Transfer Speculation / Gossip

[SoccerHQ]

Well I couldn't stand Houllier so won't be looking back at his season with any fondness. The fact he was replaced by McLeish was the equivalent of being kicked when you were down.

I felt pretty much the same at the time and was not sad to see him go, but seeing what has followed since (hindsight is of course a great benefit) we probably should have kept Houllier on for the start of the following season at least.  Even if his health wasn't good enough for him to manage the team, employing him in a role such as Director of Football might have worked.  Looking back, I think he had identified those that needed to be shipped out that summer (Ireland, Dunne etc.) and if rumours are to be believed, had plans to bring in some quality players.

The appointment of McLeish as his successor has to be the single worst decision made at the club in the thirty years I have been going.   

Yes I agree with that now. Houllier's problem is a) he followed MON directly so expectations were still of top 6 finishes and b) we actually still had a very good squad that season so fighting a relegation battle was massively underachievement.

[pauliewalnuts]

Well I couldn't stand Houllier so won't be looking back at his season with any fondness. The fact he was replaced by McLeish was the equivalent of being kicked when you were down.

I felt pretty much the same at the time and was not sad to see him go, but seeing what has followed since (hindsight is of course a great benefit) we probably should have kept Houllier on for the start of the following season at least.  Even if his health wasn't good enough for him to manage the team, employing him in a role such as Director of Football might have worked.  Looking back, I think he had identified those that needed to be shipped out that summer (Ireland, Dunne etc.) and if rumours are to be believed, had plans to bring in some quality players.

The appointment of McLeish as his successor has to be the single worst decision made at the club in the thirty years I have been going.   

Yes I agree with that now. Houllier's problem is a) he followed MON directly so expectations were still of top 6 finishes and b) we actually still had a very good squad that season so fighting a relegation battle was massively underachievement.

Yep

If you look at our "expectations" both in terms of what we saw as achievable on the pitch, as well as the way the club acted off the pitch, when Houllier took over and compare them to the way things are now, then it is pretty hard to believe that such a change took place over the course of only three or four years.

[ozzjim]

In mitigation Houllier had a truly appalling amount of injuries in the squad.

[pauliewalnuts]

In mitigation Houllier had a truly appalling amount of injuries in the squad.

And we actually managed to finish ninth, which is amazing.

I know, I know, the table doesn't lie etc etc, but that was the most flattering final league finish I've seen in a while, it was a tough old season.

[ADVILLAFAN]

In mitigation Houllier had a truly appalling amount of injuries in the squad.

And we actually managed to finish ninth, which is amazing.

I know, I know, the table doesn't lie etc etc, but that was the most flattering final league finish I've seen in a while, it was a tough old season.

We were right in it until winning away against Arsenal in the penultimate game. Blues meanwhile lost at home to Fulham and for the first time all season I thought 'they could actually go down, they need something from Tottenham away'. We then won at home to Liverpool, but nobody cared as we were all looking out for the Blues score. They didn't disappoint.

[AV82EC]

In mitigation Houllier had a truly appalling amount of injuries in the squad.

And we actually managed to finish ninth, which is amazing.

I know, I know, the table doesn't lie etc etc, but that was the most flattering final league finish I've seen in a while, it was a tough old season.

Yep we were 14th I think going into the final day then every result above us went our way in about 5 games and we ended up 9th.

[TimTheVillain]

Lescott for Albion?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2661234/Joleon-Lescott-set-sign-West-Brom-Alan-Irvines-signing.html

I'd sooner have him than Senderos.

That's a real shitter.

[saunders_heroes]

Albion finally sign Lescott.
Can't believe we've allowed that to happen as he's just what we need at the back.

[Richard E]

Albion finally sign Lescott.
Can't believe we've allowed that to happen as he's just what we need at the back.

How have we "allowed it to happen"?

What we were supposed to do to prevent it? Kidnap him? Nuke The Hawthorns?

[saunders_heroes]

Albion finally sign Lescott.
Can't believe we've allowed that to happen as he's just what we need at the back.

How have we "allowed it to happen"?

What we were supposed to do to prevent it? Kidnap him? Nuke The Hawthorns?

Erm, sign him? Offer the going rate for a defender as good as him, perhaps?
He was available and on a free transfer. We should have signed him, it's a simple as that, but yet again we went for the cheaper option.

[Richard E]

Perhaps we weren't that interested in him?

Perhaps he didn't want to be third choice behind Vlaar and Okore?

Perhaps he particularly wanted to work with Alan Irvine (allegedly)?

Have all the other clubs who were interested in Lescott also "allowed this to happen."?

He's an OK defender in the latter stages of his career. It's hardly the end of the world and hardly a stick to beat our club with that we didn't sign him. 

[supertom]

We can just sign Lescott in a years time any way because he'll be in the Championship! He's been poor for a couple of years now in all honesty and he's likely getting paid a fair wedge at 31 for them. I don't reckon it'll transpire that we're missing all that much. I know some may have said that Lescott could have covered left back, but his pace has completely deserted him now. He's got the turning circle of a milkvan now. No way would he be good at fullback now.

Senderos might not be brilliant but in recent years hasn't been any worse than Lescott. I'm also looking forward to seeing how Okore does.

West Brom are welcome to pay 50-60k for Lescott as far as I'm concerned. I'd rather pay 25k for Senderos and then devote more of our wage budget to our real problem area, which is an all but non-existent midfield. The vast majority of matches last season it was Delph running around while Westwood and KEA disappeared into the shadows of opposition players.

That said, if we don't get in a couple of reasonable midfielders, I will probably punch a whole through a wall.

[RussellC]

Perhaps we weren't that interested in him?

Perhaps he didn't want to be third choice behind Vlaar and Okore?

Perhaps he particularly wanted to work with Alan Irvine (allegedly)?

Have all the other clubs who were interested in Lescott also "allowed this to happen."?

He's an OK defender in the latter stages of his career. It's hardly the end of the world and hardly a stick to beat our club with that we didn't sign him. 

I think the fact that we signed Senderos instead is. Whatever the reasoning, I doubt many (if any) of us would have preferred Senderos to Lescott given the choice a few weeks ago.

I sincerely doubt (and hope) that Paul Lambert wouldn't have done either.

[QBVILLA]

If Lescott hadn't spent the last twelve months warming the bench then I have no doubt he's be in Brazil now. Credit to the Albion on this one, good signing. Did we need him? Not if Okore is fit to start the season imo.

[Richard E]

If Lescott hadn't spent the last twelve months warming the bench then I have no doubt he's be in Brazil now. Credit to the Albion on this one, good signing. Did we need him? Not if Okore is fit to start the season imo.

If Lescott was that great he probably wouldn't have spent the last twelve months warming the bench.