Summer Transfer Thread: Speculation, Lies, Absolute Cr*p and Bosman Rumours

[Risso]

If the vague rumours of Dunne going are true then that frees up his wages for further signings but at present we have 3 players with plenty of first team experience to come back. As I said the other day that I liken it to when MON first came and that it will take more than one transfer window for Lambert to build the squad he wants.

The huge difference there is that O'Neill came in late in the summer, and so didn't have much opportunity.   After that, he was lucky enough to be backed to the hilt by Lerner as they spent fortunes on players they thought would get us to the Champions League.  That clearly isn't the target any more, and Lambert isn't ever going to be given big money to spend.  The point in sacking McLeish was the same as when they signed Bent - the consequences of not doing were likely to be far worse and even more expensive.

[Risso]

Fletcher going to Sunderland shows what little cash we have spare.

Or that Lambert realises that Steven Fletcher for 12 million is quite likely to be bad business. If we get our wage bill in order I can still see Lerner coming up with 10-12 million for a player if Lambert was convinced it was a sound investment.

Not a chance in hell.  No way that will happen ever again, unless it's another Darren Bent style emergency signing to stave off relegation.

[TaxDodger]

Fletcher going to Sunderland shows what little cash we have spare.

Or that Lambert realises that Steven Fletcher for 12 million is quite likely to be bad business. If we get our wage bill in order I can still see Lerner coming up with 10-12 million for a player if Lambert was convinced it was a sound investment.

Not a chance in hell.  No way that will happen ever again, unless it's another Darren Bent style emergency signing to stave off relegation.

So apart from panic buys do you think there's no chance at all that we will buy a player for £10 million while Randy Lerner is our owner? I don't agree with that. I'll admit it's unlikely for the next couple of windows, but I think Lerner may well be willing to spend decent money on players following a few seasons of cut backs. Probably nothing like the level of spending we saw in O'Neill's first few seasons but I don't agree with this notion that he's simply lost interest.

[maidstonevillain]

Fletcher going to Sunderland shows what little cash we have spare.

Or that Lambert realises that Steven Fletcher for 12 million is quite likely to be bad business. If we get our wage bill in order I can still see Lerner coming up with 10-12 million for a player if Lambert was convinced it was a sound investment.

Not a chance in hell.  No way that will happen ever again, unless it's another Darren Bent style emergency signing to stave off relegation.

You may be right. But I still would not be surprised if we ended up with someone like Carroll before the window shuts.

[GordonCowansisthegreatest]

It's not rocket science that if Bent's out for a while like last season we're fooked.

We're also fooked if we don't get supply to him.

Without signings, we are in the shit again I'm afraid, and a bottom half finish certainly on the cards - depends what Lerner wants or can afford.

I think he wants out, but no investors have put the money he wants on the table yet.

Personally speaking, I get the feeling that he sees sport as a poor investment now ( which football is) and started by selling Clevelend Browns off - Villa next ?

Fletcher going to Sunderland shows what little cash we have spare.

I think Lerner is quite happy for us to tick along in the bottom half of the table, he certainly has no desire to push us further.
Seems to me he has lost all interest, so hopefully he'll look to sell.

FFS pass me a razor blade!!

[Chris Smith]

If the vague rumours of Dunne going are true then that frees up his wages for further signings but at present we have 3 players with plenty of first team experience to come back. As I said the other day that I liken it to when MON first came and that it will take more than one transfer window for Lambert to build the squad he wants.

The huge difference there is that O'Neill came in late in the summer, and so didn't have much opportunity.   After that, he was lucky enough to be backed to the hilt by Lerner as they spent fortunes on players they thought would get us to the Champions League.  That clearly isn't the target any more, and Lambert isn't ever going to be given big money to spend.  The point in sacking McLeish was the same as when they signed Bent - the consequences of not doing were likely to be far worse and even more expensive.

Why more expensive? If he's lost interest then he can reduce the wage bill far more by allowing us to get relegated. With parachute payments for a couple of years that should give him enough time to find a buyer.

[pauliewalnuts]

If the vague rumours of Dunne going are true then that frees up his wages for further signings but at present we have 3 players with plenty of first team experience to come back. As I said the other day that I liken it to when MON first came and that it will take more than one transfer window for Lambert to build the squad he wants.

The huge difference there is that O'Neill came in late in the summer, and so didn't have much opportunity.   After that, he was lucky enough to be backed to the hilt by Lerner as they spent fortunes on players they thought would get us to the Champions League.  That clearly isn't the target any more, and Lambert isn't ever going to be given big money to spend.  The point in sacking McLeish was the same as when they signed Bent - the consequences of not doing were likely to be far worse and even more expensive.

Why more expensive? If he's lost interest then he can reduce the wage bill far more by allowing us to get relegated. With parachute payments for a couple of years that should give him enough time to find a buyer.

Slightly far fetched, Chris.

Even with parachute payments as a buffer to some lost revenue, it's hard to believe anyone searching for a buyer for a club would see having it not in the premier league as a way of either saving money or making the club more attractive to buyers.

[Chris Smith]

If the vague rumours of Dunne going are true then that frees up his wages for further signings but at present we have 3 players with plenty of first team experience to come back. As I said the other day that I liken it to when MON first came and that it will take more than one transfer window for Lambert to build the squad he wants.

The huge difference there is that O'Neill came in late in the summer, and so didn't have much opportunity.   After that, he was lucky enough to be backed to the hilt by Lerner as they spent fortunes on players they thought would get us to the Champions League.  That clearly isn't the target any more, and Lambert isn't ever going to be given big money to spend.  The point in sacking McLeish was the same as when they signed Bent - the consequences of not doing were likely to be far worse and even more expensive.

Why more expensive? If he's lost interest then he can reduce the wage bill far more by allowing us to get relegated. With parachute payments for a couple of years that should give him enough time to find a buyer.

Slightly far fetched, Chris.

Even with parachute payments as a buffer to some lost revenue, it's hard to believe anyone searching for a buyer for a club would see having it not in the premier league as a way of either saving money or making the club more attractive to buyers.

I was offering the other extreme to Risso's position. He's been running with the same line for 18 months, if he was so desperate to sell how come he hasn't? Or at least why no whisper from any interested buyer?

 

[pauliewalnuts]

Because perhaps nobody is interested in buying?

How long has Kenwright been trying to flog Everton?

[Chris Smith]

Because perhaps nobody is interested in buying?

How long has Kenwright been trying to flog Everton?

Not many people will be interested if you don't let them know it's for sale.

It just makes no sense than an intelligent man like Lambert, who would not be short of other opportunities, would come to us without some discussion about what the clubs ambitions are and how he'll be backed.

[Concrete John]

Fletcher going to Sunderland shows what little cash we have spare.

Or that Lambert realises that Steven Fletcher for 12 million is quite likely to be bad business. If we get our wage bill in order I can still see Lerner coming up with 10-12 million for a player if Lambert was convinced it was a sound investment.

Not a chance in hell.  No way that will happen ever again, unless it's another Darren Bent style emergency signing to stave off relegation.

So apart from panic buys do you think there's no chance at all that we will buy a player for £10 million while Randy Lerner is our owner? I don't agree with that. I'll admit it's unlikely for the next couple of windows, but I think Lerner may well be willing to spend decent money on players following a few seasons of cut backs. Probably nothing like the level of spending we saw in O'Neill's first few seasons but I don't agree with this notion that he's simply lost interest.

We paid £10m or thereabouts for N'Zogbia not too long ago, and that wasn't an 'avoid relegation panic buy'.  And Houllier is on record as saying he was talking about Bent as soon as he came in, which was far too early in the season to be thinking we were in a survival battle.

I think if a signing of that level makes financial sense, including the wages fitting into the overall plan, then they'll sanction it.  What I think we have right now is a position where we are struggling to attract players genuinely worth that level of fee, so they won't spend it on someone with an inflated value, like Fletcher, jarvis, etc. 

[ozzjim]

Sorry but Chris is right. Lambert coming shows the ambition is still there, but needs some dross to leave. Ireland and nzogbia will go soon too.

[Toronto Villa]

it is a little concerning that despite the early optimism of signings, and Lambert's desire to get players in early that it's now been a number of weeks since the last new arrival. I understand his need to get in the right type of player, but even so, you have to think that we might have made one signing to maintain the early momentum of good feeling. Even a loan would have been nice. I'll stand by what I said about giving a lot of the current crop a chance to show what they can do, but we still need 3 or 4 new faces, even just to add some options. It is becoming apparent that as long as  Hutton, Warnock and semingly Dunne are around, constituting over £100 grand a week, that things will be a little slow. Maybe the other teams know that too and will deal with us at the last minute, giving us little time to reload. Hope that isn't the case.

[pelty]

With all due respect to Risso and the rest of the moaners, their narrative grows tiresome. "Randy is no longer interested... Randy wants to sell... Sell to buy." It is difficult to understand why some on here are unable to grasp that the club is seeking a more measured fiscal approach and no longer wishes to hemorrhage money. Everyone knows where the wage bill was and that was an untenable position both for Randy and the club's long-term future, thus the desire to dial it back. We can debate issues of "Too much too fast" or what have you, but there is no doubt that this was necessary. That being said, money is there to be spent should PL ask for it, but the player needs to fit within the wage structure. The transfer fee is not the issue (assuming it is not too extravagant), but the weekly wages need to be in line with the long-term fiscal plan of the club. There is no sell-to-buy policy, per se, but it is no secret that there are players the club would like off the books. Even if those players are not shipped off, this would *not* preclude more purchases by the end of the window. If a desire for fiscal sanity = disinterest, then I suppose Randy is no longer interested, but it could be argued that such measures demonstrate a greater interest in the future of the club than the wanton spending of the MON years. As many recognize, the game has changed a bit even since those days and, although Randy may be wealthy, he is not an oil baron. He was never going to outspend Man City and to try to do so would have brought the club to its knees.

[Rick_avfc]

With all due respect to Risso and the rest of the moaners, their narrative grows tiresome. "Randy is no longer interested... Randy wants to sell... Sell to buy." It is difficult to understand why some on here are unable to grasp that the club is seeking a more measured fiscal approach and no longer wishes to hemorrhage money. Everyone knows where the wage bill was and that was an untenable position both for Randy and the club's long-term future, thus the desire to dial it back. We can debate issues of "Too much too fast" or what have you, but there is no doubt that this was necessary. That being said, money is there to be spent should PL ask for it, but the player needs to fit within the wage structure. The transfer fee is not the issue (assuming it is not too extravagant), but the weekly wages need to be in line with the long-term fiscal plan of the club. There is no sell-to-buy policy, per se, but it is no secret that there are players the club would like off the books. Even if those players are not shipped off, this would *not* preclude more purchases by the end of the window. If a desire for fiscal sanity = disinterest, then I suppose Randy is no longer interested, but it could be argued that such measures demonstrate a greater interest in the future of the club than the wanton spending of the MON years. As many recognize, the game has changed a bit even since those days and, although Randy may be wealthy, he is not an oil baron. He was never going to outspend Man City and to try to do so would have brought the club to its knees.

Well said!