|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2014 13:03:21 GMT
It was but we can't afford to spend £4m a pop on an occasional contribution, however important. Rob, you know your stuff, and you must also know that it might be crazy, but that if you want a striker that can make an impact at this level, less than £4M is rock bottom.
Jerome was a great impact sub and also made a contribution in the critical games at the end of the season. His pace is a huge asset and made Crouch's goal away at QPR. For a "squad" striker he was in the "bargain bucket" category, (as was Kightly for that matter: Jarvis £12M and Downing £20m?). We've talked about Van Wolfswinkel that came on big money. I think he's managed something like one goal on the opening day and 7 shots since! Is the Jerome signing another criticism of Pulis?
Bent went from Sunderland to Villa for £24M, Soldado at Spurs was in the mid £20M mark, Bony was £12m wasn't he? A quality striker just doesn't come cheap. Pappis Cisse, Benteke and even maybe Michu may be one season wonders. And for every Michu at £2M, there is a Cornelius at £8M. It's a huge gamble that can make or break your season.
My point is that Fuller, Etherington and the 2011 version of Pennant were so good, and came for combined fees of around £4.5M, that replacing them with the same quality for anything like the same money was probably impossible. Instead of being lauded for finding those bargains and getting the best out of them, Pulis is criticised for not repeating the impossible. Seems a tad harsh to me.
Let's hope that in Arnie, Wingie and Ireland, Hughes can do the same.
Look at the teams around us in the bottom half. How many of them spend £3-4m on players they don't intend to use as more than a fringe player? I'll wager there's not many. We couldn't, and can't afford to keep doing that.
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Mar 21, 2014 13:16:48 GMT
'We' can afford
If 'we' choose to pull back then it's because they don't care enough
Sunderland - spent fortunes West Ham - spent fortunes - they don't play Downing and Jarvis at the same time do they? they both cost lots didn't they? big debts but owners want the best for them Swansea - 12m on Bony when Michu already firing (and he cost £2M) Hull - how mcuh did they spend on Jelavic and Long - have they been playing both of them in every game Norwich - that vans winkel, hooper - doesn't play both of them Fulham - spent lots haven't they?
when you run out of money and genuinely can't afford is when you fall out of the league
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2014 13:21:44 GMT
'We' can afford If 'we' choose to pull back then it's because they don't care enough Sunderland - spent fortunes West Ham - spent fortunes - they don't play Downing and Jarvis at the same time do they? they both cost lots didn't they? big debts but owners want the best for them Swansea - 12m on Bony when Michu already firing (and he cost £2M) Hull - how mcuh did they spend on Jelavic and Long - have they been playing both of them in every game Norwich - that vans winkel, hooper - doesn't play both of them Fulham - spent lots haven't they? when you run out of money and genuinely can't afford is when you fall out of the league Swansea, Norwich and Hull haven't spent what we've spent in recent seasons though have they? Fulham had dialled back their spending in the last few seasons as well. Sunderland have recouped what, £60m+ in player sales over the last 5 years or so? Don't know if they do play Jarvis and Downing together when both are fit but can't say West Ham are a team I especially want us to emulate.
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Mar 21, 2014 13:27:52 GMT
Swansea and Hull haven't been in the Prem as long as us though in recent times have they?
This is what you asked either.
You wanted to know if people spend 3-4M on squad players and I think they do and more in some cases.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2014 13:28:48 GMT
I'm not saying we shouldn't spend, we desperately need to. I'm saying we can't keep pissing decent sized fees away on players we don't think are good enough to feature regularly.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2014 13:30:36 GMT
Swansea and Hull haven't been in the Prem as long as us though in recent times have they? This is what you asked either. You wanted to know if people spend 3-4M on squad players and I think they do and more in some cases. The clubs around us don't generally. West Ham perhaps. I'd argue they were in a minority. They haven't been in the prem as long, no. Hence they haven't had the splurge we've had. And are therefore, maybe, better placed to do so than us?
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Mar 21, 2014 13:31:54 GMT
It goes with the territory of building a capable football squad I'm afraid when your youth system has produced fuck all.
If we want to stay here then we will need to keep spending...no use being like other clubs that spend for a while....then stop...then go down.
Wolves, Middlesborough, Bolton....
|
|
|
Post by Miles Offside on Mar 21, 2014 16:24:50 GMT
We had three of our best seasons for many years under Pulis before he bored us to death in his last two.
Pulis left behind - despite what you read on here to the contrary - one of the best (if not the best) squad in the bottom half of the Prem. All his signings were gambles. Some were awful, some average and some came off brilliantly. Stoke have since recouped from incoming transfer fees about £10M of the money he spent. Much of the rest is invested in the squad.
At the end of last season I wanted Pulis to go, but only if we were sure of replacing him with better. I didn't want us to do something like Cardiff did when they replaced Malky Mackay.
I didn't want Hughes and for a good part of this season I would've preferred somebody else (like Mackay).
MH got off to a ropey start by getting our defenders endlessly passing sideways and backwards. We didn't have much of a clue what to do in the opponent's half (not much change there, then).
When he came I said we needed 3 front men to make the team click. Last Saturday he basically played a Pulis team with his own forward three playing just behind Crouch and it worked a treat.
The wins over Chelsea, United, Arsenal and West Ham were brilliant and Hughes can take a lot of credit for them. He can also take credit for getting the players to train with the ball every day. Unbelievably, it said on Sky that they only trained one day of the week with the ball when TP was here.
So MH is making progress and I've warmed to him of late. He's definitely progressed us as a footballing side this season. We've become much better to watch.
MH hasn't yet worked the "miracle" mentioned by the OP, but what we've seen is encouraging.
|
|
|
Post by okeydokeystokie2 on Mar 21, 2014 17:55:06 GMT
I'm not saying we shouldn't spend, we desperately need to. I'm saying we can't keep pissing decent sized fees away on players we don't think are good enough to feature regularly. You're kidding yourself Rob. If you want to put a striker on the bench in the Prem, £3-4M is the absolute minimum.
All these players were on the bench this weekend. I reckon all of them would go for at least that kind of money.
Lambert (!) , Rodellaga, Van Wolfswinkel, Redmond, Gale (£8M?), Jerome, Altidore, Lita, Sinclair.
That's just the teams around us. Demba Ba, Danny Wellbeck, Niklas Bendtner, Victor Moses and Edwin Dzeko barely get a game.
The Premier League is an expensive club. If you want to stay in it you have to splash the cash.
Perhaps you've been spoiled by some of Tone's bargains ;-)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2014 17:58:58 GMT
I'm not saying we shouldn't spend, we desperately need to. I'm saying we can't keep pissing decent sized fees away on players we don't think are good enough to feature regularly. You're kidding yourself Rob. If you want to put a striker on the bench in the Prem, £3-4M is the absolute minimum.
All these players were on the bench this weekend. I reckon all of them would go for at least that kind of money.
Lambert (!) , Rodellaga, Van Wolfswinkel, Redmond, Gale (£8M?), Jerome, Altidore, Lita, Sinclair.
That's just the teams around us. Demba Ba, Danny Wellbeck, Niklas Bendtner, Victor Moses and Edwin Dzeko barely get a game.
The Premier League is an expensive club. If you want to stay in it you have to splash the cash.
Perhaps you've been spoiled by some of Tone's bargains ;-)
We're talking about the teams around us and most of the ones you list weren't signed to be bench players were they? Altidore and RVW were supposed to be the main men for their respective sides, as was Gayle. Lita didn't cost anywhere near that, Rodallega was a free transfer and Redmond and Sinclair are wingers. Even if we can afford the odd one, we were at a point where most of the players we brought in weren't getting in the team regularly. Only Crouch, Nzonzi and Cameron in his last four windows cemented themselves in the team.
|
|
|
Post by okeydokeystokie2 on Mar 21, 2014 18:05:45 GMT
I think you're in a bit of a cul de sac here.
I think in the great scheme of things, in this league, Jerome and Walters for something like a combined fee of £5.5M are absolute bargains.
Not sure why you want to argue that point, but it is as they say, a game of opinions.
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Mar 21, 2014 18:06:16 GMT
We had three of our best seasons for many years under Pulis before he bored us to death in his last two. Pulis left behind - despite what you read on here to the contrary - one of the best (if not the best) squad in the bottom half of the Prem. All his signings were gambles. Some were awful, some average and some came off brilliantly. Stoke have since recouped from incoming transfer fees about £10M of the money he spent. Much of the rest is invested in the squad. At the end of last season I wanted Pulis to go, but only if we were sure of replacing him with better. I didn't want us to do something like Cardiff did when they replaced Malky Mackay. I didn't want Hughes and for a good part of this season I would've preferred somebody else (like Mackay). MH got off to a ropey start by getting our defenders endlessly passing sideways and backwards. We didn't have much of a clue what to do in the opponent's half (not much change there, then). When he came I said we needed 3 front men to make the team click. Last Saturday he basically played a Pulis team with his own forward three playing just behind Crouch and it worked a treat. The wins over Chelsea, United, Arsenal and West Ham were brilliant and Hughes can take a lot of credit for them. He can also take credit for getting the players to train with the ball every day. Unbelievably, it said on Sky that they only trained one day of the week with the ball when TP was here. So MH is making progress and I've warmed to him of late. He's definitely progressed us as a footballing side this season. We've become much better to watch. MH hasn't yet worked the "miracle" mentioned by the OP, but what we've seen is encouraging. Now that is a cracking post.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2014 18:07:55 GMT
I think you're in a bit of a cul de sac here. I think in the great scheme of things, in this league, Jerome and Walters for something like a combined fee of £5.5M are absolute bargains. Not sure why you want to argue that point, but it is as they say, a game of opinions. My point is we couldn't keep spunking that kind of money on fringe players, which I've said several times. Maybe you get away with it now and then. Doing it consistently is something a club of our size and stature can't afford to do indefinitely. I don't think we've had our money's worth out of Jerome because he wasn't given enough of a chance, but I accept I'm in a minority there.
|
|
|
Post by robstokie on Mar 21, 2014 18:08:34 GMT
I think that Sparky has, slowly, turned us around and for the first time in a couple of seasons. I think we can start to look forward instead of worrying about avoiding relegation. If we can keep the form going then, looking at our last 8 games, there is no reason we cannot finish 10th/11th.
As for the spending debate, I would prefer to sit on the fence. Yes, we need a striker in the summer, but i dont think we need to be chucking absolute wads of cash around. There are some good young strikers out there, such as Berahino, Vokes and Austin and there is no reason why we would have to break the bank to get them in (providing their teams go or stay down in the Championship). Plus, if we can get Aaron Hunt in 1-We wont have to break the bank for him and 2-It will be a real coup to get someone of his calibre.
|
|
|
Post by Fred Ferret on Mar 21, 2014 18:11:26 GMT
Yes, crackin!
LMH - bloody good manager - extend his contract (eh? Stafford).
|
|
|
Post by pottersrule on Mar 21, 2014 18:12:25 GMT
It was but we can't afford to spend £4m a pop on an occasional contribution, however important. Rob, you know your stuff, and you must also know that it might be crazy, but that if you want a striker that can make an impact at this level, less than £4M is rock bottom.
Jerome was a great impact sub and also made a contribution in the critical games at the end of the season. His pace is a huge asset and made Crouch's goal away at QPR. For a "squad" striker he was in the "bargain bucket" category, (as was Kightly for that matter: Jarvis £12M and Downing £20m?). We've talked about Van Wolfswinkel that came on big money. I think he's managed something like one goal on the opening day and 7 shots since! Is the Jerome signing another criticism of Pulis?
Bent went from Sunderland to Villa for £24M, Soldado at Spurs was in the mid £20M mark, Bony was £12m wasn't he? A quality striker just doesn't come cheap. Pappis Cisse, Benteke and even maybe Michu may be one season wonders. And for every Michu at £2M, there is a Cornelius at £8M. It's a huge gamble that can make or break your season.
My point is that Fuller, Etherington and the 2011 version of Pennant were so good, and came for combined fees of around £4.5M, that replacing them with the same quality for anything like the same money was probably impossible. Instead of being lauded for finding those bargains and getting the best out of them, Pulis is criticised for not repeating the impossible. Seems a tad harsh to me.
Let's hope that in Arnie, Wingie and Ireland, Hughes can do the same.
Excellent post,totally agree.
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Mar 21, 2014 18:13:48 GMT
Yes, crackin! LMH - bloody good manager - extend his contract (eh? Stafford). Each to their own.
|
|
|
Post by Fred Ferret on Mar 21, 2014 18:21:15 GMT
Yes, crackin! LMH - bloody good manager - extend his contract (eh? Stafford). Each to their own. What time is the train to Cripple Palarse?
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Mar 21, 2014 18:21:14 GMT
We had three of our best seasons for many years under Pulis before he bored us to death in his last two. Pulis left behind - despite what you read on here to the contrary - one of the best (if not the best) squad in the bottom half of the Prem. All his signings were gambles. Some were awful, some average and some came off brilliantly. Stoke have since recouped from incoming transfer fees about £10M of the money he spent. Much of the rest is invested in the squad. At the end of last season I wanted Pulis to go, but only if we were sure of replacing him with better. I didn't want us to do something like Cardiff did when they replaced Malky Mackay. I didn't want Hughes and for a good part of this season I would've preferred somebody else (like Mackay). MH got off to a ropey start by getting our defenders endlessly passing sideways and backwards. We didn't have much of a clue what to do in the opponent's half (not much change there, then). When he came I said we needed 3 front men to make the team click. Last Saturday he basically played a Pulis team with his own forward three playing just behind Crouch and it worked a treat. The wins over Chelsea, United, Arsenal and West Ham were brilliant and Hughes can take a lot of credit for them. He can also take credit for getting the players to train with the ball every day. Unbelievably, it said on Sky that they only trained one day of the week with the ball when TP was here. So MH is making progress and I've warmed to him of late. He's definitely progressed us as a footballing side this season. We've become much better to watch. MH hasn't yet worked the "miracle" mentioned by the OP, but what we've seen is encouraging. You wanted Pulis out and replaced by MacKay? How does that work - you're replacing like for like? Pretty much EXACTLY the same manager. Only Stoke City fans expected miracles from a new Manager virtually from the get go. This after ten years of the same manager who lowered expectations with those same said fans lapping it up hook line and sinker. Mark Hughes is doing a tremendous job - only an idiot would say he isn't.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2014 18:22:10 GMT
I think that Sparky has, slowly, turned us around and for the first time in a couple of seasons. I think we can start to look forward instead of worrying about avoiding relegation. If we can keep the form going then, looking at our last 8 games, there is no reason we cannot finish 10th/11th. As for the spending debate, I would prefer to sit on the fence. Yes, we need a striker in the summer, but i dont think we need to be chucking absolute wads of cash around. There are some good young strikers out there, such as Berahino, Vokes and Austin and there is no reason why we would have to break the bank to get them in (providing their teams go or stay down in the Championship). Plus, if we can get Aaron Hunt in 1-We wont have to break the bank for him and 2-It will be a real coup to get someone of his calibre. We need to spend a fair wedge, no question. But we're not in a position to throw good money after bad like we were doing in the last couple of seasons, which was the point I was trying to make to Okie.
|
|
|
Post by Mint Berry Barks on Mar 21, 2014 18:38:02 GMT
We had three of our best seasons for many years under Pulis before he bored us to death in his last two. Pulis left behind - despite what you read on here to the contrary - one of the best (if not the best) squad in the bottom half of the Prem. All his signings were gambles. Some were awful, some average and some came off brilliantly. Stoke have since recouped from incoming transfer fees about £10M of the money he spent. Much of the rest is invested in the squad. At the end of last season I wanted Pulis to go, but only if we were sure of replacing him with better. I didn't want us to do something like Cardiff did when they replaced Malky Mackay. I didn't want Hughes and for a good part of this season I would've preferred somebody else (like Mackay). MH got off to a ropey start by getting our defenders endlessly passing sideways and backwards. We didn't have much of a clue what to do in the opponent's half (not much change there, then). When he came I said we needed 3 front men to make the team click. Last Saturday he basically played a Pulis team with his own forward three playing just behind Crouch and it worked a treat. The wins over Chelsea, United, Arsenal and West Ham were brilliant and Hughes can take a lot of credit for them. He can also take credit for getting the players to train with the ball every day. Unbelievably, it said on Sky that they only trained one day of the week with the ball when TP was here. So MH is making progress and I've warmed to him of late. He's definitely progressed us as a footballing side this season. We've become much better to watch. MH hasn't yet worked the "miracle" mentioned by the OP, but what we've seen is encouraging. That was my main gripe with Pulis over the last 18 months of his spell here, we had the best squad in the bottom half of the league and the potential foundation on which to build a very, solid top 10 team on. People complained about the terrible football and I don't disagree because at times, it was terrible to watch but my problem with Tony was that he wasn't utilizing his personal to the most of their ability despite spending a small fortune and buying some very talented footballers. It was a shame because he was ultimately holding us back, not through design but just that he and his staff didn't know any other way of playing. We were becoming stagnant and I think we would have been relegated this season had he stayed. He goes with all my well wishes and in Hughes I believe we have more of a 'football' manager, if that makes sense. "Mark and his staff" have clearly worked very hard on bringing out the best in some of our underappreciated footballers from past seasons (Whelan, Adam and Crouch to an extent) and made some of our better players even better. Due to some quality signings for very little, Hughes has added more strings to our bow and for the first time since 2011, we're looking upwards rather than over our shoulders. I am a very happy fan at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Mar 21, 2014 20:19:39 GMT
What time is the train to Cripple Palarse? Not a clue and why would I?
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Mar 22, 2014 10:19:36 GMT
We had three of our best seasons for many years under Pulis before he bored us to death in his last two. Pulis left behind - despite what you read on here to the contrary - one of the best (if not the best) squad in the bottom half of the Prem. All his signings were gambles. Some were awful, some average and some came off brilliantly. Stoke have since recouped from incoming transfer fees about £10M of the money he spent. Much of the rest is invested in the squad. At the end of last season I wanted Pulis to go, but only if we were sure of replacing him with better. I didn't want us to do something like Cardiff did when they replaced Malky Mackay. I didn't want Hughes and for a good part of this season I would've preferred somebody else (like Mackay). MH got off to a ropey start by getting our defenders endlessly passing sideways and backwards. We didn't have much of a clue what to do in the opponent's half (not much change there, then). When he came I said we needed 3 front men to make the team click. Last Saturday he basically played a Pulis team with his own forward three playing just behind Crouch and it worked a treat. The wins over Chelsea, United, Arsenal and West Ham were brilliant and Hughes can take a lot of credit for them. He can also take credit for getting the players to train with the ball every day. Unbelievably, it said on Sky that they only trained one day of the week with the ball when TP was here. So MH is making progress and I've warmed to him of late. He's definitely progressed us as a footballing side this season. We've become much better to watch. MH hasn't yet worked the "miracle" mentioned by the OP, but what we've seen is encouraging. That was my main gripe with Pulis over the last 18 months of his spell here, we had the best squad in the bottom half of the league and the potential foundation on which to build a very, solid top 10 team on. People complained about the terrible football and I don't disagree because at times, it was terrible to watch but my problem with Tony was that he wasn't utilizing his personal to the most of their ability despite spending a small fortune and buying some very talented footballers. It was a shame because he was ultimately holding us back, not through design but just that he and his staff didn't know any other way of playing. We were becoming stagnant and I think we would have been relegated this season had he stayed. He goes with all my well wishes and in Hughes I believe we have more of a 'football' manager, if that makes sense. "Mark and his staff" have clearly worked very hard on bringing out the best in some of our underappreciated footballers from past seasons (Whelan, Adam and Crouch to an extent) and made some of our better players even better. Due to some quality signings for very little, Hughes has added more strings to our bow and for the first time since 2011, we're looking upwards rather than over our shoulders. I am a very happy fan at the moment. Two good posts. It's disappointing that things went negative under TP who did a great job for the club, but eventually "lost the plot". On reflection, much as it was great to be in Europe, I don't think it did the club any favours. It clearly adversely impacted on league form and too much* football made everyone stale. (* I know there are those who think you can't have too much.)
|
|
|
Post by foster on Mar 22, 2014 10:41:07 GMT
Considering the money spent, has hughes made a bad signing yet?
|
|
|
Post by marrer on Mar 22, 2014 10:48:13 GMT
Tony Pulis did a great job for Stoke City for a number of years but his final 2 seasons were worse than awful. He was given the benefit of the doubt for the first awful season because of our Europa league campaign but didn't have that luxury last season which was even worse. He spent a fortune, we went backwards and he was rightly sacked. That doesn't alter the fact that the job he did prior to that was fantastic and beyond our wildest dreams. Mark Hughes has come into the club on a downward spiral with limited backing in the transfer market and is doing a very good job. Hopefully he will continue to a very good job and Stoke City will be back on an upward curve again. Can't we just leave it at that? Beat me to it . Bloody right you two. I wish everyone would just leave this topic alone. Pulis did a good job, then he didn't, then he went, now he's somewhere else. End of story. Hope you lot don't go on about your ex-girlfriends like you go on about TP.
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on Mar 22, 2014 15:51:01 GMT
Beat me to it . Bloody right you two. I wish everyone would just leave this topic alone. Pulis did a good job, then he didn't, then he went, now he's somewhere else. End of story. Hope you lot don't go on about your ex-girlfriends like you go on about TP. You think any of these lot have girlfriends?
|
|
|
Post by frank63 on Mar 22, 2014 19:55:21 GMT
The Lads done ok and we seem to be improving good luck to him.
|
|
|
Post by braddamick on Mar 22, 2014 20:38:29 GMT
What really got to me when Hughsey arrived was all this Media talk about "be careful what you wish for" as if we had already reached our full potential as a Club. We can`t be expected to play "proper" Football and rub shoulders with the Top Teams. I for one am loving every minute of our continuing Transformation.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Mar 22, 2014 20:55:41 GMT
What really got to me when Hughsey arrived was all this Media talk about "be careful what you wish for" as if we had already reached our full potential as a Club. We can`t be expected to play "proper" Football and rub shoulders with the Top Teams. I for one am loving every minute of our continuing Transformation. Also around that time 'Charlton' were mentioned more than once, and it wasn't just rimmers doing the mentioning
|
|
|
Post by nononsense on Mar 22, 2014 20:55:46 GMT
29 goals in 30 games is still goal shy isn't it ?? You've been told several times that it's 32 goals in 30 games. yes, my mistake! we are definitely not goal shy scoring an amazing 32 goals in 30 games!!
|
|