing in players . 
Imagine we are in this position but hadn't signed the 2 we did. We would be excited at the prospect of two young, hungry , promising strikers coming in , I say that because many were in the summer .  
When we signed Wells (Johnson's vanity signing IMO), he was decent Championship striker . But after he was here a while people complained about his stats, Johnson started playing him wide and our £5m striker was a bit part player. My point is there are no Guarantees , specially with strikers. 
How much would a proven Championship striker , mid 20's cost ? 

I do think that "IF" the right player came along and everyone agreed he was right, Lansdown would stump up. He might take some convincing though, £5m on 2 strikers that many have given up on 6 months into the Season.

 

Edited January 9 by 1960maaan

[mozo]

5 hours ago, Jose said:

And this where it gets awkward. Because the money spent on the other two looks poor business. So can he be trusted with more? Or were they Tinnions signings. I’d say a mixture of the two. So can you blame SL for not giving them anymore? 
 

We do need it, but you can see what the argument would be not to give him anymore. 

I do think we're being a bit hypercritical here. I personally think that Twine, McNally and McGuane add quality to the squad, so that's that's three. I know it's contentious, but I think Hirakawa and Armstrong are  good additions, who will both take time but het better. Mayulu is an enigma. We shall see.

I don't see that as a terrible transfer window, and I haven't taken the liberty of throwing Bird in the mix, or indeed the potential of Stokes.

I do though, understand the frustration that we've spent money, but currently don't have a first choice striker.

But is it that easy...?

5 hours ago, frenchred said:

Can you blame the powers that be for that with what he wasted in the summer!

How much was wasted? Hard to say.

5 hours ago, petehinton said:

I’m a broken record on this, but he in no way should be given more money in January, regardless of where we are. 
 

The squad is big, and unbalanced. He was allowed to sign 7 players and spend close to £8-9m in the summer window. 
 

Say we sign another striker in the hope he gets to the play offs and don’t make it, then what for the summer? We have 5 strikers in a team that want to only play 1. 
 

You can tell in an ideal world he would ship Fally out and get someone else in, but that clearly isn’t gonna happen. 
 

“it’s up to us to coach what we’ve got to improve them” - was his quote 4 weeks ago. 

Don't forget, in the summer we have Wells and Cornick out the door. Bell and SPH at junctions in their career (huge opportunity for them, but they've got to take it).

So then we've got 2, no let's be fair, Mayulu may need a loan. TBC.

3 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

Indeed - not three weeks ago the forum consensus was “Manning Out” and as I’ve said, for me the whole since isn’t enough to move that dial - post WBA we though the season was dead and we’d be mid table at best. Three wins and a draw against four struggling teams is welcome, but it’s not enough to say “Well we’re a real contender” - because we’re not. We’re eighth. We’ve beaten one team above us. We’re not - as xG shows - missing loads of gilt edged chances a striker would finish. We need to have a sustained improvement over H2 to make the playoffs statistically- god, even Ian Gay said yesterday it was unlikely. And one player will not move that dial!

And most pertinently of all, the most key player in our system at the moment is Wells. You need to sign a striker who not only can finish better than him, but has the intelligence to run the channels and work the defence as well. We’re talking about replacing (or rotating but a top notch striker isn’t coming for that) one of our best players this season in a high cost position. That - at a January window - is silly money and probably not attainable.

Work with what we have. That has to be the stance.

This would be easier for me to grasp if there were examples of strikers that we could have snapped up had we not spread the money on a variety of players. £3m doesn't get you much in the striker market, and doesn't seem to be an obvious Ivan Toney or Victor Gyokores. 

Edited January 9 by mozo

[maxjak]

32 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I'm going to be dull here but one such rule is that if Clubs lose between X and Y in 2 years actual, present year Forecast- so 2021-22, 2022-23 actual and 2023-24 Predicted, they have to submit Future Predicted FFP Numbers for 2024-25 and 2025-26 to the League by 31st March 2024. This represents  an element of external control too on top of what Dave said. (Have to do it in PL too but that seems altogether looser).

The League will already have our Forecasts for 2024-25 and 2025-26. Key thing is that you're compliant at all times.

They're a Club that really need looking into. The media seem to completely ignore elements of their rise and spending patterns. It's odd.

The initial cheat helped to pave the way for the current success...I won't go chapter and verse.

It is an age old conundrum.........it seems that once this type of underhand success is accomplished, people are loathe to criticise the achievement, almost as if they admire the way they took on "The Man" and got one over on them.................apparently, Cheats don't prosper?       And honesty is the best policy?..........Discuss?

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, maxjak said:

It is an age old conundrum.........it seems that once this type of underhand success is accomplished, people are loathe to criticise the achievement, almost as if they admire the way they took on "The Man" and got one over on them.................apparently, Cheats don't prosper?       And honesty is the best policy?..........Discuss?

Rules were much laxer then, it took good management and holding their nerve too but I've a serious issue with one element of their FFP to 2023-24 as it happens.

It's odd because most other breaches get covered in depth or even Clubs who are close to limits.

[maxjak]

4 minutes ago, mozo said:

I do think we're being a bit hypercritical here. I personally that Twine, McNally and McGuane add quality to the squad, so that's that's three. I know it's contentious, but I think Hirakawa and Armstrong are  good additions, who will both take time but het better. Mayulu is an enigma. We shall see.

I don't see that as a terrible transfer window, and I haven't taken the liberty of throwing Bird in the mix, or indeed the potential of Stokes.

I do though, understand the frustration that we've spent money, but currently don't have a first choice striker.

But is it that easy...?

How much was wasted? Hard to say.

Don't forget, in the summer we have Wells and Cornick out the door. Bell and SPH at junctions in their career (huge opportunity for them, but they've got to take it).

So then we've got 2, no let's be fair, Mayulu may need a loan. TBC.

This would be easier for me to grasp if there were examples of strikers that we could have snapped up had we not spread the money on a variety of players. £3m doesn't get you much in the striker market, and doesn't seem to be an obvious Ivan Toney or Victor Gyokores. 

Two points..........I don't personally believe that Sinclair Armstromg will ever forge a successful career above League One.............and it is no good finding a Victor Gyokeres when he has already made it, you have to sign him for the original fee of £1 mill that Coventry paid Brighton 3 years ago.  They are out there (Strikers), but you need to get ahead of the pack?

[Mr Popodopolous]

9 minutes ago, mozo said:

I do think we're being a bit hypercritical here. I personally think that Twine, McNally and McGuane add quality to the squad, so that's that's three. I know it's contentious, but I think Hirakawa and Armstrong are  good additions, who will both take time but het better. Mayulu is an enigma. We shall see.

I don't see that as a terrible transfer window, and I haven't taken the liberty of throwing Bird in the mix, or indeed the potential of Stokes.

I do though, understand the frustration that we've spent money, but currently don't have a first choice striker.

But is it that easy...?

How much was wasted? Hard to say.

Don't forget, in the summer we have Wells and Cornick out the door. Bell and SPH at junctions in their career (huge opportunity for them, but they've got to take it).

So then we've got 2, no let's be fair, Mayulu may need a loan. TBC.

This would be easier for me to grasp if there were examples of strikers that we could have snapped up had we not spread the money on a variety of players. £3m doesn't get you much in the striker market, and doesn't seem to be an obvious Ivan Toney or Victor Gyokores. 

Agree on elements of first paragraph, still yet to be fully convinced on Twine but he is improving. McNally, Bird, McGuane all impressive, Yu and Earthy ups and downs but loan means we aren't tied down.

Mayulu is the big question mark to date IMO, the number 9, one of the bàiggest fees since early 2020..he's certainly fallen short. Armstrong has in different ways but I thought less of a leader.

Well tbh, why weren't we in for e.g. Cannon on Loan in Summer?

This isn't hindsight, I've rated him for a while. He is flourishing in a faltering Stoke side..he is young yet has credible experience of the level.

Letting Wells go would be a mistake, a great too and that experience out of the door. We've shed loads if experience. Naismith another, all that experience..going and gone?

Cornick is contracted until 2026 so no guarantees he will be going anywhere.