|
Post by carplips on Jan 3, 2011 13:22:05 GMT
Style of play has NO EFFECT WHATSOEVER on a player's choice of club. I have never heard such nonsense in my life. Well when we sign a striker that has a career goalscoreing record of at least 15 goals a season March and a central midfielder that is a Premiership standard player that has a good reputation and pedigree, i'll believe you. eidur???? tunny????i know eidur is in his twilight and we might not use them at all but they both tick the box's
|
|
|
Post by roostersgonnagetya on Jan 3, 2011 13:25:12 GMT
add the fact that we are competing for the same players as top 6,7,8,9 clubs, some even lower in the table, to the fact we play a more defensive style and refuse to shop abroad for players, where does that leave us?
It leaves us picking the bones out of the bottom half of the Premier League, relegated teams and the championship, ( where Pulis has started to look to shop more), this is despite having the funds to compete and 3 seasons as a mid table premiership team.
|
|
|
Post by roostersgonnagetya on Jan 3, 2011 13:27:14 GMT
Well when we sign a striker that has a career goalscoreing record of at least 15 goals a season March and a central midfielder that is a Premiership standard player that has a good reputation and pedigree, i'll believe you. eidur???? tunny????i know eidur is in his twilight and we might not use them at all but they both tick the box's 15 goals a season? EG was a last minute deal and Tunny was plucked from a soon to be championship playing club. Off the subject but just as important, niether play much do they which doesnt give out the right vibe to attacking players.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2011 13:31:43 GMT
But strikers who consistently score goals in the Premier League generally go to bigger clubs don't they? This is only our third season here and already we've signed at least two strikers who were publicly linked to top clubs not six months previously and a striker with 90+ Premier League goals to his name. But according to some it all comes down to money ??? something that we are there abouts on par with with teams outside the top 4, so if we are competing with these teams for the same players then you tell me what we have going for us other than money, because the style certainley isn't a 'sweetner' is it? It's not ALL about the money is it? Prospects for success/prestige (trophies, Europe etc), location, family concerns all come into it and I'd say all come miles above style of play as concerns.
|
|
|
Post by roostersgonnagetya on Jan 3, 2011 13:34:28 GMT
But according to some it all comes down to money ??? something that we are there abouts on par with with teams outside the top 4, so if we are competing with these teams for the same players then you tell me what we have going for us other than money, because the style certainley isn't a 'sweetner' is it? It's not ALL about the money is it? Prospects for success/prestige (trophies, Europe etc), location, family concerns all come into it and I'd say all come miles above style of play as concerns. But we sit in 8th place, it's known in the game we have money, it's known we are debt free, it's known that the manager will be here for the forseeable future, all that stability offers the potential to really go places with these 'quality' additions, they should be knocking down our door to play for Stoke, but for some strange reason, they don't seem to be.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2011 13:35:59 GMT
It's not ALL about the money is it? Prospects for success/prestige (trophies, Europe etc), location, family concerns all come into it and I'd say all come miles above style of play as concerns. But we sit in 8th place, it's known in the game we have money, it's know we are debt free, it's known that the manager will be here for the forseeable future, all that stability offers the potential top really go places, they should be knocking down our door to play for Stoke, but for some strange reason, they don't seem to be. Who exactly is "they"? "They" don't seem to be knocking the door down to play for super sexy Bolton either do they?
|
|
|
Post by roostersgonnagetya on Jan 3, 2011 13:56:56 GMT
But we sit in 8th place, it's known in the game we have money, it's know we are debt free, it's known that the manager will be here for the forseeable future, all that stability offers the potential top really go places, they should be knocking down our door to play for Stoke, but for some strange reason, they don't seem to be. Who exactly is "they"? "They" don't seem to be knocking the door down to play for super sexy Bolton either do they? Put it this way, if you were a footballer, Bolton and Stoke were after your signature, they are offering the same amount of money, where would you want to play if you were an attack minded midfielder or a 15 goal a season man? 'They' are midfielders better than Whitehead and Delap, Loic Remy, Cisse, Bent, Carlton Cole, Van Nistlerooy.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2011 14:02:36 GMT
Who exactly is "they"? "They" don't seem to be knocking the door down to play for super sexy Bolton either do they? Put it this way, if you were a footballer, Bolton and Stoke were after your signature, they are offering the same amount of money, where would you want to play if you were an attack minded midfielder or a 15 goal a season man? 'They' are midfielders better than Whitehead and Delap, Loic Remy, Cisse, Bent, Carlton Cole, Van Nistlerooy. Hang on, where does "offering the same amount of money" come from? Why aren't we offering them more if we can afford to? Also, it would depend on things like guarantees of first team football, what was the best decision for my family etc. Do you think your average "brap brap" footballer pores over tactics in making decisions? The players - you list - how many of them were we seriously in for and how much is "Dave says"? Remy, Cisse, Bent and RvN all went to bigger clubs, who were a more attractive proposition than Stoke City irrespective of style of play. You've still not come up with anything to say that style of play is the reason why players don't come here. You've just listed players who haven't and jumped to that conclusion based on absolutely nothing. You spout this stuff every transfer window, and every transfer window you're proven fairly comprehensively wrong.
|
|
|
Post by roostersgonnagetya on Jan 3, 2011 14:03:46 GMT
oh for a midfielder like Joey Barton, everthing Newcastle did yesterday went through him.
|
|
|
Post by roostersgonnagetya on Jan 3, 2011 14:06:12 GMT
Put it this way, if you were a footballer, Bolton and Stoke were after your signature, they are offering the same amount of money, where would you want to play if you were an attack minded midfielder or a 15 goal a season man? 'They' are midfielders better than Whitehead and Delap, Loic Remy, Cisse, Bent, Carlton Cole, Van Nistlerooy. Hang on, where does "offering the same amount of money" come from? Why aren't we offering them more if we can afford to? Also, it would depend on things like guarantees of first team football, what was the best decision for my family etc. Do you think your average "brap brap" footballer pores over tactics in making decisions? The players - you list - how many of them were we seriously in for and how much is "Dave says"? Remy, Cisse, Bent and RvN all went to bigger clubs, who were a more attractive proposition than Stoke City irrespective of style of play. You've still not come up with anything to say that style of play is the reason why players don't come here. You've just listed players who haven't and jumped to that conclusion based on absolutely nothing. You spout this stuff every transfer window, and every transfer window you're proven fairly comprehensively wrong. ;D We'll see, Pulis is struggling to attract high calibre midfielders as far as my eyes can see, otherwise we would have some by now.
|
|
|
Post by roostersgonnagetya on Jan 3, 2011 14:06:38 GMT
that fucking kovac didnt even want t know.
EDIT: The day we sign a Krancjar or a huddlestone I'll believe our style doesn't affect the odds of attracting real quality in certain positions.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jan 3, 2011 14:10:31 GMT
It's not ALL about the money is it? Prospects for success/prestige (trophies, Europe etc), location, family concerns all come into it and I'd say all come miles above style of play as concerns. But we sit in 8th place, it's known in the game we have money, it's known we are debt free, it's known that the manager will be here for the forseeable future, all that stability offers the potential to really go places with these 'quality' additions, they should be knocking down our door to play for Stoke, but for some strange reason, they don't seem to be. You can't have it both ways. On the one hand you argue we can't attract any "quality" players on the other you remind us we are in 8th position in the Prem. So we are either 8th by pure fluke or because we have quality players. I like to think it's the second of those things. I don't think we appreciate what we have sometimes playing staff wise, be careful what you wish for...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2011 14:11:17 GMT
Hang on, where does "offering the same amount of money" come from? Why aren't we offering them more if we can afford to? Also, it would depend on things like guarantees of first team football, what was the best decision for my family etc. Do you think your average "brap brap" footballer pores over tactics in making decisions? The players - you list - how many of them were we seriously in for and how much is "Dave says"? Remy, Cisse, Bent and RvN all went to bigger clubs, who were a more attractive proposition than Stoke City irrespective of style of play. You've still not come up with anything to say that style of play is the reason why players don't come here. You've just listed players who haven't and jumped to that conclusion based on absolutely nothing. You spout this stuff every transfer window, and every transfer window you're proven fairly comprehensively wrong. ;D We'll see, Pulis is struggling to attract high calibre midfielders as far as my eyes can see, otherwise we would have some by now. Again, what proof do you have that style of play is the issue? Could it not be that (yet again) we're aiming too high and that Stoke, regardless of how they play, are not big enough for the players we're targeting? When we see a player snub us for Bolton or Wigan or West Brom I'll take your point.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2011 14:12:48 GMT
that fucking kovac didnt even want t know. EDIT: The day we sign a Krancjar or a huddlestone I'll believe our style doesn't affect the odds of attracting real quality in certain positions. Wasn't it West Ham's decision to keep hold of Kovac? We've signed a Tuncay, Gudjohnsen, Pennant and Etherington in recent seasons so how is a Krancjar or Huddlestone (who incidentally is firmly part of Spurs' plans) any different?
|
|
|
Post by roostersgonnagetya on Jan 3, 2011 14:21:39 GMT
;D We'll see, Pulis is struggling to attract high calibre midfielders as far as my eyes can see, otherwise we would have some by now. Again, what proof do you have that style of play is the issue? Could it not be that (yet again) we're aiming too high and that Stoke, regardless of how they play, are not big enough for the players we're targeting? When we see a player snub us for Bolton or Wigan or West Brom I'll take your point. Scott Carson? ;D Yes but the thing is that Wigan, WBA are not in our mini league financially. We should be beating these to players without doubt simply because we can offer more money, its not these players that concern me, we should also be beating bigger clubs to good players as well because they know they stand more chance of starting in a Stoke shirt, but we don't, for whatever reason. I ask you this, If we can't compete in our mini league financially then why are we not looking more seriously abroad, places like Holland and Germany etc. Instead, with all this financial "clout" we are looking to the championship for players and we are getting excited about signing a championship right back that is more than likely no better than we have. Don't get me started on Gary O Neil, the engine room of a shit middlesborough team, fantastic! Jesus, thank God for this financial clout, we'd never stand a chance of these players otherwise. Knows how to push us on doesn't he TP, looking at championship players
|
|
|
Post by roostersgonnagetya on Jan 3, 2011 14:25:10 GMT
I feel that with Tony Pulis's 'limitations' in the transfer market he is costing us valuable time in what could be a golden era in the history of Stoke City, we have a chairman that is willing to spend the doe, but the manager is limited to where he will spend it, Mr Coates will not be his sugar Daddy for long and we keep going for established mediocrity before taking a punt on some foreign lad with a good reputation abroad.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2011 14:28:08 GMT
Again, what proof do you have that style of play is the issue? Could it not be that (yet again) we're aiming too high and that Stoke, regardless of how they play, are not big enough for the players we're targeting? When we see a player snub us for Bolton or Wigan or West Brom I'll take your point. Scott Carson? ;D Yes but the thing is that Wigan, WBA are not in our mini league financially. We should be beating these to players without doubt simply because we can offer more money, its not these players that concern me, we should also be beating bigger clubs to good players as well because they know they stand more chance of starting in a Stoke shirt, but we don't, for whatever reason. I ask you this, If we can't compete in our mini league financially then why are we not looking more seriously abroad, places like Holland and Germany etc. Instead, with all this financial "clout" we are looking to the championship for players and we are getting excited about signing a championship right back that is more than likely no better than we have. Don't get me started on Gary O Neil, the engine room of a shit middlesborough team, fantastic! Knows how to push us on doesn't he TP, looking at championship players So who is in this "mini-league" then? You're making your own impossible, magical criteria that we can't hope to live up to, because you move the goalposts the second they're fulfilled, to use as a stick to beat the manager with. Again, you've cried like a little girl about this every window and been proven wrong every single time.
|
|
|
Post by roostersgonnagetya on Jan 3, 2011 14:31:49 GMT
Scott Carson? ;D Yes but the thing is that Wigan, WBA are not in our mini league financially. We should be beating these to players without doubt simply because we can offer more money, its not these players that concern me, we should also be beating bigger clubs to good players as well because they know they stand more chance of starting in a Stoke shirt, but we don't, for whatever reason. I ask you this, If we can't compete in our mini league financially then why are we not looking more seriously abroad, places like Holland and Germany etc. Instead, with all this financial "clout" we are looking to the championship for players and we are getting excited about signing a championship right back that is more than likely no better than we have. Don't get me started on Gary O Neil, the engine room of a shit middlesborough team, fantastic! Knows how to push us on doesn't he TP, looking at championship players So who is in this "mini-league" then? You're making your own impossible, magical criteria that we can't hope to live up to, because you move the goalposts the second they're fulfilled, to use as a stick to beat the manager with. Again, you've cried like a little girl about this every window and been proven wrong every single time. Incorrect, I've been crying for a very long time about our central midfield on or off this board and I've been proven right for the past 5 seasons.
|
|
|
Post by roostersgonnagetya on Jan 3, 2011 14:32:29 GMT
so you are saying the lasrt transfer window was a success then RVD?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2011 14:44:48 GMT
so you are saying the lasrt transfer window was a success then RVD? It was a mixed bag, but overall yes in that the two major priorities - "Mama with goals" and "right-sided Etherington" were met. So it was in that respect, yes. I also distinctly remember before we went out and signed three reasonably high-profile attacking players you talking this kind of bullshit about how no attacking players wanted to sign for us because of how we played.
|
|
|
Post by roostersgonnagetya on Jan 3, 2011 16:34:03 GMT
so you are saying the lasrt transfer window was a success then RVD? It was a mixed bag, but overall yes in that the two major priorities - "Mama with goals" and "right-sided Etherington" were met. So it was in that respect, yes. I also distinctly remember before we went out and signed three reasonably high-profile attacking players you talking this kind of bullshit about how no attacking players wanted to sign for us because of how we played. DO you mean 3 reasonably high profile players that nobody else was in for, did you see us beating anyone in particular for these players ??? Gudjohnsson come here because no-one else wanted him, theres a reason why Monaco didn't either.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2011 16:38:21 GMT
It was a mixed bag, but overall yes in that the two major priorities - "Mama with goals" and "right-sided Etherington" were met. So it was in that respect, yes. I also distinctly remember before we went out and signed three reasonably high-profile attacking players you talking this kind of bullshit about how no attacking players wanted to sign for us because of how we played. DO you mean 3 reasonably high profile players that nobody else was in for, did you see us beating anyone in particular for these players ??? Gudjohnsson come here because no-one else wanted him, theres a reason why Monaco didn't either. There you go again, moving the goalposts - why does it matter who was in for them? You were saying we couldn't attract attacking players, and when we do you panic and scrabble round for further criteria because you've been proven wrong. Like the players you listed earlier - they all signed for clubs who were bigger than us regardless of how we play.
|
|
|
Post by roostersgonnagetya on Jan 3, 2011 16:40:33 GMT
DO you mean 3 reasonably high profile players that nobody else was in for, did you see us beating anyone in particular for these players ??? Gudjohnsson come here because no-one else wanted him, theres a reason why Monaco didn't either. There you go again, moving the goalposts - why does it matter who was in for them? You were saying we couldn't attract attacking players, and when we do you panic and scrabble round for further criteria because you've been proven wrong. Like the players you listed earlier - they all signed for clubs who were bigger than us regardless of how we play. I'm not moving the goalposts but if I put all my bullet points together it would take a lifetime, that is how many issues there are imo.
|
|
|
Post by roostersgonnagetya on Jan 3, 2011 16:43:18 GMT
Pulis would never admit to style being a problem in attracting players, ever.
It has to though, certain types of player, it just has too.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2011 16:44:00 GMT
There you go again, moving the goalposts - why does it matter who was in for them? You were saying we couldn't attract attacking players, and when we do you panic and scrabble round for further criteria because you've been proven wrong. Like the players you listed earlier - they all signed for clubs who were bigger than us regardless of how we play. I'm not moving the goalposts but if I put all my bullet points together it would take a lifetime, that is how many issues there are imo. You are moving the goalposts. Re-read this very thread and see how you keep coming up with new criteria that we have to fit in with.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Jan 3, 2011 16:45:31 GMT
Primarily it is all about money. Offer a player more money to come to your club than someone else and generally he will sign. There are exceptions to that obviously, but as a rule, money talks.
Undoubtedly, if we were to offer a player the same money as a club like Everton, Newcastle or Villa, then chances are the player would choose them. They are bigger clubs regardless of league positions.
However, if we were to offer a player the same money and we were battling it out with the likes of Blackpool, Wigan, West Brom, Birmingham and Wolves, then we would undoubtedly secure the players signature.
Of that I am absolutely 100% certain. You are kidding yourself if you believe anything other.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2011 16:47:45 GMT
Pulis would never admit to style being a problem in attracting players, ever. It has to though, certain types of player, it just has too. Why? Show me some evidence.
|
|
|
Post by Tubes on Jan 3, 2011 16:51:26 GMT
come off it. Wasn't Pennant on several peoples radars? There were several clubs supposedly looking to steal him in January. And Kenwynne? Are you telling me there was no interest in Kenwynne from any other PL clubs?
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Jan 3, 2011 17:11:59 GMT
Rooster...In what way have you been proven right for the last 5 seasons?
The last 5 seasons have been ones of continual progression, so despite what you consider to be a woeful midfield, many would suggest that you have been proven very wrong.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jan 3, 2011 17:22:49 GMT
There are only 3 factors affecting a footballer's choice of club
1 Money 2 Money 3 Money
More established clubs tend to offer more security. longer contracts and more chance of bonuses for winning things.
The only footballers who are exceptions to this are those who allow their wives/girlfriends to decide. They have only one factor affecting their decision; MONEY.
|
|