Jump to content


Beholder

#SWFC don't need to go mad.

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, OwlsfaninNorway said:

Attack: [Nuhiu], Joao, Hooper, Rhodes, Matias, Fletcher, Winnall, [Forestieri] - Could sell up to 4

 

I simply cannot comprehend this widespread and rabid obsession about only having 4 strikers in the squad, which is what you're advocating above.

 

Presumably you have 2 in the starting line-up and 2 on the bench each game? In which case, even a single injury severely limits the options. If you have a couple of absences at the same time you have no choices whatsoever. So what then? The loan window is only open for a few weeks in the season these days and using someone out of position or youngsters is unlikely to be sustainable for a team with promotion aspirations.

 

Consider that 5 of the 8 listed above have been unavailable for several months each (3 of them are becoming serial offenders in that regard) and another has been chronically lacking in form. The bare minimum squad requirement is 5 and probably the safer and more sensible option is 6.

  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


5 hours ago, Fuzzy logics said:

 

Because I don't think we are in a financial position to improve on Reach, Hunt, Lees et al....

We don't have to  buy from Britain though with our over inflated prices here, there are players abroad that would love to come here and would be cheaper, we just need to find them. 

 

Or than improving all the positions, just focus on 2. I think getting more players in that ain't gonna improve the first 11 would be a bigger waste of money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said in another thread this squad has been together for much of Chansiri’s reign so far and has been relatively successful.

 

It’s been well documented why we’ve hit the buffers this season but when key players were fit notably Forrestieri and Bannan we invariably picked up good results.

 

Jos has had to work with what he’s inherited so far and this will probably have to continue as moving players in and out at the moment will be difficult.

 

I see next season as this squad’s last chance to get promoted. If we don’t then I think there will be change and this might even include Mr Chansiri looking to sell

the club?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My fear is although we've got a few positives and some momentum and form to take into next season. If we have more or less the same squad as last season, although I think we might have a chance of hitting the ground running for a change, if we don't strengthen and freshen things up, I can see us running out of steam around the second half of next season. That's why I think it's crucial that we don't stand still, seize the positivity and momentum that Jos has brought back and let him bring in one way or another the players he needs to suit how he wants to play.

 

I still think we need to trim the squad and strengthen it with some of the attributes we have lacked ever since Wembley. The best thing about the way we finished the season is that quite a few players seem like new players under Jos; the likes of Reach; Nuhiu, Joao and the youngsters that have come through. If we can build around those players and a couple of key players, then we could have a more balanced, adaptable and effective squad. But in order for it to be a top 6 squad, we still need to look too freshen it up; strengthen what we've got, build a more effective team that's harder to beat and able to be consistent and to increase our depth we still need to bring in players that will improve our first 11. In order to do that we will have to be astute like Cardiff, improve our physicality, tempo and directness of the team but also be able to adapt to different formations like Jos alluded to. To do that we don't have to break the bank or go over the FFP limit but we'll have to be smart and lucky to get it right this summer but the signs are promising with Jos but he'll need time, trust and backing. However, I wouldn't expect too much but who knows how we will fare in Jos' first full season, I'm intrigued and excited to find out. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

2 have already gone, Loovens & Wallace.

 

 

I'd try and get rid of 

 

Jones

Palmer

Fletcher

Abdi

 

That would free up some decent money even if Fletchers is a loan. This would make us very competitive for some great free transfers without paying a fee.

 

Possibly look at adding Rhodes to that list too.

Edited by LiamAP22D
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have thought we have some right to terminate Abdi’s contract now, or agree a settlement, based on him having one year left on his contract and not being able to play football.  

 

If you employed someone who only appeared 16 times in over 100 days of work, there must be some right to a termination. 

  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Walt said:

Would keeping him make things worse? 

I have no knowledge at all on FFP, please educate me. Say we sold him for circa £6,000,000 we would automatically be £2,000,000 down on the deal but then wouldn't have to pay his wages which at (a guessed) £40,000 per week would be roughly £2 ,000,000 per year. Why wouldn't shifting that amount off the wage bill help us? I realise transfers are payed in installments but unless we have to pay the whole lot to Boro in one go fail to see how a deal like this would not help.

If we get £6m for Rhodes under the terms of our agreement with Boro we would need to pay the remainder of the fee(lets say £6m) unfortunately any fee we received for him would be paid over the term of his contract so if it was 3 years we would receive £2m a year, thus leaving us £4m out of pocket and even closer to our FFP limit.

Edited by Owling Wolfe
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, prowl said:

I wasn't one that disagreed but it depends.

 

If we paid £8m (various figure have been suggested but just use £8m cos it makes the calculations easier) and signed him on a 4 year deal then we have already written his value down by £2m. If we get more than £6M for him we break even as far as transfer fee effects on FFP are concerned. 

 

If we hold on to him for another year we need to write his value down by another £2M in the next accounts, so in effect if we sold him this transfer window for £4M, we would have made a loss of £2M which would show in the books but that is the same as we would have had to write him down for anyway.

 

Could we get £4M for him, I think we could. BUT....

 

We pay him a good wage (again let's say £40K per week or <>£2m per year. If we sell him this year we won't have to pay him that £2M, so we save that which is positively beneficial in reducing the cost of running the club.

 

IN effect if we sell him for £4M we will be better off by not having to pay his wages, if we sell him for anything over £2M we are better off but by a diminishing amount, if we sell for less than £2M we are worse off.

 

Financial year ends can complicate the picture but I think in effect the above is about right. 

 

Confused?....You soon will be. (You need to be a certain age to get the reference.)

The problem we would have is the fee owed to Boro is payable over the term of his contract, if we sell him that becomes payable instantly, however the fee we receive is payable over the length of his contract. Therefore, using your figures, we sell him for £6m which would be paid at £2m a year but would have to pay Boro £6m up front, thus putting us £4m out of pocket.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Sergeant Tibbs said:

Getting rid of Rhodes would reduce the risk of Jos having to shoehorn him into the squad.

It would surely ease the wage bill. He is no longer an asset, just a drain on our finances.

This is the third time I've typed this but just to be clear, 

 

If we get £6m for Rhodes under the terms of our agreement with Boro we would need to pay the remainder of the fee(lets say £6m) unfortunately any fee we received for him would be paid over the term of his contract so if it was 3 years we would receive £2m a year, thus leaving us £4m out of pocket and even closer to our FFP limit. Therefore selling Rhodes at this time is not a feasible option.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current squad does need improving which it has done since May 2016. A new centre half, wide positions improving a new central midfielder and a bit of pace are required. Stick with what we already have and a failed play off bid will be the best we can hope for.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Owling Wolfe said:

Getting rid of Rhodes won't free up money to ease FFP I'm afraid.

but we wont be paying his wages?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, OwlsfaninNorway said:

Need 2 decent in each position.

Keeper: Wildsmith, Dawson, Westwood - Could sell Westwood
LB: Hunt, Baker
CM(3): Lees, Pudil, Venancio, Thornilley, Nielsen, van Aken,  Hutchinson(?)
RB: Reach, NEW

DCM: Pelupessy, Hutchinson, Jones
CM: Bannan, Forestieri, Kirby/Clare/Stobbs(?), NEW
Attack: Dave, Joao, Hooper, Rhodes, Mattias, Fletcher, Winnall, Fletcher - Could sell up to 4

So just 2 new I think.

I think you need to get a pair of those gloves with left and right stitched on to the outside

 

or is it like driving over in Norway and left and right are the opposite way round?

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Owling Wolfe said:

This is the third time I've typed this but just to be clear, 

 

If we get £6m for Rhodes under the terms of our agreement with Boro we would need to pay the remainder of the fee(lets say £6m) unfortunately any fee we received for him would be paid over the term of his contract so if it was 3 years we would receive £2m a year, thus leaving us £4m out of pocket and even closer to our FFP limit. Therefore selling Rhodes at this time is not a feasible option.

 

 

  •  

Sometimes it is sensible for an organisation to cut it's losses.

If a bank recognises it's not going to recoup its investment, often it will write it off.

This is an investment that hasn't worked out, and that is being kind to the player.

  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We could lose Rhodes,  Fletcher and Abdi without it impacting the squad in the slightest. Problem is, they wont go and nobody will want them anyway.

 

We MAY need a box to box midfielder if Lee doesn't come back.

 

Pelupusey should be given the chance to show he can do the DM role.If we get offered a decent loan option for that position then we could look at it.

 

No need for CB's if Venacio stays, with all the youngsters that can play there as well as Lees and Van Aken. 

 

Yep, we have a good squad when injuries dont decimate it. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Owling Wolfe said:

The problem we would have is the fee owed to Boro is payable over the term of his contract, if we sell him that becomes payable instantly, however the fee we receive is payable over the length of his contract. Therefore, using your figures, we sell him for £6m which would be paid at £2m a year but would have to pay Boro £6m up front, thus putting us £4m out of pocket.

That is just cash flow, DC has plenty of money so it's not a problem. What matters is how things are presented in the accounts. The two things aren't necessarily the same.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

First things first, we need to replace Loovens, Venacio and Wallace.

 

All three of them have been important players for us.

 

If Venacio signs, it probably still leaves us a centre back short, unless one of the young lads is good enough to play week-in, week-out.  Especially as we seem to have settled on three at the back.  We only have Pudil, Lees and a bunch of youngsters on the books at present. (I would include Van Aken as a 'promising youngster' as he has at no point looked ready to play in the Championship).  I suppose Hutchinson might be able to play there a couple of times a season.

 

After that, some full-backs and another central midfielder are the most important priorities.  We lack the flexibility to not play Reach at LWB which needs addressing.  We are over-reliant on Jack Hunt being fit on the other side as well.

 

If Jos is confident that any of the young players are ready to make the step up and fill some of those gaps, that's all well and good.  It would be nice to get Clare signed up as he seems like a real talent and could save us a few million.

Edited by owlinexile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Owling Wolfe said:

If we get £6m for Rhodes under the terms of our agreement with Boro we would need to pay the remainder of the fee(lets say £6m) unfortunately any fee we received for him would be paid over the term of his contract so if it was 3 years we would receive £2m a year, thus leaving us £4m out of pocket and even closer to our FFP limit.

Tar.

So we would pay £6 million off straight away. The purchasing club would give us £2 million towards this now and £4 million over the next two years. Then you have to factor in the saving of circa £2 million per year in wages.

 

At present Rhodes cost us £8 million for the transfer fee over four years and (a guesstimated) £8 million in wages over the four years = £16 million over 4 x years.

 

I suppose the club needs Rhodes to come good or he’s going to cost us big time, either that or take the hit now if someone was willing to pay circa £6 million for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Owls-Fan said:

I would have thought we have some right to terminate Abdi’s contract now, or agree a settlement, based on him having one year left on his contract and not being able to play football.  

 

If you employed someone who only appeared 16 times in over 100 days of work, there must be some right to a termination. 

 

Are you actually serious?

 

 

  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, pgmetcalf said:

 

FFP? What's that?  Hasn't bothered Wolves has it? They haven't been sanctioned and they're in the PL next season 

Exactly FOUCK FFP!

  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×