|
Post by scfc5 on Jun 3, 2018 9:29:53 GMT
Why would the player agree to this?? If he was told he wasn’t actually going to play but Wolves were going to take their contractual option with Bournemouth to make a quick buck. It makes sense all round. And we can’t moan about paying more than the Wolves figure. That figure was the agreed option when the loan was agreed. He is their player now and they can sell for whatever someone will pay. They are two separate deals and we had no opportunity to buy him for what Wolves paid. If we think he’ll fire us up, he’s worth it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 9:35:20 GMT
We seem happily haemorrhage money and have our pants pulled down on deals, Wimmer, Saido, McClean & now this. But wouldnt spend it on the likes on Cedric, Lemina, Maguire when we had the chance. You do realise that good footballers usually have a choice of who they sign for? Ok, so I will give the BMI example then. Everything was agreed, (apparently) anytime we want yet wouldn't pay it so chucked £18 mill on Wimmer to save £1 mill on Indi which we very much needed at the time.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Jun 3, 2018 9:35:45 GMT
We seem happily haemorrhage money and have our pants pulled down on deals, Wimmer, Saido, McClean & now this. But wouldnt spend it on the likes on Cedric, Lemina, Maguire when we had the chance. You do realise that good footballers usually have a choice of who they sign for? They do, but there must be a reason why they weren't signing for us? I think the poster has a point.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Jun 3, 2018 9:42:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 3, 2018 9:47:00 GMT
You do realise that good footballers usually have a choice of who they sign for? Ok, so I will give the BMI example then. Everything was agreed, (apparently) anytime we want yet wouldn't pay it so chucked £18 mill on Wimmer to save £1 mill on Indi which we very much needed at the time. Hadn't we already signed Bruno before we signed Wimmer?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 3, 2018 9:47:52 GMT
You do realise that good footballers usually have a choice of who they sign for? They do, but there must be a reason why they weren't signing for us? I think the poster has a point. Wasn't the reason that Southampton were at the time rightly considered a better prospect than us, as far as Cedric and Lemina were concerned?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 9:52:57 GMT
Fingers crossed this happens. Looks good stat wise
What’s his character like, anyone know?
|
|
|
Post by itsmorethanagame on Jun 3, 2018 9:53:11 GMT
Wolves like 'quick' players which he is but I don't see him like Gayle who has an eye for goal at that level. Still wondering who's targets these really are! Rowetts or Cartos mates! I think he's a pretty similar kind of player to Gayle. Been found wanting for a mid-table Prem team, but is the type you really want if you're a rich Championship club after someone semi-proven. Interestingly, doesn't seem to have got loads of minutes at Bournemouth if you think 900 minutes is 10 full games. But obviously Howe got less and less convinced about him as time went on. He doesn't seem to have had any major injuries. I'd be wary if the fee pushed over £15m though. Somewhere around £10/12m and seems fine. www.thesun.co.uk/archives/football/140337/benik-afobe-was-the-one-says-ex-arsenal-scout/He never really lived up to his hype as a youth. www.transfermarkt.com/benik-afobe/detaillierteleistungsdaten/spieler/11085814/15 10 goals in 1251 mins for MK Dons (L1) 14/15 13 goals in 1798 mins for Wolves (Ch) 15/16 9 goals in 2032 mins for Wolves (Ch) 15/16 4 goals in 938 mins for Bmouth (Pr) 16/17 6 goals in 1451 mins for Bmouth (Pr) 17/18 0 goals in 532 mins for Bmouth (Pr) 17/18 6 goals in 697 mins for Wolves (Ch) But if Wolves have paid 12.5m where is the profit? Say we paid 15m at the very most. You’ve got Afobe’s signing on fee and then run the risk of us pulling out, not agreeing terms e.t.c is the small profit worth risk for Wolves? And that’s presuming we would pay that sort of fee without part of it being add ons e.t.c. It just seems so far fetched. It’s their first season up and you would think Afobe would be good back up and someone to bring off the bench for them.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Jun 3, 2018 9:56:39 GMT
I think he's a pretty similar kind of player to Gayle. Been found wanting for a mid-table Prem team, but is the type you really want if you're a rich Championship club after someone semi-proven. Interestingly, doesn't seem to have got loads of minutes at Bournemouth if you think 900 minutes is 10 full games. But obviously Howe got less and less convinced about him as time went on. He doesn't seem to have had any major injuries. I'd be wary if the fee pushed over £15m though. Somewhere around £10/12m and seems fine. www.thesun.co.uk/archives/football/140337/benik-afobe-was-the-one-says-ex-arsenal-scout/He never really lived up to his hype as a youth. www.transfermarkt.com/benik-afobe/detaillierteleistungsdaten/spieler/11085814/15 10 goals in 1251 mins for MK Dons (L1) 14/15 13 goals in 1798 mins for Wolves (Ch) 15/16 9 goals in 2032 mins for Wolves (Ch) 15/16 4 goals in 938 mins for Bmouth (Pr) 16/17 6 goals in 1451 mins for Bmouth (Pr) 17/18 0 goals in 532 mins for Bmouth (Pr) 17/18 6 goals in 697 mins for Wolves (Ch) But if Wolves have paid 12.5m where is the profit? Say we paid 15m at the very most. You’ve got Afobe’s signing on fee and then run the risk of us pulling out, not agreeing terms e.t.c is the small profit worth risk for Wolves? And that’s presuming we would pay that sort of fee without part of it being add ons e.t.c. It just seems so far fetched. It’s their first season up and you would think Afobe would be good back up and someone to bring off the bench for them. He's just been on the fringes at Bournemouth for 2 years though. Does he want to jump right back into that? He started more than half of his Wolves loan games in the Championship on the bench (and they haven't started shopping properly yet!) Even if they sell him for £13.5m, Wolves have made £1m for absolutely nothing, haven't they? They'll be well aware if there's a market for a quick, effortless turnaround profit. I'm not saying it's happening, but it seems plausible.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Jun 3, 2018 10:05:39 GMT
You do realise that good footballers usually have a choice of who they sign for? They do, but there must be a reason why they weren't signing for us? I think the poster has a point. He doesn't have a point at all. He said we wouldn't spend it on those players as if it was a formality. He doesn't really have any proof of that. Several clubs were after those players and they chose other clubs other than us.
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Jun 3, 2018 10:05:44 GMT
They might have been contracted to buy him based on some clause as part of the loan. Appearances goals etc.
|
|
|
Post by Absolution on Jun 3, 2018 10:07:18 GMT
They might have been contracted to buy him based on some clause as part of the loan. Appearances goals etc. That sounds more plausible to me.
|
|
|
Post by itsmorethanagame on Jun 3, 2018 10:07:50 GMT
I hope he does it just seems too far fetched for my liking.
The only thing I hadn’t considered is if they had paid a largish loan fee for him already. E.g they paid 3.5m for the January loan so effectively they have only had to put an extra 9m to make it permanent. They then sell him to us for 12.5m and they’ve got all of their money back.
Im still not convinced but we shall see. Be happy if he signs as he looks a very good championship striker. Saw him score a couple of crackers for Wolves last season.
|
|
|
Post by MilanStokie on Jun 3, 2018 10:08:10 GMT
it's a win win. get him in.
if he lights the league up and gets us promoted we would have a real asset on our hands.
If he underwhelming, at 25 we would almost certainly make the money back. he is the type lots of teams want in their 11.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Jun 3, 2018 10:11:42 GMT
They do, but there must be a reason why they weren't signing for us? I think the poster has a point. Wasn't the reason that Southampton were at the time rightly considered a better prospect than us, as far as Cedric and Lemina were concerned? Possibly, Tox. Someone also mentioned peculiarities in our contracts (I forget the details) that might have discouraged players from signing. I think the poster was pointing out an inconsistency in approach to signings, and I can see what he means.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Jun 3, 2018 10:12:20 GMT
They do, but there must be a reason why they weren't signing for us? I think the poster has a point. He doesn't have a point at all. He said we wouldn't spend it on those players as if it was a formality. He doesn't really have any proof of that. Several clubs were after those players and they chose other clubs other than us. I thought he did. Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by GreaterGlasgowstokie on Jun 3, 2018 10:14:39 GMT
They do, but there must be a reason why they weren't signing for us? I think the poster has a point. He doesn't have a point at all. He said we wouldn't spend it on those players as if it was a formality. He doesn't really have any proof of that. Several clubs were after those players and they chose other clubs other than us. Yes but the most likely explanation for repeatedly losing out on players to the likes of southampton is that we did not offer competitive terms. Hughes obviously hinted at missing out on preferred targets. It was an issue and a contributory factor to our demise. Not as big a factor as the poor decision making in purchasing the likes of wimmer, berahino etc, and the incompetence of Hughes and lambert of course.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Jun 3, 2018 10:18:25 GMT
He doesn't have a point at all. He said we wouldn't spend it on those players as if it was a formality. He doesn't really have any proof of that. Several clubs were after those players and they chose other clubs other than us. Yes but the most likely explanation for repeatedly losing out on players to the likes of southampton is that we did not offer competitive terms. Hughes obviously hinted at missing out on preferred targets. It was an issue and a contributory factor to our demise. Not as big a factor as the poor decision making in purchasing the likes of wimmer, berahino etc, and the incompetence of Hughes and lambert of course. That's what I was trying to say, but failing to! 😁
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Jun 3, 2018 10:20:31 GMT
He doesn't have a point at all. He said we wouldn't spend it on those players as if it was a formality. He doesn't really have any proof of that. Several clubs were after those players and they chose other clubs other than us. Yes but the most likely explanation for repeatedly losing out on players to the likes of southampton is that we did not offer competitive terms. Hughes obviously hinted at missing out on preferred targets. It was an issue and a contributory factor to our demise. Not as big a factor as the poor decision making in purchasing the likes of wimmer, berahino etc, and the incompetence of Hughes and lambert of course. Our wage bill last season was the same as Southampton's. Harry Maguire opted to join a club who won the Premier League a year before.
|
|
|
Post by gonk on Jun 3, 2018 10:23:25 GMT
it's a win win. get him in. if he lights the league up and gets us promoted we would have a real asset on our hands. If he underwhelming, at 25 we would almost certainly make the money back. he is the type lots of teams want in their 11. They Could also be thinking to make it part of a deal for Butland or Allen or N’Diaye.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 3, 2018 10:27:17 GMT
Yes but the most likely explanation for repeatedly losing out on players to the likes of southampton is that we did not offer competitive terms. Hughes obviously hinted at missing out on preferred targets. It was an issue and a contributory factor to our demise. Not as big a factor as the poor decision making in purchasing the likes of wimmer, berahino etc, and the incompetence of Hughes and lambert of course. Our wage bill last season was the same as Southampton's. Harry Maguire opted to join a club who won the Premier League a year before. It's a case of poor lil' old Stoke again then, dave? Just one of them things again where no current employee of the club can be criticised at all?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 3, 2018 10:31:05 GMT
Wasn't the reason that Southampton were at the time rightly considered a better prospect than us, as far as Cedric and Lemina were concerned? Possibly, Tox. Someone also mentioned peculiarities in our contracts (I forget the details) that might have discouraged players from signing. I think the poster was pointing out an inconsistency in approach to signings, and I can see what he means. I don't follow to be honest Tricky. Those examples - maybe Maguire it sounds like we wouldn't pay what they wanted but Leicester were probably a bigger draw than us anyway. Same with Southampton for the others. Sometimes players just choose other clubs sometimes, it isn't always someone's fault.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 10:31:40 GMT
Didn’t Arsenal play this same scenario with Clive Allen in the early 80s ?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 3, 2018 10:34:05 GMT
Our wage bill last season was the same as Southampton's. Harry Maguire opted to join a club who won the Premier League a year before. It's a case of poor lil' old Stoke again then, dave? Just one of them things again where no current employee of the club can be criticised at all? Sometimes that's the case though surely mate? I don't see which part of the reasoning is flawed? Is it really inconceivable that there are some occasions where players just choose other clubs because they feel they're a more attractive option, or does every single thing have to be some sort of boobish incompetence?
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Jun 3, 2018 10:35:40 GMT
Possibly, Tox. Someone also mentioned peculiarities in our contracts (I forget the details) that might have discouraged players from signing. I think the poster was pointing out an inconsistency in approach to signings, and I can see what he means. I don't follow to be honest Tricky. Those examples - maybe Maguire it sounds like we wouldn't pay what they wanted but Leicester were probably a bigger draw than us anyway. Same with Southampton for the others. Sometimes players just choose other clubs sometimes, it isn't always someone's fault. I don't follow myself at times, Tox. I know what I meant, though! 😁
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Jun 3, 2018 10:39:08 GMT
Knows where the net is Exactly what we want PLITB Are you a descendent of Will Shakespeare?
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 3, 2018 10:40:20 GMT
It's a case of poor lil' old Stoke again then, dave? Just one of them things again where no current employee of the club can be criticised at all? Sometimes that's the case though surely mate? I don't see which part of the reasoning is flawed? Is it really inconceivable that there are some occasions where players just choose other clubs because they feel they're a more attractive option, or does every single thing have to be some sort of boobish incompetence? Its being applied to every scenario recently though isn't it, Rob We couldn't possibly have got more for Arnie or put a minimum release in his new contract or a sell on or more achievable add ons. We couldn't have possibly pushed back on the commercial suicide of the Shaqiri release clause. N'Zonzi sold for buttons, nothing to see here. 17M on Wimmer? All Hughes's fault mate. Operation arse covering for the Teflon Tossers is in full swing and quite to what ends I have absolutely no idea
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 3, 2018 10:58:46 GMT
Sometimes that's the case though surely mate? I don't see which part of the reasoning is flawed? Is it really inconceivable that there are some occasions where players just choose other clubs because they feel they're a more attractive option, or does every single thing have to be some sort of boobish incompetence? Its being applied to every scenario recently though isn't it, Rob We couldn't possibly have got more for Arnie or put a minimum release in his new contract or a sell on or more achievable add ons. We couldn't have possibly pushed back on the commercial suicide of the Shaqiri release clause. N'Zonzi sold for buttons, nothing to see here. 17M on Wimmer? All Hughes's fault mate. Operation arse covering for the Teflon Tossers is in full swing and quite to what ends I have absolutely no idea I don't think the two are mutually exclusive mate. You can think Carto and Scholes are jokers who need to be booted out of the club yesterday while still thinking that some things are fairly unavoidable and there wasn't much we could do. How many clubs have sell-on clauses for 28 year olds? Why would Sevilla or anyone pay more for Nzonzi when they could sit tight and get him for nowt in a year? The Shaqiri thing is frustrating but can you imagine the outcry on here if we'd not signed Shaqiri because we insisted on a higher relegation release clause? 'Typical small-time Stoke, already planning for relegation'.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 3, 2018 11:50:58 GMT
Its being applied to every scenario recently though isn't it, Rob We couldn't possibly have got more for Arnie or put a minimum release in his new contract or a sell on or more achievable add ons. We couldn't have possibly pushed back on the commercial suicide of the Shaqiri release clause. N'Zonzi sold for buttons, nothing to see here. 17M on Wimmer? All Hughes's fault mate. Operation arse covering for the Teflon Tossers is in full swing and quite to what ends I have absolutely no idea I don't think the two are mutually exclusive mate. You can think Carto and Scholes are jokers who need to be booted out of the club yesterday while still thinking that some things are fairly unavoidable and there wasn't much we could do. How many clubs have sell-on clauses for 28 year olds? Why would Sevilla or anyone pay more for Nzonzi when they could sit tight and get him for nowt in a year? The Shaqiri thing is frustrating but can you imagine the outcry on here if we'd not signed Shaqiri because we insisted on a higher relegation release clause? 'Typical small-time Stoke, already planning for relegation'. It doesn't really work like that though does it? There have been a series of failures over a number of years and people are desperate to make excuses for them in a way they don't for football managers. Two people have rightly paid the price for failings on the pitch with their jobs, the fact that nobody has paid the same price behind the scenes for the catastrophes off it is nothing short of a scandal. We are club where there are no consequences, no accountability and no responsibility and supporters are complicit in letting that culture spread.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jun 3, 2018 11:53:53 GMT
I don't think the two are mutually exclusive mate. You can think Carto and Scholes are jokers who need to be booted out of the club yesterday while still thinking that some things are fairly unavoidable and there wasn't much we could do. How many clubs have sell-on clauses for 28 year olds? Why would Sevilla or anyone pay more for Nzonzi when they could sit tight and get him for nowt in a year? The Shaqiri thing is frustrating but can you imagine the outcry on here if we'd not signed Shaqiri because we insisted on a higher relegation release clause? 'Typical small-time Stoke, already planning for relegation'. It doesn't really work like that though does it? There have been a series of failures over a number of years and people are desperate to make excuses for them in a way they don't for football managers. Two people have rightly paid the price for failings on the pitch with their jobs, the fact that nobody has paid the same price behind the scenes for the catastrophes off it is nothing short of a scandal. We are club where there are no consequences, no accountability and no responsibility and supporters are complicit in letting that culture spread. Doesn't work like what sorry? Is it not fair to criticise them for the things that clearly they have had a hand in while suggesting that maybe somethings were beyond anyone's control? Is that unreasonable, is that 'fans being complicit'? Or should it just be an all-out witch hunt where they're 100% to blame for everything and anything more considered is part of the problem?
|
|