Summer Transfer Thread and Gustavo Cisneros Type Rumours.

[chrisw1]

I can't believe anyone is seriously suggesting that we weren't bad off when we got promoted because we had Hutton, Jedinak, Whelan, Adomah, Green, Chester & Elphick to call on.

Nobody's suggesting that at all, as you well know.

People constantly play down our £140m spend because we had so few players - I've done it myself.  The point being made was that lots of clubs get promoted with some sub-standard players.  The fact we decided to shift ours off the books doesn't change the fact that the £140m we had to spend pretty much blows out the water what any other promoted club spent before or since.

I like Smith and think he has doen ok.  But the suggestion that he hasn't had an incredible budget to play with is ludicrous.

[paul_e]

I can't believe anyone is seriously suggesting that we weren't bad off when we got promoted because we had Hutton, Jedinak, Whelan, Adomah, Green, Chester & Elphick to call on.

Nobody's suggesting that at all, as you well know.

People constantly play down our £140m spend because we had so few players - I've done it myself.  The point being made was that lots of clubs get promoted with some sub-standard players.  The fact we decided to shift ours off the books doesn't change the fact that the £140m we had to spend pretty much blows out the water what any other promoted club spent before or since.

I like Smith and think he has doen ok.  But the suggestion that he hasn't had an incredible budget to play with is ludicrous.

The bold bit isn't quite accurate though because what we actually did was not give new contracts to people who were out of contract with us and weren't good enough to play at the level we were moving to. A poorer club in the same position wouldn't have done the same but replaced them with free transfers and cheaper gambles. We could afford to spend more so we did but we still had the spread the money thin and bring in a lot of players in a single window. No one has said he hasn't had a good budget people have just said that, on average, his signings have been right about the average cost you'd expect for premier league players over the 5 windows he's had so it's not like he's had the sort of insane funding that Chelsea and the Manchester clubs have thrown around at times and we've been blowing clubs out of the water with our spending.

[chrisw1]

I can't believe anyone is seriously suggesting that we weren't bad off when we got promoted because we had Hutton, Jedinak, Whelan, Adomah, Green, Chester & Elphick to call on.

Nobody's suggesting that at all, as you well know.

People constantly play down our £140m spend because we had so few players - I've done it myself.  The point being made was that lots of clubs get promoted with some sub-standard players.  The fact we decided to shift ours off the books doesn't change the fact that the £140m we had to spend pretty much blows out the water what any other promoted club spent before or since.

I like Smith and think he has doen ok.  But the suggestion that he hasn't had an incredible budget to play with is ludicrous.

The bold bit isn't quite accurate though because what we actually did was not give new contracts to people who were out of contract with us and weren't good enough to play at the level we were moving to. A poorer club in the same position wouldn't have done the same but replaced them with free transfers and cheaper gambles. We could afford to spend more so we did but we still had the spread the money thin and bring in a lot of players in a single window. No one has said he hasn't had a good budget people have just said that, on average, his signings have been right about the average cost you'd expect for premier league players over the 5 windows he's had so it's not like he's had the sort of insane funding that Chelsea and the Manchester clubs have thrown around at times and we've been blowing clubs out of the water with our spending.

I don't think I'm disagreeing with you really Paul.  We could have retained these players and chose not to.  Other promoted clubs don't tend to have that luxury.  The money was spread thin as we were able to make that decision.  I think the squad we came up with is a bit over played.  Of the play off final team we had the opportunity to retain the entire match day squad except for Tuanzebe & Abraham at a starting cost of c £30m for Mings, ElGhazi & Hause. 

The reality is the budget we've had is enormous compared to most promoted clubs.

[RamboandBruno]

Every thread eventually morphs into a Smith thread!!

In other news the Greasy one has a pre recorded interview prior to the Engerland game tonight…let’s all brace to be thoroughly wound up…..the fucker was always going to move!

[Rudy Can't Fail]

We've spent longer in the Premier League, so obviously we've spent more.

Leeds spent £96.1m last season, net, compared to the momey they spent in their summer prior to promotion.

They didn't have a squad to replace either. They've spent money and unsurprisingly benefited from it. What a shocking conclusion.

All true but the season before (19/20) they spent zero, relied on loans and had to sell to stay afloat. The season before a net spend of just under £4m. Whichever way you look at it, Bielsa has done a fantastic job there. Whether they can continue this season is another matter, their squad may be too small but that's how he prefers it.

[paul_e]

I don't think I'm disagreeing with you really Paul.  We could have retained these players and chose not to.  Other promoted clubs don't tend to have that luxury.  The money was spread thin as we were able to make that decision.  I think the squad we came up with is a bit over played.  Of the play off final team we had the opportunity to retain the entire match day squad except for Tuanzebe & Abraham at a starting cost of c £30m for Mings, ElGhazi & Hause. 

The reality is the budget we've had is enormous compared to most promoted clubs.

The bold bit is what I'm disagreeing with, no club/manager would give a new contract, with a massive pay rise, to a player they had decided wasn't good enough to be part of the squad, I don't care how big your budget is that just doesn't happen. What that means is that any club who'd been promoted with a squad in the mess ours was would've been in the same position of needing to completely rebuild and it's that part of it that people use as a reason why staying up was a good result. We've seen other clubs have to do similar and go straight back down.


The amount spent is pretty misleading (it always is, I hate the comments about net spend all the time, it's a meaningless debate beyond the debt/FFP aspects) the difficulty always comes from forming so many new signings into a functioning team. This is why I've said a number of times that I think a team trying to get somewhere should generally be limiting new signings to 4-6 in the summer and 1-2 in the winter as the absolute maximum and even that is too many to do year after year. I'd like us to get to the point where we're only adding 2-3 players a season and each of them is either adding quality into the first 11 or is coming in a year early to slowly replace someone who we're looking to move on the next summer.

[Sexual Ealing]

We've spent longer in the Premier League, so obviously we've spent more.

Leeds spent £96.1m last season, net, compared to the momey they spent in their summer prior to promotion.

They didn't have a squad to replace either. They've spent money and unsurprisingly benefited from it. What a shocking conclusion.

All true but the season before (19/20) they spent zero, relied on loans and had to sell to stay afloat. The season before a net spend of just under £4m. Whichever way you look at it, Bielsa has done a fantastic job there. Whether they can continue this season is another matter, their squad may be too small but that's how he prefers it.

Bielsa's done a great job, yes. I just don't know what it has to do with us or Dean Smith. Klopp's done a brilliant job, as has Brendan Rodgers. Still means nothing to Villa.

[tomd2103]

Code: [Select]

Dean's had very limited success without Grealish in whatever side he's put out. We're still two or three players short of a balanced first team squad without our erstwhile worldie and with all players fit. It's not going to end well.

I think the injury / COVID situation is making things seem a bit worse with the squad.  From last season, I thought we needed a better replacement left back than Neil Taylor - got in Ashley Young who can also cover right back.  We needed to replace Engels if he moved on - got in Tuanzebe, albeit on loan.  Needed better wide options and to bring in someone if a certain person left - brought in Buendia and Bailey.  Needed another forward option - brought in Ings. 

The only real disappointment for me was we didn't bring in a quality defensive midfielder and I still think that will be a costly decision.  I think the only other position we we are somewhat weaker in terms of squad options is goalkeeper, but apart from that I don't think we are significantly weaker although we have lost a genuinely top class talent.

[dave.woodhall]

I can't believe anyone is seriously suggesting that we weren't bad off when we got promoted because we had Hutton, Jedinak, Whelan, Adomah, Green, Chester & Elphick to call on.

Nobody's suggesting that at all, as you well know.

People constantly play down our £140m spend because we had so few players - I've done it myself.  The point being made was that lots of clubs get promoted with some sub-standard players.  The fact we decided to shift ours off the books doesn't change the fact that the £140m we had to spend pretty much blows out the water what any other promoted club spent before or since.

I like Smith and think he has doen ok.  But the suggestion that he hasn't had an incredible budget to play with is ludicrous.

That's exactly what you are saying otherwise why mention them, so don't come this "as you well know" bollocks. The players you named weren't good enough - any Premier League club with them in the squad would have been lucky to get more than a dozen points. Of course we could have kept them. We could also have re-signed Jordan Bowery, Michael Boulding and Joleon Lescott and got the same end result.

When the final whistle sounded in the play-off final we had two contracted players good enough for a Premier League team - Ratboy and John McGinn. How that can be turned into some sort of luxury is beyond me.

[john e]

Absolutely nothing to do with Smith because he didn’t sign them
but it’s staggering to think that we spent more money in the championship than any other team in history yet when we were promoted most of the side weren’t good enough to play in the premiership

Just shows you what a load of shit arsed managers we had before Smith

[chrisw1]

Dave

The point is we weren't as much different from other promoted teams as people make out.  As I said in the post above we could have had the entire play off squad save for Axel & Abraham.

I don't see how that is such a diferent starting point to the likes of West Brom, Watford, Norwich, Sheffield, Cardiff & Huddersfield over the years.

Yes it was a weak team, but so were a load of the above.  We spent £140m.  They didn't and had to make do with keeping their weaker players.

[paul_e]

Again keeping and giving new contracts isn't the same thing, no club has ever been promoted and given new contracts to players like Whelan who were clearly too old to be effective in their new league.

if they'd all been under contract for another year or 2 and we'd still done the same then your point would make more sense but as it stands you're talking about us choosing to do something monumentally stupid that would've assured our relegation as an alternative to spending the money we did.

[dave.woodhall]

You've certainly picked some rip-roaring Premier League success stories there. Of course we had to get of them. Three had gone already and the other four weren't good enough.

[LeeB]

Absolutely nothing to do with Smith because he didn’t sign them
but it’s staggering to think that we spent more money in the championship than any other team in history yet when we were promoted most of the side weren’t good enough to play in the premiership

Just shows you what a load of shit arsed managers we had before Smith

And there's rub. Not only has Dean succeeded, well over-acheived in my book, but he's done whilst clearing up all the mess left behind.

[Ian.]

I can't believe anyone is seriously suggesting that we weren't bad off when we got promoted because we had Hutton, Jedinak, Whelan, Adomah, Green, Chester & Elphick to call on.

Yes, it's been galling to see how well all of their careers have progressed since.

Absolutely right, we had no choice but to address so many positions across through the squad and 12-20 million a player doesn’t get you too much anymore and that’s the market we was in at the time.