|
Post by Pugsley on Sept 2, 2016 10:20:42 GMT
TP's favorite phrases: "Irons in the fire" "Waiting for apples to drop" "Crumbs from the main table" He felt the best deals were to be had once all the big clubs had done their business and were looking to off-load their next level down players - hence dealing late in the window. While he was at Stoke he had an unhealthy relationship with his former mentor, Harry Redknapp, who would regularly fuck us over, stringing us along to assist how own activity - Exhibit A: £8Million for Wilson Palacios Then you need to factor in that Tony needs to satisfy several criteria. DNA; minimum height; and defensive ability in at least ten players on the pitch (There was always room for one Ricardo Fuller who could do what they wanted and didn't give a shit anyway). You then have to accommodate that TP always gets his man. It was inevitable that one day he would sign Scott Dann, once day he will sign Joe Ledley, he will sign Peter Crouch again and and probably Jon Walters too. He sees value in trying to work with bad lads and redeem them and so I was surprised WBA didn't go for Balotelli - that would have been a typical TP signing (he would then have played in the midfield cage behind Rondon) He doesn't really like kiddies or players with no premiership experience. Foreign players are okay, if they have previously played in the Prem. Generally, he would rather spend a fortune on a seasoned 30 year old premiership journeyman than a promising 18 year old genius. He doesn't like academies at all - he thinks they are expensive and useless, so grow your own is not in his plans. After a while I think our owners felt he was out of control. £20million on Crouch and Palacios apparently did not go down well. Crouch was in his 30s and the owner clearly had doubts about the wisdom of buying players with no residual value. Having said that Crouch has been value for money - but I understand Coates point, when he eventually goes it will be on a free. As a result we put a transfer team in place to act as a check and do the negotiations without undue influence from Harry Redknapp. We bought some more creative players, but it wasn't long before TP was messing them around - playing a crap right back called Shotton at right wing instead of Jermaine Pennant, not playing Charlie Adam and telling him he had no future. Ultimately TP always gets his own way ....until we realized we had stalled and we're going backwards. To most of it was all a bit Arthuir Daly. I think it was a factor in our decision to have him paid him off. It is noticeably different now. We usually like doing business at the start of a window, having worked on the deal over months. It feels like we are doing things a bit more professionally with the transfer team very active and influential working alongside the manager. So, good luck with Tony. It's always entertaining. I will give him that. Hasn't he been playing kiddies recently, including a sixteen year old on the bench? Perhaps through necessity but I think he's learning that lesson - I wish Hughes would find a way of doing the same. It's obvious that he has his own methods and won't deviate and to be honest it's served him well. Surely he's like every other manager in that regard?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2016 10:20:53 GMT
Good to see a balanced opposition poster giving us insights into the world of west brom. With 'haway' and 'hammered' also, we've got a few good people visiting...... staffsvilla too! We even had that sound Arsenal fan (pires7) for a month or so earlier this year.
|
|
|
Post by 3putts on Sept 2, 2016 10:21:48 GMT
so to sum up you have come on here to post your anti pulis feelings? transfer dealings are done behind the scenes and have very little to do with the manager. all the manager will say I fancy this player then the club will try to do a deal but [as is usually the case these days]its all down to ££££ and how much the chairman is prepared to lay out. we have enough of our own whingers on here[you should have seen the oatcake 24 hours before transfer deadline]so we don't need whingers from other clubs.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Sept 2, 2016 10:26:48 GMT
This is a really bizarre thread tbh, but for me jeycov sums my own feelings up superbly. Those who want to make up total bullshit about Pulis should remember the fact that we quite possibly wouldn't be in the position we are today without his contribution. For me, Valencia was the beginning of the end. He betrayed fans in a way that many struggled to forgive him for. We'll never know what might have been, and we may never get a better opportunity (I seem to remember our second team giving Valencia a proper game, perhaps our first might have won?). People get a kick out of bashing Pulis though, and I don't think there's a more classless way of acting. His transfers were much better than we give him credit for as well. Jeycov mentioned Shawcross, N'Zonzi, Sorensen, Bego etc.... what about the others? Abdoulaye Faye? James Beattie? Etherington? Pennant? Whelan (albeit before Prem)? etc etc.... Pulis made many good transfers that he isn't really given enough credit for. He did, however, also make some bizarre transfers.... an overweight Eidur comes to mind.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2016 10:27:34 GMT
so to sum up you have come on here to post your anti pulis feelings? transfer dealings are done behind the scenes and have very little to do with the manager. all the manager will say I fancy this player then the club will try to do a deal but [as is usually the case these days]its all down to ££££ and how much the chairman is prepared to lay out. we have enough of our own whingers on here[you should have seen the oatcake 24 hours before transfer deadline]so we don't need whingers from other clubs. I'm not sure that's fair. albion1 just wants some info, opinions and background on Pulis's Stoke tenure, which is fair enough.
|
|
|
Post by miggo on Sept 2, 2016 10:31:23 GMT
From a few posts on here when Pulis first joined us and occasional visits since I know there's nothing everyone loves more (both Stoke and Albion fans) than a nice healthy balanced debate about everyone's favorite manager - Tony Pulis. Seriously has anyone ever split opinions quite as much as he has? Anyway although I appreciate this will most likely turn out like pretty much every other Pulis thread over the last decade I was looking for some insight in to how your transfers were conducted when Pulis was in charge. Following the absolute fuck up that was our window and in particular deadline day there's plenty of rumors on where the blame lies with the new chairman now coming out and not so subtlety blaming Pulis for the collapse of the Camacho deal. Whilst I am sure both the club and Pulis are to blame in some area's I'm sure there were many similarities to windows you guys used to have under Pulis. Eg bids seemingly in for a player, a deal close and then 'someone' changes their mind and it's not completed after terms/medical have been agreed (Did Huddlestone not basically sign one year for you? Similar to our Sakho/Camacho deals this year). Also how everything seems to be left until deadline day? Stoke were always among the busiest teams from memory whilst I think h signed 5 players on TDD at Palace. It's noticeable now how much later we do the majority of our signings since Pulis arrived. Also who had the final say on transfers and did you have a technical or sporting director at the time and if so did they do anything or was it a token role. I wont bother going to to his preference for UK based talent as I think his distrust of anything foreign is pretty well established by now. So yeh among the usual repies of 'oh great another Pulis thread' any insight you can give in to how the transfer system worked for you would be great. As a side note you must be petty happy with the window in the end? I was surprised to see Wollscheid go even with Martins Indi signing? As for Berahino I'm not sure if you dodged a bullet or not. £20m seems steep but in the market for a domestic player aged 22 was probably a fair price. He's has been absolute dog shit for us for a while now. I think many fans blame this on his attitude but personally I think that's a bit lazy and the effort appears to be there. There's a very decent player in there and plenty of time for him to come good. I think a move to Stoke would be a great move for all 3 parties and would have backed him to score 15+ if he had signed for you. Since the mess with the Spurs move last season he is playing for a manager who doesn't want him and then plays him out of position and in front of fans where the large majority are on his back the first time he makes even the slightest mistake. Saying that missing 2 penalties in 1 game probably didn't help him win round any doubters. Just out of interest who is there to take over ? Who would you like to see come in. No doubt Pulis splits opinion and I'm sure that relationship is destined to end fairly soon no matter what the club have said this morning but looking at available managers specifically in this country there are not many decent ones available.
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Sept 2, 2016 10:32:37 GMT
This is a really bizarre thread tbh, but for me jeycov sums my own feelings up superbly. Those who want to make up total bullshit about Pulis should remember the fact that we quite possibly wouldn't be in the position we are today without his contribution. For me, Valencia was the beginning of the end. He betrayed fans in a way that many struggled to forgive him for. We'll never know what might have been, and we may never get a better opportunity (I seem to remember our second team giving Valencia a proper game, perhaps our first might have won?). People get a kick out of bashing Pulis though, and I don't think there's a more classless way of acting. His transfers were much better than we give him credit for as well. Jeycov mentioned Shawcross, N'Zonzi, Sorensen, Bego etc.... what about the others? Abdoulaye Faye? James Beattie? Etherington? Pennant? Whelan (albeit before Prem)? etc etc.... Pulis made many good transfers that he isn't really given enough credit for. He did, however, also make some bizarre transfers.... an overweight Eidur comes to mind. He's no different to other managers - good and bad signings. Special mentions for Woodgate and the criminally under used Owen. Johnny Tex and Wolly spring to mind for the current boss.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Sept 2, 2016 10:36:51 GMT
Plenty of theories, not sure anyone really knows the truth. Going back to the original Spurs bid I quite applaud our stance. Spurs were offering next to nothing up front with all the money in installments. Because Berahino was 'only' on £15k a week it was all very well selling him but because of FFP we were already close to our wage ceiling. With only £15k coming off the wage bill and £5m or so coming in from Spurs it left us in a tricky position as any half decent replacement would want at least £50k in wages which we couldn't afford under the FFP rules, even though as a club we could afford to pay it. There's also talk that with the takeover (which started last year and fell down last minute) Berahino was practically included in the valuation of the club. So the value was say £150m, which included Berahino as a £20m asset that could be sold within days of the new owners coming in if they so wished. Without him the value might have been £130m as even if the £20m was re invested we all know that especially when Pulis is involved £20m worth of spending doesn't always equal £20m worth of players. Not sure how much truth is in either of those and there may be other factors aswell but for last year I personally believe it was a combination of those 2. Last summer to an extent I backed our stance in the matter. However with the tweet and drop in form coupled with him not fitting in to Pulis plans it became clear he had to go. We then rejected another £20m+ bid in January from Newcastle which I think most would have accepted, the reason being this time we didn't want to sell to a relegation rival. There's reasoning behind it even though most would have sold. As for this summer - literally no idea. The 'buy a replacement' doesn't wash at all as it seems we were never really in for a striker other than the mysterious Sakho deal and I think 99% of fans can't believe he is still there. Makes absolutely no sense for anyone as apart from anything else he wont play in the first XI for Pulis and if he does it will be in a position hat doesn't suit him at all. Personally feel quite sorry for him. Kids a bit of an idiot but nowhere near as bad as he is made out to although other Albion fans will disagree with that. If he moves on a free in the summer we should get around £10m anyway in compensation unless he moves abroad when we get £0 which is something some have suggested he will do to spite us. Albion, all you need to know is that the basic balance sheet for us for TP reads:
+ he took us up
- he's a massive twat
That said, you obviously have the broad measure of him already. He did bring in some decent players obviously but also made some absolute car crash purchases too - and, as others have already alluded to, he did like to get up to some real fun and games in the transfer market.
And clearly, he is still at it with the saga that is SB. As alster says, it has been widely mooted in the meeja the likely route for SB & his agents / acolytes to go down now in order to get back in the Prem (possibly with us) is via a foreign club - royally shafting you guys for twenty big in the process.
So it will be interesting to see who the new take-away boys blame for that little deficit (if, indeed, SB was factored in as an asset in the first place as you suggest).
He's not going to change and with the lines drawn so publicly in the sand now, it will just be interesting to see just how this plays out and when he goes, not if.
Like you I think he'll be waiting for a big fat goodbye if the new owners are daft enough to pay him. I'm sure the Council Tax for Sandbanks must be crippling him these days after Parish took his trousers down last year.
I don't see the argument about Berahino's value in the accounts. If you have a player who you value at £20 million in the accounts then, if you sell him for £20 million you still have the £20 million cash in your accounts. If you spend the cash on a replacement player then you no longer have the cash but, instead you have another player valued at whatever you pay for him. Obviously agent's fees will cream a bit off the bottom line, but basically - cash or player - the value should be reflected in the accounts.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2016 10:38:05 GMT
He spend the fabled £80m-plus here on a mix of decent solid players, but for every one of those, there was also a complete shitter. Michael Kightly is still having four wanks a day even now, after his multiple contract extensions that Tone handed him, based on contibuting 2/5 of fuck all.
He then went to Palace, and a couple of months in, was asked by a reporter how and why he was managing to play a better standard of 'football' there, than he'd become renowned for here. He stated that the squad of players at Palace was better than he had at Stoke, and this allowed him to play in a different style. That 'better' Palace team was built by Neil Warnock for around £15m iirc.
Supertone in a nutshell.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Sept 2, 2016 10:39:02 GMT
so to sum up you have come on here to post your anti pulis feelings? transfer dealings are done behind the scenes and have very little to do with the manager. all the manager will say I fancy this player then the club will try to do a deal but [as is usually the case these days]its all down to ££££ and how much the chairman is prepared to lay out. we have enough of our own whingers on here[you should have seen the oatcake 24 hours before transfer deadline]so we don't need whingers from other clubs. No. He comes on here to get a different perspective. You're the one thats whinging.
|
|
|
Post by albion1 on Sept 2, 2016 10:41:57 GMT
Albion, all you need to know is that the basic balance sheet for us for TP reads:
+ he took us up
- he's a massive twat
That said, you obviously have the broad measure of him already. He did bring in some decent players obviously but also made some absolute car crash purchases too - and, as others have already alluded to, he did like to get up to some real fun and games in the transfer market.
And clearly, he is still at it with the saga that is SB. As alster says, it has been widely mooted in the meeja the likely route for SB & his agents / acolytes to go down now in order to get back in the Prem (possibly with us) is via a foreign club - royally shafting you guys for twenty big in the process.
So it will be interesting to see who the new take-away boys blame for that little deficit (if, indeed, SB was factored in as an asset in the first place as you suggest).
He's not going to change and with the lines drawn so publicly in the sand now, it will just be interesting to see just how this plays out and when he goes, not if.
Like you I think he'll be waiting for a big fat goodbye if the new owners are daft enough to pay him. I'm sure the Council Tax for Sandbanks must be crippling him these days after Parish took his trousers down last year.
I don't see the argument about Berahino's value in the accounts. If you have a player who you value at £20 million in the accounts then, if you sell him for £20 million you still have the £20 million cash in your accounts. If you spend the cash on a replacement player then you no longer have the cash but, instead you have another player valued at whatever you pay for him. Obviously agent's fees will cream a bit off the bottom line, but basically - cash or player - the value should be reflected in the accounts. But if he spent that £20m on a Callum McManaman or Wilson Palacios you don't have a £20m asset anymore. Plus if you were a prospective owner looking to buy the club and a £20m player was about to be sold would you not want to be the one spending that £20m in a few weeks time? From both Peace and any prospective new owners point of view it didn't make sense to sell Berahino for £20m and spend the money on replacements before the new owner was in place.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Sept 2, 2016 10:41:59 GMT
From a few posts on here when Pulis first joined us and occasional visits since I know there's nothing everyone loves more (both Stoke and Albion fans) than a nice healthy balanced debate about everyone's favorite manager - Tony Pulis. Seriously has anyone ever split opinions quite as much as he has? Anyway although I appreciate this will most likely turn out like pretty much every other Pulis thread over the last decade I was looking for some insight in to how your transfers were conducted when Pulis was in charge. Following the absolute fuck up that was our window and in particular deadline day there's plenty of rumors on where the blame lies with the new chairman now coming out and not so subtlety blaming Pulis for the collapse of the Camacho deal. Whilst I am sure both the club and Pulis are to blame in some area's I'm sure there were many similarities to windows you guys used to have under Pulis. Eg bids seemingly in for a player, a deal close and then 'someone' changes their mind and it's not completed after terms/medical have been agreed (Did Huddlestone not basically sign one year for you? Similar to our Sakho/Camacho deals this year). Also how everything seems to be left until deadline day? Stoke were always among the busiest teams from memory whilst I think h signed 5 players on TDD at Palace. It's noticeable now how much later we do the majority of our signings since Pulis arrived. Also who had the final say on transfers and did you have a technical or sporting director at the time and if so did they do anything or was it a token role. I wont bother going to to his preference for UK based talent as I think his distrust of anything foreign is pretty well established by now. So yeh among the usual repies of 'oh great another Pulis thread' any insight you can give in to how the transfer system worked for you would be great. As a side note you must be petty happy with the window in the end? I was surprised to see Wollscheid go even with Martins Indi signing? As for Berahino I'm not sure if you dodged a bullet or not. £20m seems steep but in the market for a domestic player aged 22 was probably a fair price. He's has been absolute dog shit for us for a while now. I think many fans blame this on his attitude but personally I think that's a bit lazy and the effort appears to be there. There's a very decent player in there and plenty of time for him to come good. I think a move to Stoke would be a great move for all 3 parties and would have backed him to score 15+ if he had signed for you. Since the mess with the Spurs move last season he is playing for a manager who doesn't want him and then plays him out of position and in front of fans where the large majority are on his back the first time he makes even the slightest mistake. Saying that missing 2 penalties in 1 game probably didn't help him win round any doubters. I'm not going to get involved in the debate really other than to say it is well know within football circles that Pulis is a "ditherer" and cannot make his mind up. He's well known for being scared to commit to early for a player in case something better comes along later on. That, more than anything else, is why your transfer window and indeed many of ours, all go the same way with him in charge. The "games" with "I need 5 players", front of house comments and extra quality are all par for the course and are all lines we've heard ourselves many times before, as is the dumbing down of expectation, the belief that the best you can hope for is survival and the age old pre-season message that "this will be my most challenging season ever". It's all about lowering expectation so any old shit appears successful. If he needs 5 more players and extra quality, it really does beg the question of just what the fuck he spent the best part of 40-50m on last season.
|
|
|
Post by agingerstokie on Sept 2, 2016 10:46:55 GMT
He spend the fabled £80m-plus here on a mix of decent solid players, but for every one of those, there was also a complete shitter. Michael Kightly is still having four wanks a day even now, after his multiple contract extensions that Tone handed him, based on contibuting 2/5 of fuck all. He then went to Palace, and a couple of months in, was asked by a reporter how and why he was managing to play a better standard of 'football' there, than he'd become renowned for here. He stated that the squad of players at Palace was better than he had at Stoke, and this allowed him to play in a different style. That 'better' Palace team was built by Neil Warnock for around £15m iirc. Supertone in a nutshell. Michael Kightly was only here for 2 years what bollocks is this?
|
|
|
Post by albion1 on Sept 2, 2016 10:50:40 GMT
so to sum up you have come on here to post your anti pulis feelings? transfer dealings are done behind the scenes and have very little to do with the manager. all the manager will say I fancy this player then the club will try to do a deal but [as is usually the case these days]its all down to ££££ and how much the chairman is prepared to lay out. we have enough of our own whingers on here[you should have seen the oatcake 24 hours before transfer deadline]so we don't need whingers from other clubs. No. He comes on here to get a different perspective. You're the one thats whinging. Yeh just to add obviously everyone is aware of Pulis style and methods. I was more interested in how your transfers worked under him. So for example was their a DoF in place? I seem to remember John Rudge had some sort of title similar to that? Was he actively involved in a way Dan Ashworth was with us or was it more of a token role. Did Pulis identify the players he wanted or were they offered to him. Did he have the final say on any players coming or going? Did he say 'I want a left bac'k and someone else came back with 3 options for him or did he say 'I want player X' and that was that. Was it, as some other have alluded to for various reasons, Pulis who was mainly responsible for Stoke doing a lot of their business so late on or were there other factors? Was it a common theme that players seemed to have terms agreed, medical done and transfer fee agreed only for the deal to fall apart and if so would you say this was down to Pulis (and if so for what reason) or wasit someone else at the club who was involved in the transfer process. Similar to at Albion with the likes of Evans & Rondon (who apparently was pretty much forced on him) he has made some decent signings to go along with absolute shockers like McManaman or just bizarre like Chester. I'm aware for every Shawcross there's a Palacios or similar, but I'm more interested in finding out more about how the process ran (although more than happy to talk about any Stoke/Albin related subjects where there may be some mutual interest)
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Sept 2, 2016 10:54:16 GMT
I don't see the argument about Berahino's value in the accounts. If you have a player who you value at £20 million in the accounts then, if you sell him for £20 million you still have the £20 million cash in your accounts. If you spend the cash on a replacement player then you no longer have the cash but, instead you have another player valued at whatever you pay for him. Obviously agent's fees will cream a bit off the bottom line, but basically - cash or player - the value should be reflected in the accounts. But if he spent that £20m on a Callum McManaman or Wilson Palacios you don't have a £20m asset anymore. Plus if you were a prospective owner looking to buy the club and a £20m player was about to be sold would you not want to be the one spending that £20m in a few weeks time? From both Peace and any prospective new owners point of view it didn't make sense to sell Berahino for £20m and spend the money on replacements before the new owner was in place. But it will make even less sense if Berahino and his agent carry out their threat to move abroad next spring to avoid a tribunal fee! And if he does somehow find his way back to the Premier League the following year (with profits for the foreign club and Berahino and a saving for his new Prem club) that will surely be a very bitter pill for the Baggies owners - whoever they are at the time.
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Sept 2, 2016 10:57:37 GMT
No. He comes on here to get a different perspective. You're the one thats whinging. Yeh just to add obviously everyone is aware of Pulis style and methods. I was more interested in how your transfers worked under him. So for example was their a DoF in place? I seem to remember John Rudge had some sort of title similar to that? Was he actively involved in a way Dan Ashworth was with us or was it more of a token role. Did Pulis identify the players he wanted or were they offered to him. Did he have the final say on any players coming or going? Did he say 'I want a left bac'k and someone else came back with 3 options for him or did he say 'I want player X' and that was that. Was it, as some other have alluded to for various reasons, Pulis who was mainly responsible for Stoke doing a lot of their business so late on or were there other factors? Was it a common theme that players seemed to have terms agreed, medical done and transfer fee agreed only for the deal to fall apart and if so would you say this was down to Pulis (and if so for what reason) or wasit someone else at the club who was involved in the transfer process. Similar to at Albion with the likes of Evans & Rondon (who apparently was pretty much forced on him) he has made some decent signings to go along with absolute shockers like McManaman or just bizarre like Chester. I'm aware for every Shawcross there's a Palacios or similar, but I'm more interested in finding out more about how the process ran (although more than happy to talk about any Stoke/Albin related subjects where there may be some mutual interest) My understanding was that he had pretty much complete control as to who he wanted to bring in (with Rudge and Scholes assisting in the actual negotiations). He'd more than earned that with the success he'd brought to the club and even though there were a few really odd signings, in the main the players he brought in made a decent contribution. He had a couple of shocking last windows though where he brought in something like 14 players and you could count the ones who played regularly on one hand. They also pretty much dismantled the very good team he'd assembled before that too, which was capable of playing some very good football. It was at that point that changes to the system were made, Cartwrignt was brought in to scout for him and the toys came out of the pram. There was no way back from there.
|
|
|
Post by albion1 on Sept 2, 2016 10:59:08 GMT
TP's favorite phrases: "Irons in the fire" "Waiting for apples to drop" "Crumbs from the main table" He felt the best deals were to be had once all the big clubs had done their business and were looking to off-load their next level down players - hence dealing late in the window. While he was at Stoke he had an unhealthy relationship with his former mentor, Harry Redknapp, who would regularly fuck us over, stringing us along to assist how own activity - Exhibit A: £8Million for Wilson Palacios Then you need to factor in that Tony needs to satisfy several criteria. DNA; minimum height; and defensive ability in at least ten players on the pitch (There was always room for one Ricardo Fuller who could do what they wanted and didn't give a shit anyway). You then have to accommodate that TP always gets his man. It was inevitable that one day he would sign Scott Dann, once day he will sign Joe Ledley, he will sign Peter Crouch again and and probably Jon Walters too. He sees value in trying to work with bad lads and redeem them and so I was surprised WBA didn't go for Balotelli - that would have been a typical TP signing (he would then have played in the midfield cage behind Rondon) He doesn't really like kiddies or players with no premiership experience. Foreign players are okay, if they have previously played in the Prem. Generally, he would rather spend a fortune on a seasoned 30 year old premiership journeyman than a promising 18 year old genius. He doesn't like academies at all - he thinks they are expensive and useless, so grow your own is not in his plans. After a while I think our owners felt he was out of control. £20million on Crouch and Palacios apparently did not go down well. Crouch was in his 30s and the owner clearly had doubts about the wisdom of buying players with no residual value. Having said that Crouch has been value for money - but I understand Coates point, when he eventually goes it will be on a free. As a result we put a transfer team in place to act as a check and do the negotiations without undue influence from Harry Redknapp. We bought some more creative players, but it wasn't long before TP was messing them around - playing a crap right back called Shotton at right wing instead of Jermaine Pennant, not playing Charlie Adam and telling him he had no future. Ultimately TP always gets his own way ....until we realized we had stalled and we're going backwards. To most of it was all a bit Arthuir Daly. I think it was a factor in our decision to have him paid him off. It is noticeably different now. We usually like doing business at the start of a window, having worked on the deal over months. It feels like we are doing things a bit more professionally with the transfer team very active and influential working alongside the manager. So, good luck with Tony. It's always entertaining. I will give him that. Hasn't he been playing kiddies recently, including a sixteen year old on the bench? Perhaps through necessity but I think he's learning that lesson - I wish Hughes would find a way of doing the same.It's obvious that he has his own methods and won't deviate and to be honest it's served him well. Surely he's like every other manager in that regard? Yes. By all accounts he has been genuinely surprised at the quality of the academy kids and has a few involved around the squad. Leko got a few run outs once we were safe last season. Apparently he was the first teenager ever selected by Pulis to start a PL game but I dont know for definite if thats true or not. This season Sam Field has also featured after being named on the bench at the end of last year. Kane Wlson a 16 year old full back also made the bench last week after impressing in pre season. It's good to see them involved. With our lack of pace/creativity out wide I think Leko deserves to be in the squad on merit regardless of age although if we had signed a quality winger I would have been happy to see him go on loan. Sam Field played in the league cup and was pretty much the only positive. If I was going to be cynical I would suggest his inclusion from the start against Boro was very un Pulis like and it was maybe a ploy to placate a few fans with pressure growing on him. But it's extremely harsh to critisise a manager for not playing youth players and then suggest alternative motives for him doing so when they are selected. If I'm honest I think given the choice between a PL journeyman in his early 30's or blooding these youngsters he would pick for former more times than not but either way they are starting to get game tie so he needs some sort of credit for that. Saying that Sam Field is a reasonably slightly built technical centre midfielder so it's open to debate if playing in the middle for a Pulis side is the best place for his development right now
|
|
|
Post by oslostokie1 on Sept 2, 2016 11:01:27 GMT
Basically, if he could sign "athletes" who would conform to his rigid style of play, then they would turn out fine, which with a couple of USPs like a talismanic striker (ie. Fuller) and a long throw, would be sufficient to keep you safe from the drop. If those are the limit of your ambitions, and there is nothing wrong with that perhaps, then he is absolutely peerless. The problem comes when the owners and supporters expect the team to "push on" to the next level which implies more expensive and talented players who generally do not conform as readily, or at all. That's when he begins to struggle.
|
|
|
Post by oslostokie1 on Sept 2, 2016 11:03:56 GMT
He spend the fabled £80m-plus here on a mix of decent solid players, but for every one of those, there was also a complete shitter. Michael Kightly is still having four wanks a day even now, after his multiple contract extensions that Tone handed him, based on contibuting 2/5 of fuck all. He then went to Palace, and a couple of months in, was asked by a reporter how and why he was managing to play a better standard of 'football' there, than he'd become renowned for here. He stated that the squad of players at Palace was better than he had at Stoke, and this allowed him to play in a different style. That 'better' Palace team was built by Neil Warnock for around £15m iirc. Supertone in a nutshell. Michael Kightly was only here for 2 years what bollocks is this? Guessing he meant Tonge
|
|
|
Post by albion1 on Sept 2, 2016 11:05:47 GMT
From a few posts on here when Pulis first joined us and occasional visits since I know there's nothing everyone loves more (both Stoke and Albion fans) than a nice healthy balanced debate about everyone's favorite manager - Tony Pulis. Seriously has anyone ever split opinions quite as much as he has? Anyway although I appreciate this will most likely turn out like pretty much every other Pulis thread over the last decade I was looking for some insight in to how your transfers were conducted when Pulis was in charge. Following the absolute fuck up that was our window and in particular deadline day there's plenty of rumors on where the blame lies with the new chairman now coming out and not so subtlety blaming Pulis for the collapse of the Camacho deal. Whilst I am sure both the club and Pulis are to blame in some area's I'm sure there were many similarities to windows you guys used to have under Pulis. Eg bids seemingly in for a player, a deal close and then 'someone' changes their mind and it's not completed after terms/medical have been agreed (Did Huddlestone not basically sign one year for you? Similar to our Sakho/Camacho deals this year). Also how everything seems to be left until deadline day? Stoke were always among the busiest teams from memory whilst I think h signed 5 players on TDD at Palace. It's noticeable now how much later we do the majority of our signings since Pulis arrived. Also who had the final say on transfers and did you have a technical or sporting director at the time and if so did they do anything or was it a token role. I wont bother going to to his preference for UK based talent as I think his distrust of anything foreign is pretty well established by now. So yeh among the usual repies of 'oh great another Pulis thread' any insight you can give in to how the transfer system worked for you would be great. As a side note you must be petty happy with the window in the end? I was surprised to see Wollscheid go even with Martins Indi signing? As for Berahino I'm not sure if you dodged a bullet or not. £20m seems steep but in the market for a domestic player aged 22 was probably a fair price. He's has been absolute dog shit for us for a while now. I think many fans blame this on his attitude but personally I think that's a bit lazy and the effort appears to be there. There's a very decent player in there and plenty of time for him to come good. I think a move to Stoke would be a great move for all 3 parties and would have backed him to score 15+ if he had signed for you. Since the mess with the Spurs move last season he is playing for a manager who doesn't want him and then plays him out of position and in front of fans where the large majority are on his back the first time he makes even the slightest mistake. Saying that missing 2 penalties in 1 game probably didn't help him win round any doubters. Just out of interest who is there to take over ? Who would you like to see come in. No doubt Pulis splits opinion and I'm sure that relationship is destined to end fairly soon no matter what the club have said this morning but looking at available managers specifically in this country there are not many decent ones available. It's a tricky one. On westbrom.com the house rules are that you cant talk about possible replacement managers whilst we have a manager in place so it's difficult to gauge who would interest fans in general. Hodgson would be an obvious one but I'm not sure if he would be interested in the job now. We used him to make us a mid table side and he used to try and get the England job. I dont see what his motives would be for coming back now. Other than that I would hope we stay away from the likes of Bruce but then who else do you go for? There's not an obvious candidate out there. It would be a punt but I wouldnt be against Gary Rowett who I think has done a very good job at Blues after doing a similar job at Burton, but it's still a big jump. Rowett (or any manager really) would offer more hope, somthing which is badly missing among most fans at the moment, but if you were going to look purely at survival then Pulis gives you a better chance than Rowett does. As much as I'd love to see him go tomorrow the sensible choice is to let him run his contract down and leave as soon as the season finishes with him hopefully keeping us up, especially with the uncertainty around the new owners. The issue being of course it means another 10 months of soul destroying football.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Sept 2, 2016 11:08:26 GMT
No. He comes on here to get a different perspective. You're the one thats whinging. Yeh just to add obviously everyone is aware of Pulis style and methods. I was more interested in how your transfers worked under him. So for example was their a DoF in place? I seem to remember John Rudge had some sort of title similar to that? Was he actively involved in a way Dan Ashworth was with us or was it more of a token role. Did Pulis identify the players he wanted or were they offered to him. Did he have the final say on any players coming or going? Did he say 'I want a left bac'k and someone else came back with 3 options for him or did he say 'I want player X' and that was that. Was it, as some other have alluded to for various reasons, Pulis who was mainly responsible for Stoke doing a lot of their business so late on or were there other factors? Was it a common theme that players seemed to have terms agreed, medical done and transfer fee agreed only for the deal to fall apart and if so would you say this was down to Pulis (and if so for what reason) or wasit someone else at the club who was involved in the transfer process. Similar to at Albion with the likes of Evans & Rondon (who apparently was pretty much forced on him) he has made some decent signings to go along with absolute shockers like McManaman or just bizarre like Chester. I'm aware for every Shawcross there's a Palacios or similar, but I'm more interested in finding out more about how the process ran (although more than happy to talk about any Stoke/Albin related subjects where there may be some mutual interest) How did our Transfer dealings work? Tony Pulis had the final say on everything. When concerns were expressed about the spending and other people were put in around him, he threw his toys out of the pram and soon after he was gone. I hope that answers this specific question.
|
|
|
Post by albion1 on Sept 2, 2016 11:08:44 GMT
But if he spent that £20m on a Callum McManaman or Wilson Palacios you don't have a £20m asset anymore. Plus if you were a prospective owner looking to buy the club and a £20m player was about to be sold would you not want to be the one spending that £20m in a few weeks time? From both Peace and any prospective new owners point of view it didn't make sense to sell Berahino for £20m and spend the money on replacements before the new owner was in place. But it will make even less sense if Berahino and his agent carry out their threat to move abroad next spring to avoid a tribunal fee! And if he does somehow find his way back to the Premier League the following year (with profits for the foreign club and Berahino and a saving for his new Prem club) that will surely be a very bitter pill for the Baggies owners - whoever they are at the time. Of course, but from Peace point of view I doubt he cares what happens next year. From Lai's prospective I understand but none of us really know anything about him or how he thinks as officially he isn't in charge yet so it's hard to gauge how he would react to certain situations.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2016 11:11:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Sept 2, 2016 11:38:53 GMT
This is a really bizarre thread tbh, but for me jeycov sums my own feelings up superbly. Those who want to make up total bullshit about Pulis should remember the fact that we quite possibly wouldn't be in the position we are today without his contribution. For me, Valencia was the beginning of the end. He betrayed fans in a way that many struggled to forgive him for. We'll never know what might have been, and we may never get a better opportunity (I seem to remember our second team giving Valencia a proper game, perhaps our first might have won?). People get a kick out of bashing Pulis though, and I don't think there's a more classless way of acting. His transfers were much better than we give him credit for as well. Jeycov mentioned Shawcross, N'Zonzi, Sorensen, Bego etc.... what about the others? Abdoulaye Faye? James Beattie? Etherington? Pennant? Whelan (albeit before Prem)? etc etc.... Pulis made many good transfers that he isn't really given enough credit for. He did, however, also make some bizarre transfers.... an overweight Eidur comes to mind. He's no different to other managers - good and bad signings. Special mentions for Woodgate and the criminally under used Owen. Johnny Tex and Wolly spring to mind for the current boss. Entirely true. What we don't have now though is the "he wasn't a Hughes signing" load of old bollocks.
|
|
|
Post by jonnybravo on Sept 2, 2016 11:43:44 GMT
Pulis always used to say he needs 4 or 5 players every transfer window, and wouldn't sign anyone till last minute or pay over the odds for certain players that suited the way he wanted to play,but always blamed the reason we played like we did because he couldn't get players in and can only work with what he's got but that's what he wants to play and plays the victim when it's just mind game's, it worked for us until his last years but Stoke fans are seeing a different side to pulis since he left
|
|
|
Post by gibby1409 on Sept 2, 2016 11:52:19 GMT
I'm not a TP basher, and appreciate what he did for the club. However, when he gets to the stage that he did with us in 2012/2013 season, and the little comments and games start to become obvious, then it's time for the parting of the ways.
This is the stage he's at with Albion now, you only have to listen to him. He may well keep you up,just, but my god it's going to be hard watching. The playing of the kiddies, or at least including them in the squad, is another way of saying to the board, " Look what I'm having to do! We need players in"
I think it's inevitable that he'll be going soon, he appears to have lost the crowd already. It ought to be sooner rather than later tho, because I really thought we were going down in 2012/2013 when we went from 8th on Boxing Day, to almost dropping into the bottom 3 (Scraped a win at QPR to take the pressure off) we looked doomed those last few months. Funnily enough it was after the January transfer window 😉
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Sept 2, 2016 12:17:41 GMT
He likes to prove a point does Tone, so be prepared for a potential sequence of 1-0, 0-0 and 0-1 results at some point between now and January. You'll probably start playing even more conservatively too.
I'd download some games onto your phone for matchdays if I were you.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Sept 2, 2016 12:25:57 GMT
Overall more good signings than bad,in fact way more.
However some astonishingly bad ones for sure.
Did he play politics with transfers?
Undeniably at times,yes.
|
|
|
Post by djduncanjames on Sept 2, 2016 12:42:03 GMT
God I am SO glad we don't deal with this shit anymore.
|
|
|
Post by riponstokie on Sept 2, 2016 12:43:06 GMT
As mentioned many times, Pulis (like every manager.) made both good and bad signings. Whilst there were a few terrible signings over the years, he did make some phenomenal signings that brought this club from nothing to an established premier league team (many still in the team now). The thing with TP is he has to get the right characters and the right players to suit the way in which he played, and if he did sign someone that didn't fit that bill, they'd stick out like a saw thumb (kitson for example). Admittedly, TP's transfer deals towards the back end of his tenure lead to him being backed less and less until being no longer backed by the men above in his final year which led to both the club and him wanted to go seperate ways. Love him or loath him, he will never attract names like Sparky does, but imo he is very capable of getting the best out of players collectively, which is something Mr. Hughes is yet to nail
|
|