Birkir Bjarnason - Released

[Drummond]

cant speak for others but iv'e never criticized Bruce for not playing him more
i have criticized Bruce for his midfield buys of Barney, Hourihane, Whelan and Lansbury who for me are probably the worst collection of midfield buys i can remember, costing fortunes in wages with virtually no money back

Easily Championship level players though, as is Jedinak. I'd argue Hourianne has more then proved his worth. I also think Whelan gets a lot of undue flak for being the steady eddie keep it simple player he is. He was never going to come in and turn into Cowans. I bet the four of them cost less than 6/7m combined, and that's about all they're worth

Whoever sanctioned their wages (i say that, we have no idea what their wages actually are other than pure speculation) should be asked some strong questions though for sure

well i'm glad your happy with them because that's the midfield Bruce has built for next season so we should be all set

they might not have cost the earth to buy but i bet they are on the highest wages in the whole of the championship for a midfield quartet

To be fair, Hourihane was lauded at Barnsley and was easily their best player and Captain. Whelan had tons of experience, International, and was liked by Stoke fans, Championship was his level last year though. Lansbury was one of those players that might just have worked but didn't. BB has been useful but didn't rip up trees.

I'm not sure that there were many criticising those buys when they were made.

[garyshawsknee]

Whelan wasn't needed though as we had Jedi, BB and got Onomah on loan, though he was never played in his preferred sitting position. I know he was cheap but the money spent on his wages should have been used elsewhere, now we have a player on high wages who no-one else will want.

[Clampy]

Hourhane has been ok for what we paid for him and no-one really knows how much the guy is on. Lansbury has been a massive let down though and we could have done without Whelan.

[PeterWithesShin]

He's on 25-30K a week, probably mainly due to the reduced fee. The problem is if you want to sell him there's not many clubs in division 2 that can pay that and I doubt a top flight club would take him.

[SoccerHQ]

He didn’t play more often because some of his performances were dire
people on here questioning whether he was an actual footballer at times

yes he had his moments, they all did in that central midfield area but all to few and none were consistent enough

Wasn't that in his first six months?

Last season after the new year period he looked decent in most of the games I saw. I agree his best position is the Hourihane box-to-box role.

[SoccerHQ]

Whelan wasn't needed though as we had Jedi, BB and got Onomah on loan, though he was never played in his preferred sitting position. I know he was cheap but the money spent on his wages should have been used elsewhere, now we have a player on high wages who no-one else will want.

We signed Whelan as Jedinak missed periods the previous season injured (and he also missed start of last season). Think there was also big talk at the time we would play 3-5-2 and it would be him, Chester and Terry as back 3.

Of course Jedinak hardly misses a game from returning in September so suddenly Whelan looks a very expensive sub. Still hoping Boro will come in for him.

[tomd2103]

Whelan wasn't needed though as we had Jedi, BB and got Onomah on loan, though he was never played in his preferred sitting position. I know he was cheap but the money spent on his wages should have been used elsewhere, now we have a player on high wages who no-one else will want.

We signed Whelan as Jedinak missed periods the previous season injured (and he also missed start of last season). Think there was also big talk at the time we would play 3-5-2 and it would be him, Chester and Terry as back 3.

Of course Jedinak hardly misses a game from returning in September so suddenly Whelan looks a very expensive sub. Still hoping Boro will come in for him.

Looking back, I think there was also the feeling that we needed someone a bit better on the ball than Jedinak to play in that defensive midfield role.  Whelan did fine when he played in that position last season, but I agree that unless he starts pretty much every game then he is surplus to requirements given the money he is likely to be on.   

[paul_e]

I'm not sure that there were many criticising those buys when they were made.

I raised plenty of concerns about Lansbury and Whelan, The other 2 I'm ok with and I'd be happy to keep.  Lansbury is a show pony and always has been and Whelan was a waste of money when we had Jedinak and Bjarnason. If he wanted cover for Jedinak whilst he was injured then Onomah (or an alternative loan) was enough, we just didn't need another senior player in there especially one with the same mobility issues as the guy he came in to compete with, it was like Bruce was doing everything he could to form the slowest midfield in the league.

[Drummond]

Lansbury had scored 6 in 19 at the time we signed him. He was a former Arsenal player, playing a division down but had been a good creative player scoring and creating chances, which is what many wanted us to go for.

Whelan was slow, but given Jedinak had time out due to age and injury, and the number of games we were faced with, it seemed sensible if unimaginative.

[paul_e]

Lansbury had scored 6 in 19 at the time we signed him. He was a former Arsenal player, playing a division down but had been a good creative player scoring and creating chances, which is what many wanted us to go for.

Whelan was slow, but given Jedinak had time out due to age and injury, and the number of games we were faced with, it seemed sensible if unimaginative.

That's all true about Lansbury, but it's irrelevant to what you asked because you said you didn't think there were many criticising those buys at the time and I just pointed out that I was against both of them from the first link because they weren't what we needed either in terms of numbers or quality.

[Hookeysmith]

Lansbury had scored 6 in 19 at the time we signed him. He was a former Arsenal player, playing a division down but had been a good creative player scoring and creating chances, which is what many wanted us to go for.

Whelan was slow, but given Jedinak had time out due to age and injury, and the number of games we were faced with, it seemed sensible if unimaginative.

I think Lansbury was also Forest's star man for a few seasons

[Drummond]

Lansbury had scored 6 in 19 at the time we signed him. He was a former Arsenal player, playing a division down but had been a good creative player scoring and creating chances, which is what many wanted us to go for.

Whelan was slow, but given Jedinak had time out due to age and injury, and the number of games we were faced with, it seemed sensible if unimaginative.

That's all true about Lansbury, but it's irrelevant to what you asked because you said you didn't think there were many criticising those buys at the time and I just pointed out that I was against both of them from the first link because they weren't what we needed either in terms of numbers or quality.

Very true Paul, very true. I'm not sure why I posted it, such was it's irrelevance.

Good on you for calling it though, you were right.

[paul_e]

Lansbury had scored 6 in 19 at the time we signed him. He was a former Arsenal player, playing a division down but had been a good creative player scoring and creating chances, which is what many wanted us to go for.

Whelan was slow, but given Jedinak had time out due to age and injury, and the number of games we were faced with, it seemed sensible if unimaginative.

That's all true about Lansbury, but it's irrelevant to what you asked because you said you didn't think there were many criticising those buys at the time and I just pointed out that I was against both of them from the first link because they weren't what we needed either in terms of numbers or quality.

Very true Paul, very true. I'm not sure why I posted it, such was it's irrelevance.

Good on you for calling it though, you were right.

So rather than being patronising why don't you explain how those stats show that Lansbury turned out to be a great signing for us and I was wrong to not want him.

[Clampy]

It is true that there wasn't too many people at the time against us bringing Lansbury in. There were one or two questioning Whelan though.

[Drummond]

Lansbury had scored 6 in 19 at the time we signed him. He was a former Arsenal player, playing a division down but had been a good creative player scoring and creating chances, which is what many wanted us to go for.

Whelan was slow, but given Jedinak had time out due to age and injury, and the number of games we were faced with, it seemed sensible if unimaginative.

That's all true about Lansbury, but it's irrelevant to what you asked because you said you didn't think there were many criticising those buys at the time and I just pointed out that I was against both of them from the first link because they weren't what we needed either in terms of numbers or quality.

Very true Paul, very true. I'm not sure why I posted it, such was it's irrelevance.

Good on you for calling it though, you were right.

So rather than being patronising why don't you explain how those stats show that Lansbury turned out to be a great signing for us and I was wrong to not want him.

Read my last sentence.