The great big short Summer Transfer and "What the hell do we do now" Thread | Page 220 | Vital Football

The great big short Summer Transfer and "What the hell do we do now" Thread

Gosh.
[Was going to write 'wow' but didn't want to get Ingy all hot under the collar.]

That is a high turnover but it isn't easy to assess in isolation. Were they keeping us afloat? Did they go up or down? If we had held on to, say, five for one year longer would we have gone up and made more? Who knows.

Manager turnover won't have helped. None of them is content to work with other managers' leftovers, the arrogant swines.
Pop sheet young RedRoss chap!
 
You didn’t say it Mao- allow me:

“Yet another 30 something with zero resale value”.

It's very amusing I'm sure but that doesn't address the fundamental point that we recruit aging has-beens or never beens by and large for the first team squad.

Great buying kids for development, all in favour of it but players under 24 who actually impact the starting XI are few and far between.

Maybe we'd look less lethargic if we had some youthful energy.
 
It's very amusing I'm sure but that doesn't address the fundamental point that we recruit aging has-beens or never beens by and large for the first team squad.

Great buying kids for development, all in favour of it but players under 24 who actually impact the starting XI are few and far between.

Maybe we'd look less lethargic if we had some youthful energy.

The average age of last Saturdays starting 11 was 26

I read somewhere that last seasons squad had an average age of 23.75 (have not checked that); if that is correct, it was far too young.
 
The average age of last Saturdays starting 11 was 26

I read somewhere that last seasons squad had an average age of 23.75 (have not checked that); if that is correct, it was far too young.

That doesn't speak to our recruitment though. The average age is brought down by the players from our youth academy. I'm talking about actual first squad signings.
 
In fairness, we have probably made a pretty substantial profit in fees from those players.

We have finished higher every season in that time.

A fair number of the players have been easy to move on (not all obviously).

i cant imagine anywhere near profit after wages and we failed to hit our target once :(
 
i cant imagine anywhere near profit after wages and we failed to hit our target once :(
Well no, of course we didn't make a profit after wages and expenses. Hardly any football clubs can.

But the wages are neither here nor there to the point made. We have signed a lot of players, but by and large we have been paying a similar number through most of that time.
 
That doesn't speak to our recruitment though. The average age is brought down by the players from our youth academy. I'm talking about actual first squad signings.

With the success of our Academy, we have to buy in experienced players; we cannot rely on the Academy product alone.

Clough did not think it a problem buying experienced players with no resale value; he could not win an argument at Derby until he signed Dave McKay and Frank Clarke did not do too bad for us.

I do not recall any level of criticism being levelled at him for taking that approach.
 
Well no, of course we didn't make a profit after wages and expenses. Hardly any football clubs can.

But the wages are neither here nor there to the point made. We have signed a lot of players, but by and large we have been paying a similar number through most of that time.

You are quite correct that despite the ridiculously high churn we have more than balanced the books, but ultimately wages are the point.

The reason we cannot comply with P & S is because our wage bill runs at something between 110% and 130% of income; until that level comes down to something approaching a sustainable amount we will always be in this boat.

The current shape of our squad reflects the attempts being made to get the wage bill down.

Attempting to reach the promised land while slashing the wage bill is an incredibly difficult task; but it is one which Clubs have proven in the past, can be done.
 
It's very amusing I'm sure but that doesn't address the fundamental point that we recruit aging has-beens or never beens by and large for the first team squad.

Great buying kids for development, all in favour of it but players under 24 who actually impact the starting XI are few and far between.

Maybe we'd look less lethargic if we had some youthful energy.

So let’s be clear- we are talking about this summer’s recruitment because nothing else matters to this season‘s prospects. Past divorces matter not to the merits of the current spouse.
aging has beens or never beens is a pretty derogatory and sweeping statement for the likes of Colback freeman Blackett Taylor - all proven at this level and with several seasons yet to offer.
We don’t know how the foreign imports will fare yet but it’s probably unfair on the Olympiacos striker given that he’s taking a step down to come to us and it’s clearly a ludicrous statement to apply to Soh.
So that leaves us with Fred and a back up keeper on a 1 year deal.
That’s a pretty thin argument.

As for your correlation between age and lethargy, I think this may apply to middle aged suburbia but is tenuous to say the least in the professional world of football. I think you are confusing this with the type of player we need- ie ball carriers with pace. Wingers if you like.
I think we all know we need a couple of these, but I’m willing to bet SL knows it too and the window isn’t shut yet...
 
Last edited:
With the success of our Academy, we have to buy in experienced players; we cannot rely on the Academy product alone.

Clough did not think it a problem buying experienced players with no resale value; he could not win an argument at Derby until he signed Dave McKay and Frank Clarke did not do too bad for us.

I do not recall any level of criticism being levelled at him for taking that approach.

Finances are very different now to then, he also didn't just sign experienced players, would you like a list? I'm not arguing we should rely on the academy, just the opposite. We need a balanced approach to our recruitment; experience definitely, young players for the u23s definitely but also players in that 20-24 type bracket who can challenge for the first team and grow in value.
 
So let’s be clear- we are talking about this summer’s recruitment because nothing else matters to this season‘s prospects. Past divorces matter not to the merits of the current spouse.
aging has beens or never beens is a pretty derogatory and sweeping statement for the likes of Colback freeman Blackett Taylor - all proven at this level and with several seasons yet to offer.
We don’t know how the foreign imports will fare yet but it’s probably unfair on the Olympiacos striker given that he’s taking a step down to come to us and it’s clearly a ludicrous statement to apply to Soh.
So that leaves us with Fred and a back up keeper on a 1 year deal.
That’s a pretty thin argument.

As for your correlation between age and lethargy, I think this may apply to middle aged suburbia but is tenuous to say the least in the professional world of football. I think you are confusing this with the type of player we need- ie ball carriers with pace. Wingers if you like.
I think we all know we need a couple of these, but I’m willing to bet SL knows it too and the window isn’t shut yet...

Lol that's nonsense, of course previous recruitment matters. Squad balance isn't viewed in isolation...

We've made 6 permanent signings, 4 in their 30s. That's not balanced recruitment. Strip out our youth products and Yuri and Carv are the only players 25 or younger, the majority being late 20s or 30s.
 
Finances are very different now to then, he also didn't just sign experienced players, would you like a list? I'm not arguing we should rely on the academy, just the opposite. We need a balanced approach to our recruitment; experience definitely, young players for the u23s definitely but also players in that 20-24 type bracket who can challenge for the first team and grow in value.

I did not claim that Clough just signed older players; I was giving examples of two players with no resale value, who were instrumental in helping their Clubs achieve things with a far greater value, than either one of them would have raised in the transfer market at their peak value - resale value is great, but not the be all and end all.

I think we are getting quite close to the scenario you want; we are signing players who are obviously longer term projects, but also players like McGuane and Soh who are knocking on the first team door
 
43 permanent and 18 loan signings for Nottingham Forest since June 2017. More than any club in the country.

It's ok though...they know what they are doing allegedly

Bit of context would be nice. No point looking at that in the context of the prem but in our own league is that 1% higher than others or 100% higher? We have also made healthy profits for once. Of the clubs buying less players, did they also make less money?
 
I did not claim that Clough just signed older players; I was giving examples of two players with no resale value, who were instrumental in helping their Clubs achieve things with a far greater value, than either one of them would have raised in the transfer market at their peak value - resale value is great, but not the be all and end all.

I think we are getting quite close to the scenario you want; we are signing players who are obviously longer term projects, but also players like McGuane and Soh who are knocking on the first team door

Soh is potentially really exciting, did you read the scouting report I posted?
 
Lol that's nonsense, of course previous recruitment matters. Squad balance isn't viewed in isolation...

We've made 6 permanent signings, 4 in their 30s. That's not balanced recruitment. Strip out our youth products and Yuri and Carv are the only players 25 or younger, the majority being late 20s or 30s.
Why should we ‘strip out’ our youth product from the first team stats in a vain attempt to justify your argument that the balance of the squad is wrong?
And why does a free player in his 30’s have no value? That’s certainly not true of Taylor who has got to be worth £3-4m based on the going rate for championship strikers.
And why, when a player turns 30 does he suddenly become obsolete? These are professional athletes not the proletariat from ‘Logan’s Run’.
Those inferences are the real nonsense.

Examples? Two of our three best players last season (Watson and Grabban) are 35 and 32 respectively. Were they useless? Or did their experience benefit the team?
Should we get rid of Grabban because he’s too old, or might he still contribute this season?

we need a balance of youth and experience which we are getting in place. It seems sensible to me to buy in the experience when it’s relatively cheap and to grow your own youth either to put in the squad or offset FFP.
In any case, our purchases include Blackett 26, freeman 28 and Soh 19, which reflects a balanced approach to our acquisition strategy not the one sided affair you would try and have us all believe.
 
Finances are very different now to then, he also didn't just sign experienced players, would you like a list? I'm not arguing we should rely on the academy, just the opposite. We need a balanced approach to our recruitment; experience definitely, young players for the u23s definitely but also players in that 20-24 type bracket who can challenge for the first team and grow in value.

Players in the 20-24 age bracket that are 'ready made' to challenge for the first team are assets that every team is looking for, especially with our aspirations for the EPL and thus, we need players capable of stepping up, which therefore means we are going to face competition.

These clearly do not come cheap = Soh (£4m - with just a year on his contract at PSG).

The better 'UK' prospects, e.g. Cash £16m, are going for daft money and most clubs have such assets (as we do) on long contracts. Our dealings post covid, infer that we do not have the financial resources, without selling our own prized assets.

These signings also come with the risks that this won't work out = Zach Clough and arguably, Carvalho (& some of the other loanees we've had in recent years, Dowell, Semedo, Goncalves etc - list goes on).

Personally, I think we're doing more right than wrong, with the continued developmental recruitment at u23 level and then adding experience at Championship level, with cheaper (late 20's) foreign imports or the likes of Ameobi on 1yr deals.

The squad is definitely stronger and in the main, we have targetted our weaknesses - perhaps, with a few more to come?