Jump to content

So who identified transfer targets?


Recommended Posts

I don't think Carlos was ever in charge of recruitment.

 

I can't prove it & im not ITK.

 

I just think he is a convenient scapegoat.

 

I reckon Doyen were the architects  of our recruitment but Chansiri won't hang them out to dry in case they represent any signings we would like to make in the (very very very) distant future.

 

Fair play to Chansiri he stumped up the cash & paid in good faith, most likely believing he had received good advice.

 

I still think he has to take responsibility for any failures though as he is clearly the person with the final say on any important decisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Hillsborough Mole

Wait til young Att gets Wednesday into the Champions League on Footy Manager. We'll be seeing some reyt names down at Hillsborough then

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Big Rons Hairspray said:

I don't think Carlos was ever in charge of recruitment.

 

I can't prove it & im not ITK.

 

I just think he is a convenient scapegoat.


I reckon Doyen were the architects  of our recruitment 

 

Glad you popped up.

The Doyen meme was getting  dusty in my cupboard.

Any excuse to dig it out.

 

images.png.b6f7488019a996febff5c38c1990f3cb.png

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Stoop said:

DC said last night that CC was completely in charge of second year recruitment 

 

So...

Jones

Abdi

Urby

Fletcher

Fox

kean

Buckley

Mcmanaman

Sasso

Reach

 

:carlosswfc:

Safe to say that (excluding Reach) Carlos had a complete and utter f*cking nightmare

ive been saying exactly this for 2 years ,there are a few other names to add to list ,Rhodes(carlos wouldn't play him) winnall (carlos wouldn't play him)  van aken ,mcgeady ,venancio ( carlos signed him but wouldn't play him) any more? . there are some fools what would even want carlos back 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Watson said:

 

That doesn't make it our fault, it just means that we wanted them nothing more.  Most to my memory were welcomed by OT especially Fletcher.

Well I was been sarcastic but hey ho

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, waynecoyne14 said:

I don't think carlos chose the players as he rarely played any of them i.e. abdi, Rhodes ,buckley  mcmanaman,  venancio, urby, lachman, i'm sure there are others

We know that CC took the view that it needed a long time before most new signings were ready to play because they needed to see how the team played.

 

It is just possible in the light of DC comments that CC was responsible for recruits in his last year, but he did not play them because it took time to absorb how we play. CC was wrong about that,  but it could have  been  responsible. Surprising but possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, IstillhateSteveBould said:

And who had the final say on actually bringing them in?

 

Because it's our dealings in the transfer market that have royally fizzed us up. Particularly after the play off defeat.

 

As far as I can see, Chansiri has indeed invested a significant amount of money on transfer fees and wages......but it's been horrendously mismanaged. And there's no clarity on who's responsible. 

 

At some point we were led to believe Carlos was purely a coach and had little say on incomings. But then suddenly Carlos was responsible, and now we're told certain players were signed as a "gift" to the fans, suggesting Chansiri himself. 

 

It all just seems a complete clusterfuck. Pretty much just - "Here's the amount I'm putting in - we've got a couple of years deadline to get up or we're fizzed. Let's sign some players". Scattergun approach. No strategy, no thought beyond 3 years, no contingency plan if it doesn't work out etc....

 

We're talking significant sums on fees and wages, used up on "risky" signings. Players in their late 20s and early 30s with no resale value whatsoever. All the while neglecting areas that CLEARLY needed addressing.

We knew 2 years ago that Loovens was coming to the end and we'd need a replacement. Same with Pudil. And Wallace. We knew we couldn't rely on Hutch for any period of time. And they're just the obvious things. Those elements of the play off team needed addressing without even adding to it. 

 

Why on earth didn't we spend the money we gambled on players coming to the end of their careers, on serious replacements for those players at the very least? Who ever decided to pursue the likes of Fletcher, Abdi, Jones and Rhodes? Whoever it was needs a slap.

 

I know some like to point out it's easy in hindsight, but there were plenty of people highlighting the fact that we were neglecting areas that needed attention even back then. Many said this could come back to bite us on the arse.

 

If the club had shown a bit of foresight and used up our available transfer pot on more players with a future (with resale value, as they actually did with Reach and Winnal), we'd now be in a position where we could easily sell a couple of players and rebalance properly. No silly contracts given to aging players with no resale value. 

 

Many on here felt that was the correct way to go. And they say football fans know nothing. :rolleyes:

And could have sold Hirst for 2m and inserted 20pc sell on clause. Just generally the worst in terms of player strategy...look at Brentford. Marley Watkins in,  Marley Watkins sold for big profit.

 

Not saying that we would be a selling club but f me we've sprayed our mucky custard on some right dross...

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, IstillhateSteveBould said:

And who had the final say on actually bringing them in?

 

Because it's our dealings in the transfer market that have royally fizzed us up. Particularly after the play off defeat.

 

As far as I can see, Chansiri has indeed invested a significant amount of money on transfer fees and wages......but it's been horrendously mismanaged. And there's no clarity on who's responsible. 

 

At some point we were led to believe Carlos was purely a coach and had little say on incomings. But then suddenly Carlos was responsible, and now we're told certain players were signed as a "gift" to the fans, suggesting Chansiri himself. 

 

It all just seems a complete clusterfuck. Pretty much just - "Here's the amount I'm putting in - we've got a couple of years deadline to get up or we're fizzed. Let's sign some players". Scattergun approach. No strategy, no thought beyond 3 years, no contingency plan if it doesn't work out etc....

 

We're talking significant sums on fees and wages, used up on "risky" signings. Players in their late 20s and early 30s with no resale value whatsoever. All the while neglecting areas that CLEARLY needed addressing.

We knew 2 years ago that Loovens was coming to the end and we'd need a replacement. Same with Pudil. And Wallace. We knew we couldn't rely on Hutch for any period of time. And they're just the obvious things. Those elements of the play off team needed addressing without even adding to it. 

 

Why on earth didn't we spend the money we gambled on players coming to the end of their careers, on serious replacements for those players at the very least? Who ever decided to pursue the likes of Fletcher, Abdi, Jones and Rhodes? Whoever it was needs a slap.

 

I know some like to point out it's easy in hindsight, but there were plenty of people highlighting the fact that we were neglecting areas that needed attention even back then. Many said this could come back to bite us on the arse.

 

If the club had shown a bit of foresight and used up our available transfer pot on more players with a future (with resale value, as they actually did with Reach and Winnal), we'd now be in a position where we could easily sell a couple of players and rebalance properly. No silly contracts given to aging players with no resale value. 

 

Many on here felt that was the correct way to go. And they say football fans know nothing. :rolleyes:

Exactly mate !!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, victorturner said:

We know that CC took the view that it needed a long time before most new signings were ready to play because they needed to see how the team played.

 

It is just possible in the light of DC comments that CC was responsible for recruits in his last year, but he did not play them because it took time to absorb how we play

 

Well it certainly wasn't because they weren't as  match fit as the first XI

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Watson said:

CC big mistake was changing his tactics so drastically going from attacking to defensive mode.  Should have held his nerve.

 

And there you have it in a nutshell.

 

For all the fine theories about our finances and transfer dealings, we had the squad and first Xl to get into the Prem, but for Carlos running scared of Hull and in particular Huddersfield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, IstillhateSteveBould said:

 

They were decent players and fair enough, no one would have predicted how catastrophically bad they'd turn out to be for the club in general.

 

But we didn't really need 2 more midfielders of that type, they were expensive and offered ZERO resale value. Both were signed on long contracts. We went into September that year STILL needing a at least 1 CB, a tough tackling midfielder and a LB. Minimum. 

 

The point is, whoever decided to spend that portion of our budget on those players, rather than in areas that were so clearly lacking, needs sacking.

 

In hindsight yes Abdi has been an expensive and unmitigated disaster.

 

Dont agree about Jones though. Our record with Bannan-Jones has been decent, and I would still start him ahead of Joey now, despite it meaning two lefties.

 

Good point about the flaw in the long-term gamble of buying/loaning oldish costly players though. Inevitably more likely to suffer injury and decline, and lose resale value.

 

That said, Carlos threw away a golden oportunity for this club and fan base. His fear cost us dearly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter who identified the transfer targets. That's just scapegoating anyway. As I've said many times, throughout the history of football, excellent players have moved for big money only to flop at their new clubs for a number of reasons

Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...