Jump to content

January Transfer Window 2024


Master Bates
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Saint Garrett said:

If we are to lose KWP (which I think we will in the summer) I'd like us to go after Milan van Ewijk, bloke at Coventry. I know bugger all about him, but when I've seen him, he looks class IMO.

He does look good, Isiah Jones at Boro too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, davefizzy14 said:

Benson is clearly our number one target. And its been reported he wants to join us. Hoping this happens quickly.

23 minutes ago, Wade Garrett said:

Wouldn’t hold your breath.

Surely it's in the transfer window rules that we need to have at least one deal sheet move each window? Given the supposed tension between Burnley and us, following their failed Tella pursuit, perhaps Benson is our deal sheet guy?

Edited by Ivan Katalinic's 'tache
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Saint Garrett said:

If we are to lose KWP (which I think we will in the summer) I'd like us to go after Milan van Ewijk, bloke at Coventry. I know bugger all about him, but when I've seen him, he looks class IMO.

Hopefully if we go up he would wan to stay - especially if he has children of school age he would not wan to  uproot . 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, woodsaint1 said:

Don't know how much accuracy there is in the latest reporting, or agents putting stories out there, but us and Leeds seem to have been linked with the same targets for a number of years now - Piroe, Benson, Johnson, Perraud, Diallo, Brooks, Paintsil, Duk, Lavia to name just a few

Still trying to work out if Manning was a ‘win’ for us. Lavia was a nice profit for us at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Give it to Ron said:

How is a free transfer not a win?

What did he do wrong defensively in the last 4 games?

Free transfer/low risk is a fair point. He’s still our weak link though IMO, although his performances are improving of late. This a player brought in to hit the ground running and be well versed in Martin-Ball but I still see huge gaps being left when he plays that Bree doesn’t seem to leave when he plays. He’s also not contributing anything like the goals or assists for us that he did at Swansea. Creating our most goal scoring opportunities though to be fair to him, helped by how spread out across the team that is due to our style. Is the defensive side that I remain unconvinced on.

I’m a bit underwhelmed overall and pretty sure on promotion he will need to be replaced. Therefore ‘beating’ Leeds to his signature doesn’t feel like the win it did when we signed him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, goodymatt said:

Free transfer/low risk is a fair point. He’s still our weak link though IMO, although his performances are improving of late. This a player brought in to hit the ground running and be well versed in Martin-Ball but I still see huge gaps being left when he plays that Bree doesn’t seem to leave when he plays. He’s also not contributing anything like the goals or assists for us that he did at Swansea. Creating our most goal scoring opportunities though to be fair to him, helped by how spread out across the team that is due to our style. Is the defensive side that I remain unconvinced on.

I’m a bit underwhelmed overall and pretty sure on promotion he will need to be replaced. Therefore ‘beating’ Leeds to his signature doesn’t feel like the win it did when we signed him.

Not arguing about who I would prefer but Bree is injured and it’s allowed KWP to play in what his best position is for us and be more creative.

He does tuck in too far but it’s not cost us and as say last few games not done anything wrong.

There is a stat above that says he is creative for us and as I say for a free transfer it’s a win so far. Although he is due a mistake like Baz.

We need a number of replacements if promoted not just him.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Give it to Ron said:

How is a free transfer not a win?

when they turn out to be fucking shit and you have to pay them for four bloody years. Explain how that is winning?

That's not to say I think Manning is fucking shit or his transfer a bad one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Chez said:

when they turn out to be fucking shit and you have to pay them for four bloody years. Explain how that is winning?

That's not to say I think Manning is fucking shit or his transfer a bad one. 

 

9 minutes ago, Chez said:

when they turn out to be fucking shit and you have to pay them for four bloody years. Explain how that is winning?

That's not to say I think Manning is fucking shit or his transfer a bad one. 

Who have we had on loan for four years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Give it to Ron said:

Not arguing about who I would prefer but Bree is injured and it’s allowed KWP to play in what his best position is for us and be more creative.

He does tuck in too far but it’s not cost us and as say last few games not done anything wrong.

There is a stat above that says he is creative for us and as I say for a free transfer it’s a win so far. Although he is due a mistake like Baz.

We need a number of replacements if promoted not just him.

Tucking in would be in order to give KWP the freedom of the right hand side, leaving 3 at the back protected by Flynn.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Chez said:

when they turn out to be fucking shit and you have to pay them for four bloody years. Explain how that is winning?

That's not to say I think Manning is fucking shit or his transfer a bad one. 

So who then ? In Manning case irrelevant as that’s who we were talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, notnowcato said:

Tucking in would be in order to give KWP the freedom of the right hand side, leaving 3 at the back protected by Flynn.

Agreed plus I noticed Smallbone was covering far more against Wednesday and we didn’t tuck in as much.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Chez said:

So basically, if we sell a player in January, that means in your eyes we aren't doing everything possible to get promoted immediately?

You might have a point, but in my eyes you do still have to balance the books whilst going for it (promotion) and part of that is ensuring assets don't leave the club for free.

If we got offered £10m for Che now, that would be a hard to turn down, but if we spent all of it on a replacement (be that a loan or even part of a larger transfer fee), would that not be a sign were were still going for it whole hog?

  

 

 

I read that as £10 and still found myself nodding in agreement!

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, woodsaint1 said:

Don't know how much accuracy there is in the latest reporting, or agents putting stories out there, but us and Leeds seem to have been linked with the same targets for a number of years now - Piroe, Benson, Johnson, Perraud, Diallo, Brooks, Paintsil, Duk, Lavia to name just a few

and for the majority of deals that have happened most wish the other team had won the race.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dellyears said:

 

Who have we had on loan for four years?

Not sure I follow. My comment was about whether a free transfer can be seen as anything else other than "a win".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Give it to Ron said:

So who then ? 

You posted: How is a free transfer not a win?

I replied: When they are shit and you have to pay them for years. 

Are you now asking me what free transfers have turned out to be shit and thus not a win?

If so, how about Winston Bogarde?

Or were you only referring to Manning and the fact his signing must be considered a win because we got him on a free?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, hypochondriac said:

Is anyone else not that fussed if we don't get someone? Some people going mad about it on Twitter but I really think another signing is nice to have rather than a necessity. That changes if we lose Adams or kwp of course 

if we keep everyone then i think we're in good shape. Rothwell seems a decent if unspectacular addition. A striker would be nice but i'm with you it only because a necessity if we lose someone, which could happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sfc4prem said:

Looks just like a refresh/rebranding. Nothing to see here.

Rebranding for fuck sake, he's a player not a fucking corporate business entity 🤣🤣🤣

(I should say this isn't a dig at you, these players do it all the time)

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, sfc4prem said:

Looks just like a refresh/rebranding. Nothing to see here.

why would you delete existing saints stuff? What's the benefit of doing so? Usually the reason to do it is because you are disgruntled/leaving. 

 

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chez said:

why would you delete existing saints stuff? What's the benefit of doing so? Usually the reason to do it is because you are disgruntled/leaving. 

 

Agree Chez. A little concerning. Just knew we should have had a KWP song earlier. FFS, Livramento had a song all last year and he never played. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Chez said:

So basically, if we sell a player in January, that means in your eyes we aren't doing everything possible to get promoted immediately?

You might have a point, but in my eyes you do still have to balance the books whilst going for it (promotion) and part of that is ensuring assets don't leave the club for free.

If we got offered £10m for Che now, that would be a hard to turn down, but if we spent all of it on a replacement (be that a loan or even part of a larger transfer fee), would that not be a sign were were still going for it whole hog?

  

 

 

Didn’t we balance our books with what was it 170 million in sales in the summer? I’m not so worried about che going if he is replaced, but a replacement would still have to come in with an instant impact, because like him or not, che is still scoring. I just think if we lose KWP, to me it makes us weaker, he is constantly a top performer. They would have to spend large to replace him with similar quality, which obviously they won’t, it will be a strengthening of the books, not our promotion push.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, pimpin4rizeal said:

I’d rather just stick with Arma there and if we need to rotate use sulemana/edozie/Fraser there 

the above is a great bunch and they all need minutes. If It ain’t broke don’t try to fix it 

image.png.88788fe31b6c51fc14e0063b389acbbb.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Dusic said:

He also tagged Saints in the post. Bit odd but he doesnt seem the type to cause trouble and he recently did an interview where he said as much.

The way KWP got on with life in the championship was just brilliant. He wasn't great at the end of last season along with a load others, but we heard noises of discontent from them but not him. Great attitude, playing great. Got to keep him for the rest of the season. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Saint Marky said:

Didn’t we balance our books with what was it 170 million in sales in the summer? I’m not so worried about che going if he is replaced, but a replacement would still have to come in with an instant impact, because like him or not, che is still scoring. I just think if we lose KWP, to me it makes us weaker, he is constantly a top performer. They would have to spend large to replace him with similar quality, which obviously they won’t, it will be a strengthening of the books, not our promotion push.

Not sure. I did monitor it quite closely, as our spending prior to relegation was obviously monstrous, but we certainly did recoup a lot. It prevented a meltdown, but it certainly doesn't mean we are cash rich. Money tends to be very tight in this league, with teams going for promotion usually losing tens of millions.

If there is a player we can sign that we think can do a job now and also in the Prem too, then £6m for Che will obviously go a little way towards paying for them, cos I can't see us signing a top prospect for that money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Chez said:

Not sure. I did monitor it quite closely, as our spending prior to relegation was obviously monstrous, but we certainly did recoup a lot. It prevented a meltdown, but it certainly doesn't mean we are cash rich. Money tends to be very tight in this league, with teams going for promotion usually losing tens of millions.

If there is a player we can sign that we think can do a job now and also in the Prem too, then £6m for Che will obviously go a little way towards paying for them, cos I can't see us signing a top prospect for that money.

Which makes it even weirder that we decided to sign Shea Charles for 15 million. Good player but bit of an odd one if money is tight. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I notice that the KWP to Chelsea stories all emanate from Alex Crook. I know most see him a knob, but I wondered if he actually does get inside information from agents now he is on Talkshite or does he still just add two and two together to come up with his original (and not repeated) transfer rumours?

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Chez said:

Not sure. I did monitor it quite closely, as our spending prior to relegation was obviously monstrous, but we certainly did recoup a lot. It prevented a meltdown, but it certainly doesn't mean we are cash rich. Money tends to be very tight in this league, with teams going for promotion usually losing tens of millions.

If there is a player we can sign that we think can do a job now and also in the Prem too, then £6m for Che will obviously go a little way towards paying for them, cos I can't see us signing a top prospect for that money.

Yes you are right, but personally I think they should swallow the 6 million and keep him for the promotion push. The pot of gold at the end of the rainbow certainly outweighs the six mill loss. However I have no idea if he has an attitude problem and wants out, which sort of ties in with scoring when the window has been open and being dropped when it was closed.  Obviously if that’s the case then get rid and good riddance. I dont believe this is the case with kwp, but who knows? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

Which makes it even weirder that we decided to sign Shea Charles for 15 million. Good player but bit of an odd one if money is tight. 

we had a massive hole in midfield and he no doubt was seen as another potential Lavia, who was obviously an amazing bit of business. I agree though. It felt like a bloody big fee to pay for another prospect with money much tighter. It could well turn out to be amazing business too, its early days, but it was a real sign that the club were going to continue their buy the very best talent they could afford, even if that meant talent with zero experience.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Saint Marky said:

Yes you are right, but personally I think they should swallow the 6 million and keep him for the promotion push. The pot of gold at the end of the rainbow certainly outweighs the six mill loss. However I have no idea if he has an attitude problem and wants out, which sort of ties in with scoring when the window has been open and being dropped when it was closed.  Obviously if that’s the case then get rid and good riddance. I dont believe this is the case with kwp, but who knows? 

as with the Ings sale, because the player wants out, wont sign a new contract, then I totally understand the club wanting to recoup some funds (and not letting them walk on free) so they can reinvest. As always, selling players is not the issue, it's who comes in. Can we sign someone that can do a similar job, but with a much higher ceiling? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Chez said:

we had a massive hole in midfield and he no doubt was seen as another potential Lavia, who was obviously an amazing bit of business. I agree though. It felt like a bloody big fee to pay for another prospect with money much tighter. It could well turn out to be amazing business too, its early days, but it was a real sign that the club were going to continue their buy the very best talent they could afford, even if that meant talent with zero experience.

Don't necessarily disagree, I just think if you're talking about spending 15 million in the championship it really needs to be your best and key player rather than a guy with potential who sits on the bench most weeks. Like I said, good player but for that money in our position I'd be expecting one of the top players in the championship. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plus, it's hard to ignore that he's the same age as Lavia, cost basically the same amount, but just isn't close to being as good (yet).

20 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Don't necessarily disagree, I just think if you're talking about spending 15 million in the championship it really needs to be your best and key player rather than a guy with potential who sits on the bench most weeks. Like I said, good player but for that money in our position I'd be expecting one of the top players in the championship. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Don't necessarily disagree, I just think if you're talking about spending 15 million in the championship it really needs to be your best and key player rather than a guy with potential who sits on the bench most weeks. Like I said, good player but for that money in our position I'd be expecting one of the top players in the championship. 

Well we’ve spent £10m on a striker who won’t play this season and another £10m on a squad player so our big money signings aren’t exactly giving great ROI right now 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Well we’ve spent £10m on a striker who won’t play this season and another £10m on a squad player so our big money signings aren’t exactly giving great ROI right now 

TBF you'd expect Downes and THB to have cost significantly more if we'd actually bought them. The striker was an idiotic signing I said as much at the time. 

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...