#SWFC Summer 2018 Transfer Window Rumours Thread

[gurujuan]

32 minutes ago, alcock dived said:

 

Yeah, me too! But with Guru's opinion of the Rhodes' signing ringing in my ears, I was only cautiously optimistic. I'm sure we all wish Guru was wrong on this, but unfortunately the bloody 'know-it-all'* knew it!!!!!

 

(*apologies to Guru  )

Hey, there was a time when I would also have been delighted had we signed him

Would have been a few years back mind you Him, us and football in general, all conspired to make it, not a wise signing now

[oh_weds_we_love_you]

8 hours ago, daleblue said:

Not so much over priced, but value for money, with regards to amount of time out of the team due to injuries, hindsight a wonderful thing, if they had not been injured it would have been good business.

Bad business if you're of the opinion that 2 of them were two old and injuries just waiting to happen. 

 

Fletcher was 29 when we signed him, Hooper aged 28. The rest were younger than that, wouldn’t say any of them were too old. The problem we have had is the previous management didn’t play them effectively and with the longer term in mind. Also, the previous management doesn’t seem to play any system which suits all the strikers we bought.

[oh_weds_we_love_you]

6 hours ago, CLswfc said:

Its not just about the transfer fees. Fletcher for instance on 40k a week (allegedly) 3 year deal. I wouldn't say that was good footballing business. Abdi, Matias and Rhodes well, enough said.

 

Fletcher reportedly accepted a lesser salary with us for a longer contract - 4 years. At 29 (when he signed) that’s not a problem given he’s hardly about pace - which is the only thing he’d lose over those years. Fletcher has played most of his career in the top flight, and as a free transfer (even with a salary of £30k/week) was a reasonable signing.

 

Rhodes’ record at this level isn’t bettered by anyone else, but it hasn’t worked for us so far for whatever reason.

 

Abdi is also proven quality at this level, again something hasn’t worked here.

 

Matias was always a risk.

[oh_weds_we_love_you]

5 hours ago, Quist said:

If you think we have had good value for money out of these players so be it. Its a question of wages and games they play. You need players who play 40 games a year regularly also that you can sell on hopefully for a profit. If you actually think what we have bought represents good value ok but I do not. We also have a surplus in striking deartment and are low on players in other areas.j How many of these players do you see being linked with other clubs? Most of them were signed towards end of window when no other deal had materialised. FF is an exception to rule in he has some real talent.

 

Let’s put it this way, if we sell all those strikers, we’ll make a profit overall.

 

Not sure why you’re concerned over wages - we have to pay players, and like it or not what we pay those players is the going rate for a team trying to get promoted out of the Championship.

 

Some signings work, others don’t - even Man Utd, Arsenal and Chelsea have multi-million strikers that don’t work out. Why you expect a Championship club that needs to take even more calculated gambled to succeed to not have a few signings not work out so don’t know.

 

It’s Mr Chansiri’s money, and he seems content with the business.

[Guest]

38 minutes ago, oh_weds_we_love_you said:

 

Fletcher reportedly accepted a lesser salary with us for a longer contract - 4 years. At 29 (when he signed) that’s not a problem given he’s hardly about pace - which is the only thing he’d lose over those years. Fletcher has played most of his career in the top flight, and as a free transfer (even with a salary of £30k/week) was a reasonable signing.

 

Rhodes’ record at this level isn’t bettered by anyone else, but it hasn’t worked for us so far for whatever reason.

 

Abdi is also proven quality at this level, again something hasn’t worked here.

 

Matias was always a risk.

Even at 30k a week and thats only speculation like mine is, it hasn't worked out terribly well. Its totally irrelevant about what any player did with anyone else, its SWFC who are now their employer and the returns from all of them I would suggest as proved poor business. Who else would have given Fletcher at 29 a 4 year deal on that sort of money. I didn't see clubs queuing up for Rhodes or Abdi when Wednesday signed them . So on that basis,  the business side of things was poor and the current situation supports that.  

[nevthelodgemoorowl]

Stop worrying about the strikers for a minute or two and let's get Frederico over the line !

[Inspector Lestrade]

1 hour ago, CLswfc said:

Even at 30k a week and thats only speculation like mine is, it hasn't worked out terribly well. Its totally irrelevant about what any player did with anyone else, its SWFC who are now their employer and the returns from all of them I would suggest as proved poor business. Who else would have given Fletcher at 29 a 4 year deal on that sort of money. I didn't see clubs queuing up for Rhodes or Abdi when Wednesday signed them . So on that basis,  the business side of things was poor and the current situation supports that.  

 

So you didn't see any clubs queuing up to sign Rhodes or Abdi so that makes it bad business?  How does that actually work?  If you had missed the queue would that still be bad business?  Do clubs have to notify you when they start queuing?  Or do have to spot them?  Please explain. 

[Inspector Lestrade]

38 minutes ago, nevthelodgemoorowl said:

Stop worrying about the strikers for a minute or two and let's get Frederico over the line !

 

 

Not like you not to worry about strikers.   Power to the people!!!!

Edited May 18, 2018 by Watson

[Brommers]

4 hours ago, gurujuan said:

Recruitment in general was shambolic, despite what our erstwhile owner may say 

The Rhodes signing was mind boddlingly stupid, and we’ll be paying that off for a good while yet

Went too many saying that at the time tho.

[pazowl55]

5 hours ago, Quist said:

Who is going to pay £6 million for Hooper? Most of these players are wrong side of 30 where transfer values generally decline. You have to be realistic not live infantasy world.

Don't forget we now live in a world where someone payed 6 million for Madine. 

[vulva]

10 minutes ago, pazowl55 said:

Don't forget we now live in a world where someone payed 6 million for Madine. 

And £17m for Sam Clucas. 

 

 

[pazowl55]

8 minutes ago, vulva said:

And £17m for Sam Clucas. 

 

 

Exactly and I rate him. but not that much. 

6 million for a striker who knows where the goal is like Hooper is good value in this day and age.

[oh_weds_we_love_you]

2 hours ago, CLswfc said:

Even at 30k a week and thats only speculation like mine is, it hasn't worked out terribly well. Its totally irrelevant about what any player did with anyone else, its SWFC who are now their employer and the returns from all of them I would suggest as proved poor business. Who else would have given Fletcher at 29 a 4 year deal on that sort of money. I didn't see clubs queuing up for Rhodes or Abdi when Wednesday signed them . So on that basis,  the business side of things was poor and the current situation supports that.  

 

How do you know there wasn’t a queue for Rhodes or Abdi? How many other Championship clubs could afford them?

 

The current situation (what’s that?) supports what? If you’re talking about league position, didn’t we have those same players when we finished 4th last season?

 

Norwich, according to reports, offered Fletcher £40k a week for 3 years.

 

I don’t call unforeseen injury problems as bad business. Bad business is buying a known crock, and our absentees haven’t had a history of injuries. Buying one of the most proven strikers ever at this level isn’t bad business either.

 

The sooner you accept a lot of player dealings don’t work out, especially further down the leagues you go, the happier you’ll be.

[Rogerwyldesmullet]

Deals at the top level don’t come with guarantees either. Sturridge? Jeffers? Made of quavers!!!

Edited May 18, 2018 by Rogerwyldesmullet

[Guest]

t 

1 hour ago, oh_weds_we_love_you said:

 

How do you know there wasn’t a queue for Rhodes or Abdi? How many other Championship clubs could afford them?

 

The current situation (what’s that?) supports what? If you’re talking about league position, didn’t we have those same players when we finished 4th last season?

 

Norwich, according to reports, offered Fletcher £40k a week for 3 years.

 

I don’t call unforeseen injury problems as bad business. Bad business is buying a known crock, and our absentees haven’t had a history of injuries. Buying one of the most proven strikers ever at this level isn’t bad business either.

 

The sooner you accept a lot of player dealings don’t work out, especially further down the leagues you go, the happier you’ll be.

So who is this so called proven striker who as done it at this level as also done it for Wednesday. The current situation is reference to FFP, thought you would have known that. Don't understand your last paragraph. 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, pazowl55 said:

Don't forget we now live in a world where someone payed 6 million for Madine. 

Not every team is managed by CC. Just look at some of signings/loans he 'brought' in for us.

[Guest]

Just now, CLswfc said:

Not every team is managed by CC. Just look at some of signings/loans he 'brought' in for us.

That was reference to Wednesday not Swansea or Cardiff by the way. 

[Morepork]

I see the Transfer Mega Thread has morphed into the "let's debate the value for money of our current strike force thread", I'm just going to say it.......anyone else missing NIXON????  I'll come back later. 

[S36 OWL]

7 minutes ago, Morepork said:

I see the Transfer Mega Thread has morphed into the "let's debate the value for money of our current strike force thread", I'm just going to say it.......anyone else missing NIXON????  I'll come back later. 

 

Im even missing Big Guns mate in the pub and his ITK transfer news. 

[Groundhopping Owl]

On 15/05/2018 at 17:13, Owl Rly said:

 

I don't agree with you on not fitting the system, I think he was playing through the middle as we were missing Bannan and/or FF and even then I think his industry and running from midfield was very much appreciated. Last few games he has been playing Wing Back and I think he has the abilities to be a very good player for us there.

I agree that there isn't a problem with Reach not fitting the system, but I still can't make my mind up about his best position. I'd probably end up saying that he's best as a wide left midfielder in a 4-4-2, but unfortunately that's also Forestieri's position, which might be a luxury we can't afford any more. Reach has the engine to play at wing back as he bombs up and down the wing for 90 minutes, but nobody can deny that he has an infuriating tendency to nesh tackles in key moments. In fairness to him he's done a decent job in a more central role when asked to play there in the second half of the season - the reason I don't see Reach being sold is because of that sort of versatility, as well as his borderline outrageous work rate.