The cupboard is almost bare

Mid table is the ideal. No worries about Europe or relegation. Consistently in the top league and with the opportunity to give one of the big boys a bloody nose now and again. Sounds great !

maybe a cup run every few seasons?

True, the value of the pound is falling pretty rapidly.

Fair play.

maybe a cup run every few seasons?

Not bothered tbh.

Personally I'd prefer some identity back. The feel good factor is seeing us win no matter what league we are in. I enjoyed the lower leagues, we played decent football, had more games and got some success. Saturday's gave me the good feeling of having seen my team win - it didn't matter what league we were in. We also played more games and weren't being ripped off just to pay silly wages. I'm going to be radical but if relegation meant that again I'd take it. I'm fed up with being treated like a mug by The Premier League and dare I say it our club too. I'm also fed up seeing players just come and go.

In the summer we replaced Pelle, Mane, Wanyama & Juanmi with Boufal, Hojbjerg, Redmond & Pied. We also had Austin from the previous window and signed Alex McCarthy in goal. Of course our performances have gone backwards, because none of the replacements are currently as good as their predecessors. It could be a minor blip before the likes of Hojbjerg and Redmond go on to become world beaters, but equally we might have just failed to find players of the same quality. Pied and McCarthy are two 'extra' signings, but in truth they were brought in for competition/backup rather than because they were tipped for future stardom.

Had we used the extra, say £20m, to invest in two other promising £10m players, we would have increased the chances of upgrading the team (if not right now, then maybe in a season or two), and at the very least would have a stronger squad and more tactical 'possibilities'.

I know it's easier said than done to put this into operation, but the club tends to pride itself on its scouting ability and transfer policy, so it's hard to buy the argument that there simply weren't any options for us. My point is that our policy of selling our players is not a bad one in itself, but becomes so if we don't reinvest wisely and fully.

In the summer we replaced Pelle, Mane, Wanyama & Juanmi with Boufal, Hojbjerg, Redmond & Pied. We also had Austin from the previous window and signed Alex McCarthy in goal. Of course our performances have gone backwards, because none of the replacements are currently as good as their predecessors. It could be a minor blip before the likes of Hojbjerg and Redmond go on to become world beaters, but equally we might have just failed to find players of the same quality. Pied and McCarthy are two 'extra' signings, but in truth they were brought in for competition/backup rather than because they were tipped for future stardom.

 

Had we used the extra, say £20m, to invest in two other promising £10m players, we would have increased the chances of upgrading the team (if not right now, then maybe in a season or two), and at the very least would have a stronger squad and more tactical 'possibilities'.

 

I know it's easier said than done to put this into operation, but the club tends to pride itself on its scouting ability and transfer policy, so it's hard to buy the argument that there simply weren't any options for us. My point is that our policy of selling our players is not a bad one in itself, but becomes so if we don't reinvest wisely and fully.

'our policy of selling our players is not a bad one in itself, but becomes so if we don't reinvest wisely and fully'

You cant go on selling your best players and losing good managers,eventually your get caught out. Its like building a house with bricks and selling the mortar.

'our policy of selling our players is not a bad one in itself, but becomes so if we don't reinvest wisely and fully'

 

You cant go on selling your best players and losing good managers,eventually your get caught out. Its like building a house with bricks and selling the mortar.

Yes, you can. Did you read my entire post? Of course it's not easy but if you identify the right targets then replacing one player with two that eventually become as good (or almost as good) improves the team. My post was actually being critical of the club, because even though the apparent business model makes sense, I do not believe they have gone about implementing it effectively; one-for-one is much riskier, takes longer to come to frutition, has dips along the way, and prevents you from mounting a serious challenge to the top teams because you are in a perpetual cycle.

Funny how when we are doing badly the players get evaluated as not good enough for the league but yet last season many of the same players were apparently evaluated as good enough for the prem. Short sighted idiots in football in every direction you look. It isn't the players, it is the tactics behind them (both on the pitch and in the boardroom) that has been wrong this season.

The real trauma of the club failing to capitalise on the success of the last few years and in failing to appoint an exciting football approach is the loss of support from youth. In the millennial age of immediate reward and instant gratification there is no time for Sports entertainment businesses to rest on their laurels. If Saints execs do not regularly provide a product that excites and delivers enjoyable competitive football then they will quickly lose generations of our youngest supporters who are weened to buy a product and then expect immediate entertainment, success, glory, and big image branding all over their favorite social sites.

Yes it sucks but this is the reality of modern and evolving culture. The club either move with it or fall behind.

Yes, you can. Did you read my entire post? Of course it's not easy but if you identify the right targets then replacing one player with two that eventually become as good (or almost as good) improves the team. My post was actually being critical of the club, because even though the apparent business model makes sense, I do not believe they have gone about implementing it effectively; one-for-one is much riskier, takes longer to come to frutition, has dips along the way, and prevents you from mounting a serious challenge to the top teams because you are in a perpetual cycle.

This is the problem with your thesis. The Prem is an unforgiving league, and the amount of time available for a player to eventually become as good (or almost as good) as the player being sold, is finite. Can we afford a whole season for a replacement player to become "almost as good"? Hodjberg is a classic case in point. At the beginning of the season I was very pleased with his recruitment - there was definite quality to be seen, and I thought he would quickly get up to speed in the League. But he seems to have gone backwards as the season has progressed. Is that because of rotation, or coaching? How long can you give a player like him to get up to speed when your team results have you heading to the bottom regions of the league? One season? Two? Clasie is another case in point. Do you continue to give these players time to develop, with an eye on the profit from a future transfer, to the detriment of the development of the team? Or do we accept that the team will not develop, and we are merely in a holding pattern (spiral) while we seek to generate annual profits from our transfer policy? It is a fine, fine line between this strategy being a success and a dismal failure IMO.

Was taking a look at the squad earlier and its frightening how saturated we now are with very middle of the road players - assuming VVD is sold in the summer, we will have arguably a worse squad than we did under Adkins (2013)

 

We have genuinely ran out of players to sell (to the top 6 sides) and we just look fully bloated with unexceptional players.

 

What’s gone wrong with our famous recruitment process - the magic black box? We have one of the most expensive squads in Europe but full of totally bang average premier league players.

 

GKs

Forster

McCarthy

Taylor

 

Defenders

Van Dijk

Fonte

Gardos

Yoshida

Pied

McQueen

Stephens

Bertrand

Targett

Soares

Martina

 

Midfielders

Clasie

Romeu

Ward-Prowse

Höjbjerg

Davis

Reed

Isgrove

 

Forwards

Boufal

Sims

Tadic

Redmond

Rodríguez

Austin

Long

I think we would be doing better with Adkins at the helm. Puel has no idea how to attack in the premier league.

This is the problem with your thesis. The Prem is an unforgiving league, and the amount of time available for a player to eventually become as good (or almost as good) as the player being sold, is finite. Can we afford a whole season for a replacement player to become "almost as good"? Hodjberg is a classic case in point. At the beginning of the season I was very pleased with his recruitment - there was definite quality to be seen, and I thought he would quickly get up to speed in the League. But he seems to have gone backwards as the season has progressed. Is that because of rotation, or coaching? How long can you give a player like him to get up to speed when your team results have you heading to the bottom regions of the league? One season? Two? Clasie is another case in point. Do you continue to give these players time to develop, with an eye on the profit from a future transfer, to the detriment of the development of the team? Or do we accept that the team will not develop, and we are merely in a holding pattern (spiral) while we seek to generate annual profits from our transfer policy? It is a fine, fine line between this strategy being a success and a dismal failure IMO.

Ok yes I can see your point here, and Hojbjerg is a good example of a player that now seems to be treading water after initial early promise. The reason for me phrasing it like this though is that it's clearly a big ask, and probably unrealistic to sell your best player and sign someone for half the money who steps into the team and is immediately an upgrade. Mane took a while (half a season?) before he regularly showed excellence, and Boufal has shown flashes of brilliance but is not yet close to being 'as good' as the player we lost in Mane. Those are more the transfers I'm thinking about rather than perservering for 3 or 4 seasons with a player just in case they suddenly have a break out season - which is probably more the case with someone like Clasie.

I also agree that it is a fine line, but at the same time for clubs of our size I'm not sure what viable alternatives there are to sustained success? Especially when we can (if you take this claim at face value) attract good players because they know they will have an opportunity to progress and then leave. People may not agree with this strategy, which is fine, but you can't have your cake and eat it.

This is the problem with your thesis. The Prem is an unforgiving league, and the amount of time available for a player to eventually become as good (or almost as good) as the player being sold, is finite. Can we afford a whole season for a replacement player to become "almost as good"? Hodjberg is a classic case in point. At the beginning of the season I was very pleased with his recruitment - there was definite quality to be seen, and I thought he would quickly get up to speed in the League. But he seems to have gone backwards as the season has progressed. Is that because of rotation, or coaching? How long can you give a player like him to get up to speed when your team results have you heading to the bottom regions of the league? One season? Two? Clasie is another case in point. Do you continue to give these players time to develop, with an eye on the profit from a future transfer, to the detriment of the development of the team? Or do we accept that the team will not develop, and we are merely in a holding pattern (spiral) while we seek to generate annual profits from our transfer policy? It is a fine, fine line between this strategy being a success and a dismal failure IMO.

very very good point. All we can hope for right now is that players like Hojbjerg begin to find their feet (again) and we see improvement from the other young players we are waiting on. One thing RK (or the transfer committee) ensured was that the transition from Lambert, Lovren, Shaw and Lallana to the next batch was a little easier by bringing in slightly more senior players in Pelle and Tadic that hit the ground running. Mind you we did the same with Classie and that hasn't worked as well.

I think we would be doing better with Adkins at the helm. Puel has no idea how to attack in the premier league.

Definitely more entertaining football

I think we would be doing better with Adkins at the helm. Puel has no idea how to attack in the premier league.

Lovely bloke Nigel, and probably out of his depth in the Prem when relieved of his duties. He did however trust his players, and allow them to express themselves, and there was never a dull moment - all about entertainment and positivity. Claude is also treading water, but by comparison his tenure feels like drowning by attaching weights to your balls until you eventually drown...

Funny how when we are doing badly the players get evaluated as not good enough for the league but yet last season many of the same players were apparently evaluated as good enough for the prem. Short sighted idiots in football in every direction you look. It isn't the players, it is the tactics behind them (both on the pitch and in the boardroom) that has been wrong this season.

 

The real trauma of the club failing to capitalise on the success of the last few years and in failing to appoint an exciting football approach is the loss of support from youth. In the millennial age of immediate reward and instant gratification there is no time for Sports entertainment businesses to rest on their laurels. If Saints execs do not regularly provide a product that excites and delivers enjoyable competitive football then they will quickly lose generations of our youngest supporters who are weened to buy a product and then expect immediate entertainment, success, glory, and big image branding all over their favorite social sites.

 

Yes it sucks but this is the reality of modern and evolving culture. The club either move with it or fall behind.

I agree with this . Other than Redmond I think most of our players are ok for 8th to 6th if used effectively. Something Puel seems incapable of .

Yes Cuco and Prowse are poor but ok for back up .

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

One gem in the cupboard was thought to be redmond, a young english, fast and with great dribbing skill. If he could have scored a few more goals this seasons, his value should have been tripled and we could sell him in this summer for profit. However, his potential has never been realized although he has been, as of right, our regular this season at the expenses of long and Jrod. In this summer, we will no longer be renowned as a selling club for big 6, and we only have VDD in our cupboard.

I agree with this . Other than Redmond I think most of our players are ok for 8th to 6th if used effectively. Something Puel seems incapable of .

 

Yes Cuco and Prowse are poor but ok for back up .

 

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

One gem in the cupboard was thought to be redmond, a young english, fast and with great dribbing skill. If he could have scored a few more goals this seasons, his value should have been tripled and we could sell him in this summer for profit. However, his potential has never been realized although he has been, as of right, our regular this season at the expenses of long and Jrod. In this summer, we will no longer be renowned as a selling club for big 6, and we only have VDD in our cupboard.

I believe Redmond in last years team or our Mopo team would have been fantastic. I don't think we are getting the best or anywhere near his potential out of him yet.

However, his potential has never been realized

He's 22, in his first year, out of position, at a new club in a team struggling for form. I'd give him some more time.

Regarding pens - really ?, are you confident when Tadic steps up to take one then ? - we had a very worrying period post Lambert when our pen taking was frankly poor, Austin has solved that so it's a definate bonus and counts. SFC think you have been quite kind with a few of those, and harsh on a few others - I'd go based on this season..

GKs

Forster - lower prem

McCarthy - championship

Taylor - Div 1 (from recent career)

Defenders

Van Dijk - Top prem

Fonte - Mid prem

Gardos - champ

Yoshida - lower prem

Pied - unknown

McQueen - lower prem

Stephens - champ

Bertrand - top prem

Targett - championship

Soares - mid prem

Martina - championship

 

Midfielders

Clasie - lower prem

Romeu - mid prem

Ward-Prowse - champ

Höjbjerg - champ

Davis - mid prem

Reed - champ

Isgrove - div 1

 

Forwards

Boufal - lower prem

Sims - championship

Tadic - lower prem

Redmond - lower prem

Rodríguez - champ

Austin - mid prem

Long - champ

 

That said I think there is potential for the following to rise above their current rankings: Redmond, Hojberg, McQueen, Sims, Soares, McCarthy, J-Rod, Forster

Bit harsh on Boufal I would say he's got the potential to exceed lower prem quality

He's 22, in his first year, out of position, at a new club in a team struggling for form. I'd give him some more time.

His own form and this statement is not mutually exclusive to be fair.

Had he still been playing up front then I would agree he is being played out of position but ever since we went to a 4-3-3 with two wide players he should be in his element. He shows glimpses but his decision making or execution lets him down too much. I don't know if that will change - he still seems like the same Nathan Redmond that frustrated at Norwich 3 years ago to me but I appreciate progress with young players is not always linear.

I am desperate for him to play with instinct more and use his pace when he has the ball as much as when he doesn't. There was a break on Saturday in the second half where it was 4 on 3 (Saints had the ball and the man advantage) and Puel was on the sideline screaming at Redmond to move quickly and Redmond slowed things down and played a poor ball behind Tadic's stride which brought things to a halt and Puel went absolutely berserk.

i really think the magic black box was effectively just our Head of Recruitment, Paul Mitchell, and that when he went to Tottenham it went with him. Yes, I know it is a room full of videos and not a box but it was the analyst who interpreted all of the data who was the real box of tricks. I believe he was responsible for identifying all of our great signings, both players and managers, from Pochettino through Wanyama and Mane to van Dijk. When he want to Tottenham, he not only took Wanyama and Alderweireld with him but also a couple of players he'd have brought here: Dele Alli for 5 million from his former club of MK Dons and Kieran Trippier.The only reason we got van Dijk when Mitchell left was that Spurs opted for Alderweireld instead. Since Mitchell's departure our dealings in the transfer market have been poor and have led to a general downgrading in the quality of the squad. Without Mitchell our emperor has no clothes.

I can't buy all this, "only we have the black box" business. You really think teams who spend 90 million on 1 player, can't afford to buy some monitors, some servers and analysts? Its because they simply cannot afford to buy an unknown player from a lower level league and risk him not having an instant impact, and plus risk losing out on all the publicity of signing a pogba. Us on the other hand don't have all that pressure on us, we can buy a mane or a juanmi, our fans will sit and watch if he's a gem or a dud, they won't sh@t the bed like " oh! Sh@t, we need Antoine griezzman even tho we already have zlatan on 300,000k a week!"

Are you rating Cuco higher than Redmond?

In so far that he can play his position somewhat effectively yes . Redmond rarely looks useful

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

In so far that he can play his position somewhat effectively yes . Redmond rarely looks useful

 

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

We have some fantastic players in that list. VVD aside, Bertrand, Cedric, Romeu, Boufal and Davis are all far from unexceptional and we have some very exciting young talent in Sims, Hojbjerg, McQueen and Reed (recently).

 

I'm still struggling to understand the Charlie Austin love in that seems to be happening. Yes he's scored 9 goals but 4 of them were penalties and I'm yet to watch a match where he's been the best player on the pitch. I'd go as far as saying that at Palace Away he was embarrassing. Even if he was fit I'd still pick Jay over him.

When Austin got hurt he was accounting for something like 45% of our total goals. This was 2nd in the PL I think, and rediculously high. They guy is by far the best finisher we have. He was on track for 15-20 PL goals. He did this with the same formation and players that Long and Jrod are playing with, so not ideal, however he was getting it done. He is also much better than the other two in the air and around the goal. The players knew this and had a lot of confidence they could score when he was in there. With all the complaining about lack of scoring now, and losing Pelle, here is a guy who was scoring and was replacing Pelle's output (in fact probably exceeding it), but you'd rather knock him? You can't say results matter to the strikers we have now, but "looks" matter when discussing Austin. Given a full PL season Austin has proven he can score 15-20 goals. He had 18 with QPR and was on track for that this season. How many other strikers do we have, or does any team have, that can say that?

The guy is by far the best finisher we have. He was on track for 15-20 PL goals.

As much as I agree that we really miss him at the moment, Charlie Austin scored 6 goals in 5 games out of 14 games he played in the League and 2 of those goals were penalties. So that’s 4 field goals in 14 matches. To say he's by far the best finisher seems to be overstating it a bit, based on those figures. Both Rodriguez and Redmond have scored 3 field goals in the PL this season.

I believe Austin scored 6 goals in 13 games, putting aside the "non PL" league goals he got. You can ding him for making penalties I guess, but at least he makes them unlike others. Long currently has 1 PL goal in 17 games, and Rodriguez has 3 in 13 appearances. Its an apples to apples comparison because early on Austin wasn't starting either, plus they have played in the same system with the same players. 6 goals in 13 games is something like 17 goals in 38, which is pretty much what he did with QPR too. So of all our guys he does have a track record of scoring.

Look I like Rodriguez, and I also like Long although I think he should be a change of pace off the bench ideally. I'd love to see a traditional 2 striker setup with Austin and Rodriguez upfront. Put Redmond and Long outside, with Boufal and Tadic inside. My issue is that people seem to need to "pick" one striker to like. Austin came in and did what he was supposed to do, fill Pelle's stats, which he did. He also gives us more of a presence in the box and air than the others do, however the others bring something to the table too. No one striker is the perfect Arguello. I see no reason for anyone to be bashing Austin. What exactly didn't he do, and where would we be without his goals.

I don't know if you're referring to me, but I'm definitely not bashing Austin. I'd much rather her were available. And it IS very important to have someone who'll score a penalty as well. I just meant that the idea that he's by far our best finisher seems off, because of the numbers: 4 field goals out of 13 vs. Rodriguez' 3 out of 13. I'm thinking both could do better.

I'd love to see a traditional 2 striker setup with Austin and Rodriguez upfront. Put Redmond and Long outside, with Boufal and Tadic inside.

I'm not 'bashing' Austin, I just disagree with the notion that he's this incredible striker who's head and shoulders above Long or Jay. Statistically Austin completes the least dribbles, is dispossessed the most, has the poorest first touch of the 3, and personally I think he's the least suited to our current tactics.

Having 2 strikers playing alongside each other would be an interesting change of pace. Last time Austin and Jay played together up front they had 38 goals between them in a season for Burnley...

I can't buy all this, "only we have the black box" business. You really think teams who spend 90 million on 1 player, can't afford to buy some monitors, some servers and analysts? Its because they simply cannot afford to buy an unknown player from a lower level league and risk him not having an instant impact, and plus risk losing out on all the publicity of signing a pogba. Us on the other hand don't have all that pressure on us, we can buy a mane or a juanmi, our fans will sit and watch if he's a gem or a dud, they won't sh@t the bed like " oh! Sh@t, we need Antoine griezzman even tho we already have zlatan on 300,000k a week!"

I think all the talk of the mysterious black box was a bit of PR spin, which first appeared in one of Les Reed's videos, with the implication being that he was in charge of it. If there ever were any secrets about it, there certainly aren't now because Spurs will have them too. The real key to our success in finding talented players was our head of recruitment, chief scout and 'black box' info analyst, Paul Mitchell.

Talking of Antoine Griezmann, I'm surprised nobody at the club spotted him when he played at St Mary's for Real Sociedad in a pre-season friendly in 2013. I certainly did. Even though he only came on as a sub, he caught the eye, as he ran along the left wing in front of the Itchen Stand in the 2nd half not only because of his bleached white hair but also for the fact that he was very obviously the most gifted player on the pitch. I actually posted on another Saints message board after the match that we should sign him.

In the summer we replaced Pelle, Mane, Wanyama & Juanmi with Boufal, Hojbjerg, Redmond & Pied. We also had Austin from the previous window and signed Alex McCarthy in goal. Of course our performances have gone backwards, because none of the replacements are currently as good as their predecessors. It could be a minor blip before the likes of Hojbjerg and Redmond go on to become world beaters, but equally we might have just failed to find players of the same quality. Pied and McCarthy are two 'extra' signings, but in truth they were brought in for competition/backup rather than because they were tipped for future stardom.

 

Had we used the extra, say £20m, to invest in two other promising £10m players, we would have increased the chances of upgrading the team (if not right now, then maybe in a season or two), and at the very least would have a stronger squad and more tactical 'possibilities'.

 

I know it's easier said than done to put this into operation, but the club tends to pride itself on its scouting ability and transfer policy, so it's hard to buy the argument that there simply weren't any options for us. My point is that our policy of selling our players is not a bad one in itself, but becomes so if we don't reinvest wisely and fully.

Why do we only have to look at promising £10m players? Why not sign 1 or 2 27 year olds? Not much resale value, but at least we could get a good 4 years from them.

Hence the reason we are showcasing more youngsters this season !

Why do we only have to look at promising £10m players? Why not sign 1 or 2 27 year olds? Not much resale value, but at least we could get a good 4 years from them.

I think you've answered your own question. It's about their resale value. The board's priority is for the business to make a profit. Even taking that into consideration, I think the club is often in too much of a rush to cash in on them. We could afford to keep players like Mane here for 3 years of their 5-year contracts rather than just 2 and probably get an even bigger transfer fee for them.

This is the problem with your thesis. The Prem is an unforgiving league, and the amount of time available for a player to eventually become as good (or almost as good) as the player being sold, is finite. Can we afford a whole season for a replacement player to become "almost as good"? Hodjberg is a classic case in point. At the beginning of the season I was very pleased with his recruitment - there was definite quality to be seen, and I thought he would quickly get up to speed in the League. But he seems to have gone backwards as the season has progressed. Is that because of rotation, or coaching? How long can you give a player like him to get up to speed when your team results have you heading to the bottom regions of the league? One season? Two? Clasie is another case in point. Do you continue to give these players time to develop, with an eye on the profit from a future transfer, to the detriment of the development of the team? Or do we accept that the team will not develop, and we are merely in a holding pattern (spiral) while we seek to generate annual profits from our transfer policy? It is a fine, fine line between this strategy being a success and a dismal failure IMO.

So by and large you agree with each other?

I think you've answered your own question. It's about their resale value. The board's priority is for the business to make a profit. Even taking that into consideration, I think the club is often in too much of a rush to cash in on them. We could afford to keep players like Mane here for 3 years of their 5-year contracts rather than just 2 and probably get an even bigger transfer fee for them.

I agree. The team is no more than a vehicle to improve players worth before they are sold on.

As a supporter, I think it f*cking sucks. Then we get all the PR bullsh*t from Les and Ralph to try and pull the wool over our eyes.

I agree. The team is no more than a vehicle to improve players worth before they are sold on.

 

As a supporter, I think it f*cking sucks. Then we get all the PR bullsh*t from Les and Ralph to try and pull the wool over our eyes.

This post made me laugh out loud in real life.

Comedy gold.

An idiot said that Matina was better than Redmond.

Just think about it, someone actually took the time, thought about it, within the bounds of their obviously limited capacity, and concluded that Martina was better than Redmond.

F_uck me, we have some of the dumbest fans in the world, most of whom it would appear, can be found on this thread.

I seriously doubt if many of you could actually manage to walk and talk at the same time you're so thick.

It's good to have someone like you around VFTT. Someone who's always objective, always right, always graceful. Thank you.

This post made me laugh out loud in real life.

 

Comedy gold.

Why?

Why?

Well it is just ridiculous analysis of the situation which is pretty realistic for a mid table team

I'm not 'bashing' Austin, I just disagree with the notion that he's this incredible striker who's head and shoulders above Long or Jay. Statistically Austin completes the least dribbles, is dispossessed the most, has the poorest first touch of the 3, and personally I think he's the least suited to our current tactics.

 

Having 2 strikers playing alongside each other would be an interesting change of pace. Last time Austin and Jay played together up front they had 38 goals between them in a season for Burnley...

38 goals works for me.

Well it is just ridiculous analysis of the situation which is pretty realistic for a mid table team

I don't think it's ridiculous. We look to sign players of a certain age, so we can sell them on for a large profit. All well and good, but don't you think it's gone a bit too far? Doesn't do much for continuity, and whilst the club are enjoying the massive TV deal, surely we're not that hard up.

Would we, for example, consider signing a 27 year old like Morgan? (My point is his age and talent, don't get into a debate about him per se). A really good proven player who would give us a good few years at this stage of his career. At the moment, I would have to say we wouldn't.

Why?

Because it's paranoid hysterical nonsense, that's why.

Because it's paranoid hysterical nonsense, that's why.

Are you on your period?

Are you on your period?

Please just keep posting your opinions on this forum. It gets me through my menstrual cycle with laughter in my heart.

Keep the gold coming.

Why do we only have to look at promising £10m players? Why not sign 1 or 2 27 year olds? Not much resale value, but at least we could get a good 4 years from them.

Nordic Saint has addressed this question in some part above, but I was also just giving an example of how we could have spent the remaining money rather than not spending it all. My example was also in keeping with the business model, which is why I chose it. But yes you could think of other "types" of player that we could buy instead.

Please just keep posting your opinions on this forum. It gets me through my menstrual cycle with laughter in my heart.Keep the gold coming.

Nordic Saint has addressed this question in some part above, but I was also just giving an example of how we could have spent the remaining money rather than not spending it all. My example was also in keeping with the business model, which is why I chose it. But yes you could think of other "types" of player that we could buy instead.

We are just a squad on bad form. Have a good spell of games with a few back from injury and that list would look a whole lot better.

An idiot said that Matina was better than Redmond.

 

Just think about it, someone actually took the time, thought about it, within the bounds of their obviously limited capacity, and concluded that Martina was better than Redmond.

 

F_uck me, we have some of the dumbest fans in the world, most of whom it would appear, can be found on this thread.

 

I seriously doubt if many of you could actually manage to walk and talk at the same time you're so thick.

Thank you for the insult ?

Cuco maybe limited but he does whats expected of him . We know his level .

Redmond rarely does what is expected of him .

I don't need you to agree .

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk