Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

Snowball
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 15894
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Snowball » 23 Apr 2019 09:51

Nameless
Snowball I said he got a new contract under Gourlay



Which part of that is wrong?


Where did I say Gourlay wasn’t nominally the CEO at the time ?
Your comment was misleading though.



Owners might say "Don't Sell" but it's still the DoF
or CEO who actually signs off on the details of the contract.


There was a general sense under Gourlay that we were splashing
cash, giving too-long contracts etc.


Put it another way. Do you think, had Howe been CEO that Moore's
contract would have been exactly the same as the "Gourlay" one?

TiagoIlori
Member
Posts: 359
Joined: 31 Jul 2017 18:34

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by TiagoIlori » 23 Apr 2019 10:04

Snowball
Nameless
Snowball I said he got a new contract under Gourlay



Which part of that is wrong?


Where did I say Gourlay wasn’t nominally the CEO at the time ?
Your comment was misleading though.



Owners might say "Don't Sell" but it's still the DoF
or CEO who actually signs off on the details of the contract.


There was a general sense under Gourlay that we were splashing
cash, giving too-long contracts etc.


Put it another way. Do you think, had Howe been CEO that Moore's
contract would have been exactly the same as the "Gourlay" one?

Yes. The owners dealt with Moore, gave him a new contract. Only slight difference is that I reckon we’d have dealt with the situation a bit better.

muirinho
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1516
Joined: 20 Jan 2016 12:10

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by muirinho » 23 Apr 2019 10:10

Snowball
Nameless
Snowball I said he got a new contract under Gourlay



Which part of that is wrong?


Where did I say Gourlay wasn’t nominally the CEO at the time ?
Your comment was misleading though.



Owners might say "Don't Sell" but it's still the DoF
or CEO who actually signs off on the details of the contract.


There was a general sense under Gourlay that we were splashing
cash, giving too-long contracts etc.


Put it another way. Do you think, had Howe been CEO that Moore's
contract would have been exactly the same as the "Gourlay" one?


don't know about whether it would have been a different contract or not, but if you listen to the Moore podcast with ElmParkRoyals, it's very clear that Gourlay was messing about with Moore. the owners promised Moore a new contract, and Gourlay kept trying to delay stuff - it was because the new contract didn't turn up that Moore put in a transfer request and it was only resolved when the owners (or one of them) flew over to the club to sort that out.

I think it was probably that kind of stuff that led to Gourlay's sacking - but it's also interesting. the owners clearly don't want to lose what they regard as the club's best assets. they stopped Moore from leaving, and they stopped Meite from leaving (as he was the club's top scorer)

So I think Howe will have to tread carefully when cutting the wage bill, not to target players that the owners want to keep.

User avatar
Old Man Andrews
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 9291
Joined: 02 Oct 2017 13:06
Location: The South of England

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Old Man Andrews » 23 Apr 2019 10:22

Prioritise the ones most likely to happen. If we sell Swift I think we could buy Baker. Sell Moore I think we could buy Miazga. Oliveira I think there is already a fee in place.

Martinez - Won't come here in a million years, he is better than us by a country mile

EjarIa - Got a feeling Liverpool would want him playing Premier League but would take him back in heartbeat. Just can't see it.

User avatar
Stranded
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 9615
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 12:42
Location: Propping up the bar in the Nags

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Stranded » 23 Apr 2019 10:37

Old Man Andrews Prioritise the ones most likely to happen. If we sell Swift I think we could buy Baker. Sell Moore I think we could buy Miazga. Oliveira I think there is already a fee in place.

Martinez - Won't come here in a million years, he is better than us by a country mile

EjarIa - Got a feeling Liverpool would want him playing Premier League but would take him back in heartbeat. Just can't see it.


Agree on Martinez but I'm really not sure where Ejaria stands. I simply do not see him breaking into the Liverpool team, they have arguably moved beyond Ejaria and at 21 he may well decide he needs to play week in, week out. If he were to leave, and we were interested, him being a London lad could play in our favour. Of the 6 loanees here at the moment, I would say they fit into 3 groups at the mo:

Probable
Oliveria
Baker
Eza

Possible
Miazga
Ejaria

Not going to happen
Martinez


User avatar
Old Man Andrews
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 9291
Joined: 02 Oct 2017 13:06
Location: The South of England

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Old Man Andrews » 23 Apr 2019 10:39

Stranded
Old Man Andrews Prioritise the ones most likely to happen. If we sell Swift I think we could buy Baker. Sell Moore I think we could buy Miazga. Oliveira I think there is already a fee in place.

Martinez - Won't come here in a million years, he is better than us by a country mile

EjarIa - Got a feeling Liverpool would want him playing Premier League but would take him back in heartbeat. Just can't see it.


Agree on Martinez but I'm really not sure where Ejaria stands. I simply do not see him breaking into the Liverpool team, they have arguably moved beyond Ejaria and at 21 he may well decide he needs to play week in, week out. If he were to leave, and we were interested, him being a London lad could play in our favour. Of the 6 loanees here at the moment, I would say they fit into 3 groups at the mo:

Probable
Oliveria
Baker
Eza

Possible
Miazga
Ejaria

Not going to happen
Martinez


Oh I didn't mean he would play for Liverpool, meant they would farm him out to a Brighton, Norwich etc. Happy to have him back though if he wants to come.

User avatar
Stranded
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 9615
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 12:42
Location: Propping up the bar in the Nags

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Stranded » 23 Apr 2019 10:42

Old Man Andrews
Stranded
Old Man Andrews Prioritise the ones most likely to happen. If we sell Swift I think we could buy Baker. Sell Moore I think we could buy Miazga. Oliveira I think there is already a fee in place.

Martinez - Won't come here in a million years, he is better than us by a country mile

EjarIa - Got a feeling Liverpool would want him playing Premier League but would take him back in heartbeat. Just can't see it.


Agree on Martinez but I'm really not sure where Ejaria stands. I simply do not see him breaking into the Liverpool team, they have arguably moved beyond Ejaria and at 21 he may well decide he needs to play week in, week out. If he were to leave, and we were interested, him being a London lad could play in our favour. Of the 6 loanees here at the moment, I would say they fit into 3 groups at the mo:

Probable
Oliveria
Baker
Eza

Possible
Miazga
Ejaria

Not going to happen
Martinez


Oh I didn't mean he would play for Liverpool, meant they would farm him out to a Brighton, Norwich etc. Happy to have him back though if he wants to come.


Oh, I knew what you meant but I'm not sure he's ready to be a PL starter, I could be wrong of course. He signed a "long-term" contract last summer so Liverpool obviously think he will have a decent sale value.

User avatar
Denver Royal
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 1890
Joined: 02 Jun 2004 10:58
Location: Between Emmer Green duck pond and The White Horse

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Denver Royal » 23 Apr 2019 14:43

Snowball Listening to the CEO tonight, they will be shipping out the top earners
That will be Swift, MOORE, McCleary, Gunter for starters.
They have to ship out the top earners, players getting "too much" for RFC's position/status.
The point about selling Moore is (say) 10 Million (which we might insist needs to be mostly up-front) and THEN his wages, which I suspect are over 20K a week, for all I know, a lot more than that. So in one stroke we could improve our FFP situation by 10-14 Million.
Meanwhile he gets Premiership football.
Apart from Miazga maybe not-staying because Moore goes, Moore alone leaving would go a huge way to sorting FFP. Throw in Swift, McShane, O'Shea, Kelly (and somehow offload Aluko) and we're hunky-dory. Decent CBs aren't rare

Yep, pretty much. Surprised there's not been more clamor to sell Moore? There was last year. And for me, not too much has changed. Fairly sure Moore could be replaced for less. He had a release-clause built in to his new deal, right?
.
muirinho Don't know about whether it would have been a different contract or not, but if you listen to the Moore podcast with ElmParkRoyals, it's very clear that Gourlay was messing about with Moore. the owners promised Moore a new contract, and Gourlay kept trying to delay stuff - it was because the new contract didn't turn up that Moore put in a transfer request and it was only resolved when the owners (or one of them) flew over to the club to sort that out.
I think it was probably that kind of stuff that led to Gourlay's sacking - but it's also interesting. the owners clearly don't want to lose what they regard as the club's best assets. they stopped Moore from leaving, and they stopped Meite from leaving (as he was the club's top scorer)
So I think Howe will have to tread carefully when cutting the wage bill, not to target players that the owners want to keep.


Still not sure how I feel about that, tbh. Generally speaking, wouldn't really want ownership meddling/deciding player decisions from the other side of the world. You employ people to do that. Our owners are very much in absentia. They don't even watch the games do they?

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5484
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Nameless » 23 Apr 2019 16:34

Denver Royal
Snowball Listening to the CEO tonight, they will be shipping out the top earners
That will be Swift, MOORE, McCleary, Gunter for starters.
They have to ship out the top earners, players getting "too much" for RFC's position/status.
The point about selling Moore is (say) 10 Million (which we might insist needs to be mostly up-front) and THEN his wages, which I suspect are over 20K a week, for all I know, a lot more than that. So in one stroke we could improve our FFP situation by 10-14 Million.
Meanwhile he gets Premiership football.
Apart from Miazga maybe not-staying because Moore goes, Moore alone leaving would go a huge way to sorting FFP. Throw in Swift, McShane, O'Shea, Kelly (and somehow offload Aluko) and we're hunky-dory. Decent CBs aren't rare

Yep, pretty much. Surprised there's not been more clamor to sell Moore? There was last year. And for me, not too much has changed. Fairly sure Moore could be replaced for less. He had a release-clause built in to his new deal, right?
.
muirinho Don't know about whether it would have been a different contract or not, but if you listen to the Moore podcast with ElmParkRoyals, it's very clear that Gourlay was messing about with Moore. the owners promised Moore a new contract, and Gourlay kept trying to delay stuff - it was because the new contract didn't turn up that Moore put in a transfer request and it was only resolved when the owners (or one of them) flew over to the club to sort that out.
I think it was probably that kind of stuff that led to Gourlay's sacking - but it's also interesting. the owners clearly don't want to lose what they regard as the club's best assets. they stopped Moore from leaving, and they stopped Meite from leaving (as he was the club's top scorer)
So I think Howe will have to tread carefully when cutting the wage bill, not to target players that the owners want to keep.


Still not sure how I feel about that, tbh. Generally speaking, wouldn't really want ownership meddling/deciding player decisions from the other side of the world. You employ people to do that. Our owners are very much in absentia. They don't even watch the games do they?


Half our owners have lived in the UK for years so ate hardly making decisions from the other side of the world.
From all you hear they are very closely involved in the running of the club, to call them ‘in absentia’ is really quite insulting.


User avatar
Denver Royal
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 1890
Joined: 02 Jun 2004 10:58
Location: Between Emmer Green duck pond and The White Horse

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Denver Royal » 23 Apr 2019 16:56

Nameless
Denver Royal
Snowball Listening to the CEO tonight, they will be shipping out the top earners
That will be Swift, MOORE, McCleary, Gunter for starters.
They have to ship out the top earners, players getting "too much" for RFC's position/status.
The point about selling Moore is (say) 10 Million (which we might insist needs to be mostly up-front) and THEN his wages, which I suspect are over 20K a week, for all I know, a lot more than that. So in one stroke we could improve our FFP situation by 10-14 Million.
Meanwhile he gets Premiership football.
Apart from Miazga maybe not-staying because Moore goes, Moore alone leaving would go a huge way to sorting FFP. Throw in Swift, McShane, O'Shea, Kelly (and somehow offload Aluko) and we're hunky-dory. Decent CBs aren't rare

Yep, pretty much. Surprised there's not been more clamor to sell Moore? There was last year. And for me, not too much has changed. Fairly sure Moore could be replaced for less. He had a release-clause built in to his new deal, right?
.
muirinho Don't know about whether it would have been a different contract or not, but if you listen to the Moore podcast with ElmParkRoyals, it's very clear that Gourlay was messing about with Moore. the owners promised Moore a new contract, and Gourlay kept trying to delay stuff - it was because the new contract didn't turn up that Moore put in a transfer request and it was only resolved when the owners (or one of them) flew over to the club to sort that out.
I think it was probably that kind of stuff that led to Gourlay's sacking - but it's also interesting. the owners clearly don't want to lose what they regard as the club's best assets. they stopped Moore from leaving, and they stopped Meite from leaving (as he was the club's top scorer)
So I think Howe will have to tread carefully when cutting the wage bill, not to target players that the owners want to keep.


Still not sure how I feel about that, tbh. Generally speaking, wouldn't really want ownership meddling/deciding player decisions from the other side of the world. You employ people to do that. Our owners are very much in absentia. They don't even watch the games do they?


Half our owners have lived in the UK for years so ate hardly making decisions from the other side of the world.
From all you hear they are very closely involved in the running of the club, to call them ‘in absentia’ is really quite insulting.

Ok, but what about: 'Howe will have to tread carefully when cutting the wage bill, not to target players the owners want to keep'.
I'm not sure what players they would be. What if they want to keep Swift?

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5484
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Nameless » 23 Apr 2019 18:01

Denver Royal
Nameless
Denver Royal Yep, pretty much. Surprised there's not been more clamor to sell Moore? There was last year. And for me, not too much has changed. Fairly sure Moore could be replaced for less. He had a release-clause built in to his new deal, right?
.


Still not sure how I feel about that, tbh. Generally speaking, wouldn't really want ownership meddling/deciding player decisions from the other side of the world. You employ people to do that. Our owners are very much in absentia. They don't even watch the games do they?


Half our owners have lived in the UK for years so ate hardly making decisions from the other side of the world.
From all you hear they are very closely involved in the running of the club, to call them ‘in absentia’ is really quite insulting.

Ok, but what about: 'Howe will have to tread carefully when cutting the wage bill, not to target players the owners want to keep'.
I'm not sure what players they would be. What if they want to keep Swift?


There has been talk from Jose bout there being a ‘project’ at Reading and others have mentioned the owners long term plan. This will be something Howe and Gomes will be part of and have an input to but they will need to stay consistent with it. If the owners want to build a team round a set of players then it would be crazy for Howe to decide he is going to follow his own agenda and get rid of those players. If the owners have told him to (say) generate £10 million in transfer income and save £10 million pa in wages and not restricted how he does it then he can set his own agenda. Seems pretty standard stuff really.The people who pay the bills get to say what happens, how could it be otherwise ?

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8859
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Snowflake Royal » 23 Apr 2019 18:41

Stranded
Old Man Andrews
Stranded
Agree on Martinez but I'm really not sure where Ejaria stands. I simply do not see him breaking into the Liverpool team, they have arguably moved beyond Ejaria and at 21 he may well decide he needs to play week in, week out. If he were to leave, and we were interested, him being a London lad could play in our favour. Of the 6 loanees here at the moment, I would say they fit into 3 groups at the mo:

Probable
Oliveria
Baker
Eza

Possible
Miazga
Ejaria

Not going to happen
Martinez


Oh I didn't mean he would play for Liverpool, meant they would farm him out to a Brighton, Norwich etc. Happy to have him back though if he wants to come.


Oh, I knew what you meant but I'm not sure he's ready to be a PL starter, I could be wrong of course. He signed a "long-term" contract last summer so Liverpool obviously think he will have a decent sale value.

Of Gomes loanees I'd personally say he's easily furthest from being up to a PL starter.

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8859
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Snowflake Royal » 23 Apr 2019 18:44

Denver Royal
Snowball Listening to the CEO tonight, they will be shipping out the top earners
That will be Swift, MOORE, McCleary, Gunter for starters.
They have to ship out the top earners, players getting "too much" for RFC's position/status.
The point about selling Moore is (say) 10 Million (which we might insist needs to be mostly up-front) and THEN his wages, which I suspect are over 20K a week, for all I know, a lot more than that. So in one stroke we could improve our FFP situation by 10-14 Million.
Meanwhile he gets Premiership football.
Apart from Miazga maybe not-staying because Moore goes, Moore alone leaving would go a huge way to sorting FFP. Throw in Swift, McShane, O'Shea, Kelly (and somehow offload Aluko) and we're hunky-dory. Decent CBs aren't rare

Yep, pretty much. Surprised there's not been more clamor to sell Moore? There was last year. And for me, not too much has changed. Fairly sure Moore could be replaced for less. He had a release-clause built in to his new deal, right?
.
muirinho Don't know about whether it would have been a different contract or not, but if you listen to the Moore podcast with ElmParkRoyals, it's very clear that Gourlay was messing about with Moore. the owners promised Moore a new contract, and Gourlay kept trying to delay stuff - it was because the new contract didn't turn up that Moore put in a transfer request and it was only resolved when the owners (or one of them) flew over to the club to sort that out.
I think it was probably that kind of stuff that led to Gourlay's sacking - but it's also interesting. the owners clearly don't want to lose what they regard as the club's best assets. they stopped Moore from leaving, and they stopped Meite from leaving (as he was the club's top scorer)
So I think Howe will have to tread carefully when cutting the wage bill, not to target players that the owners want to keep.


Still not sure how I feel about that, tbh. Generally speaking, wouldn't really want ownership meddling/deciding player decisions from the other side of the world. You employ people to do that. Our owners are very much in absentia. They don't even watch the games do they?

Looking at our current CB options I don't think we can afford to sell Moore for less than crazy money.

Sell Moore and we're looking at either an entirely new CB pair, relying on at least one Academy graduate plus a newbie or moving Blackett across. None of that inspires confidence and McShane and O'Shea are certainly not up to it.


User avatar
Old Man Andrews
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 9291
Joined: 02 Oct 2017 13:06
Location: The South of England

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Old Man Andrews » 23 Apr 2019 18:53

Snowflake Royal
Stranded
Old Man Andrews
Oh I didn't mean he would play for Liverpool, meant they would farm him out to a Brighton, Norwich etc. Happy to have him back though if he wants to come.


Oh, I knew what you meant but I'm not sure he's ready to be a PL starter, I could be wrong of course. He signed a "long-term" contract last summer so Liverpool obviously think he will have a decent sale value.

Of Gomes loanees I'd personally say he's easily furthest from being up to a PL starter.

Before Swift's injury I think I'd agree with you but he has really stepped it up in last few games, there's definitely something there.

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8859
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Snowflake Royal » 23 Apr 2019 19:12

Old Man Andrews
Snowflake Royal
Stranded
Oh, I knew what you meant but I'm not sure he's ready to be a PL starter, I could be wrong of course. He signed a "long-term" contract last summer so Liverpool obviously think he will have a decent sale value.

Of Gomes loanees I'd personally say he's easily furthest from being up to a PL starter.

Before Swift's injury I think I'd agree with you but he has really stepped it up in last few games, there's definitely something there.

Oh he's good and has potential... I just think he's half a season or so behind the others in development. Has more mistakes in him and a bit less consistent. Could be a product of the nature of his position though.

Delboy
Member
Posts: 245
Joined: 27 Nov 2011 10:54

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Delboy » 24 Apr 2019 20:47

Spotrac . Com gives all players contracts in premiership interesting most on £20 k week Ejaria £2 k Martinez 6 year contract so loan is best option for us

Zip
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5488
Joined: 30 Dec 2017 16:39

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Zip » 24 Apr 2019 21:00

Nameless
Denver Royal
Snowball Listening to the CEO tonight, they will be shipping out the top earners
That will be Swift, MOORE, McCleary, Gunter for starters.
They have to ship out the top earners, players getting "too much" for RFC's position/status.
The point about selling Moore is (say) 10 Million (which we might insist needs to be mostly up-front) and THEN his wages, which I suspect are over 20K a week, for all I know, a lot more than that. So in one stroke we could improve our FFP situation by 10-14 Million.
Meanwhile he gets Premiership football.
Apart from Miazga maybe not-staying because Moore goes, Moore alone leaving would go a huge way to sorting FFP. Throw in Swift, McShane, O'Shea, Kelly (and somehow offload Aluko) and we're hunky-dory. Decent CBs aren't rare

Yep, pretty much. Surprised there's not been more clamor to sell Moore? There was last year. And for me, not too much has changed. Fairly sure Moore could be replaced for less. He had a release-clause built in to his new deal, right?
.
muirinho Don't know about whether it would have been a different contract or not, but if you listen to the Moore podcast with ElmParkRoyals, it's very clear that Gourlay was messing about with Moore. the owners promised Moore a new contract, and Gourlay kept trying to delay stuff - it was because the new contract didn't turn up that Moore put in a transfer request and it was only resolved when the owners (or one of them) flew over to the club to sort that out.
I think it was probably that kind of stuff that led to Gourlay's sacking - but it's also interesting. the owners clearly don't want to lose what they regard as the club's best assets. they stopped Moore from leaving, and they stopped Meite from leaving (as he was the club's top scorer)
So I think Howe will have to tread carefully when cutting the wage bill, not to target players that the owners want to keep.


Still not sure how I feel about that, tbh. Generally speaking, wouldn't really want ownership meddling/deciding player decisions from the other side of the world. You employ people to do that. Our owners are very much in absentia. They don't even watch the games do they?


Half our owners have lived in the UK for years so ate hardly making decisions from the other side of the world.
From all you hear they are very closely involved in the running of the club, to call them ‘in absentia’ is really quite insulting.


I don’t think they get the credit they deserve. Meite would have been sold unless Yongge had stepped in.
They got it wrong hiring Gourlay but got it right getting rid of him and bringing Howe back.
ST prices great value. Twenty’s Plenty. Reduced Cup prices against Man Utd again. Sanctioning the continuation of Club 1871. Completing the Bearwood training centre.
Providing significant funds to Stam.

Our owners have been very supportive in my view and deserve a lot more credit than they get.

User avatar
NewCorkSeth
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5989
Joined: 05 Jul 2013 00:17
Location: Wherever Nameless may be.

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by NewCorkSeth » 24 Apr 2019 21:01

Snowflake Royal
Denver Royal
Snowball Listening to the CEO tonight, they will be shipping out the top earners
That will be Swift, MOORE, McCleary, Gunter for starters.
They have to ship out the top earners, players getting "too much" for RFC's position/status.
The point about selling Moore is (say) 10 Million (which we might insist needs to be mostly up-front) and THEN his wages, which I suspect are over 20K a week, for all I know, a lot more than that. So in one stroke we could improve our FFP situation by 10-14 Million.
Meanwhile he gets Premiership football.
Apart from Miazga maybe not-staying because Moore goes, Moore alone leaving would go a huge way to sorting FFP. Throw in Swift, McShane, O'Shea, Kelly (and somehow offload Aluko) and we're hunky-dory. Decent CBs aren't rare

Yep, pretty much. Surprised there's not been more clamor to sell Moore? There was last year. And for me, not too much has changed. Fairly sure Moore could be replaced for less. He had a release-clause built in to his new deal, right?
.
muirinho Don't know about whether it would have been a different contract or not, but if you listen to the Moore podcast with ElmParkRoyals, it's very clear that Gourlay was messing about with Moore. the owners promised Moore a new contract, and Gourlay kept trying to delay stuff - it was because the new contract didn't turn up that Moore put in a transfer request and it was only resolved when the owners (or one of them) flew over to the club to sort that out.
I think it was probably that kind of stuff that led to Gourlay's sacking - but it's also interesting. the owners clearly don't want to lose what they regard as the club's best assets. they stopped Moore from leaving, and they stopped Meite from leaving (as he was the club's top scorer)
So I think Howe will have to tread carefully when cutting the wage bill, not to target players that the owners want to keep.


Still not sure how I feel about that, tbh. Generally speaking, wouldn't really want ownership meddling/deciding player decisions from the other side of the world. You employ people to do that. Our owners are very much in absentia. They don't even watch the games do they?

Looking at our current CB options I don't think we can afford to sell Moore for less than crazy money.

Sell Moore and we're looking at either an entirely new CB pair, relying on at least one Academy graduate plus a newbie or moving Blackett across. None of that inspires confidence and McShane and O'Shea are certainly not up to it.

Dead right.

Zip
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5488
Joined: 30 Dec 2017 16:39

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Zip » 24 Apr 2019 21:05

Old Man Andrews Prioritise the ones most likely to happen. If we sell Swift I think we could buy Baker. Sell Moore I think we could buy Miazga. Oliveira I think there is already a fee in place.

Martinez - Won't come here in a million years, he is better than us by a country mile

EjarIa - Got a feeling Liverpool would want him playing Premier League but would take him back in heartbeat. Just can't see it.


I can’t see much point selling Moore to fund Miazga’s signing.

Hound
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 11136
Joined: 27 Sep 2016 22:16
Location: Simpleton

Re: Which of the loanees would you prioritise?

by Hound » 24 Apr 2019 21:23

Zip
Nameless
Denver Royal Yep, pretty much. Surprised there's not been more clamor to sell Moore? There was last year. And for me, not too much has changed. Fairly sure Moore could be replaced for less. He had a release-clause built in to his new deal, right?
.


Still not sure how I feel about that, tbh. Generally speaking, wouldn't really want ownership meddling/deciding player decisions from the other side of the world. You employ people to do that. Our owners are very much in absentia. They don't even watch the games do they?


Half our owners have lived in the UK for years so ate hardly making decisions from the other side of the world.
From all you hear they are very closely involved in the running of the club, to call them ‘in absentia’ is really quite insulting.


I don’t think they get the credit they deserve. Meite would have been sold unless Yongge had stepped in.
They got it wrong hiring Gourlay but got it right getting rid of him and bringing Howe back.
ST prices great value. Twenty’s Plenty. Reduced Cup prices against Man Utd again. Sanctioning the continuation of Club 1871. Completing the Bearwood training centre.
Providing significant funds to Stam.

Our owners have been very supportive in my view and deserve a lot more credit than they get.


Big +1 to that

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Basildon, John Smith, Majestic-12 [Bot], MSN [Bot] and 39 guests

It is currently 18 Oct 2019 09:54