|
|
Post by Miles Offside on Aug 2, 2015 23:10:51 GMT
I probably should know better, but I'm hoping that this doesn't descend into one of those Hughes v Pulis threads, or spending big versus signing bargains. Try to leave that stuff aside and look at what we're trying to achieve as a club. Anyway, here goes - When Pulis (keep calm  went two years ago I said on here that Mark Hughes probably inherited the best squad in the bottom half of the Prem. My view at the time was that we were defensively solid but we needed three forward players to play behind Crouch to turn us into a regular top ten club. We could then have fielded a side of ........Bego .................................Cameron..Ryan...Huth...Wilson ........................................Nzonzi...Whelan ......................................Three new players ...........................................Crouch Two years later, and after we've signed eighteen players (nineteen if Moses is counted in) we've still got only one proper out-and-out winger, Arnie, who could hold down a regular first team place (Affellay looks like he might play in the Bojan role until the latter is fully fit and Moha is someway off yet). And we've got no pace up front, other than Diouf. Now it's clear that Mark wants more pace up front, which is why we've been after the likes of the Ukrainian wingers. It's also clear that players like Moha and Telford are very much about looking beyond the coming season. Things have moved on recently with Bego, Huth and Nzonzi leaving, but we still have Butland and Adam from the players Hughes inherited who could step in. At the end of last season Mark stated that he was happy with the depth of the squad but wanted to add quality players who could go straight into the first team. I agree with him when he says that, but to be fair that's no different to the position he inherited two years ago. Then he only needed three players who could slot straight into the first team (see above). So what does that say of our transfer policy over the past two years? We've signed nearly the equivalent of two whole teams yet it wouldn't surprise me to see as many as six Pulis signings lining up on Sunday. Hughes is doing a good job with what he's got at his disposal. This is not a swipe at him or a way of praising Tony Pulis. But for me, the position we are in now raises some real questions about exactly what our transfer policy is and how much say the manager has in it? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2015 23:15:04 GMT
You've wasted your time writing that, and my time reading it! To the shit bin with you!  |
|
|
|
Post by Miles Offside on Aug 2, 2015 23:18:08 GMT
You've wasted your time writing that, and my time reading it! To the shit bin with you! I did say I should've known better. |
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Aug 3, 2015 2:41:17 GMT
I agree I can't see what the policy is either. IMO unless we had a cash-flow problem, which I doubt, we should held onto our prized assets, Begovic and N'zonzi until we strengthened the pool of potential players, assessed where we were at the end of July, then held a fire sale and dumped those surplus to requirements.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Aug 3, 2015 6:37:54 GMT
How many of your 18 signings have been U21 or development players? It is hardly fair to include those in a post moaning about the transfer policy. When Arsenal signed a young Fabregas or Portsmouth signed a teenage Begovic - no one said that it represented poor transfer business. For what it is worth, I reckon players like Telford and Moha look very promising for our future and I'm delighted we signed them - just as I would be if we signed Traore. I certainly wouldn't be including those signings in some tirade against the club's first team policy. In the long term building a squad of good youngsters for the future is just as important as building a current first team squad.
I liked TP (fully paid up rimmer, I was) and I appreciate all he did for the first team - but he neglected to plan for the future by ensuring a steady stream of recruits for the academy and development squads - and that is one reason why we now need to recruit so many players in the 18-21 age range.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2015 6:52:50 GMT
If we can get in the Nzonzi and Moses replacements before the season starts then we are going to be ok.
|
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Aug 3, 2015 7:00:21 GMT
Pete
By definition that says if we don't replace Nzonzi and Moses this week we won't be ok , we will not be replacing either this week at all , let alone with proven premier league players .
What would your view then be of our prospects it's not a provocation just seeing if we go as we are do you believe we will really struggle As I agree with Nzonzi and Moses or improvements we would be in a great spot pending the shawcross situation. Without and I don't think we I'll replace either .
|
|
|
|
Post by breakonthrough on Aug 3, 2015 7:26:24 GMT
Pete By definition that says if we don't replace Nzonzi and Moses this week we won't be ok , we will not be replacing either this week at all , let alone with proven premier league players . What would your view then be of our prospects it's not a provocation just seeing if we go as we are do you believe we will really struggle As I agree with Nzonzi and Moses or improvements we would be in a great spot pending the shawcross situation. Without and I don't think we I'll replace either . I can't take any of that seriously, simply because you didn't say rhetoric...what's going on with the world?!? We will bring in a winger at the very least, I'm sure Hughes can see we need one. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2015 7:27:51 GMT
If we can get in the Nzonzi and Moses replacements before the season starts then we are going to be ok. We've already got them. Van Ginkel and Afellay. |
|
|
|
Post by poethebald on Aug 3, 2015 8:46:45 GMT
If we can get in the Nzonzi and Moses replacements before the season starts then we are going to be ok. We've already got them. Van Ginkel and Afellay. I hope not....Both injury prone and relatively unproven in the Prem. |
|
|
|
Post by stokemark on Aug 3, 2015 8:53:52 GMT
The policy is very transparent in that we will sign 'free agents' when we can who we can then pay a lump sum to (instead of another club) and thus subsidise their wages.
I think we are prepared to pay moderate fees for someone younger with potential too but the weak spot in this approach is our ability to compete in the large fee / large wage category.
For me thats why we were very interested in Konoplyanka but unable to do deals for Shaq or Yarmalenko, the latter demanding salaries in excess of our ceiling of £60K per week.
Take a look at our accounts and you can see that the strategy is to increase revenue but keep operating costs (mostly wages) flat.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Aug 3, 2015 9:03:02 GMT
The policy is very transparent in that we will sign 'free agents' when we can who we can then pay a lump sum to (instead of another club) and thus subsidise their wages. I think we are prepared to pay moderate fees for someone younger with potential too but the weak spot in this approach is our ability to compete in the large fee / large wage category. For me thats why we were very interested in Konoplyanka but unable to do deals for Shaq or Yarmalenko, the latter demanding salaries in excess of our ceiling of £60K per week.Take a look at our accounts and you can see that the strategy is to increase revenue but keep operating costs (mostly wages) flat. I've seen no evidence that your statement regarding Shaq and Yarmolenko is true. Yarmo has made it clear last night that he is prepared to come to us and Shaq has never mentioned money once - in fact he'd be getting a pay rise if he joined us but he wants CL football. What evidence do you have for your comment? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2015 9:21:48 GMT
We've already got them. Van Ginkel and Afellay. I hope not....Both injury prone and relatively unproven in the Prem. Well given the CEO has been banging his chops in the press about how many players we've signed and how well we've done, I'm not expecting any more than one more high profile signing for the wing and a Shawcross loan replacement at the most. Cut that down to the loan if we can't get the winger. |
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Aug 3, 2015 9:27:48 GMT
We've already got them. Van Ginkel and Afellay. I hope not....Both injury prone and relatively unproven in the Prem. You hope NOT? Really as a stoke fan you ought to hope so, but it's not how it works nowadays is it? |
|
|
|
Post by huddy on Aug 3, 2015 9:30:55 GMT
If we can get in the Nzonzi and Moses replacements before the season starts then we are going to be ok. We've already got them. Van Ginkel and Afellay. In no way is Van Ginkel a like for like for Nzonzi and that's a problem. |
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Aug 3, 2015 9:41:27 GMT
We're not going to get a 'like for like' replacement for N'zonzi. We're going have to adapt with anothe type of player.
Oh and to the op, these past 2 years have got to be the worst we've had haven't they?
|
|
|
|
Post by jimigoodwinsbeard on Aug 3, 2015 9:41:34 GMT
We've already got them. Van Ginkel and Afellay. In no way is Van Ginkel a like for like for Nzonzi and that's a problem. In what way is he different to nzonzi? Serious question, only seen MVG play bout 45mins in the friendlies. |
|
|
|
Post by stokemark on Aug 3, 2015 9:44:57 GMT
The policy is very transparent in that we will sign 'free agents' when we can who we can then pay a lump sum to (instead of another club) and thus subsidise their wages. I think we are prepared to pay moderate fees for someone younger with potential too but the weak spot in this approach is our ability to compete in the large fee / large wage category. For me thats why we were very interested in Konoplyanka but unable to do deals for Shaq or Yarmalenko, the latter demanding salaries in excess of our ceiling of £60K per week.Take a look at our accounts and you can see that the strategy is to increase revenue but keep operating costs (mostly wages) flat. I've seen no evidence that your statement regarding Shaq and Yarmolenko is true. Yarmo has made it clear last night that he is prepared to come to us and Shaq has never mentioned money once - in fact he'd be getting a pay rise if he joined us but he wants CL football. What evidence do you have for your comment? Evidence ? I have stated 'for me' - I dont have any 'evidence' whatsoever If you take a look at our last two sets of accounts then its my summation of our strategy based on the fact that I am a forensic accountant but it dosaent take a genius to figure it out |
|
|
|
Post by stokemark on Aug 3, 2015 9:46:51 GMT
We're not going to get a 'like for like' replacement for N'zonzi. We're going have to adapt with anothe type of player. Oh and to the op, these past 2 years have got to be the worst we've had haven't they? Genuine question Pwingy Are you happy with going into the season with what we now have and if not, what else do you think we need / would you change ? |
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Aug 3, 2015 9:47:43 GMT
We've already got them. Van Ginkel and Afellay. In no way is Van Ginkel a like for like for Nzonzi and that's a problem. True, but I doubt there is any plan to replace N'Zonzi 1 for 1 even if there were such a player who would join us which I doubt. I think instead the plan is to enhance the midfield with RIP Van Winkel and sweat the other playing assets we have in that department a bit harder such as Sidwell and to a lesser extent Adam who were not overly deployed last season. I think that's the plan. NB I see pwingy has arrived peppering the place with his own unique heavy dose of Stalinist sarcasm, thread over in terms of a sensible discussion, sorry Miles Offside, try again on another post and see if you can sneek a sensible discussion point past him, I doubt it, but I wish you luck |
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Aug 3, 2015 9:50:38 GMT
We're not going to get a 'like for like' replacement for N'zonzi. We're going have to adapt with anothe type of player. Oh and to the op, these past 2 years have got to be the worst we've had haven't they? Genuine question Pwingy Are you happy with going into the season with what we now have and if not, what else do you think we need / would you change ? We will 100% be signing player(s) before the window shuts. We need a winger and a defender in on loan. |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Aug 3, 2015 9:51:32 GMT
I've seen no evidence that your statement regarding Shaq and Yarmolenko is true. Yarmo has made it clear last night that he is prepared to come to us and Shaq has never mentioned money once - in fact he'd be getting a pay rise if he joined us but he wants CL football. What evidence do you have for your comment? Evidence ? I have stated 'for me' - I dont have any 'evidence' whatsoever If you take a look at our last two sets of accounts then its my summation of our strategy based on the fact that I am a forensic accountant but it dosaent take a genius to figure it out Yes, but you must surely have some reason for saying that Shaq and Yarmolenko are demanding salaries in excess of what we have offered. How does that square with Yarmolenko's interview last night saying he wants to come to Stoke, but it his his club which have not accepted our bid? And in all the many comments Shaq has made about our bid he has never once suggested that our terms are a problem. He appears to want CL football even if that means accepting lower wages than we offered. |
|
|
|
Post by poethebald on Aug 3, 2015 9:52:06 GMT
I hope not....Both injury prone and relatively unproven in the Prem. You hope NOT? Really as a stoke fan you ought to hope so, but it's not how it works nowadays is it? As a Stoke fan....it is my opinion that both of these players are good players.However, the facts are that they are injury prone.One has limited experience of premiership football the other has none. This would appear to be some what of a gamble, particularly with the lack of indepth quality in the central midfield.Time will tell I guess, but the spine of the team is looking at little frail at the moment.In my opinion as a Stoke fan! |
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Aug 3, 2015 9:52:46 GMT
You hope NOT? Really as a stoke fan you ought to hope so, but it's not how it works nowadays is it? As a Stoke fan....it is my opinion that both of these players are good players.However, the facts are that they are injury prone.One has limited experience of premiership football the other has none. This would appear to be some what of a gamble, particularly with the lack of indepth quality in the central midfield.Time will tell I guess, but the spine of the team is looking at little frail at the moment.In my opinion as a Stoke fan! But you hope that they ARE good enough then surely? |
|
|
|
Post by stokemark on Aug 3, 2015 9:58:19 GMT
Evidence ? I have stated 'for me' - I dont have any 'evidence' whatsoever If you take a look at our last two sets of accounts then its my summation of our strategy based on the fact that I am a forensic accountant but it dosaent take a genius to figure it out Yes, but you must surely have some reason for saying that Shaq and Yarmolenko are demanding salaries in excess of what we have offered. How does that square with Yarmolenko's interview last night saying he wants to come to Stoke, but it his his club which have not accepted our bid? And in all the many comments Shaq has made about our bid he has never once suggested that our terms are a problem. He appears to want CL football even if that means accepting lower wages than we offered. RE: Yarmalenko then until a bid is accepted we cannot talk to him about wages so we will have to wait and see. Re: Shaquiri then I dont think we have heard his side of the story beyond Percy reporting that following discussions 'there was no response'. I think the difference between joining a club who are playing in the Champions League v Stoke is that they will pay him much more money than we can possibly consider - When really has a modern day footballer baulked on a transfer due to footballing reasons ? |
|
|
|
Post by poethebald on Aug 3, 2015 9:59:08 GMT
I hope not....Both injury prone and relatively unproven in the Prem. Well given the CEO has been banging his chops in the press about how many players we've signed and how well we've done, I'm not expecting any more than one more high profile signing for the wing and a Shawcross loan replacement at the most. Cut that down to the loan if we can't get the winger. You are probably right mate.I just think the spine of the team looks a little frail at the moment due to the lack of quality cover in central midfield and at centre half.This coupled with MVGs and Affelys injury records, plus Shawcross's injury I think we need reinforcements. |
|
|
|
Post by poethebald on Aug 3, 2015 10:09:07 GMT
As a Stoke fan....it is my opinion that both of these players are good players.However, the facts are that they are injury prone.One has limited experience of premiership football the other has none. This would appear to be some what of a gamble, particularly with the lack of indepth quality in the central midfield.Time will tell I guess, but the spine of the team is looking at little frail at the moment.In my opinion as a Stoke fan! But you hope that they ARE good enough then surely? Of course, what I was indicating was that I don't think they are for a better word solid signings.Due to the reasons outlined above.However, as stated above time will tell.I do think we still need more quality reinforcements in central midfield,particularly the DM role. As for the winger, transfer rumours would suggest the manager continues to see the need for improvement there too. |
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Aug 3, 2015 10:11:02 GMT
As a Stoke fan....it is my opinion that both of these players are good players.However, the facts are that they are injury prone.One has limited experience of premiership football the other has none. This would appear to be some what of a gamble, particularly with the lack of indepth quality in the central midfield.Time will tell I guess, but the spine of the team is looking at little frail at the moment.In my opinion as a Stoke fan! But you hope that they ARE good enough then surely? He didn't say he hoped they weren't good enough, he said he hoped they weren't the replacement plan for Nzonzi and Moses for the reasons he has now stated, twice. He may be right or he may be wrong but it was a valid opinion. But you knew all of that anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2015 10:13:00 GMT
Well given the CEO has been banging his chops in the press about how many players we've signed and how well we've done, I'm not expecting any more than one more high profile signing for the wing and a Shawcross loan replacement at the most. Cut that down to the loan if we can't get the winger. You are probably right mate.I just think the spine of the team looks a little frail at the moment due to the lack of quality cover in central midfield and at centre half.This coupled with MVGs and Affelys injury records, plus Shawcross's injury I think we need reinforcements. I think we'll be fine. Butland did ok last season, we still have the continuity of Whelan sitting alongside Van Ginkel, who could go either way but has massive potential. Up front we've still retained Crouch who we know we can revert back to if needs be. The only question mark is the injury to Ryan. That's tough to take but partially unseen given we didn't know how his injury would turn out with rest. We could be sat here now with him in the side having had a full pre season. |
|
|
|
Post by poethebald on Aug 3, 2015 10:16:30 GMT
But you hope that they ARE good enough then surely? He didn't say he hoped they weren't good enough, he said he hoped they weren't the replacement plan for Nzonzi and Moses for the reasons he has now stated, twice. He may be right or he may be wrong but it was a valid opinion. But you knew all of that anyway. Thankyou God's.I thought I was losing the plot there for a second. |
|
went two years ago I said on here that Mark Hughes probably inherited the best squad in the bottom half of the Prem. My view at the time was that we were defensively solid but we needed three forward players to play behind Crouch to turn us into a regular top ten club.
