Transfer Deadline Day. Real intel only!

[WoodleyRoyal]

peter odemwingie at QPR last night

[Royal Rother]

Apparently Samba has only played a handful of games this season and is not match fit.

If Soccerbase is to be believed then that's not really the case, although it does indicate he may not have played for 6 weeks, so your comment has validity.

http://www.soccerbase.com/players/playe ... r_id=41718

[Platypuss]

Apparently Samba has only played a handful of games this season and is not match fit.

If Soccerbase is to be believed then that's not really the case, although it does indicate he may not have played for 6 weeks, so your comment has validity.

http://www.soccerbase.com/players/playe ... r_id=41718

I would assume that's because of their mid-winter break.

[Scutterbucketz]

Apparently Samba has only played a handful of games this season and is not match fit.

If Soccerbase is to be believed then that's not really the case, although it does indicate he may not have played for 6 weeks, so your comment has validity.

http://www.soccerbase.com/players/playe ... r_id=41718

When he was interviewed yesterday on SSN he confirmed that he was not match fit. Possibly the craziest purchase I've ever seen.

[Einstein agogo]

Has Church gone or what?

[andrew1957]

Samba really must think Christmas has come early.

£100K+ per week for 4.5 years guaranteed.

[cmonurz]

Posted my full thoughts in a longer post half way through this thread, but if we keep finding things don't 'come to fruition' it stands to reason we need to look at our approach, as well as the market.

You've got that so wrong.

Our approach is right. We land players at value prices, and don't get ripped off. The way the club is / has been run means we don't get desperate and therefore don't get dragged into paying daft prices for players. It is those deals that don't come to fruition. We'll miss out on some good ones, but it's a policy that has stood the club in pretty good stead over the years I'd say.

As opposed to looking at the market - why the hell should we do what every other club does? It is the way this club is run that means we DON'T get desperate and dragged into all this nonsense. Other clubs could learn so much from Reading. That is why we are so often referred to by other clubs, and indeed FANS of other clubs as being a model that others should aspire to.

And yet many of our own fans don't see it.

You couldn't make it up.

No, no I haven't got it wrong. This is like the endless spending debates on the coalition thread. You think we should spend next to nothing, because it's prudent, I think we should spend a little bit more.

I don't agree that it is a good thing that, hypothetically, for the sake of an extra £1m each, we might have secured Zaha, Ince and that African winger we were looking at whose name I can't remember. That wouldn't mean we had been ripped off, it would mean we had adjusted our approach, only slightly, to reflect the market.

It's pretty one-eyed to imply some of our fans are idiots because they support a slightly looser policy on transfers.

[HoneyRoastHoax]

[MartinRdg]

With reference to the Sunzu deal if, as he thinks, and he is out of contract then we can sign him anytime whether inside or outside the window, is that right ??

That is true

[southbank1871]

Cmonurz - where has RR said he wants us to spend next to nothing? He's merely suggesting that we shouldn't be paying (what we consider) over the odds for players.

[cmonurz]

Cmonurz - where has RR said he wants us to spend next to nothing? He's merely suggesting that we shouldn't be paying (what we consider) over the odds for players.

Fair enough, he hasn't explicitly stated that.

But he has linked paying more than what we consider to be the right price for players, with financial instability, and in response to my points that it might be our approach that is wrong, not the market, given other clubs without exception (ignoring the likes of QPR) are prepared to pay more than we are.

Relative to the spending of all other teams at the level we are playing at, we spend next to nothing, hence me using that phrase. Even Norwich City, who aren't big spenders at all, have probably exceeded our transfer record this season in purchasing each of Snodgrass, Turner and Bassong (an educated guess, they are like us in not disclosing their fees generally).

[maffff]

Relative to the spending of all other teams at the level we are playing at, we spend next to nothing, hence me using that phrase.

Net spend January 2013 (taken from the telegrpah website, doesn't include loans):

QPR £23m
Liverpool £20.5m
Newcastle £11m (+Mbabu)
Arsenal £8.5m
Manchester United £7m
Stoke £7m
Sunderland £6m
Southampton £4.2m
Spusr £4m
Everton £3m
Reading £3m
Aston Villa £1.6m
West Ham £0
Wigan £0
Everton £0
Fulham £??? (whatever Chris David, less Stephen Kelly)
Norwich -£200k
West Brom -£1.5m
Chelsea -£5m
Swansea -£5m
Manchester City -£22m

IF Sigurdsson had come off we would have been the third biggest net spenders in this window in the league.

[Pepe the Horseman]

Relative to the spending of all other teams at the level we are playing at, we spend next to nothing, hence me using that phrase.

Net spend January 2013 (taken from the telegrpah website, doesn't include loans):

QPR £23m
Liverpool £20.5m
Newcastle £11m (+Mbabu)
Arsenal £8.5m
Manchester United £7m
Stoke £7m
Sunderland £6m
Southampton £4.2m
Spusr £4m
Everton £3m
Reading £3m
Aston Villa £1.6m
West Ham £0
Wigan £0
Everton £0
Fulham £??? (whatever Chris David, less Stephen Kelly)
Norwich -£200k
West Brom -£1.5m
Chelsea -£5m
Swansea -£5m
Manchester City -£22m

IF Sigurdsson had come off we would have been the third biggest net spenders in this window in the league.

We should follow the Manchester City model

[RoyalBlue]

The odds of success that McDermott was citing last night made me think that it might either be Sidwell or Sig we were after. I reckon we might have that 40-50% chance of pulling either of those deals off. Working in our favour is the fact that I suspect both players would be happy to return.

Called that one right then!

[cmonurz]

Relative to the spending of all other teams at the level we are playing at, we spend next to nothing, hence me using that phrase.

Net spend January 2013 (taken from the telegrpah website, doesn't include loans):

QPR £23m
Liverpool £20.5m
Newcastle £11m (+Mbabu)
Arsenal £8.5m
Manchester United £7m
Stoke £7m
Sunderland £6m
Southampton £4.2m
Spusr £4m
Everton £3m
Reading £3m
Aston Villa £1.6m
West Ham £0
Wigan £0
Everton £0
Fulham £??? (whatever Chris David, less Stephen Kelly)
Norwich -£200k
West Brom -£1.5m
Chelsea -£5m
Swansea -£5m
Manchester City -£22m

IF Sigurdsson had come off we would have been the third biggest net spenders in this window in the league.

Great, but a) I wasn't talking about net spend, but our preparedness to spend larger amounts on transfer fees than it seems we are, and b) one thing most of us agree on is that the squad we came up with was not fit for purpose - that necessitates a higher level of spending, and c) those figures don't include summer spending, where our decision not to buy proven players has left us short in January.

[PistolPete]

Relative to the spending of all other teams at the level we are playing at, we spend next to nothing, hence me using that phrase.

Net spend January 2013 (taken from the telegrpah website, doesn't include loans):

QPR £23m
Liverpool £20.5m
Newcastle £11m (+Mbabu)
Arsenal £8.5m
Manchester United £7m
Stoke £7m
Sunderland £6m
Southampton £4.2m
Spusr £4m
Everton £3m
Reading £3m
Aston Villa £1.6m
West Ham £0
Wigan £0
Everton £0
Fulham £??? (whatever Chris David, less Stephen Kelly)
Norwich -£200k
West Brom -£1.5m
Chelsea -£5m
Swansea -£5m
Manchester City -£22m

IF Sigurdsson had come off we would have been the third biggest net spenders in this window in the league.

Great, but a) I wasn't talking about net spend, but our preparedness to spend larger amounts on transfer fees than it seems we are, and b) one thing most of us agree on is that the squad we came up with was not fit for purpose - that necessitates a higher level of spending, and c) those figures don't include summer spending, where our decision not to buy proven players has left us short in January.

Fot for purpose?! What was the purpose? Entertain the fans? Put up a good fight? Qualify for Europe? At the moment we are 17th, which we ALL would have taken pre-season. Oh, and for the record, the is no such thing as a 'proven player' when a transfer is concerned. And just for the millionth time, a high transfer deficit does not equal success. Please ask a QPR fan if you need clarification...

[Royal Rother]

there is no such thing as a 'proven player' when a transfer is concerned

Spot on and, it seems, so easily forgotten.

Junior Hoilett anyone? Bosingwa? Zamora? Andy Johnson? Park Ji-Sung? Bothroyd?

[cmonurz]

Fot for purpose?! What was the purpose? Entertain the fans? Put up a good fight? Qualify for Europe? At the moment we are 17th, which we ALL would have taken pre-season. Oh, and for the record, the is no such thing as a 'proven player' when a transfer is concerned. And just for the millionth time, a high transfer deficit does not equal success. Please ask a QPR fan if you need clarification...

oh fcuking yawn.

For what purpose? To give us a better chance of staying up, what else?

[cmonurz]

there is no such thing as a 'proven player' when a transfer is concerned

Spot on and, it seems, so easily forgotten.

Junior Hoilett anyone? Bosingwa? Zamora? Andy Johnson? Park Ji-Sung? Bothroyd?

As has already been said, that seems to have manifested itself in our transfer policy as to simply not take risks, ever.

[ZacNaloen]

Our transfer policy is nothing but taking calculated risks