|
Post by boskampsflaps on Aug 1, 2014 19:40:37 GMT
I do love these threads. They remind me of the similar ones we had over the first half of last Season when people were queueing up to say Arnie was shit and nothing but a showpony. Or the ones we still have saying that Ireland is garbage and offers very little. Cameron started 41 games last Season. Only Shawcross started more with 43. The season in question being our best ever in the Prem. If Hughes didn't rate the guy he could have given Wilko a chance here or there. Or even Shotton. But he didn't. He stuck with Geoff from start to finish and he's just boosted his stock even further in the World Cup. Anyone who states "he shouldn't be anywhere near the first team" needs to give their head a wobble. Out of interest, how long before we get the "Bojan is garbage" threads? Clearly he thought he was the best of a bad bunch, do you think he got a new right back in because he was happy with what he has, if Cameron was so good there was no need to get anyone in, we've plenty of cover if needs be.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 19:45:52 GMT
Somebody has got to be moved on (which means someone has to want them before we get the shift palacios etc) if we want to comply with the Premier League FFP. We can only increase th e wage bill by approx £2.4 million which is about 46K a week. I would imagine we are well above that with the signings we have made so far this summer. Why £2.4m ? Out TV income is around £20 m higher than 2 seasons ago so that can all go on wages each season, plus the £4m a year rise that is allowed. FFP is not a factor in our wages According to this article then we are affected by FFP rules. www.footyplace.com/features/ffp-to-blame-for-southampton-exodus-0730298110[/quote]
|
|
|
Post by alster on Aug 1, 2014 19:52:16 GMT
I do love these threads. They remind me of the similar ones we had over the first half of last Season when people were queueing up to say Arnie was shit and nothing but a showpony. Or the ones we still have saying that Ireland is garbage and offers very little. Cameron started 41 games last Season. Only Shawcross started more with 43. The season in question being our best ever in the Prem. If Hughes didn't rate the guy he could have given Wilko a chance here or there. Or even Shotton. But he didn't. He stuck with Geoff from start to finish and he's just boosted his stock even further in the World Cup. Anyone who states "he shouldn't be anywhere near the first team" needs to give their head a wobble. Out of interest, how long before we get the "Bojan is garbage" threads? Last seasons options at RB were Cameron, Wilko, Shotts, Wilson. Shotts is simply out of his depth being anywhere in the top two divisions. Wilko is a fairly limited Championship standard RB with chronic injury issues. Wilson has no pace and can not get back if he crosses the half way line. therefor the position was Cameron's by default despite constant garbage delivery and a few defensive horror shows. The managers first move of the closed season was to rectify that situation, justifiably. I'm not sure what you saw in the World Cup but IMO Cameron raised his stock by about as much as Palacios in that he was there. On the Bojan point, I hope he does well and gets me off my seat with some sublime skill but where these opinions have come from about him being a shoe in to tear the Prem to shreds I'm confused by. I see him being a bit part player initially and needing to show his worth when he gets his chances.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 1, 2014 20:01:12 GMT
As I said ... we've obviously been talking at cross purposes, I've been offering an objective opinion based on what I think the manager might do, whereas you have been offering an opinion based on what you would do if you were the manager.
Nothing wrong in that of course but obviously they are two different discussions.
They're not mutually exclusive. I didn't say they were but I think they are different discussions. By way of example if I had expressed my own personal view on what should happen, then I would be offering a different opinion to the one I have.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 20:08:17 GMT
I'm not an expert either but it's to do with income. The more you earn the more you can pay out on wages. Did you really expect the Premiership elite to agree to 'FFP' and it actually be fair? Plus any additional commercial in more which is around £20 million given the TV deal so there is no issue with our wages for the foreseeable future The TV deal is the same as last season so it is not additional income for the coming season.
|
|
|
Post by thedeadlyshart on Aug 1, 2014 20:25:01 GMT
They're not mutually exclusive. I didn't say they were but I think they are different discussions. By way of example if I had expressed my own personal view on what should happen, then I would be offering a different opinion to the one I have. my view is that Hughes will pick his squad based on the form of the players and who he has historically picked. Based on last season and the preseason games that is how I would pick them and how I'd expect Hughes to pick them. Once I've seen what he does in a preseason match with all of his players available I'd have a better idea. It doesn't matter whose opinion it is, yours is no more objective than mine. It's speculation and what I've been saying from the beginning is that it's too early to say whether a player who started so many games last season and hasn't even played a preseason match is or is not in the manager's plans. How do we know that Hughes rates Wilson over Cameron? We don't!
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 1, 2014 20:40:39 GMT
I didn't say they were but I think they are different discussions. By way of example if I had expressed my own personal view on what should happen, then I would be offering a different opinion to the one I have. my view is that Hughes will pick his squad based on the form of the players and who he has historically picked. Based on last season and the preseason games that is how I would pick them and how I'd expect Hughes to pick them. Once I've seen what he does in a preseason match with all of his players available I'd have a better idea. It doesn't matter whose opinion it is, yours is no more objective than mine. It's speculation and what I've been saying from the beginning is that it's too early to say whether a player who started so many games last season and hasn't even played a preseason match is or is not in the manager's plans. How do we know that Hughes rates Wilson over Cameron? We don't!
You've just said that you don't rate Sidwell and you wouldn't have him in the match day squad, yet Hughes has just gone and signed him, I don't know how you can say that's being objective, you're letting your own personal opinion on the player dictate what you think Hughes will/should do.
Indeed I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make anymore, I guess it's probably best for us to agree to disagree, although I'm not entirely sure what we're disagreeing on - as I said, I think we've come at it from different points and there's really nothing wrong in that.
For what it's worth, I don't really rate Phil Bardsley but standing back and looking at it objectively, I fully expect him to be first choice right back next season.
|
|
|
Post by thedeadlyshart on Aug 1, 2014 20:47:14 GMT
my view is that Hughes will pick his squad based on the form of the players and who he has historically picked. Based on last season and the preseason games that is how I would pick them and how I'd expect Hughes to pick them. Once I've seen what he does in a preseason match with all of his players available I'd have a better idea. It doesn't matter whose opinion it is, yours is no more objective than mine. It's speculation and what I've been saying from the beginning is that it's too early to say whether a player who started so many games last season and hasn't even played a preseason match is or is not in the manager's plans. How do we know that Hughes rates Wilson over Cameron? We don't!
You've just said that you don't rate Sidwell and yet Hughes has just gone and signed him, I don't know how you can say that's being objective, you're letting your own personal opinion on the player dictate what you think Hughes will/should do.
Indeed I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make anymore, I guess it's probably best for us to agree to disagree, although I'm not entirely sure what we're disagreeing on - as I said, I think we've come at it from different points and there's really nothing wrong in that.
For what it's worth, I don't really rate Phil Bardsley but standing back and looking at it objectively I fully expect him to be first choice right back next season.
hughes signed guidetti and hardly played him. Pulis signed palacios and hardly played him. Signing a player doesn't mean they will be playing.
|
|
|
Post by roberthuth4 on Aug 1, 2014 20:48:26 GMT
Lets replace GC with an average full back: JOKE
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Aug 1, 2014 20:49:00 GMT
Lets replace GC with an average full back: JOKE GC isn't a full back though.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 1, 2014 20:50:54 GMT
You've just said that you don't rate Sidwell and yet Hughes has just gone and signed him, I don't know how you can say that's being objective, you're letting your own personal opinion on the player dictate what you think Hughes will/should do.
Indeed I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make anymore, I guess it's probably best for us to agree to disagree, although I'm not entirely sure what we're disagreeing on - as I said, I think we've come at it from different points and there's really nothing wrong in that.
For what it's worth, I don't really rate Phil Bardsley but standing back and looking at it objectively I fully expect him to be first choice right back next season.
hughes signed guidetti and hardly played him. Pulis signed palacios and hardly played him. Signing a player doesn't mean they will be playing.
I'll be gobsmacked if Sidwell isn't in the match day squad next season but hey let's just agree to disagree.
I'm cool.
|
|
|
Post by thedeadlyshart on Aug 1, 2014 21:04:40 GMT
hughes signed guidetti and hardly played him. Pulis signed palacios and hardly played him. Signing a player doesn't mean they will be playing.
I'll be gobsmacked if Sidwell isn't in the match day squad next season but hey let's just agree to disagree.
I'm cool.
Cool me too.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Aug 1, 2014 21:32:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Aug 1, 2014 21:39:16 GMT
Stoke now have the greatest abundance of talent on the books that they have ever had, but I think it is premature to start breaking up the squad of players that achieved ninth place just a few months ago. MH is correct to start to phase in better players but I think it is too early to jettison the main 2013-14 players.
When things have settled down by Christmas, then is the time to start letting go those key players last season who are no longer required. It isn't the case that Stoke are desperate for the finance.
|
|
|
Post by ayem on Aug 1, 2014 23:58:32 GMT
Quick questions: If we do go over the FFP rules, what's the penalty? With the teams depth would we make back the money through further play in cup matches?
|
|
|
Post by adi on Aug 2, 2014 3:32:17 GMT
This is a tough one as Id rather we kept hold off Geoff, however, Im struggling to see where he will play right now. Cover for RB and cover for DM.
|
|
|
Post by pedro23 on Aug 2, 2014 4:11:21 GMT
If the thread title is true, I am trying to think of a Stoke player who in recent times has attracted that much interest. Especially when you consider the battering he takes on this board. Can't recall any of our more popular players being that much in demand. Obviously the World Cup put him in the shop window.
|
|
|
Post by claudinho on Aug 2, 2014 5:10:11 GMT
Lets replace GC with an average full back: JOKE GC isn't a full back though. Funny, seems like he played an entire season there last year
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2014 6:25:08 GMT
Lets replace GC with an average full back: JOKE Nice to see you getting behind our new signing, before he has even played a game.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Aug 2, 2014 6:32:44 GMT
I'm not an expert either but it's to do with income. The more you earn the more you can pay out on wages. Did you really expect the Premiership elite to agree to 'FFP' and it actually be fair? Plus any additional commercial in more which is around £20 million given the TV deal so there is no issue with our wages for the foreseeable future Chiswick - you couldn't be more wrong in your assessment of the situation! The Premier League FFP rules were brought in to ensure that the additional TV income did not all go in wages. So the base date for the implementation of the rules was the point at which the extra TV income was distributed to clubs for the first time. So, from that point the rules on wages came into force and those rules allow for modest increases in wages each year unless new sources of income are found. So, clubs can't count the extra TV money as extra income, as the base date for the new rules was the date at which the new TV deal came into force. So the starting point for the FFP rules is the point which includes the new TV money. I can't remember the exact figure for the wage increase we are allowed each year (in the absence of any extra income) but it is of the order of £4 million. So, you need to look at the "ins" and "outs" of our playing staff and work out whether the wages of the "ins" exceeds the wages of the "outs" and by how much. I reckon that at the moment the players we have brought in mean that (with our minimal outs so far) we're probably a few £million up on our wage bill and, of course, we are still trying to add Assaidi and possibly a right sided player to the mix. The situation is complicated by the fact that Jerome is an "in" as far as our wage bill is concerned as his wages were paid for most of last season by Crystal Palace. So, my gut feeling is that we'll need to shed some wages and (purely as a guess) I reckon it is the order of £4 or £5 million - a "Crouch" plus an "Adam" plus a couple of cheapo players, perhaps?
|
|
|
Post by tarheel on Aug 2, 2014 6:39:57 GMT
4.5m bid popping around twitter seems a good starting point. Not that I think he should be sold.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2014 6:41:23 GMT
GC isn't a full back though. Funny, seems like he played an entire season there last year He isn't a full back. Bardsley is.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Aug 2, 2014 6:48:50 GMT
Stoke now have the greatest abundance of talent on the books that they have ever had, but I think it is premature to start breaking up the squad of players that achieved ninth place just a few months ago. MH is correct to start to phase in better players but I think it is too early to jettison the main 2013-14 players. When things have settled down by Christmas, then is the time to start letting go those key players last season who are no longer required. It isn't the case that Stoke are desperate for the finance. To stay within the wage limits under the FFP rules the club HAVE to shed players from the wage bill. It isn't a question of whether we can afford to pay the wages. If we were owned by a consortium of ten Russian Oligarchs our wage cap would still be there under the FFP rules. So getting rid of players in this window rather than in the January window means fewer players would need to be shipped out to stay within the rules.
|
|
|
Post by roberthuth4 on Aug 2, 2014 7:52:23 GMT
Lets replace GC with an average full back: JOKE Nice to see you getting behind our new signing, before he has even played a game. Nice to see everyone throwing a player out who played in our best ever season.
|
|
|
Post by stokiemac on Aug 2, 2014 8:06:30 GMT
I'd rather get rid of N'Zonzi than Cameron and then use Cameron as back up for the DM slot, I think Cameron bought into the club and culture 100% last season and if the World Cup showed anything about the USA squad it's their willingness to work hard as a unit and do what's best for the team. N'Zonzi however brilliant "on his day" doesn't like the club, the area or the position he plays and wouldn't be a big loss imho with people like Adam,Sidwell,Ireland,Muniesa,Cameron,Wilson,Whelan all able to play centre mid comfortably.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Aug 2, 2014 8:11:02 GMT
I agree Geoff isn't a natural RB and Bardsley is. but Geoff has played well in the position overall and adds a lot to Stoke's attack. I hope MH doesn't automatically replace Geoff until Bardsley proves he is better in the team.
A Sunderland fan in my neighbouring village (I live in N Yorks) says Bardsley is generally very good but can have stinker games.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2014 8:16:26 GMT
Nice to see you getting behind our new signing, before he has even played a game. Nice to see everyone throwing a player out who played in our best ever season. Nobody is doing that, but the fact is that he isn't a right back, and he has got plenty of competition for his favoured positions.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2014 8:18:29 GMT
I agree Geoff isn't a natural RB and Bardsley is. but Geoff has played well in the position overall and adds a lot to Stoke's attack. I hope MH doesn't automatically replace Geoff until Bardsley proves he is better in the team.A Sunderland fan in my neighbouring village (I live in N Yorks) says Bardsley is generally very good but can have stinker games. Horses for courses and Bardsley is at a new club in a new team now. Who knows how he will perform. What we know is that GC is not a natural full back and we needed one. We've now got one. We must use him.
|
|
|
Post by countofmontecristo on Aug 2, 2014 9:24:46 GMT
I'd rather get rid of N'Zonzi than Cameron and then use Cameron as back up for the DM slot, I think Cameron bought into the club and culture 100% last season and if the World Cup showed anything about the USA squad it's their willingness to work hard as a unit and do what's best for the team. N'Zonzi however brilliant "on his day" doesn't like the club, the area or the position he plays and wouldn't be a big loss imho with people like Adam,Sidwell,Ireland,Muniesa,Cameron,Wilson,Whelan all able to play centre mid comfortably. I agree with keeping Cameron instead of Nzonzi - although I rate Nzonzi and voted him player of the season on here the year before last. I just think that Geoffs attitude is what we need in the team. I can see him as a straight replacement for Nzonzi, but being more direct and bringing energy and athleticism as a box to box midfielder. I'm a bit suprised to see so many advocates of him as a DCM as defensive disciplin does not seem to be one of his strengths.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 2, 2014 9:34:53 GMT
I'd rather get rid of N'Zonzi than Cameron and then use Cameron as back up for the DM slot, I think Cameron bought into the club and culture 100% last season and if the World Cup showed anything about the USA squad it's their willingness to work hard as a unit and do what's best for the team. N'Zonzi however brilliant "on his day" doesn't like the club, the area or the position he plays and wouldn't be a big loss imho with people like Adam,Sidwell,Ireland,Muniesa,Cameron,Wilson,Whelan all able to play centre mid comfortably. I agree with keeping Cameron instead of Nzonzi - although I rate Nzonzi and voted him player of the season on here the year before last. I just think that Geoffs attitude is what we need in the team. I can see him as a straight replacement for Nzonzi, but being more direct and bringing energy and athleticism as a box to box midfielder. I'm a bit suprised to see so many advocates of him as a DCM as defensive disciplin does not seem to be one of his strengths. I agree with most of that tbh but find it staggering you'd want Cameron over N'Zonzi. We have no one who is as calm on the ball as Fonz, he is vital to how we play with keeping the ball and I just can't see that we have anyone who can replicate that and I certainly wouldn't want to see him go and definitely for nothing less than 10/12 million. It's just not worth it. Agreed on Cameron being more suited to that role than DM though.
|
|