|
Post by cmc89 on Aug 2, 2014 13:33:47 GMT
He isn't a full back. Bardsley is. I guess you can call what Bardsley does playing "full back." I get that you're american (i think) and you have a big love in for geoff, but what is your issue with bardsley? Is it only because he's been signed to compete with geoff?
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Aug 2, 2014 13:37:36 GMT
I like Geoff, I personally thought he did well last season out of position. But if you have the chance to upgrade your team, sentiment can't come into the reckoning. I'd love him to stay because IF Bardsley doesn't play well, gets injured or gets suspended he'd be a great back up. Will he want that though? Somehow, Potter supporters have bought into Bardsley being a better full back than Geoff. It's amusing, though quite unfortunate. I've stuck up for Geoff lots of times on this board. Seeing as though all your previous posts revolve around American players and Geoff in particular I guess that you may not be the best person to be having this debate with.
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Aug 2, 2014 13:39:51 GMT
I think Hull's valuation at £4.5M is a bit low for a WC player who was a regular last season in a top 10 team! I don't think we should consider selling for less than £6M in this case. Geoff's versatility is certainly something all teams could need! Not low at all, if you've read this board. Terrible footballer, uses the outside of his foot too much, somehow appeared in 2nd most games on the club last season, terrible in WC, etc... It would be SHOCK to get more than a few quid for him. Geoff is a decent player and his versatility is certainly a big plus as well! I guess he won't be a first choice in any position this season, but he is a decent alternative in many positions!
|
|
|
Post by claudinho on Aug 2, 2014 13:55:30 GMT
I guess you can call what Bardsley does playing "full back." I get that you're american (i think) and you have a big love in for geoff, but what is your issue with bardsley? Is it only because he's been signed to compete with geoff? Not American
|
|
|
Post by claudinho on Aug 2, 2014 13:57:08 GMT
Somehow, Potter supporters have bought into Bardsley being a better full back than Geoff. It's amusing, though quite unfortunate. I've stuck up for Geoff lots of times on this board. Seeing as though all your previous posts revolve around American players and Geoff in particular I guess that you may not be the best person to be having this debate with. I live in America, so I'm very familiar with American players. I watched Bardsley a great deal last season. There is a reason Sunderland chose not to extend his contract. I'm in favor of upgrading, but Bardsley isn't an upgrade.
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on Aug 2, 2014 14:00:40 GMT
I've stuck up for Geoff lots of times on this board. Seeing as though all your previous posts revolve around American players and Geoff in particular I guess that you may not be the best person to be having this debate with. I live in America, so I'm very familiar with American players. I watched Bardsley a great deal last season. There is a reason Sunderland chose not to extend his contract. There is indeed a reason. Bardsley wanted to leave and wouldn't sign the one they offered. I wouldn't describe that as a Sunderland choice though
|
|
|
Post by Olgrligm on Aug 2, 2014 14:03:48 GMT
It would from a FFP point of view though I think. If you pay up a player's contract that is just an advance payment of wages. It doesn't help the cub to comply with FFP. In fact if you were paying up more than one year of a contract you would be worse off under FFP as you would be paying more than a year's wage for the player in the current year. As a small complication, did it not come out a few years ago that unless a player officially requests a move away, they get their remaining wages stumped up as a loyalty payment? How does that square with everything?
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Aug 2, 2014 14:34:01 GMT
If you pay up a player's contract that is just an advance payment of wages. It doesn't help the cub to comply with FFP. In fact if you were paying up more than one year of a contract you would be worse off under FFP as you would be paying more than a year's wage for the player in the current year. As a small complication, did it not come out a few years ago that unless a player officially requests a move away, they get their remaining wages stumped up as a loyalty payment? How does that square with everything? Good question. I think, whenever they are moving to a better or equivalent contract, that doesn't apply - because the selling club would simply say "we're not selling you" - usually some sort of compromise is reached. I suspect that when the player moves to a poorer contract, in most cases the selling club makes up the difference in wages. As to the treatment of the contract payments in either case, logically it should be treated as wages - as it is subject to income tax - therefore it IS wages.
|
|
|
Post by bolders on Aug 2, 2014 14:57:17 GMT
It's a shame 9 clubs are not interested in Wilson Palacios. Edited for you
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Aug 2, 2014 15:03:58 GMT
I like Geoff, I personally thought he did well last season out of position. But if you have the chance to upgrade your team, sentiment can't come into the reckoning. I'd love him to stay because IF Bardsley doesn't play well, gets injured or gets suspended he'd be a great back up. Will he want that though? Somehow, Potter supporters have bought into Bardsley being a better full back than Geoff. It's amusing, though quite unfortunate. Probably because he will be, Cameron ISN'T a bloody right back, it's not his position, he may do well else where but I wouldn't be wanting him at right back again over a player who's specialist position it is.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Aug 2, 2014 15:04:58 GMT
I've stuck up for Geoff lots of times on this board. Seeing as though all your previous posts revolve around American players and Geoff in particular I guess that you may not be the best person to be having this debate with. I live in America, so I'm very familiar with American players. I watched Bardsley a great deal last season. There is a reason Sunderland chose not to extend his contract. I'm in favor of upgrading, but Bardsley isn't an upgrade. Sunderland offered him a new contract, he turned them down, facts eh.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Aug 2, 2014 15:06:14 GMT
I live in America, so I'm very familiar with American players. I watched Bardsley a great deal last season. There is a reason Sunderland chose not to extend his contract. I'm in favor of upgrading, but Bardsley isn't an upgrade. Sunderland offered him a new contract, he turned them down, facts eh.
|
|
|
Post by Olgrligm on Aug 2, 2014 15:39:16 GMT
As a small complication, did it not come out a few years ago that unless a player officially requests a move away, they get their remaining wages stumped up as a loyalty payment? How does that square with everything? Good question. I think, whenever they are moving to a better or equivalent contract, that doesn't apply - because the selling club would simply say "we're not selling you" - usually some sort of compromise is reached. I suspect that when the player moves to a poorer contract, in most cases the selling club makes up the difference in wages. As to the treatment of the contract payments in either case, logically it should be treated as wages - as it is subject to income tax - therefore it IS wages. That would make sense, thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 2, 2014 15:54:42 GMT
I've stuck up for Geoff lots of times on this board. Seeing as though all your previous posts revolve around American players and Geoff in particular I guess that you may not be the best person to be having this debate with. I live in America, so I'm very familiar with American players. I watched Bardsley a great deal last season. There is a reason Sunderland chose not to extend his contract. I'm in favor of upgrading, but Bardsley isn't an upgrade. You have already been told and indeed you have already acknowledged earlier in the thread that Sunderland wanted him to sign a new contract with them but he chose us instead.
|
|
|
Post by stokefaninde on Aug 2, 2014 15:58:01 GMT
Im biased no doubt to much of a Geoff fan to call it honestly but so many clubs interested says something
|
|
|
Post by stokefaninde on Aug 2, 2014 15:59:28 GMT
Im biased no doubt to much of a Geoff fan to call it honestly but so many clubs interested says something
|
|
|
Post by bolders on Aug 2, 2014 15:59:57 GMT
i wouldn't sell him to any of our competitors
|
|
|
Post by stokemanusa on Aug 2, 2014 16:00:11 GMT
Well. Whats a Geoff thread without Stokemanusa's input right??? Seeing that bardsley was the gem in a shit mine at Sunderland last season playing in his natural position and at the end of the season actually had a lower opta matchday rating than Geoff who wasn't always in position makes me think its not a massive upgrade as some think it is... it seems another free signing for similar replacement (hughes is on fire) to eventually sell on geoff for a profit or to keep for depth... Bardsley had more goals (he has a cracking powershot) but most are forgetting that this here is another case of the Pulis signings that have come to roost... It's hughes biggest problem and tbh hes mastered the art of free transfers... im mean, Muniesa... come on. Our inability to offload players like Palacios will hurt our overall depth and wage structure. Palacios offers little anymore whereas selling a pro like Cameron who can fill in and stay healthy would be ideal. Geoff wants to play, can you blame him? 41 EPL starts top 10 team and a 7 out of ten season rating? I'd rather have Geof as cover for Nzonzi or Whelan over Wilson or Palacios anyday. Seeing as he was our fittest player at 29 is a testament to his utility as an athlete and his hard work on and off the pitch in a long season. Getting rid of him could comeback to hurt come November on. Lets face it Wilko isn't going to be able to cover 20 odd games he cant go a half without a injury. Shotton? Inept at going forward with the ball at his feet (a new requirement...) Our fullbacks shift between being wingbacks and rbs during counters, Wilko and Shotton are cringeworthy to play one-twos with Arnie or Odemwingie. Wilson I could see, but hes had his fair share of injuries and mishaps all over. The midfield debacle and his wth moments last season come to mind. He steadied the ship but I feel hes a better CB than RB. (He played well versus Schalke mind the other day at RB. Youth wins here vs Cameron, time will tell.) I like bardsley as a pro and hes a very good signing on a free but the idea he was a "better" RB last season than Cameron isn't true, infact they were on par in almost every category. They were frighteningly similar in most stats and bardsley was also being called out for being "out of position" at Sunderland. Infact some wanted a straight swap. Its not a new revelation teams want geoff, all though 9 is a higher number than last Jan window. (Norwich, Sunderland and West brom) were chasing him. The usual fluffing or instantaneous derailing of a player is going on. (See my 3 favorites, Muni, Geoff and Arnie.) Bardsley is already getting both and a similar situation to which Geoff and others had here a few years back. FFS give him time. Some people just don't want players to succeed. I remember being one of a few on here rating Cameron and was ridiculed for doing so. I love that he proved the doubters wrong especially those who said he'd never start ughhmmm for Stoke or any PL teams... 41 and now 9 teams think he's worthy... Seeing some of these posters in here all of a sudden change tune is hilariously funny. Imo theres alot of deadwood worth releasing even if it bites us before the season ie Palacios.. Doha was a dagger to the staff id imagine but loaning him to keep our important squad players like Cameron intact and here is needed because of injury and suspension. What are they thinking... I can name 8-10 worth shifting off to keep Geoff or say Adam if they would stay to make it work. I believe in Hughes and if Cameron wants to go and its good for us let it be but I'd disagree with others hes left on the books. He has that something like team USA in the WC England lacks and I want that here ie Adam as well. You dont know what you have till its gone.
|
|
|
Post by stokemanusa on Aug 2, 2014 16:00:27 GMT
It's a shame 9 clubs are not interested in Wilson Palacios. Edited for you I know right...
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Aug 2, 2014 16:08:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by claudinho on Aug 2, 2014 16:09:29 GMT
I live in America, so I'm very familiar with American players. I watched Bardsley a great deal last season. There is a reason Sunderland chose not to extend his contract. I'm in favor of upgrading, but Bardsley isn't an upgrade. Sunderland offered him a new contract, he turned them down, facts eh. If they'd wanted to keep him, the offer would have been far better.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 2, 2014 16:12:17 GMT
Sunderland offered him a new contract, he turned them down, facts eh. If they'd wanted to keep him, the offer would have been far better. So they went to the trouble of putting a new deal on the table just for a laugh?
|
|
|
Post by claudinho on Aug 2, 2014 16:12:45 GMT
Well. Whats a Geoff thread without Stokemanusa's input right??? Seeing that bardsley was the gem in a shit mine at Sunderland last season playing in his natural position and at the end of the season actually had a lower opta matchday rating than Geoff who wasn't always in position makes me think its not a massive upgrade as some think it is... it seems another free signing for similar replacement (hughes is on fire) to eventually sell on geoff for a profit or to keep for depth... Bardsley had more goals (he has a cracking powershot) but most are forgetting that this here is another case of the Pulis signings that have come to roost... It's hughes biggest problem and tbh hes mastered the art of free transfers... im mean, Muniesa... come on. Our inability to offload players like Palacios will hurt our overall depth and wage structure. Palacios offers little anymore whereas selling a pro like Cameron who can fill in and stay healthy would be ideal. Geoff wants to play, can you blame him? 41 EPL starts top 10 team and a 7 out of ten season rating? I'd rather have Geof as cover for Nzonzi or Whelan over Wilson or Palacios anyday. Seeing as he was our fittest player at 29 is a testament to his utility as an athlete and his hard work on and off the pitch in a long season. Getting rid of him could comeback to hurt come November on. Lets face it Wilko isn't going to be able to cover 20 odd games he cant go a half without a injury. Shotton? Inept at going forward with the ball at his feet (a new requirement...) Our fullbacks shift between being wingbacks and rbs during counters, Wilko and Shotton are cringeworthy to play one-twos with Arnie or Odemwingie. Wilson I could see, but hes had his fair share of injuries and mishaps all over. The midfield debacle and his wth moments last season come to mind. He steadied the ship but I feel hes a better CB than RB. (He played well versus Schalke mind the other day at RB. Youth wins here vs Cameron, time will tell.) I like bardsley as a pro and hes a very good signing on a free but the idea he was a "better" RB last season than Cameron isn't true, infact they were on par in almost every category. They were frighteningly similar in most stats and bardsley was also being called out for being "out of position" at Sunderland. Infact some wanted a straight swap. Its not a new revelation teams want geoff, all though 9 is a higher number than last Jan window. (Norwich, Sunderland and West brom) were chasing him. The usual fluffing or instantaneous derailing of a player is going on. (See my 3 favorites, Muni, Geoff and Arnie.) Bardsley is already getting both and a similar situation to which Geoff and others had here a few years back. FFS give him time. Some people just don't want players to succeed. I remember being one of a few on here rating Cameron and was ridiculed for doing so. I love that he proved the doubters wrong especially those who said he'd never start ughhmmm for Stoke or any PL teams... 41 and now 9 teams think he's worthy... Seeing some of these posters in here all of a sudden change tune is hilariously funny. Imo theres alot of deadwood worth releasing even if it bites us before the season ie Palacios.. Doha was a dagger to the staff id imagine but loaning him to keep our important squad players like Cameron intact and here is needed because of injury and suspension. What are they thinking... I can name 8-10 worth shifting off to keep Geoff or say Adam if they would stay to make it work. I believe in Hughes and if Cameron wants to go and its good for us let it be but I'd disagree with others hes left on the books. He has that something like team USA in the WC England lacks and I want that here ie Adam as well. You dont know what you have till its gone. Facts are unwelcome here, stokemanusa.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 2, 2014 16:14:40 GMT
They'll sell if Geoff wants a guarantee of first team footy and somebody matches our valuation of him of course.
|
|
|
Post by claudinho on Aug 2, 2014 16:16:42 GMT
If they'd wanted to keep him, the offer would have been far better. So they went to the trouble of putting a new deal on the table just for a laugh? Of course not. They put together a deal to try to keep an asset, albeit a marginal one.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 2, 2014 16:20:33 GMT
So they went to the trouble of putting a new deal on the table just for a laugh? Of course not. They put together a deal to try to keep an asset, albeit a marginal one. He was out of contract mate.
|
|
|
Post by takeshikovacs on Aug 2, 2014 16:28:17 GMT
I think I'd prefer Geoff with a broken leg and a blindfold as cover for right back over Wilko.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Aug 2, 2014 16:35:57 GMT
Sunderland offered him a new contract, he turned them down, facts eh. If they'd wanted to keep him, the offer would have been far better. So, how much was the offer he turned down then? And, as you seem to know a lot about Sunderland's finances, do you know how close they are to their wage ceiling under the Premier League FFP rules? I ask because (as I'm sure you know) it is the FFP rules which are probably determining the size of a lot of contract renewal offers at the moment - at all clubs not just Sunderland and Stoke.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Aug 2, 2014 16:37:01 GMT
Sunderland offered him a new contract, he turned them down, facts eh. If they'd wanted to keep him, the offer would have been far better. How I read it, he moved because we are the better team and less likely to be in a relegation battle, stop trying to twist things to suit your agenda (only I can do that )
|
|
|
Post by Danstoke82 on Aug 4, 2014 7:18:49 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. Granted but would Geoff want to be considered as just cover?. The player himself will obviously be keen to play and I struggle to see where he would start over any of the others?
|
|