Is SWFC's recruitment that bad?

[thewookieisdown]

9 minutes ago, WayneTheOwl said:

 

Transfer fee wise, not far the best bit of business in the last 23 years let alone 3 years.

 

It seems we are better at picking up quality free's than we are spending money though!!!

I think the opposite.  Our cash acquisitions have by and large (not always) been quite good; it's the frees and esp the loans that have been less so (again, not always)

[shezzas left peg]

I'll agree on actual transfer fee out lay its not looking that terrible. 

For me it's more of the balance of where we needed to strengthen and a lack of different options signing too many similar players or ones that just don't get a game that's the problem. 

[thewookieisdown]

4 minutes ago, shezzas left peg said:

I'll agree on actual transfer fee out lay its not looking that terrible. 

For me it's more of the balance of where we needed to strengthen and a lack of different options signing too many similar players or ones that just don't get a game that's the problem. 

I'd say we've made three signings in the past two seasons that were transformational.  FF and ok the benefits from that were largely in 15-16; but for so much of that time he was inspired.  The most exciting player since Carbone and Di Canio.  Bannan.  Hooper.

 

But that kind of signing is easier to picture than execute

[Blatter]

1 hour ago, londonowl said:

 

What I actually did was create the thread in response to the number of people taking about 'progress since the Play-Off Final' in the Ask The Chaitman thread. That was the timeframe. It wasn't a deliberate selection to make a point. 

Sorry if I misjudged your motive but it is worth pointing out that we have paid fees for several more players during the Chansiri ownership.

[kristmace]

Agree with the OP.

 

We've spent a bit, but not that much compared to other clubs really. 

 

According to TransferMarkt website, of the 18 clubs who have been in the Championship 2 years running now, 7 have spent more money on transfers than us (Villa, Wolves, Fulham, Norwich, Derby, Birmingham and Leeds). We've only spent fractionally more than Bristol C and Reading in the last 2 years too. 

[Carlton Palmreader]

4 hours ago, londonowl said:

EDIT:

 

You can pay 3 players £20k a week for 2 years for the same money as one £4 million player!!

 

Bad maths.

 

Well someone has to keep up the pedantry on here... it should be 1.92 players. 

 

[Guest wilyfox]

I wouldn't trust our recruitment to get it right at the 10th attempt. 

[londonowl]

22 minutes ago, t'owl said:

 

Well someone has to keep up the pedantry on here... it should be 1.92 players. 

 

 

Lol. Pedantry at it's finest! Nothing like a pedant who's wrong.

 

You still have to pay the £4 million player so assuming he also is also on £20k a week, it's pretty much 3.

[Carlton Palmreader]

6 minutes ago, londonowl said:

 

Lol. Pedantry at it's finest! Nothing like a pedant who's wrong.

 

You still have to pay the £4 million player so assuming he also is also on £20k a week, it's pretty much 3.

Sir, i salute your maths! Clearly I was assuming the £4 mill player was so delighted with his signing fee he offered to do a love job 

[Indoor Owl]

Anyone ripping on our transfer policy is completely and demonstrably out to lunch, in my opinion:

 

Bannan is here on a free.

Fletcher is here on a free.

Pudil is here on a free.

George Boyd is here on a free.

Ross Wallace is here on a free.

 

Into the paid transfers, Reach was the best left back in the Championship last month by the numbers.

Van Aken looks like he'll develop into outright star.

Hunt was brought in, and does good work.  Hooper has been outstanding.  FF is here for a song, and has been a great goal scorer. 

 

 

Unless you're the type that is desperately searching for any excuse to knock the club and our current manager, our transfer policy from 2015 has actually been outstanding.

 

I'm not overly concerned about churning through the odd McGugan, Urby, Melo, or Matias along the way; and I'm not particularly sure why anyone would be in the first place.  High potential upside signings that didn't work out.  C'est la vie.

Edited November 6, 2017 by Indoor Owl

[Indoor Owl]

4 hours ago, thewookieisdown said:

I think the opposite.  Our cash acquisitions have by and large (not always) been quite good; it's the frees and esp the loans that have been less so (again, not always)

 

Going to have to strongly disagree with you there:

 

Bannan, Fletcher, Pudil, Boyd, and Wallace are all here on free transfers.  

We make out like bandits when it comes to finding talent on a free.

[thewookieisdown]

6 hours ago, Indoor Owl said:

 

Going to have to strongly disagree with you there:

 

Bannan, Fletcher, Pudil, Boyd, and Wallace are all here on free transfers.  

We make out like bandits when it comes to finding talent on a free.

I thought we'd paid for Bannan.  (This is what comes of being 50).

 

Not convinced about Boyd - who could be so far - and the early signs were unpromising.  But too early to tell.

 

On the wider point I agree.  The more you think about it, the better it seems

[torryowl]

I think we have a lot of good players and very few( if any) poor ones  the trick is making them into a good team and by and large carlos as achieved that ......

[Owling Wolfe]

8 hours ago, Indoor Owl said:

Anyone ripping on our transfer policy is completely and demonstrably out to lunch, in my opinion:

 

Bannan is here on a free.

Fletcher is here on a free.

Pudil is here on a free.

George Boyd is here on a free.

Ross Wallace is here on a free.

 

Into the paid transfers, Reach was the best left back in the Championship last month by the numbers.

Van Aken looks like he'll develop into outright star.

Hunt was brought in, and does good work.  Hooper has been outstanding.  FF is here for a song, and has been a great goal scorer. 

 

 

Unless you're the type that is desperately searching for any excuse to knock the club and our current manager, our transfer policy from 2015 has actually been outstanding.

 

I'm not overly concerned about churning through the odd McGugan, Urby, Melo, or Matias along the way; and I'm not particularly sure why anyone would be in the first place.  High potential upside signings that didn't work out.  C'est la vie.

I would even argue that ratherbthan bad signings they would be better described as decent back up that, thankfully, wasnt needed.

[torres]

13 hours ago, londonowl said:

Following on from 'Ask The Chairman' and all the 'blame' laid at Carlos' feet for our transfer record I wonder if it really is that bad.

 

From what I can work out, we have paid a fee for 6 players in the last 2 years.

 

Rhodes, Van Aken, Reach, Abdi, Fox, Winnall.

 

Most wanted Rhodes. He may come good, he may not but you can always argue it was a good signing on paper. How many strikers with his record are available at this level for £10m?

Jury out on Van Aken but the club are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Buy a proven centre back with little sell-on fee or a youngster to develop and they get criticised either way.

Reach is starting to show his worth. £5m is not much for a player these days and certainly no guarantee of a great one.

Abdi was a great signing that really hasn't worked out.

Fox is adequate full back cover for the few hundred grand that we paid for him.

Winnall is currently on a swap with a player Derby paid 10 times as much for.

 

If you take Rhodes out of the equation, we really are not the 'Big spending Owls' that some of the media like to portray us as. I think the only think missing from our recruitment is the ability to uncover a couple of cheap gems but that's what every other club in the land is looking for so difficult to hold that against anyone.

 

Sure we have paid some wages to some players that have not worked out but you can pay 5 Players £20k a week for 2 years for the same monay as buying one for £4 million who may get injured the day after he arrives so there is some logic to it.

 

I think we are all disappointed that not much progress has been made but arguably we haven't spent the money to make much progress.

 

 

 

 

Yes our recruitment is terrible!!

 

We still need exactly the same as we did the day after Wembley 

 

Having spent £35m and not managed to fill those areas it's hard to argue differently 

[Hirstys_12th_Pint]

13 hours ago, vulva said:

The vast majority of the signings, when made, were met with full agreement on here. 

 

Ironically, the one signing at the time that was criticised heavily was Bannan,

 

And the Bannan deal was arranged via Glenn Roeder.

[sheriwozgod]

As has been pointed out there have been some cracking signings but some of the lists are selective.

 

During CC,s reign we have also paid fees for Hunt, McCugan, Wiggins, Hooper, Forestieri, Mattias, Joao, Jones,...............................but for me its the money wasted on loan fees and wages for the likes of  Sogou, Lachmann, Emmanuelson, Turner, Kean , Price, Sasso , Bennett , Lopez , McGeady, Buckley , Mcmanaman , etc that have hamstrung us.

[Athelwulf]

Terrible.

[owlandished]

1 hour ago, sheriwozgod said:

As has been pointed out there have been some cracking signings but some of the lists are selective.

 

During CC,s reign we have also paid fees for Hunt, McCugan, Wiggins, Hooper, Forestieri, Mattias, Joao, Jones,...............................but for me its the money wasted on loan fees and wages for the likes of  Sogou, Lachmann, Emmanuelson, Turner, Kean , Price, Sasso , Bennett , Lopez , McGeady, Buckley , Mcmanaman , etc that have hamstrung us.

Money wasted? I think it's more about the decisions made and how the player signed performed, than the money. After all, we don't know the intricacies of every financial deal, so no point judging based on that

[matthefish2002]

10 hours ago, Indoor Owl said:

Anyone ripping on our transfer policy is completely and demonstrably out to lunch, in my opinion:

 

Bannan is here on a free.

Fletcher is here on a free.

Pudil is here on a free.

George Boyd is here on a free.

Ross Wallace is here on a free.

 

 

 

No such thing as a free transfer in football. Yes no transfer fee paid but that means the player can demand a whopping signing on fee and higher wages.

Fletcher was reported to get a £1m signing on fee and £40k per week wages as no transfer fee was paid for him.