TeaCider's Summer Transfer Thread 2022 - AKA: Still Going For Just a Little Luongo

[Smogzilla 7,484]

https://ghanasoccernet.com/middlesbrough-reading-paok-fc-and-augsburg-approach-chelsea-to-sign-ghana-defender-baba-rahman?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

 

Linked to Baba Rahman AGAIN

[Foxtrot Oscar Colin 607]

4 minutes ago, Smogzilla said:

https://ghanasoccernet.com/middlesbrough-reading-paok-fc-and-augsburg-approach-chelsea-to-sign-ghana-defender-baba-rahman?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

 

Linked to Baba Rahman AGAIN

Lazy journalism?

[Neverbefore 10,942]

6 minutes ago, Smogzilla said:

https://ghanasoccernet.com/middlesbrough-reading-paok-fc-and-augsburg-approach-chelsea-to-sign-ghana-defender-baba-rahman?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

 

Linked to Baba Rahman AGAIN

How is he still a Chelsea player

[Will 2,958]

15 minutes ago, Smogzilla said:

https://ghanasoccernet.com/middlesbrough-reading-paok-fc-and-augsburg-approach-chelsea-to-sign-ghana-defender-baba-rahman?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

 

Linked to Baba Rahman AGAIN

Was good for Reading when he played last year, would be alright with this.

[Rob 4,505]

21 minutes ago, Foxtrot Oscar Colin said:

This is the biggest problem at the club for the last decade or so. We buy players to suit managers instead of appointing managers that suit our model and what we are trying to achieve. We desperately need to settle on a strategy of how we want to look as a club and play on the pitch and recruit managers and players to suit that. We're never going to achieve any long term consistency and success by chopping and changing everything every 2 or 3 years. Once wilder is gone eventually I really hope Scott can implement something in this regard. Personally I'd be doing all I could to bring mogga in as DOF when wilder eventually leaves. 

never going to get away from that problem as most managers will want to implement their own style, want their own players and how can you predict who your next manager will be and when they will be the manager to have the right players for him, in an ideal world that would be the case but even if we did manage to pull it off, the next manager still is going to have players he wants to retain and those that are no good to him, at the time most managers are brought in with a view to them being here long term and not chopping and changing every few years, but results and fans often dictate the need for the change, and when a club is in a situation where the sack is given then they always going to be players who are out of favour regardless if they were bought inline with the clubs long term vision or if just bought to suit the managers short term plans

[ManBearPig 1,853]

I mean if we are selling for a loss, why not just keep him as a squad player? It’s not like he’s absolute garbage is it? There is definitely a player in there. 
 

I posted it ages ago about the link for the gazette on when we signed him, but can’t for the life of me find it. But in that I’m sure it said that all people were delighted to sign him? But I can’t remember the exact quote. 
 

Just goes to show that what is posted by the Gazette isn’t the truth and is just a mouth piece for the club (which we probably all knew anyway). 
 

I mean, it’s Gibsons club after all but *** me, stick to the method. 5m wasted when we could have used that else where 🤦🏼‍♂️ 

We are a mess aren’t we 🤣

 

[Foxtrot Oscar Colin 607]

11 minutes ago, Rob said:

never going to get away from that problem as most managers will want to implement their own style, want their own players and how can you predict who your next manager will be and when they will be the manager to have the right players for him, in an ideal world that would be the case but even if we did manage to pull it off, the next manager still is going to have players he wants to retain and those that are no good to him, at the time most managers are brought in with a view to them being here long term and not chopping and changing every few years, but results and fans often dictate the need for the change, and when a club is in a situation where the sack is given then they always going to be players who are out of favour regardless if they were bought inline with the clubs long term vision or if just bought to suit the managers short term plans

I don't agree. There will always be the odd player who will be out the door when a new manager comes in and the odd tactical tweak due to new signings but you pick your manager based on how he has his teams playing and how adaptable he is to coaching a team in your style and getting the best out of the players currently at the club. Then you don't have as high a turnover of players and you become more organised as a club. There are plenty of teams that do this and have become more successful by doing it. Our issue is we lurch from one playing style to another and have wasted so much money on players that aren't suitable for the new managers and its been a bit of a car crash for a long time now.

[Will 2,958]

17 minutes ago, Rob said:

never going to get away from that problem as most managers will want to implement their own style, want their own players and how can you predict who your next manager will be and when they will be the manager to have the right players for him, in an ideal world that would be the case but even if we did manage to pull it off, the next manager still is going to have players he wants to retain and those that are no good to him, at the time most managers are brought in with a view to them being here long term and not chopping and changing every few years, but results and fans often dictate the need for the change, and when a club is in a situation where the sack is given then they always going to be players who are out of favour regardless if they were bought inline with the clubs long term vision or if just bought to suit the managers short term plans

Plenty of clubs manage it. For all they are mocked, Watford know the type of manager they want who won't just rip up the plan and start over every time. Swansea have a clear identity and pick managers that suit that. Brentford have the same. I could name more but I think that shows that it is possible. You don't need to know who the next manager will be or when we will need to change manager if you have a clear identity and find a manager to fit that. Managers are far cheaper to chop and change than players, that's just a fact. For some reason we as a club seem to enjoy doing both, scrap the manager and then allow the new guy to just sell half the squad and spend a load of money bringing "their" players in.

[Foxtrot Oscar Colin 607]

In all fairness with Payero he's not had a chance to prove anything he's not had a run of games and he hasn't been fit. His performances were getting better as the season was progressing when he did get on the pitch. Its a signing that hasn't worked out but to label it as a bad signing due to him not being good enough is unfounded and imo untrue. I'd hesitantly say whoever scouted him based on his ability was correct as I believe he has the ability to be a good player at this level but as far as his attitude, commitment and ability to stay fit well that's maybe that's where we could havw failed here but even that is speculation.

I mean we could have sent Hamilton Ricard back to Colombia after he looked like a donkey for a few months in the old div1 thinking he won't hit a barn door in the prem but it's a bloody good job we never. Some Foreign players need more than one injury hit season to adapt.

Edited June 7, 2022 by Foxtrot Oscar Colin

[ScarBoro 857]

19 minutes ago, ManBearPig said:

I mean if we are selling for a loss, why not just keep him as a squad player? It’s not like he’s absolute garbage is it? There is definitely a player in there. 
 

I posted it ages ago about the link for the gazette on when we signed him, but can’t for the life of me find it. But in that I’m sure it said that all people were delighted to sign him? But I can’t remember the exact quote. 
 

Just goes to show that what is posted by the Gazette isn’t the truth and is just a mouth piece for the club (which we probably all knew anyway). 
 

I mean, it’s Gibsons club after all but *** me, stick to the method. 5m wasted when we could have used that else where 🤦🏼‍♂️ 

We are a mess aren’t we 🤣

 

Why not keep him as a squad player? Well, even if we only get half of what we paid for him, depending on what we actually did pay, that is a good sum of money we can use to buy someone else. We also save his wages, though they were maybe not huge. If Wilder really doesn’t want to play him, far better to spend the money on a player he is willing to play, even if that player is only a squad member, or to pay a couple of free transfers their wages. No point in throwing good money after bad.

[DurhamRed 2,047]

I'm sure Gibson doesn't watch Banfield religiously someone from scouting team will of presented the case and he said yes to it

[Riverside94 962]

Has it been said as a fact that we are selling Payero at a loss?

[Tom 2,492]

2 minutes ago, Riverside94 said:

Has it been said as a fact that we are selling Payero at a loss?

No, but when has that ever stopped people on this board getting their knickers in a twist over it?

[nunthorpered 1,922]

4 minutes ago, DurhamRed said:

I'm sure Gibson doesn't watch Banfield religiously someone from scouting team will of presented the case and he said yes to it

He has a direct feed to the tontine for the weekend games i think...

[Foogle 2,104]

2 minutes ago, Riverside94 said:

Has it been said as a fact that we are selling Payero at a loss?

We'd be sending him out to develop in a place he feels comfortable and to get some game time after missing most of the year. Doubt we've made a decision beyond that, its a wise decision from my point of view as he'd be back near the start of our season in October hopefully refreshed and match fit, like a competitive pre-season for him.

Personally I think that makes more sense than making a homesick lad do preseason with us when he still needs to develop to get first team football. People are acting like he's a lost cause for some reason.