Jump to content

SWFC SUMMER 2022 TRANSFER RUMOUR MEGATHREAD - in memory of Gurujuan


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, WorrallOwl17 said:

Although it might seem a bit pessimistic and negative, the Vaulks rumours were way too ambitious weren't they? We need to realise what league we're in, and even though we're a bigger club than a lot of teams in the championship, we just don't have that pull at the moment. The championship is way more appealing and the money is way better, even at clubs like Huddersfield, Preston, Blackpool, Hull etc. Vaulks was never going to drop to League 1, and i can't see Dean/Flint/Hector doing that either. I do think we need to lower our expectations a little and it pains me to say it because of the clubs in the champ, but it's just way more appealing unfortunately even at the smaller clubs up there

Disagree mate . When we signed jack hunt . Marvin Johnson and Lewis wing they had all come off the back of 30+ games in the championship just like vaulks . Johnson had actually played the majority for a top 10 boro side . Vaulks playing for a bottom half Cardiff side whilst we’re top end league one isn’t exactly Messi to morecambe. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Barnsleyowl1996 said:

Disagree mate . When we signed jack hunt . Marvin Johnson and Lewis wing they had all come off the back of 30+ games in the championship just like vaulks . Johnson had actually played the majority for a top 10 boro side . Vaulks playing for a bottom half Cardiff side whilst we’re top end league one isn’t exactly Messi to morecambe. 

Just feel them sides linked with him now, is it Stoke, Hudds and one more? Feel like they'll have more pull than us. Hope i'm wrong, just how i feel it is. Like with that Boyle who went Hudds, i'm sure some big sides in League 1 were interested but he went there instead. Same with Tucker, Blackpool and Hull want him now. Surely there's more appeal going up a league even if it's to a club like that

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Barnsleyowl1996 said:

Disagree mate . When we signed jack hunt . Marvin Johnson and Lewis wing they had all come off the back of 30+ games in the championship just like vaulks . Johnson had actually played the majority for a top 10 boro side . Vaulks playing for a bottom half Cardiff side whilst we’re top end league one isn’t exactly Messi to morecambe. 

And Byers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, WorrallOwl17 said:

Just feel them sides linked with him now, is it Stoke, Hudds and one more? Feel like they'll have more pull than us. Hope i'm wrong, just how i feel it is. Like with that Boyle who went Hudds, i'm sure some big sides in League 1 were interested but he went there instead. Same with Tucker, Blackpool and Hull want him now. Surely there's more appeal going up a league even if it's to a club like that

Its more complicated than just saying than they 'want him'.

Want him to play in the first team or as a squad player?

Interested in him in case their first targets dont come off -  but not if they do?

Want him but dont want to give him the length of contract we will give?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think Vaulks quite likes the area. Did a lot of good work for Sheffield Childrens Hospital when at Rotherham. Just a hunch but if it came down to it, I think he’d move back to the area over a Championship club.


However, I do think it depends on what Luongo decides to do. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, CourteenerOwl said:

Looks like O'Nein has left Sunderland.

 

Whilst not technically the greatest player he would be a good addition to add to the depth of the squad. Can play pretty much anywhere in defense and midfield.


If take O’Nein as a DM player. He’s not afraid to get stuck in and has got a bit of the devil about him. We need players that other teams don’t like.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Tewkesbury said:

SCMP should be a model of how FFP should be done.

Just guarantee the 2+ year contracts for relegation from the EPL instead of parachute payments, so teams up there can still sign decent players, then you're good to go.

 

If the owner wants to throw money at promotion, they can. But it's their own personal money at risk, not the club's.

Or why is it not mandatory to have it in players contracts 

 

in the even lt of relegation you will have your wage dropped by xxx% or be released on free transfer 

 

or the owners must be able to cover all the wages even after a huge reduction in the clubs revenue 

 

the millions spent by in parachute payments could have been spent to making lower league clubs much more sustainable 

 

I’m not sure what the total sum is in what has been payed out for parachute payments since they began but I’d hazard a guess that that combined money would have given every league one or two club in that time the finances to improve training facilities or build new grounds that are more sustainable, cost effective, and generate better matchday income, experience and can attract more crowds. All extremely important for the survival and growth of clubs at the the bottom of the football ladder 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WalthamOwl said:


not sure about him, okay as a squad player, replacement for Dunkley perhaps. Any other signings close as far as you know? 


Underwhelming for me. Don’t think he’s better than the defenders who have left! Hopefully a back-up option. 

Not that I’m aware of mate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:


Underwhelming for me. Don’t think he’s better than the defenders who have left! Hopefully a back-up option. 

Not that I’m aware of mate. 

Think you will be pleasantly surprised, Blackpool mate rated him, says wins everything in the air and fit as a butchers dog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Tewkesbury said:

SCMP should be a model of how FFP should be done.

Just guarantee the 2+ year contracts for relegation from the EPL instead of parachute payments, so teams up there can still sign decent players, then you're good to go.

 

If the owner wants to throw money at promotion, they can. But it's their own personal money at risk, not the club's.

 

I couldn't agree more. As I've said numerous times, if an owner of a company wants to invest, they should be allowed to. But that money should be ring-fenced, so that the club doesn't get the burden of the debt. If at a later date the club can afford to pay back this money, or some of it, then there should also be a provision to do so, whilst again, protecting the company/club.

 

It's not rocket science, and if people like me and you (and countless others) can easily arrive at the same solution, it beggars belief why the ELF can't. But of course we all know that the EFL are deliberately restrictive in their business practice to appease their paymasters. That's the real problem and until that is resolved, football finances will remain unbalanced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, fpowl said:

Or why is it not mandatory to have it in players contracts 

 

in the even lt of relegation you will have your wage dropped by xxx% or be released on free transfer 

 

or the owners must be able to cover all the wages even after a huge reduction in the clubs revenue 

 

the millions spent by in parachute payments could have been spent to making lower league clubs much more sustainable 

 

I’m not sure what the total sum is in what has been payed out for parachute payments since they began but I’d hazard a guess that that combined money would have given every league one or two club in that time the finances to improve training facilities or build new grounds that are more sustainable, cost effective, and generate better matchday income, experience and can attract more crowds. All extremely important for the survival and growth of clubs at the the bottom of the football ladder 

Because then nobody half decent will play for any clubs below 10th.

 

The EPL is the best league in the world because it gives all 20 teams enough money to be reasonably competitive and wants the best players in the world, this is why it gets so much international money.

 

Without some guarantee, the best players will only play for a couple of clubs and we turn into the french or spanish leagues, reducing overall EPL viewing and money, and there would still be no money for the lower leagues.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ChapSmurf said:

 

I couldn't agree more. As I've said numerous times, if an owner of a company wants to invest, they should be allowed to. But that money should be ring-fenced, so that the club doesn't get the burden of the debt. If at a later date the club can afford to pay back this money, or some of it, then there should also be a provision to do so, whilst again, protecting the company/club.

 

It's not rocket science, and if people like me and you (and countless others) can easily arrive at the same solution, it beggars belief why the ELF can't. But of course we all know that the EFL are deliberately restrictive in their business practice to appease their paymasters. That's the real problem and until that is resolved, football finances will remain unbalanced.

The thing is that nobody bar a few football nerds know anything about the SCMP. The worst thing is, it's actually part of the FFP document.

 

There's no writeups, summaries or anything published about it bar the actual document, that you have to scroll through for 20 minutes to get to it.

 

I was going to write one when I had COVID, but binned it halfway through.

 

I don't see why one of the sports reporters hasn't done an article on it yet, as it answers a lot of fan's complaints about the money regulations.

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...