Thoughts on this summer's transfer window

[NG32]

Don't prices generally get higher for players, the closer the deadline comes? Surely makes us even less likely to sign anyone now tbh.

 

Could also argue that other clubs get desperate to sell as they need the money for other transfers.

[Dave]

We can compromise our principles (Robert Palmer) and still improve our squad. Spending the extra £1-2million to get Debuchy, a player who we clearly want, will improve us and have had scouted for a long time, isn't going to send us into bankruptcy.

 

Spending a little bit more than we want to might be the difference between 6th and 5th or 5th and 4th. Having the famous scouting network is pointless if we're not going to trust it with an extra few million here and there which, in today's terms, is nothing.

 

It's not as simple as a little extra money on one player though. Once we allow selling clubs to know that we're susceptible to brinksmanship, other clubs will be more liable to move the goalposts on us like Lille have done.

 

Right now we project a very strong image as a club who will not negotiate too far beyond our initial price and who will not have our chain dragged around by unreasonable sellers or dodgy agents.

 

Once we lose that, it'll just become even harder for us to sign the players we want in the future.

 

As things stand this principle means we will simply miss out on players. Everybody knows our game now, what makes you think we'll just keep getting away with it?

 

Nobody expects or wants us to be ripped off, but getting value for money isn't a new idea. The key is finding that compromise between driving a hard bargain and being flexible. Sometimes you have to pay the going rate or you'll end up with nowt.

 

[toon25]

I'm refusing to nail my colours to the mast until Friday is over. But I do think we'll be shooting ourselves in the foot if the investment we needed in a RB, CB and ST doesn't materialise. Given that these were positions that needed strengthening before the summer I'll be disappointed.

[bealios]

Back to the original post, its pretty much average so far.

 

As we stand I think we are a slightly overall better squad than last year, not just the swap of Anita for Guthrie and the younger lads coming in for the likes of Best, Lovenkrands and Smith etc., but as other have said, an extra year for some of our more recent imports. Ben Arfa in particular looks a far better all round player, and seems to have added something to his game in terms of helping out the team.

 

What I'm more worried about is the fact that with a lot of extra games we really needed to be improving by a bigger margin to maintain a top 6 challenge with a decent cup run. Of our rivals, I think Liverpool and Everton look stronger than last year. Arsenal are probably a bit weaker, but started off being a lot better than the rest of our rivals. Spurs are a bit of an unknown, but I expect them to make a couple of decent signings, although still not convinced about AVB.

 

I think the squad as it is and with our likely demand this year, we're looking at 7th/8th, with a decent UEFA run. I think we're 2 or 3 signings away this window from being able to maintain a top 5/6 challenge with the extra demands on the squad.

 

[Jack Flash]

We can compromise our principles (Robert Palmer) and still improve our squad. Spending the extra £1-2million to get Debuchy, a player who we clearly want, will improve us and have had scouted for a long time, isn't going to send us into bankruptcy.

 

Spending a little bit more than we want to might be the difference between 6th and 5th or 5th and 4th. Having the famous scouting network is pointless if we're not going to trust it with an extra few million here and there which, in today's terms, is nothing.

 

It's not as simple as a little extra money on one player though. Once we allow selling clubs to know that we're susceptible to brinksmanship, other clubs will be more liable to move the goalposts on us like Lille have done.

 

Right now we project a very strong image as a club who will not negotiate too far beyond our initial price and who will not have our chain dragged around by unreasonable sellers or dodgy agents.

 

Once we lose that, it'll just become even harder for us to sign the players we want in the future.

 

Other clubs know how we operate now and adjust their prices accordingly imo. We're seen as getting great bargains so when we come knocking the other club will assume we're going to rip them off somehow and that has probably hindered us this summer, mainly with Lille and Twente.

 

One thing that's very clear is that we either undervalue players or simply bid very low deliberately and both of those things can drag a transfer out for months when we could just compromise a little bit and probably get the player much earlier.

[oldtype]

We can compromise our principles (Robert Palmer) and still improve our squad. Spending the extra £1-2million to get Debuchy, a player who we clearly want, will improve us and have had scouted for a long time, isn't going to send us into bankruptcy.

 

Spending a little bit more than we want to might be the difference between 6th and 5th or 5th and 4th. Having the famous scouting network is pointless if we're not going to trust it with an extra few million here and there which, in today's terms, is nothing.

 

It's not as simple as a little extra money on one player though. Once we allow selling clubs to know that we're susceptible to brinksmanship, other clubs will be more liable to move the goalposts on us like Lille have done.

 

Right now we project a very strong image as a club who will not negotiate too far beyond our initial price and who will not have our chain dragged around by unreasonable sellers or dodgy agents.

 

Once we lose that, it'll just become even harder for us to sign the players we want in the future.

 

As things stand this principle means we will simply miss out on players. Everybody knows our game now, what makes you think we'll just keep getting away with it?

 

Nobody expects or wants us to be ripped off, but getting value for money isn't a new idea. The key is finding that compromise between driving a hard bargain and being flexible. Sometimes you have to pay the going rate or you'll end up with nowt.

 

 

Because there's always an incentive for clubs to sell.

 

Our game is that we leverage every incentive and potential advantage we can to bring prices down as low as possible. Part of it is targeting players who have fallen out with their club, want to leave, our have contractual complications. As long as we have a reputation for playing hardball, we can take maximum advantage of these factors to force clubs to sell at a price lower than they would be comfortable with.

 

None of that works anymore when we start gaining a reputation for frequently caving in to the selling club's asking price. Obviously there's some room for flexibility, but there's a fine line between being open to negotiations and being a sucker. We were on the wrong side of that line in the past and I think we're on the right side of it now.

 

The club have shown even in the case of Debuchy that we're not completely immovable from our opening bid (we've made what, three separate bids?) But what we're not going to do is snap their hands off as soon as they ask for 8 mil. That's the path toward more Albert Luques.

 

To summarize my point, there are real costs to paying a bit more for someone like Debuchy that go far, far beyond 1 or 2 million pounds. And I'm happy that the people who run the club are aware of this.

[Dave]

If we fail to bring in anyone to displace Simpson I hope not to read any posts from you complaining about his ability then.

[BottledDog]

If we fail to bring in anyone to displace Simpson I hope not to read any posts from you complaining about his ability then.

 

Giving the club the benefit of doubt if we fail to bring in certain players this window has no relation to how someone rates Simpson now or in the future surely?

[oldtype]

If we fail to bring in anyone to displace Simpson I hope not to read any posts from you complaining about his ability then.

 

Now that's just petulant.

 

It would be nice to have an upgrade on Simpson, but having him as first choice is the lesser of two evils in this case compared to paying whatever it takes to get Debuchy.

[Dave]

If we fail to bring in anyone to displace Simpson I hope not to read any posts from you complaining about his ability then.

 

Giving the club the benefit of doubt if we fail to bring in certain players this window has no relation to how someone rates Simpson surely?

 

Why not? Whilst I don't agree with the absolute slating Simpson gets most of the time now, the biggest weakness in our team is as clear as can be. We've lined up a well-regarded replacement who not only can we afford, but seems desperate to come. He wouldn't do our chances of keeping hold of Cabaye any harm either. If we fail to get Debuchy then will people shrug their shoulders and accept that the principles come first and therefore what we have will suffice? That it was better to stick with Simpson than compromise with Lille? When he is costing us points down the line, I doubt it somehow.

 

Comparing this to the Luque deal is ridiculous and does the argument no favours.

 

[oldtype]

It's not just about principles. The point was that there are real costs associated with unilaterally caving in to demands that go far beyond just the immediate one or two mil.

 

The Luque deal was a symbol not an analogy but I don't suppose you'd bother to make that distinction given how little time you've spent on considering what my point actually is.

 

Much more convenient to skip straight to the one-liner putdown.

[Dave]

So is your point that if we compromise in this one instance to secure Debuchy, then we will have no choice but to 'unilaterally cave in' on all other deals further down the line? If so and there's no going back, how did we get to where we are now?

[BottledDog]

If we fail to bring in anyone to displace Simpson I hope not to read any posts from you complaining about his ability then.

 

Giving the club the benefit of doubt if we fail to bring in certain players this window has no relation to how someone rates Simpson surely?

 

Why not? Whilst I don't agree with the absolute slating Simpson gets most of the time now, the biggest weakness in our team is as clear as can be. We've lined up a well-regarded replacement who not only can we afford, but seems desperate to come. He wouldn't do our chances of keeping hold of Cabaye any harm either. If we fail to get Debuchy then will people shrug their shoulders and accept that the principles come first and therefore what we have will suffice? That it was better to stick with Simpson than compromise with Lille? I doubt it somehow.

 

Comparing this to the Luque deal is ridiculous and does the argument no favours.

 

We'll be ok if we don't bring anyone else in, but like yourself, I'd find it beyond disappointing if we couldn't capitalise on a great season (one that will be very difficult to repeat unless we strengthen considering the state of our rivals last time out), and right back is certainly one of the most obvious places to upgrade.

 

I have enough faith in what we appear to be trying to do though that without knowing the facts yet, see no point apportioning out blame, and can't justify getting angry if we do miss out. It's hard to believe we have given up on a player we clearly highly rate and put at the top of our shopping list because we're haggling with a willing seller over a couple of hundred grand.

 

I'd like to think it was that simple though, because if it is, he'll be with us before the window closes.

[oldtype]

So is your point that if we compromise in this one instance to secure Debuchy, then we will have no choice but to 'unilaterally cave in' on all other deals further down the line? If so and there's no going back, how did we get to where we are now?

 

No, my point is that if we cave in once it increases the likelihood that in the future selling clubs will make further unrealistic demands, which could be much more detrimental to us over the long term than not getting Debuchy right now

 

[ATB]

I can´t see us be a winner in a negotiation really. The only thing we will avoid is over spending, in our sense.

Since we value a player, and the own club is value a player, the only time we will get him is if we value him higher then the club.

 

Before we asked what a club wanted for a player and we paid that. Now we say "take or leave", and if we lucky we get him, otherwise don´t, without really looking what the difference between the clubs is. And that´s my problem right now.

 

Instead of paying £1-2m extra for Debuchy we just leave. Ok if it was £5m, in that case. Leave and move on. But with us it can be a matter of £500k. We just don´t bow for anything. And that is just insane. You need to have some kind of feeling when you should leave your own valuation.

[Dave]

So is your point that if we compromise in this one instance to secure Debuchy, then we will have no choice but to 'unilaterally cave in' on all other deals further down the line? If so and there's no going back, how did we get to where we are now?

 

No, my point is that if we cave in once it increases the likelihood that in the future selling clubs will make further unrealistic demands, which could be much more detrimental to us over the long term than not getting Debuchy right now

 

 

I just think that we can't have it all ways; if we finish as high as fifth in the world's highest profile league, selling clubs simply aren't going to believe that we can't afford more money. If we do it by buying players cheaply who increase in value dramatically, selling clubs simply aren't going to believe that it was an accident. If there's a new TV deal imminent that gives ludicrous sums of additional income, selling clubs simply aren't going to believe that it's not there to tap into.

 

Once you step beyond signing only players that have contract clauses, major disputes with their club or are unattached, you have to compromise at some stage. I still have hope for the Debuchy deal, but I've got a horrible feeling we're just sat hoping Lille will fold and I'm not convinced they will.

[Jack Flash]

Why are we "caving in" anyway? Why can't we just be buying a player we want for a very affordable fee?

 

I'm as guilty as anyone of believing the hype around our transfer deals but sometimes it just doesn't work.

[oldtype]

So is your point that if we compromise in this one instance to secure Debuchy, then we will have no choice but to 'unilaterally cave in' on all other deals further down the line? If so and there's no going back, how did we get to where we are now?

 

No, my point is that if we cave in once it increases the likelihood that in the future selling clubs will make further unrealistic demands, which could be much more detrimental to us over the long term than not getting Debuchy right now

 

 

I just think that we can't have it all ways; if we finish as high as fifth in the world's highest profile league, selling clubs simply aren't going to believe that we can't afford more money. If we do it by buying players cheaply who increase in value dramatically, selling clubs simply aren't going to believe that it was an accident. If there's a new TV deal imminent that gives ludicrous sums of additional income, selling clubs simply aren't going to believe that it's not there to tap into.

 

Once you step beyond signing only players that have contract clauses, club disputes or are unattached, you have to compromise at some stage.

 

As with any endeavour, there is obviously a need to be flexible at times. But I believe that compromise has to come from a position of strength if it is to benefit us.

 

Take the Debuchy case for example. We've apparently made three separate bids, each larger than the previous. Lille have not moved an inch from their original asking price. (If anything, they've moved the goalposts on us.)

 

Are we the ones who are being unreasonable and inflexible? And what sort of message does it send when we just throw our hands up and pay them whatever they want?

[Guest BooBoo]

I think we're sometimes guilty of overly congratulating ourselves re our transfer strategy. Yes we've secured some bargains but we've also missed a lot of targets.

[Mole_Toonfan]

Don't really consider paying around £6m for Debuchy "caving in" It's still a very affordable price and fair for both parties IMO.

 

I'm not asking us to go completely mad but i think sometimes going forward we might have to pay what the selling club wants if the valuation isn't that far apart to get who we want.

 

Still don't expect us to do that mind.

 

 

[oldtype]

I think we're sometimes guilty of overly congratulating ourselves re our transfer strategy. Yes we've secured some bargains but we've also missed a lot of targets.

 

Everyone misses out on targets.

 

What's more important is the fact that we haven't brought in a single overpaid failure since the adoption of the current policy.

[Guest icemanblue]

So glad I'm out of the country for the last two days of the window. It's going to be grim.

[Hanshithispantz]

So is your point that if we compromise in this one instance to secure Debuchy, then we will have no choice but to 'unilaterally cave in' on all other deals further down the line? If so and there's no going back, how did we get to where we are now?

 

No, my point is that if we cave in once it increases the likelihood that in the future selling clubs will make further unrealistic demands, which could be much more detrimental to us over the long term than not getting Debuchy right now

 

 

I just think that we can't have it all ways; if we finish as high as fifth in the world's highest profile league, selling clubs simply aren't going to believe that we can't afford more money. If we do it by buying players cheaply who increase in value dramatically, selling clubs simply aren't going to believe that it was an accident. If there's a new TV deal imminent that gives ludicrous sums of additional income, selling clubs simply aren't going to believe that it's not there to tap into.

 

Once you step beyond signing only players that have contract clauses, club disputes or are unattached, you have to compromise at some stage.

 

As with any endeavour, there is obviously a need to be flexible at times. But I believe that compromise has to come from a position of strength if it is to benefit us.

 

Take the Debuchy case for example. We've apparently made three separate bids, each larger than the previous. Lille have not moved an inch from their original asking price. (If anything, they've moved the goalposts on us.)

 

Are we the ones who are being unreasonable and inflexible? And what sort of message does it send when we just throw our hands up and pay them whatever they want?

Tbf to Lille, they haven't moved from a very reasonable asking price, some would even say cheap in this day and age.

[Guest BooBoo]

Modric, Woodgate, NZogbia, Gameiro, Gervinho, De Jong, Douglas.

 

That's just the ones off the top of my head. I'd say our miss rate is pretty high.

[oldtype]

I'm honestly not qualified to decide on whether that's a reasonable price or not, but it does beg the question, if 6m for Debuchy is such a no-brainer than why has nobody else offered to pay it?