Dan's Summer Transfer Thread. Aka: " Post Mortem Time""

[BelgianBoro 765]

4 minutes ago, mendieta420 said:

So who is replacing Saville?

Does he need replacing? 

[Mr_Maz 2,899]

3 minutes ago, Johnmfc81 said:

Yes you can tell Warnock doesn't want him, in one of his interviews when asked about Leo he said something along the lines of he's good at giving the subs instructions before they come on.. with one of his sarcastic looking smiles.

He actually  said Leo was as good as he's seen at getting subs ready 

[Brunners 7,981]

19 minutes ago, HolgateBoy said:

Could be quite a decent signing this, we needed more height and presence in the middle, and he chips in with a few goals/assists too. Though, does this now mean Wing will be out the door next?

Wonder if this is one of those swap deals NW was talking about.

9 minutes ago, Mfcdanny said:

They only got to see wing in a handful of games. We all thought he was gonna be class when he 1st came through. But the more you watch from him makes you realise he’s average at best 

Or the more you watch of him the more you realise he's just not suited to the way our midfield plays. He was excellent at Rotherham when he went there & he was excellent that first season for us. That suggests to me it's a fit problem, not a talent one.

[Mr_Maz 2,899]

4 minutes ago, Brunners said:

Wonder if this is one of those swap deals NW was talking about.

Or the more you watch of him the more you realise he's just not suited to the way our midfield plays. He was excellent at Rotherham when he went there & he was excellent that first season for us. That suggests to me it's a fit problem, not a talent one.

didn;t Morsy say that the midfield was all about winning second balls? which is not exactly Wings strong point

[BoroJake 2,345]

I wonder how much we have spent on crooks. I think Rotherham wanted 1 million didn’t they?

[TheJew 2,937]

15 minutes ago, Mr_Maz said:

He actually  said Leo was as good as he's seen at getting subs ready 

A good old chest beat will do that, I guess.

[Mr_Maz 2,899]

1 minute ago, BoroJake said:

I wonder how much we have spent on crooks. I think Rotherham wanted 1 million didn’t they?

someone on the other forum said 750k

[TheJew 2,937]

16 minutes ago, Brunners said:

Wonder if this is one of those swap deals NW was talking about.

Or the more you watch of him the more you realise he's just not suited to the way our midfield plays. He was excellent at Rotherham when he went there & he was excellent that first season for us. That suggests to me it's a fit problem, not a talent one.

Play him as a number 10 or head of a 3 and he is great 

[wilsoncgp 9,276]

16 hours ago, SzilardNemethsCurtains said:

Not people to make their own conclusions or hear something from an anonymous source then state as fact

Deliver a view using facts, it's not hard

Actually, it is hard. As p_mards has shown, which you have accepted, the information that is pushed out of the club about how it is actually run behind the scenes, the facts about it, they are delivered at the club's and thus Gibson's behest, in a manner that they see fit. Woodgate's appointment is the perfect example of why it is so hard to build a case based on legitimate, provable facts as there are so few actually available.

[SzilardNemethsCurtains 2,844]

3 minutes ago, wilsoncgp said:

Actually, it is hard. As p_mards has shown, which you have accepted, the information that is pushed out of the club about how it is actually run behind the scenes, the facts about it, they are delivered at the club's and thus Gibson's behest, in a manner that they see fit. Woodgate's appointment is the perfect example of why it is so hard to build a case based on legitimate, provable facts as there are so few actually available.

The thing is I don't disagree at all, my point though is we don't need to be as bad and make our own narrative.

I tend to think all the things we know for a fact are bad enough, i.e. awful relationships with players, poor recruitment, cronyism, bad relationships with other clubs/agents and an inability to create a long term plan. An example I will use for conjecture is adding into it that he's some kind of dictatorial figure who buys his own players which seems to be a bit of a stretch. I do see how quotes in isolation can support the theory but others contradict, I don't intend to be argumentative or contradictory but I'd like us to be better than the club when it comes to holding them to account

Characters such as Karanka and Warnock would not just accept that too and AK surely would have spoke of it after his sacking. If I have missed that, then apologies

[DurhamRed 2,046]

Um not too sure about crooks if being honest mpanzu looked better he better still be coming 

[SzilardNemethsCurtains 2,844]

1 hour ago, Brunners said:

Wonder if this is one of those swap deals NW was talking about.

Or the more you watch of him the more you realise he's just not suited to the way our midfield plays. He was excellent at Rotherham when he went there & he was excellent that first season for us. That suggests to me it's a fit problem, not a talent one.

Agree with that but I think he did suffer from burnout too and for a player of his mould that's fairly stark to his performances. I do hope we keep him

[SzilardNemethsCurtains 2,844]

Anyone else happy that it looks to be Crooks over Mpanzu? Pelly didn't stand out for me in the few games I have seen whilst Crooks played a big part in both games albeit as a pantomime villain in the second fixture

[SzilardNemethsCurtains 2,844]

1 hour ago, BelgianBoro said:

Does he need replacing? 

Our second top goalscorer wasn't he? Involved in 10 goals

[RiversideRed 1,216]