|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 28, 2015 13:53:51 GMT
One year left on his deal (just like Zonz and Bego) and Hull still get this type of fee for him. Not sure if it's a Jedi mind trick or the most farcical commentary on the English domestic transfer market imaginable! Now that makes me fucking mad!
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Jul 28, 2015 13:56:31 GMT
How did I guess that a lets laugh at west brom thread would turn into a lets slag stokes hierarchy off thread.
Like clockwork boys.
Tick tick.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 13:56:46 GMT
I mean about the whole Pulis thing, can't we just leave it behind? It's pretty sad. It's the same on Twatter, he's gone, move on. That goes for both sides. If you look at some of my posts, I have only used it as point of comparison in terms of transfer policy, as a proponent of the good business we are doing right now. I'd rather be adding decent players for free than paying over the odds for average players. People do take an interest in Pulis generally though, get over it. Whatever your opinion of him, he played a big part of our club in recent times.
|
|
|
Post by dozintheseventees on Jul 28, 2015 13:57:03 GMT
One year left on his deal (just like Zonz and Bego) and Hull still get this type of fee for him. Not sure if it's a Jedi mind trick or the most farcical commentary on the English domestic transfer market imaginable! Could be that we just shit at selling our players for decent money. I believe, in the Chester case, there were several clubs interested and I think THAT has been the problem for us. With both Bego and N'Zonzi it seems we only had one suitor and, to get a top price, you always need at least two bidders.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 28, 2015 14:00:26 GMT
I mean about the whole Pulis thing, can't we just leave it behind? It's pretty sad. It's the same on Twatter, he's gone, move on. That goes for both sides. If you look at some of my posts, I have only used it as point of comparison in terms of transfer policy, as a proponent of the good business we are doing right now. I'd rather be adding decent players for free than paying over the odds for average players. People do take an interest in Pulis generally though, get over it. Whatever your opinion of him, he played a big part of our club in recent times. Not even going there.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 28, 2015 14:01:47 GMT
How did I guess that a lets laugh at west brom thread would turn into a lets slag stokes hierarchy off thread. Like clockwork boys. Tick tick. It is amazing how other clubs do get better fees than us though, when we had a better product and the club we were selling too are massive. But it's a debate for a different thread. I'm out on this.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 14:03:41 GMT
Good signing.......never understand why fans think that money matters ......that's the owners worry and costs you nothing Because for most clubs, the amount they have to spend is not finite. So if your club has just spunked a load of money on someone you think is utter garbage (and I'm not talking about this deal, just generally), then there may not be much left to buy a player or two who can actually improve your club - which is what every supporter wants. Anyway, I'm old-school. I'm from a time when the club didn't have a pot to piss-in. Spending more than £250k still seems like alien territory to me. But it's not in your hands, and never will be .......don't you think they know what they're doing?
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Jul 28, 2015 14:03:45 GMT
How did I guess that a lets laugh at west brom thread would turn into a lets slag stokes hierarchy off thread. Like clockwork boys. Tick tick. It is amazing how other clubs do get better fees than us though, when we had a better product and the club we were selling too are massive. But it's a debate for a different thread. I'm out on this. With your mind getting more fragile your opinions are getting more 'predictable'.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jul 28, 2015 14:16:31 GMT
How did I guess that a lets laugh at west brom thread would turn into a lets slag stokes hierarchy off thread. Like clockwork boys. Tick tick. How did I guess with our own transfer policy open to lots of scrutiny we would have a thread having a go at Pulis who has absolutely nothing to do with Stoke. Like clockwork indeed. Monotonous, predictable and boring.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Jul 28, 2015 14:18:14 GMT
Could be that we just shit at selling our players for decent money. I believe, in the Chester case, there were several clubs interested and I think THAT has been the problem for us. With both Bego and N'Zonzi it seems we only had one suitor and, to get a top price, you always need at least two bidders. Marketing it as called, we arguably had much better products to sell than Hull, they succeeded we failed maybe that is why we are signing players on free's.
|
|
|
Post by dozintheseventees on Jul 28, 2015 14:30:43 GMT
I believe, in the Chester case, there were several clubs interested and I think THAT has been the problem for us. With both Bego and N'Zonzi it seems we only had one suitor and, to get a top price, you always need at least two bidders. Marketing it as called, we arguably had much better products to sell than Hull, they succeeded we failed maybe that is why we are signing players on free's. I know it's been said before but we had a difficult situation with our two. We had an offer from one club (offers for both players were rejected) and we pushed them as high as they were prepared to go. In both cases we had players that were determined to go and no counter-offers coming in from elsewhere. We COULD have held firm and made them both stay until we got the right offers but that would have been a big gamble since no-one else had shown any interest. We risked being 'stuck' with two very unhappy players running down their contracts and, I believe, we took the right option and let them go. I admit, I don't really know the full situation re Chester but it seems that there were several clubs interested and that usually means he'll go for a better price. At the end of the day, we can only get what clubs will pay and I'm sure we pushed both Chelsea and Seville as far as they were prepared to go. Much as it may annoy us, we might just have to accept that Chester was more 'in demand' than our players even if we think ours were much better players. Yes it's all very unsatisfactory but I'm not sure our club could have done much more.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 14:39:00 GMT
How did I guess that a lets laugh at west brom thread would turn into a lets slag stokes hierarchy off thread. Like clockwork boys. Tick tick. How did I guess with our own transfer policy open to lots of scrutiny we would have a thread having a go at Pulis who has absolutely nothing to do with Stoke. Like clockwork indeed. Monotonous, predictable and boring. As I have said, I used our previous manager's policy to show that ours is not at all that bad. Nothing wrong with that. And James Chester is not worth £8 million, end of discussion. May I just add though, it's a signing that has taken place in our league, every reason to discuss it.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Jul 28, 2015 14:41:07 GMT
Marketing it as called, we arguably had much better products to sell than Hull, they succeeded we failed maybe that is why we are signing players on free's. I know it's been said before but we had a difficult situation with our two. We had an offer from one club (offers for both players were rejected) and we pushed them as high as they were prepared to go. In both cases we had players that were determined to go and no counter-offers coming in from elsewhere. We COULD have held firm and made them both stay until we got the right offers but that would have been a big gamble since no-one else had shown any interest. We risked being 'stuck' with two very unhappy players running down their contracts and, I believe, we took the right option and let them go. I admit, I don't really know the full situation re Chester but it seems that there were several clubs interested and that usually means he'll go for a better price. At the end of the day, we can only get what clubs will pay and I'm sure we pushed both Chelsea and Seville as far as they were prepared to go. Much as it may annoy us, we might just have to accept that Chester was more 'in demand' than our players even if we think ours were much better players. Yes it's all very unsatisfactory but I'm not sure our club could have done much more. I agree to some extent Market forces dictate prices, in the case of Bego I do not think we had any choice to sell as he has refused to play before, that should have been clamped down on but was not dealt with forcibly enough, however in the case of Zonz for what we got for him we should have made him see out his contract, as you he only had one suitor if he had thrown his toys out of the pram he could at the end of his contract had none, I know he has had the sulks before but he did not let it affect his game, we shit out more interested in what we could get for him which for our player of the season was peanuts as we seem very unlikely to replace him with the same or better quality and appear to have gone down the short term route with a loan.
|
|
|
Post by dozintheseventees on Jul 28, 2015 14:50:46 GMT
I know it's been said before but we had a difficult situation with our two. We had an offer from one club (offers for both players were rejected) and we pushed them as high as they were prepared to go. In both cases we had players that were determined to go and no counter-offers coming in from elsewhere. We COULD have held firm and made them both stay until we got the right offers but that would have been a big gamble since no-one else had shown any interest. We risked being 'stuck' with two very unhappy players running down their contracts and, I believe, we took the right option and let them go. I admit, I don't really know the full situation re Chester but it seems that there were several clubs interested and that usually means he'll go for a better price. At the end of the day, we can only get what clubs will pay and I'm sure we pushed both Chelsea and Seville as far as they were prepared to go. Much as it may annoy us, we might just have to accept that Chester was more 'in demand' than our players even if we think ours were much better players. Yes it's all very unsatisfactory but I'm not sure our club could have done much more. I agree to some extent Market forces dictate prices, in the case of Bego I do not think we had any choice to sell as he has refused to play before, that should have been clamped down on but was not dealt with forcibly enough, however in the case of Zonz for what we got for him we should have made him see out his contract, as you he only had one suitor if he had thrown his toys out of the pram he could at the end of his contract had none, I know he has had the sulks before but he did not let it affect his game, we shit out more interested in what we could get for him which for our player of the season was peanuts as we seem very unlikely to replace him with the same or better quality and appear to have gone down the short term route with a loan. Re N'Zonzi I said pretty much the same before we sold him and I would honestly have risked losing the £4 million they origionally offered before I'd let him walk away for that. I think the club probably thought the same at that point but reluctantly decided that it was best all round to let him go at £7 million. I know it's hard to swallow Carps, more or less having to accept that Chester is worth £1 million more than N'Zonzi but we both know that doesn't mean Chester is a better player than N'Zonzi. It's hard to know what kind of pressure was brought to bear on Stoke by N'Zonzi and his 'people' since he was clearly desperate to go. It was all very, very disappointing, especially when we see lesser players moving for much more.
|
|
|
Post by geoffscott on Jul 28, 2015 14:59:28 GMT
Heard this transfer and chuckled to myself.
Some very surprising responses and comments on this thread from Stoke City supporters.
Clearly not a view shared by all my fellow Stoke City supporters, but these days I feel great about Stoke City.
Anyway far more amusing...
Here's a view from a West Brom supporter from one of their forums......
How many more central defenders do we need? While I think the lad is a good player and one for the future, that position isn't a priority at this moment in time. He must be thinking of offloading one of the central defenders surely. I know that Dawson is occupying the right back position and has done well but surely recognised full backs, on both flanks, are more important acquisitions. There are also other positions in the side that are equally pressing. Let's hope that we can fill these as well with players of the right quality.
|
|
|
Post by dozintheseventees on Jul 28, 2015 15:05:35 GMT
Heard this transfer and chuckled to myself. Some very surprising responses and comments on this thread from Stoke City supporters. Clearly not a view shared by all my fellow Stoke City supporters, but these days I feel great about Stoke City. Anyway far more amusing... Here's a view from a West Brom supporter from one of their forums...... How many more central defenders do we need? While I think the lad is a good player and one for the future, that position isn't a priority at this moment in time. He must be thinking of offloading one of the central defenders surely. I know that Dawson is occupying the right back position and has done well but surely recognised full backs, on both flanks, are more important acquisitions. There are also other positions in the side that are equally pressing. Let's hope that we can fill these as well with players of the right quality. 'Recognised full backs' Oh dear, they're going to be very disappointed me thinks.
|
|
|
Post by interestedobserver on Jul 28, 2015 15:09:04 GMT
To be fair, Pulis signed some decent players for us and tended to make very good purchases in the back 4 and GK department. Some misfires in CM and a few duds in the striker role.
IMO, the problem he ran into was the overall squad he assembled with those purchases (and how he played them, at times). In his last few months here we had Shotton on RW, Adam making a few appearances on LW, Cameron (who we purchased as a CM) adjusting at RB. Wilson (who we brought in as a CM) playing LB. Meanwhile we had something like 22 million pounds worth of transfers generally sitting on the bench or in the stands (Jones, Jerome, Palacios).
Hughes inherited a squad of decent players which was a bit out of balance (again, just my opinion). He's done well at addressing the weak spots and shifting out the deadwood.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 15:10:49 GMT
Heard this transfer and chuckled to myself. Some very surprising responses and comments on this thread from Stoke City supporters. Clearly not a view shared by all my fellow Stoke City supporters, but these days I feel great about Stoke City. Anyway far more amusing... Here's a view from a West Brom supporter from one of their forums...... How many more central defenders do we need? While I think the lad is a good player and one for the future, that position isn't a priority at this moment in time. He must be thinking of offloading one of the central defenders surely. I know that Dawson is occupying the right back position and has done well but surely recognised full backs, on both flanks, are more important acquisitions. There are also other positions in the side that are equally pressing. Let's hope that we can fill these as well with players of the right quality. I suppose 'one for the future' at 26 is about right with Pulis.
|
|
|
Post by upthefud on Jul 28, 2015 15:39:24 GMT
We wouldn't be managed by Mark Hughes or be a top 10 premier league team if it weren't for the work of the previous manager.
We've moved forward and our previous manager has enjoyed great success at Palace and is steadying the ship at WBA.
Sonehow this previous manager doesn't get the respect he deserves on this board.
Something tells me that's because this previous manager proved a great deal of posters wrong and they are too proud to acknowledge his achievements.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jul 28, 2015 15:42:07 GMT
How did I guess with our own transfer policy open to lots of scrutiny we would have a thread having a go at Pulis who has absolutely nothing to do with Stoke. Like clockwork indeed. Monotonous, predictable and boring. May I just add though, it's a signing that has taken place in our league, every reason to discuss it. Nah. Only fit for the shittiest of shit bins.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Jul 28, 2015 15:42:50 GMT
I don't really care who signed them, but if we'd spent nearly £15M on Callum McManaman, James McLean and James Chester, there'd be hell up.
|
|
|
Post by dozintheseventees on Jul 28, 2015 15:48:26 GMT
I don't really care who signed them, but if we'd spent nearly £15M on Callum McManaman, James McLean and James Chester, there'd be hell up. To be fair Dave...........not 5/6 years ago there wouldn't.
|
|
|
Post by dozintheseventees on Jul 28, 2015 15:50:36 GMT
I don't really care who signed them, but if we'd spent nearly £15M on Callum McManaman, James McLean and James Chester, there'd be hell up. We spent that much on Danny Collins, Dean Whitehead and Palacios. Pulis is obviously getting better.
|
|
|
Post by mattador78 on Jul 28, 2015 15:53:52 GMT
I don't really care who signed them, but if we'd spent nearly £15M on Callum McManaman, James McLean and James Chester, there'd be hell up. There is already hell up with our signings now As for our outgoings we got 8 mill and rip van winkle for bego ( on loan with alleged option to buy ) not bad business imho and how do we know we haven't wangled in a sell on fee % for him and zonz. The squads not weaker than last seasons and we still have funds . And as for wba they are signing cbs because their usual ones played as full backs at the end of last season sound familiar
|
|
|
Post by Mint Berry Barks on Jul 28, 2015 16:02:35 GMT
Regardless of it being WBA or Pulis, if we'd gone out and dropped £8 million on James Chester, I'd be a tad confused.
That's a lot of money..
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Jul 28, 2015 16:13:46 GMT
How did I guess that a lets laugh at west brom thread would turn into a lets slag stokes hierarchy off thread. Like clockwork boys. Tick tick. How did I guess with our own transfer policy open to lots of scrutiny we would have a thread having a go at Pulis who has absolutely nothing to do with Stoke. Like clockwork indeed. Monotonous, predictable and boring. You're nothing but predictable momo. Oh and an hypocrite.
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Jul 28, 2015 16:26:09 GMT
How did I guess that a lets laugh at west brom thread would turn into a lets slag stokes hierarchy off thread. Like clockwork boys. Tick tick. It is amazing how other clubs do get better fees than us though, when we had a better product and the club we were selling too are massive. But it's a debate for a different thread. I'm out on this. No it's just amazing that some managers will over pay.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jul 28, 2015 16:28:45 GMT
How did I guess with our own transfer policy open to lots of scrutiny we would have a thread having a go at Pulis who has absolutely nothing to do with Stoke. Like clockwork indeed. Monotonous, predictable and boring. You're nothing but predictable mono. Oh and an hypocrite. I can recall one Pulis thread I've started since he left and that was regarding the potential takeover. It's just the same old predictable has beens and wankstains who start them to make their predictable, boring, petty posts. I just come on to throw sticks at them.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 16:29:32 GMT
Let's not beat around the bush, Stoke fans take interest in what Pulis does, whether you love him or hate him, they do. Period. So please don't question why I take an interest in their signings, or merely try to open a decent debate that I've actually been able to have with dozintheseventees. Read my original post, it was merely a comparison of our transfer policy, more so aimed at people moaning about this summer's business. It was actually very positive about our current affairs, using the past to show how good things are now. I haven't been a poster on the Oatcake for long to be honest pal, but in my days of being an onlooker and my short time as a more active poster I have been able to gather that positivity isn't really your thing is it? Maybe that is why you love Pulis so much, his boring and negative football perhaps suits your personality and that is fair enough mate. As for Chester, the fact you have compared him to Shawcross is laughable and the fact you think being a United graduate makes him decent is just as funny. If his graduation from the shit showed any promise he wouldn't be getting relegated with Hull at the age of 26 and resurrecting his career at Tony Pulis' West fucking Brom. I haven't compared him to Shawcross just said he's trodden a similar route (if 18 months years later in his career). Thanks for confirming though you no fucking idea if this is a good piece of business or not, don't know how good he is and consequently have no idea on the value of the transfer. One can only speculate at the motives for your post. Says the bloke who has written off pretty much every transfer we've made so far this window. The hypocrisy in your post above is astonishing.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jul 28, 2015 16:31:31 GMT
I haven't compared him to Shawcross just said he's trodden a similar route (if 18 months years later in his career). Thanks for confirming though you no fucking idea if this is a good piece of business or not, don't know how good he is and consequently have no idea on the value of the transfer. One can only speculate at the motives for your post. Says the bloke who has written off pretty much every transfer we've made so far this window. The hypocrisy in your post above is astonishing. No I haven't. You're a liar. The only one I've out right criticised is Wollscheid. Questioning the transfer policy and if supporters are having their chains pulled, again is not criticising the transfers.
|
|