Jump to content

January Transfer Window


Howaythelads
 Share

Recommended Posts

Ok, here is the chance for everybody to lay their cards on the table.

 

I know you all hate Fred and would prefer to see the Board removed, but I doubt it will happen anytime soon.

 

Between now and January the Board may or may not sack Roeder, but that's not an issue I want to address in thread.

 

The question is simple. As Macbeth keeps telling us, and various people now beat up the Board over it, the club is in debt.

 

So select the scenario....

 

A) The Board should gamble by spending cash in January in an effort to avoid relegation, in the knowledge that we may still go down and then what......? One division down, bigger debt.......

 

B) The Board should be prudent with the finances and refuse to release any funds, meaning we go with the current squad and try to avoid the drop with what we have.

 

Which is it to be?

 

If you select option A and we still go down and the club is in greater financial cack, will you then blame the Board for doing what you wanted saying they shouldn't have spent even more cash?

 

If you select option B and we go down will you then blame the Board for not splashing the cash in January despite saying right now that they shouldn't have spent in January.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think we really need to 'splash the cash'. We could go ou tand improve the squad by bringing 5 or 6 numbers in, but i still feel that we have a team capable of staying in this division - and i still think think we will do. £1m on someone like Viduka and £2m on Distin would improve those two areas considerably.

 

It's tempting to go out and spend in January, and i'll probably huff and puff if we don't, but we probably don't really need to.

 

Kind of an in-between of the scenarios, HTL, sorry. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Get in a manager, before January, that can get the best out of our players.  Whilst I don't think the squad is all that great, it's not joint bottom of the league material.

 

So that would lead me to only want to go for option A under a new manager, but option B if we still have Roeder.  I don't think he should be given any more money, as he's proving all ready he can't get his own signings to work, Duff, Martins... never mind the rest.  I also don't think the team is that bad that it needs yet another splash of cash.  It seems to be some people's answer to everything, and it's not surprising people like Hansen have the views they do.

 

Roeder is going to fuck us over, cash or no cash.  He's just not got the talent to manage a football team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Get in a manager, before January, that can get the best out of our players. Whilst I don't think the squad is all that great, it's not joint bottom of the league material.

 

That's what i've been saying. We have a decent, capable team, with good players - and then it varies to average players, to those with potential. We need a manager who will bring the best out of those players. O'Neill would have been absolutely perfect for that, and you can see how he's done it at Villa. And everywhere else he's gone.

 

Unfortunately, we don't have that manager.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But by doing this are you not ignoring the fact that Shepherd/the board are the ones who have put us in this catch-22 situation by hiring two hopeless managers and backing them with funds?

 

If none of us know the best way to solve the problem, that's not necessarily our doing, more a reflection of the dire situation we find ourselves in as a direct result of mismanagement.

 

I certainly wouldn't do the usual NUFC thing of pissing big money away on players who might not even come good, more look to bringing cheap, possibly older players, just to keep our heads above water until the end of the season when we can take a look and see how we can change things. At least we know in the summer we'll have a world class striker to come back (please God), so just getting to that point with our Premiership status still intact will be a start. We have some good players, although they're not doing it at present, and in the meantime, a change of management would be nice to start getting better out of them, cos this hopeless frigger has no chance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With regards to how much we should spend, I think the answer for me is somewhere in the middle. We clearly need to strengthen most of the squad, but then that's only what we should have done in the summer anyway, it's not like this is anything new.

 

I'd be happy if we made a couple of decent loan signings or free agents (again, this would have been far easier at the right time, in the summer - see Campbell) and spent wisely, up to maybe £5m? I see Milner going straight off for possibly £3m so that would obviously help.

 

I certainly don't see that throwing silly money at the squad will keep us up alone. Only an increase of determination (and organisation by whoever the manager is) and some half-decent players willing to roll their sleeves up will do that. Sibierski is a good example.

 

Splashing the cash has never been the answer. Using the cash wisely is. For example, how daft does the £15m on a player we didn't need (and has been shit by all accounts anyway) and an unfinished article in Martins look now? Surely with better judgement £15m could go a long way, and at least cover our squad from injuries? The likes of Allardyce and Curbishley dream of spending that kind of money; they stay up on much less.

 

So I say option C. ;)

 

Anyway, 'If you select option B and we go down will you then blame the Board for not splashing the cash in January despite saying right now that they shouldn't splash the cash in January.' isn't fair; if we go down it won't be just because we didn't spend money. It's this simplistic view of Shepherd's (i'll just spent more money, that'll work) that was resulted in many of the problems in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

we should spend, but not go overboard. it would be just like this club to make a £15m bid on someone like Bent or Klose in January. we should look for available players who won't cost the earth but who still possess quality, as we should've done in the summer (campbell, sorin and so on). Distin, Viduka, Neill have all been mentioned and i think those three would give us some additional quality. we need a goalscorer too but i can't see us getting one, perhaps we should've secured an older player like Andy Cole or Brian McBride in the summer, a cheap experienced player still capable of getting a few goals.

 

a better way of improving results would be getting in a new manager. Venables could come in till the end of the season and i think he'd give us enough of a lift to take us clear of relegation, Curbishley too, though i wouldn't want either as permanent manager.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But by doing this are you not ignoring the fact that Shepherd/the board are the ones who have put us in this catch-22 situation by hiring two hopeless managers and backing them with funds?

 

No

 

If none of us know the best way to solve the problem, that's not necessarily our doing, more a reflection of the dire situation we find ourselves in as a direct result of mismanagement.

 

Ok.

 

 

I certainly wouldn't do the usual NUFC thing of pissing big money away on players who might not even come good, more look to bringing cheap, possibly older players, just to keep our heads above water until the end of the season when we can take a look and see how we can change things. At least we know in the summer we'll have a world class striker to come back (please God), so just getting to that point with our Premiership status still intact will be a start. We have some good players, although they're not doing it at present, and in the meantime, a change of management would be nice to start getting better out of them, cos this hopeless frigger has no chance.

 

So your answer is option A. Kind of. You want the club to bring in some new players.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With regards to how much we should spend, I think the answer for me is somewhere in the middle. We clearly need to strengthen most of the squad, but then that's only what we should have done in the summer anyway, it's not like this is anything new.

 

I'd be happy if we made a couple of decent loan signings or free agents (again, this would have been far easier at the right time, in the summer - see Campbell) and spent wisely, up to maybe £5m? I see Milner going straight off for possibly £3m so that would obviously help.

 

I certainly don't see that throwing silly money at the squad will keep us up alone. Only an increase of determination (and organisation by whoever the manager is) and some half-decent players willing to roll their sleeves up will do that. Sibierski is a good example.

 

Splashing the cash has never been the answer. Using the cash wisely is. For example, how daft does the £15m on a player we didn't need (and has been shit by all accounts anyway) and an unfinished article in Martins look now? Surely with better judgement £15m could go a long way, and at least cover our squad from injuries? The likes of Allardyce and Curbishley dream of spending that kind of money; they stay up on much less.

 

So I say option C. ;)

 

Anyway, 'If you select option B and we go down will you then blame the Board for not splashing the cash in January despite saying right now that they shouldn't splash the cash in January.' isn't fair; if we go down it won't be just because we didn't spend money. It's this simplistic view of Shepherd's (i'll just spent more money, that'll work) that was resulted in many of the problems in the first place.

 

I edited the post. You're obviously confused by the the phrase "splash the cash". Bringing in any players costs money, even if the fee isnt' huge it's still another drain on the club in terms of increasing the income to wages ratio, something the Board is currently slagged for by the usual suspects.

 

Who the money is spent on is not the question, OBVIOUSLY if it was spent wisely we'd be doing ok, that applies to all managers, even Souness. If he'd spent the £50m on that 5th placed squad wisely we'd be challenging now ffs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But HTL, spending cash could mean spending £1/2/3m. Which is nowt really... a few of games' gate receipts effectively and it's not going to send us into crippling debt come next season, which ever division we may be in.

 

We could improve our team greatly by spending that sort of money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But HTL, spending cash could mean spending £1/2/3m. Which is nowt really... a few of games' gate receipts effectively and it's not going to send us into crippling debt come next season, which ever division we may be in.

 

We could improve our team greatly by spending that sort of money.

 

It's not just the spending of the transfer fee, it's the increase in wages to income ratio that is currently considered a big issue by some.

 

From reading the posts of Macbeth, Mick et al, I'd say that spending anything should be out of the question, tbh. Given the state of the club's finances.

 

Interestingly, according to Macbeth £3m isn't next to nothing and can make a huge difference, just look at the dividends per year and you can see that. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If some players go out we'd be reducing the wage bill anyway, to compensate. Bramble, Milner, Rossi, Bernard will all possibly be off the wage bill. I don't know how much those players are on, but i'd be disappointed if we couldn't improve on them for very little if we had some semblance of strategy - even if it's older, less flash players for a short term basis only, ie. to keep us up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, the wages to turnover ratio has plenty of factors, not just how many people we are having to pay. Giving Bernard any money for example looks like being a complete waste. Couldn't that be foreseen? The reaction on here was disbelief that we'd be paying a guy who couldn't impress Championship teams enough on trial. Shepherd also sanctioned Dyer more money despite his ludicrous injury record not long ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not many straight answers so far like.  I think the lack of straight answers says it all really.

 

People will be quick to criticise no matter what the Board does. I realise asking people to put their opinion down here as a matter of record is a big ask when it comes to the desire to slag them later in hindsight. Not that this principle has bothered some people too much anyway, given that the support, or a desire for a certain action doesn't matter because Fred signs the cheques and he's the one who has to have the crystal ball.

 

bluelaugh.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I'll give a straight answer, mainly because I haven't been here long enough to have any kind of reputation...

 

If the choice is between spending ANY money or spending NO money, I'll take option "A." I think a few good purchases in the transfer window will shore up a lot of the squad problems we're having. Yes, it's a gamble, since there's no real way of predicting how a new signing will fit in once they're here, but playing it safe and clamping down on the purse strings seems to me a less-likely way to avoid relegation. Our squad right now has some serious weak points, and trying to ride out the rest of the season with fingers crossed in the hopes that we'll avoid the drop seems the more foolish choice.

 

Spending a little cash on a few solid defenders and maybe a reliable goal-scorer, if we can find anyone that's willing to come here, seems a calculated risk. Our potential returns (staying up & a stronger squad) outweigh the potential risks (going down & deeper in debt) because with the investment in a stronger back 4, we increase our likelihood of staying up. Spending the cash on worthless has-beens because we can't find anyone else, on the other hand, would be a complete waste.

 

Of course, it's all a crap shoot anyway, since there are a lot more factors than just transfer window spending.

 

I'd rather risk it and have a stronger side for the 2nd half of the season, and I wouldn't fault the board for spending the cash if the gamble didn't work. At least we'd have done something to try and fight back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Moe-Ali

What the fuck?

We wont get relegated, no matter what.

Stop over-reacting to a low position.

Please.

And yes ive seen the table.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not many straight answers so far like.  I think the lack of straight answers says it all really.

  Scenario A isn't a straight scenario though.  You're trying to corner people into saying they'll have one kind of reaction regardless of what kind of spending it is, since any spending is "a gamble". 

 

It's not though.  Prudent spending, addressing the needs of the team, would result in at least some begrudged credit being given even if we go down, e.g. "at least they did that right". 

 

Being pandered to with a big name, big money trophy signing or two is going to definitely result in criticism, I think, even if we stay up.  A far greater gamble.

 

I'll go "on record" as saying I'll credit them with acting responsibly if we spend and spend well in January.  I will definitely slate them if we do not spend or if the only spending is on trophy players. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I'll give a straight answer, mainly because I haven't been here long enough to have any kind of reputation...

 

If the choice is between spending ANY money or spending NO money, I'll take option "A." I think a few good purchases in the transfer window will shore up a lot of the squad problems we're having. Yes, it's a gamble, since there's no real way of predicting how a new signing will fit in once they're here, but playing it safe and clamping down on the purse strings seems to me a less-likely way to avoid relegation. Our squad right now has some serious weak points, and trying to ride out the rest of the season with fingers crossed in the hopes that we'll avoid the drop seems the more foolish choice.

 

Spending a little cash on a few solid defenders and maybe a reliable goal-scorer, if we can find anyone that's willing to come here, seems a calculated risk. Our potential returns (staying up & a stronger squad) outweigh the potential risks (going down & deeper in debt) because with the investment in a stronger back 4, we increase our likelihood of staying up. Spending the cash on worthless has-beens because we can't find anyone else, on the other hand, would be a complete waste.

 

Of course, it's all a crap shoot anyway, since there are a lot more factors than just transfer window spending.

 

I'd rather risk it and have a stronger side for the 2nd half of the season, and I wouldn't fault the board for spending the cash if the gamble didn't work. At least we'd have done something to try and fight back.

 

Thanks.

 

Have to say that I agree with most of that, although I think the main problem is no fire power, despite how dodgy the back four may seem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not many straight answers so far like.  I think the lack of straight answers says it all really.

  Scenario A isn't a straight scenario though.  You're trying to corner people into saying they'll have one kind of reaction regardless of what kind of spending it is, since any spending is "a gamble". 

 

It's not though.  Prudent spending, addressing the needs of the team, would result in at least some begrudged credit being given even if we go down, e.g. "at least they did that right". 

 

Being pandered to with a big name, big money trophy signing or two is going to definitely result in criticism, I think, even if we stay up.  A far greater gamble.

 

I'll go "on record" as saying I'll credit them with acting responsibly if we spend and spend well in January.  I will definitely slate them if we do not spend or if the only spending is on trophy players. 

 

The manager picks the players to bring in. The fact the manager may opt to sign players certain fans don't think should be signed in favour of others isn't the issue, the issue is the club is being slated by a number of people for being in debt and for having a wage/income ratio that is too high. I want to know whether come January people are supporting the club spending even more despite that situation.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Toon Sarnie

Aren't we all jumping the gun a little bit? Its only just the start of November. Agreed we need a bit of work on the team (especially back four) But these guys are meant to be professionals, surely they should be able to start hitting the cows arse with the banjo soon.

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...