hypochondriac

Youd hope some of the few we bring in will be good enough. Potential for Shea Charles, Alcaraz abd then the others we will likely lose in Tella, kwp and Adams.

And if you don't buy players because you're not sure if they will be good enough for the Premier league and then we dint go up as a consequence? Did we worry about if Jos Hooiveld, tadanari Lee, Jaidi, Danny fox, Lee Barnard etc etc were good enough for the prem? No we got them in to get us promoted.

Maybe we should worry about the Premier league if we actually get there? Just a thought.

Bit shit though. No one wants to potentially win the World Cup wearing blue.

Both of those options are gambles.

The point is that with Adams we know he is going to get us goals and almost certainly throughout the season. With whoever else we get in we don't really know what they will give us. Given our history and given the huge amount of positions we already need to recruit for in a week or so, I can see why a number of people are voicing concerns. Also bringing in a striker who is less successful will really piss me off in a way that a misfiring full back just wouldn't.

I think that getting his replacement wrong coukd very well be the difference between promotion or failure. I don't think we have to roll the dice, it's a decision we are deciding to make and one which I do understand to be fair I just don't agree with the decision if we make it. The post above from S-Clarke sums up my thoughts rather well. I simply don't have enough faith in the club to adequately replace the players we may now lose in the small amount of time we have available and being able to convince clubs to sell for reasonable prices in the final days of the transfer window.

Yes I think selling Che Adams is a risk that we don't need to take. I of course hope that that risk pays off but I would rather we didn't do so.

I accept that that is most likely what they will do. If it costs us promotion though then it's an idiotic decision and underlines the folly of looking at a club purely in those terms (see our analytical approach to taking on Jones last year as an example.)

Personally I find the comments moaning about that alleged behaviour to be even more tedious but maybe that's just me. Let's remember you were moaning and filling this board with tedium all of Friday night so it's a bit rich to be moaning about others being boring.

He said earlier that the reason he didn't start the season is because it was expected that he would have been sold (some speculation that he was possibly being sold to Bournemouth.) I assume he was working on the assumption that he wouldn't be here and so set up early in the season as if he wouldn't be. Makes perfect sense and doesn't mean he doesn't want him.

You could easily make a business case for keeping Adams based upon him being wildly successful this year and getting us promotion.

I think there probably are. I'm not sure as we get closer to the end of the window that there are many who would want to sign for us, are better than Adams, have a proven record in the championship and are good value. Maybe I'll be proven wrong but I called it as I saw it last year about the lack of a striker and that was ultimately correct.

It's unclear that Martin wants him other than the multiple quotes of him literally saying "I really want to keep him"

So if we end up keeping Alcaraz, what would be the business case for that? Surely you'd offer him around and get rid to make some cash?

I think people would have been much more up for getting rid weeks ago before there were less than two weeks to go until the end of the window with no time to get a new striker in and up to speed with Martin's style, after we've sold the majority of our talent and when many of the championship talents have been sold or been made otherwise unavailable. I can totally see how under the current circumstances, people would rather hang onto what we have.

If it's all about business, then why spend any money at all? Just get a load of frees in or league one players on lower wages. That would save us loads of cash, probably a fair bit more than 15 million.

It would be financial suicide if we hadn't just made the most money from sales that nay championship club has ever made by a far distance which probably means we aren't really playing by the same set of rules as a Swansea, Sheffield United or even Norwich.

So selling Adams at this point of the window and trying to replace his goals is not a risk? Because that's my opinion and it's not foolish in the slightest. The risk might pay off and anyone we bring in may be better buts it's undeniably a risk and not one imo that we should be taking since if the risk doesn't work out it would most likely cost us promotion. Bizarre that you'd consider an opinion like that to be foolish but crack on if it makes you feel better.

Which is precisely my point. Apparently this amounts to "having a hard time" as opposed to typing some things on a message board whilst watching something on TV.

Wow! You can have any opinion you want, simply talking about the risks involved in selling all our best players and trying to replace the all in the last week or two of the window as opposed to maybe keeping one or two, isn't "bedwetting" or some other type of unacceptable opinion. It's a perfectly legitimate view to hold. Of course I will pass comment when inevitably we bring replacements in which we clearly will but I'm perfectly entitled to view that as a risk and question why we wouldn't look to keep the likes of Adams and Tella. I'll be giving my opinion about the wisdom of selling at this point of the window and also passing comment about the replacements and our subsequent performances. Shockingly you can do both and you can also have an opinion that develops as things change. You should try it some time.

He said that was a misrepresentation and he meant that based on the press conference of Friday he assumed we were getting two midfielders in this week.

The Echo journalist didn't say that.

Absolutely. It's short sighted.

Why did I mention they would replace players with a lack of quality? You've made that up.