|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jul 23, 2014 6:34:14 GMT
No question that we've brought in some real quality to the squad.  . Very exciting. But the real hard work starts now in getting rid of the deadwood. The problem, of course being, these players may not want to leave or may not attract much interest on the basis that they've been poor for us or hardly ripped up the trees when we've loaned them out. Kightly being an honourable exception - and of course he's now gone. So who is the deadwood we need shot of? Palacios obviously. And who in the squad are you happy staying at Stoke but, at the same time, aren't that concerned if he leaves? Cameron? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2014 6:38:57 GMT
In no particular order...
Palacios
Walters
Shotton
Shea
Ness
Crouch
Wilkinson
Jerome
|
|
|
|
Post by wuzza on Jul 23, 2014 6:43:17 GMT
There really isnt that much 'deadwood'.
Palacios as you say, Jerome could go too but other than that everyone could have a role to play.
Everyone keeps quoting Ness for example but he's young and might be getting there as far as any of us know. Also Shotton is a better player than many give him credit for.
The rest we keep for a season at least - let the new signings settle and then review the situation. Its not as if we have spent a fortune on transfer fees is it!
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Jul 23, 2014 6:44:07 GMT
In no particular order... Palacios Walters Shotton Shea Ness Crouch Wilkinson Jerome Yes, that would be my long list. I'd be happy to keep one or two of them but that will depend upon form and fitness in preseason. I find myself hoping that Ness finally starts looking like he can do the business. he was very unfortunate to pick up a bad injury within weeks of joining us and a young left footed midfielder would be a useful addition to the squad. |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Jul 23, 2014 6:47:06 GMT
There really isnt that much 'deadwood'. Palacios as you say, Jerome could go too but other than that everyone could have a role to play. Everyone keeps quoting Ness for example but he's young and might be getting there as far as any of us know. Also Shotton is a better player than many give him credit for. The rest we keep for a season at least - let the new signings settle and then review the situation. Its not as if we have spent a fortune on transfer fees is it! Keeping so many players isn't an option. If we don't free up wages and use the wages freed up to pay the new players we'll fall foul of the Premier League financial fair play rules. It isn't a question of having the money to pay them - there is, basically, a wage cap in force in the Prem these days. |
|
|
|
Post by wuzza on Jul 23, 2014 6:51:59 GMT
I'll believe it when I see it Lakeland.
There absolutely should be a wage cap but what is floating around at the minute is hardly worthy of the name.
Anyways hang on to Walters and Crouch or regret it !!
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Jul 23, 2014 6:57:22 GMT
I'll believe it when I see it Lakeland. There absolutely should be a wage cap but what is floating around at the minute is hardly worthy of the name. Anyways hang on to Walters and Crouch or regret it !! It is yet to be tested but as things stand our wage bill can increase this season by £4 million ish (I think!). Unless we find a new income stream to pay for any increase on top of that. Given that we are Stoke, you can bet that the Prem would have no problem in throwing the book at us if we did breach the rules. I suppose the saving grace is that there is still a stadium naming deal to be announced and that could be for a big wedge of cash. In fact if Bet365 were the new sponsors then they could inject new cash that way - but I doubt if Denise will be happy to pay more than the sponsorship is really worth. EDIT - a cynic might say that the stadium sponsorship deal is being delayed until the board sees how big the wage increase is!  |
|
|
|
Post by wuzza on Jul 23, 2014 7:04:22 GMT
You sum it up totally Lakeland. Could drive a bus through the arrangements as they stand!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2014 7:11:33 GMT
We need to keep players like Cameron , Wilson , Adam etc .
You get rid of your worst first and then whittle it down pro rata. I know it doesn't always work out that simple but that's the general idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeycov on Jul 23, 2014 7:20:24 GMT
We need to keep players like Cameron , Wilson , Adam etc . You get rid of your worst first and then whittle it down pro rata. I know it doesn't always work out that simple but that's the general idea. Yes, we need to retain a squad - injuries suspensions etc to cover. I would hope that all players would not be happy to start on/ not make the bench so some healthy competition is good. To be fair to MH he has rewarded players who have performed e.g. Whelan deservedly retaining his place in the first 11 As with a previous post, Walters and Crouch would be top of my "to stay list" I don't see a role for Palacios, Jerome or Shotton, maybe Wilkinson Adam has his faults but is capable of scoring some vital goals, reading play and providing some pinpoint passes to our forwards |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2014 9:11:49 GMT
In no particular order... Palacios Walters Shotton Shea Ness Crouch Wilkinson Jerome so if Crouch, Walters and Jerome all go what happens if Diouf gets injured? I think keeping at least one striker might be an idea |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2014 9:14:46 GMT
There really isnt that much 'deadwood'. Palacios as you say, Jerome could go too but other than that everyone could have a role to play. Everyone keeps quoting Ness for example but he's young and might be getting there as far as any of us know. Also Shotton is a better player than many give him credit for. The rest we keep for a season at least - let the new signings settle and then review the situation. Its not as if we have spent a fortune on transfer fees is it! transfer fees don't affect us much FFP wise but we can only increase our wagebill by £4mill and would imagine that we've already gone over that so will have to lose some players just to reconcile things financially. EDIT: Sorry Wuzza, didn't see you and LP had already discussed all this |
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Jul 23, 2014 9:23:14 GMT
Would prefer to keep Walters over Crouch.
I was totally over Crouch last season watching him plodding around the middle of the pitch knocking the ball down,passing it back and slowing down some of our fast attacking play.
Walters is a fine option to have leading the line - he works aarrrdd but is not a totally static target man like Crouch.
The only reason to keep Crouch is if we want to launch balls into the penalty area when we are chasing the game or just be a nuisance on set-pieces. But I think we have evolved past that stage as a team now
|
|
|
|
Post by Clem Fandango on Jul 23, 2014 9:23:41 GMT
I would say Jerome, Palacios and Shotton (its a shame that Coyle got the sack before that supposed transfer to Wigan took place) in the very least.
Is Edu still here or has he definitely gone now.
|
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Jul 23, 2014 9:26:01 GMT
"The club maintained its Premier League status after further investment in the playing squad, the annual wage bill rising to £60.4m (2013: £59.4m).
"Following the new Premier League broadcast deal and the introduction of Financial Fair Play rules, the group is committed to reducing the club's reliance on the group and, over the medium term, to make it self-sufficient."
Wonder exactly which wages that figure includes?
OUT
Pennant
Ethers
Kightly
Kenwyne
IN
Ireland
Odemwingie
Teixeira
Diouf
Bojan
Bardsley
Sidwell
Regardless, as mentioned, we must be well above a £4m rise at it stands, just based on the incomings in the last month. (Diouf could be nudging £3m on his own depending on how we've worked out his salary/signing-on fee?)
We probably have banked on removing Palacios and Jerome at an absolute minimum (£2.5m-a-year?)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2014 9:27:05 GMT
deadwood? these players have signed for stoke city and are part of our squad. the hard work is bringing in players which mh and the team have done superbly.players who are out of the first team will be looking for first team players then you have players who do not feature but will happily run down their contract. that is just a fact of life and happens at every club.
your thread title is ludicrous
|
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Jul 23, 2014 9:32:09 GMT
In no particular order... Palacios Walters Shotton Shea Ness Crouch Wilkinson Jerome This is pretty close. I would have preferred we kept Jerome but looks like he's going anyway. Wouldn't mind if we kept Wilkinson and Shotton either. Walters it depends. If he wants to start every game, he probably needs to move on, if he wants to stay and battle and be a squad player, by all means he's a good player to bring on with 20 minutes. Crouch is a decent bench player but again, it depends what he wants. Ness can go as far as I'm concerned as can Palacios. Shea? The book is still out. I'd like him to stay and prove the doubters wrong, but he seems to muck up every chance he gets. |
|
|
|
Post by rockthecity on Jul 23, 2014 9:36:51 GMT
Palacios
Ness
Shea 50/50 think he has something to prove
Walters
Shotton
Jerome
|
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Jul 23, 2014 9:44:39 GMT
There is plenty of deadwood bought for big money by the previous manager - Shea, Ness, Palacios, Jerome.
I wouldn't call Walters deadwood, but he must be down the pecking order now. For me he should go. Pulis would have him tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Jul 23, 2014 10:02:42 GMT
There is plenty of deadwood bought for big money by the previous manager - Shea, Ness, Palacios, Jerome. I wouldn't call Walters deadwood, but he must be down the pecking order now. For me he should go. Pulis would have him tomorrow. And for Palace, he'd be a good signing. He fits the Pulis style of football. Works hard, pushes himself in training and has a goal in him. |
|
|
|
Post by sufolkstokie on Jul 23, 2014 10:13:46 GMT
Much easier said than done
Jerome is at home but there is a distinct lack of noise re clubs after him
Palacios looks like a busted flush sadly
Shotts - it is obvious Sparky does not see him as a right back and he certainly is no winger
Edu - hopefully back to the States
the rest I would keep if SCFC can afford to
|
|
|
|
Post by cognacsmoker on Jul 23, 2014 10:17:38 GMT
Players we will be looking to move on in the next season or two:
Shea
Edu
Palacios
Jerome
Ness - unless keep him for the future if he shows promise
Shotton or Wilko
Crouch or Walters
Adam or Ireland
Which would leave us with a first team squad something like this:
Bego Butland
Bardsley Cameron Pieters Wilko
Shawcross Huth Wilson Muniesa Tex
Whelan Nzonzi Sidwell Ireland
Bojan Arnie Wingie
Diouf Walters
|
|
|
|
Post by DelapsWankingArm on Jul 23, 2014 10:28:48 GMT
Edu, Ness, Jerome Shotton, Shea & Palacios all need to go.
Is unlikely that Crouch will leave & i'd keep Walters.
|
|
|
|
Post by geoffscott on Jul 23, 2014 11:04:07 GMT
Thanks to the current management team at Stoke City, the term 'deadwood' is very quickly becoming so outdated when referring to a Stoke City squad.
Players at Stoke City that coould move on, either becuase the club sees it as good business ot becuase the player himself has seen himself move down the pecking order and wants a new challenge could include:
Ryan Shotton - Unlikely to make many matchday squads, let alone start games. At his age he needs to be playing week in week out, a move away seems more likely than not.
Geoff Cameron - No longer first choice right back, so unlikely to start the season as regular starter. Versatility should guarantee him a place in every matchday squad and lead to decent playing time on the pitch. If he doesn't get much game time, his feet may become itchy.
Robert Huth - No longer assured of being first choice center half. At 30 years of age the club may see him as a saleable assett, likewise Robert Huth could be keen on securing one last big pay day, a new long term contract with another team where he is assured to be a first team starter.
Stepen N'Zonzi - Rates himself to be worthy of a 'better' club than Stoke City, he may well get the move he has craved since joining Stoke City.
Jamie Ness - Remains an 'unknown', if not a permanent move, a loan deal seems likely.
Wilson Palacios - Still carry's the fitness concerns that hung over him when we decided to pay £6 million, if another club is prepared to take the gamble he will surely leave, probably the closest to expensive 'deadwood' left over from the previous regime.
Brek Shea - Unless he 'pulls up trees' in pre season, surely a permanent move or loan deal will be the outcome.
Charlie Adam - Probably won't be a regular starter, though still likely to see plenty of game time. Would command a decent transfer fee if the club decided to sell, Charlie Adam may decide he wants to move on, if he is not a first team starter.
Jonathan Walters - Loves to play and may not get as many starts as he would like, if he's not content with a regular place on the bench he may well push for a move.
Cameron Jerome - Mark Hughes just doesnt seem to rate him, so will surely be leaving in this transfer window.
Peter Crouch - Both player and club appear to be happy if he stays and happy if he leaves at the right price and right conditions for club and player.
|
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jul 23, 2014 11:12:36 GMT
deadwood? these players have signed for stoke city and are part of our squad. the hard work is bringing in players which mh and the team have done superbly. players who are out of the first team will be looking for first team players then you have players who do not feature but will happily run down their contract. that is just a fact of life and happens at every club. your thread title is ludicrous Don't really get this post. Is it supposed to mean that it's impossible to get rid of deadwood? If a player gets an offer to play first team football at the same wages then of course they would leave. Based on the past few seasons the hard work is getting rid of the deadwood as we haven't managed to do it. The main reason being IMO because we ask too much in return in terms of transfer fees. |
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jul 23, 2014 11:16:19 GMT
In no particular order... Palacios Walters Shotton Shea Ness Crouch Wilkinson Jerome so if Crouch, Walters and Jerome all go what happens if Diouf gets injured? I think keeping at least one striker might be an idea Can't Odemwingie do a job there? Anyway mate, you know that we would never get rid of that entire list, just a few of them would be good. |
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Jul 23, 2014 11:16:43 GMT
We will need a massive squad to cope with all the silverware heading our way!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2014 11:25:07 GMT
so if Crouch, Walters and Jerome all go what happens if Diouf gets injured? I think keeping at least one striker might be an idea Can't Odemwingie do a job there? Anyway mate, you know that we would never get rid of that entire list, just a few of them would be good. yeah he can but i don't want him turning into a player like SJW was under Tone...just use him all over the pitch as and when required and then wonder why his form takes a downturn....and Hughes seems to prefer him playing wider than as a lone striker anyway. i have no issue with Jerome and Johnny going but i'd keep Crouch. Crouch represents something completely different to our game and could be useful if we need to change tactics mid game. i'd rather that than just think "Diouf isn't working so just shove on Jerome and carry on playing the same way exactly". be sad to see SJW leave though...great worker and does massive amounts of work backtracking which no-one notices and shores up the midfield to allow them to kick on.people always applaud Cameron for the way he pushes up but seem to neglect the fact that he's only allowed to do that because of the likes of SJW who give him the cover to afford him that attacking luxury. comes in for far far too much stick on here simply because he's apparently a forward and doesn't score often..no mitigation seems to be offered on here at all for the fact that he's played most of the last few years as a glorified bloody winger. having said that, i just don't see anywhere he can fit in anymore really (especially if we do get a recognised winger in as well) |
|
|
|
Post by Stoke711 on Jul 23, 2014 11:25:57 GMT
"The club maintained its Premier League status after further investment in the playing squad, the annual wage bill rising to £60.4m (2013: £59.4m). "Following the new Premier League broadcast deal and the introduction of Financial Fair Play rules, the group is committed to reducing the club's reliance on the group and, over the medium term, to make it self-sufficient." Wonder exactly which wages that figure includes? OUT Pennant Ethers Kightly Kenwyne IN Ireland Odemwingie Teixeira Diouf Bojan Bardsley Sidwell Regardless, as mentioned, we must be well above a £4m rise at it stands, just based on the incomings in the last month. (Diouf could be nudging £3m on his own depending on how we've worked out his salary/signing-on fee?) We probably have banked on removing Palacios and Jerome at an absolute minimum (£2.5m-a-year?) Ireland was signed in Jan, his wage wont be a part of the 4mill will it? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2014 11:27:49 GMT
"The club maintained its Premier League status after further investment in the playing squad, the annual wage bill rising to £60.4m (2013: £59.4m). "Following the new Premier League broadcast deal and the introduction of Financial Fair Play rules, the group is committed to reducing the club's reliance on the group and, over the medium term, to make it self-sufficient." Wonder exactly which wages that figure includes? OUT Pennant Ethers Kightly Kenwyne IN Ireland Odemwingie Teixeira Diouf Bojan Bardsley Sidwell Regardless, as mentioned, we must be well above a £4m rise at it stands, just based on the incomings in the last month. (Diouf could be nudging £3m on his own depending on how we've worked out his salary/signing-on fee?) We probably have banked on removing Palacios and Jerome at an absolute minimum (£2.5m-a-year?) Ireland was signed in Jan, his wage wont be a part of the 4mill will it? i presume it's based on a season to season basis or if not, then based on the financial year in which case his wage would have been included in the amounts already quoted for last year? anyone that can confirm? i'm looking at you Lakeland Potter |
|
. Very exciting.
