Alan Nixon transfer debacle 16/17

[Kernow]

2 hours ago, Arsene Titman said:

I think you'll find that it's some bloke putting 2 and 2 together and making 5 , and Nixon putting him right. It seems fashionable on here to rubbish Nixon ( e.g. The title of this thread) and I don't get it. He's not the messiah but he's always worth a read and he's clearly got some contacts. 

I wasn't slagging him off? I was just trying to explain why I think the tweet was posted on here...

[Arsene Titman]

10 minutes ago, Kernow said:

I wasn't slagging him off? I was just trying to explain why I think the tweet was posted on here...

Understood, Kernow , but there are plenty who do. Nixon will be wide of the mark on occasions but I don't see how it can be said that he talks total tosh. We are not party to what goes on behind the scenes at clubs-  many transfers don't happen and for a multitude of reasons . It would be daft to take everything he says as gospel but ,equally, I don't care for people (who are no more ITK than anyone else) dismissing what he says as total bilge

[Albert]

5 minutes ago, Arsene Titman said:

Nixon will be wide of the mark on occasions but I don't see how it can be said that he talks total tosh.

Maybe because he's, to my knowledge, never called a transfer involving us and a non-nominal transfer fee first? 

Last summers efforts by him were a symphony in failure.

[Philmycock]

47 minutes ago, Albert said:

Maybe because he's, to my knowledge, never called a transfer involving us and a non-nominal transfer fee first? 

Last summers efforts by him were a symphony in failure.

He just guesses. And people like Arsene Titman hang off his every word. Has he ever got one of ours first??

[Albert]

6 minutes ago, philmycock said:

He just guesses. And people like Arsene Titman hang off his every word. Has he ever got one of ours first??

The thing is that I only ever recall him calling a few loans (i.e. Wisdom and co.), a nominal fee or two (i.e. Mitchell) and backroom changes (i.e. Zuberbuhler). I can't recall him calling one transfer with anything beyond a nominal fee first, but I recall a whole heap of transfers he's called that have never gone anywhere, and never seemed to be going anywhere. What's more, is that when people who are well known for being ITK here have come out with things early, he's continued to deny them for longer (i.e. Thorne signing). Look, if he says we've got a new tea lady or kitman, I'd listen to him any day, but at this time he's bottom of the pile and living off a few loans called at a time of great excitement (for our transfers at least) and to me has always come across as a rumour merchant (here is a vague, bizarre rumours, read about it in the paper tomorrow). 

Anyhow, my RNG transfer predictor just came out with a bizarre deal in the works, it'll be in my paper tomorrow, The Srg. A* (the graphs on page 3). 

[Day]

Same old same old. Why open a Alan Nixon topic to moan he talks ****? Every single transfer window. Tedious. Beyond.

Scott Carson last season he called it.

Look at his Twitter feed, called loads for clubs, Kent the latest on loan from Liverpool

But oh wait, you have to ignore all loan moves as they are not real transfers are they. 

ffs ?

[Anag Ram]

In general this forum seems to include a lot of people who support the same team but otherwise don't like each other very much.

There's more tolerance at a Taleban gay wedding.

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, David said:

Same old same old. Why open a Alan Nixon topic to moan he talks ****? Every single transfer window. Tedious. Beyond.

Scott Carson last season he called it.

Look at his Twitter feed, called loads for clubs, Kent the latest on loan from Liverpool

But oh wait, you have to ignore all loan moves as they are not real transfers are they. 

ffs ?

Bit touchy ?

[SaintRam]

33 minutes ago, Anag Ram said:

In general this forum seems to include a lot of people who support the same team but otherwise don't like each other very much.

There's more tolerance at a Taleban gay wedding.

I'm assuming a Taleban is something implemented by a Bibliophobe?

[eddie]

7 minutes ago, SaintRam said:

I'm assuming a Taleban is something implemented by a Bibliophobe?

He'd tell you to book off for a start.

[Bris Vegas]

There is a reason Nixon writes and says what he does. He is being told these things by people at clubs, player agents or even directly from board members for a reason. 

He doesn't just sit there and invent a story himself for the Sun or the Mirror. They wouldn't let him do this, as popular sites such as Newsnow wouldn't use their content - they've banned sites before.

You may not believe what Nixon writes or says, but just remember he has been told this info for a reason.

There are a number of potential reasons why, such as agents looking to get their players on the market, or looking to get them a new contract at the club, or the club could be looking to drawe attention to a player in order to spark a bidding war etc.

 

[Albert]

3 hours ago, David said:

Same old same old. Why open a Alan Nixon topic to moan he talks ****? Every single transfer window. Tedious. Beyond.

Scott Carson last season he called it.

Look at his Twitter feed, called loads for clubs, Kent the latest on loan from Liverpool

But oh wait, you have to ignore all loan moves as they are not real transfers are they. 

ffs ?

Not scared of an good ol' strawman are ya Daveo? When did I ever say loans weren't "real transfers". What I said is that I don't recall him ever calling a player who came in for a proper fee for us, and at a strike rate of zero it's pretty clear why we shouldn't be hanging on his every word. Again, if he's calling a loan or a free/nominal fee signing, I'll stand right up and listen, if he's announced our next great groundsman, I'll listen, but a player with a fee attached... nah. There are only so many swings and misses that people should handle, and Nixon used up his quota several times per transfer window for a number of years now. 

I'm absolutely certain that he has some kind of contacts, I doubt he's just making things up, and I have no doubt he may be on point for other clubs, but the point is that if we're talking about a move with a fee involved for us, we've seen it enough times that the first reaction should be nothing but scepticism. 

As for Scott Carson, there was someone on here that called it before him to my knowledge, and I'm pretty sure SDSR was in before him too, not that he really fell in the "transfer with a proper fee" bracket; from what I heard it was a nominal fee for his transfer. 

I get Nixon is your pet twitter source, hence him being the one with his own thread, but at some point you've got to recognise that his strike rate is pretty abysmal for us. For the record though, it's not just the Nixon thread, Nixon rumours get this thread and their own most of the time. 

1 hour ago, Bris Vegas said:

There is a reason Nixon writes and says what he does. He is being told these things by people at clubs, player agents or even directly from board members for a reason. 

He doesn't just sit there and invent a story himself for the Sun or the Mirror. They wouldn't let him do this, as popular sites such as Newsnow wouldn't use their content - they've banned sites before.

You may not believe what Nixon writes or says, but just remember he has been told this info for a reason.

There are a number of potential reasons why, such as agents looking to get their players on the market, or looking to get them a new contract at the club, or the club could be looking to drawe attention to a player in order to spark a bidding war etc.

 

As I've said many times before, I have no doubt that he has sources. If he didn't, he wouldn't be able to call what he does. I just don't trust those sources for transfers involving actual fees for us, and that is based on watching his rumours long term.

Maybe there's a better way of putting what I don't like about it though. The ones he calls right, the things like loans, backroom staff and nominal/free transfers is that they happen quickly. Take Daveo's example of Carson (which again, I remember others calling first), from the time rumours surfaced to him signing? Pretty much instant, the same with most loans, backroom deals, etc. These are the transfers where there's a short turn around, and to be honest, not a lot of secrecy. The big ones that drag out though, the ones that get talked about on here for days, weeks, months, 400 pages of puns... Nope... The thing is, he bigs up, teases and builds up those ones, the ones that he hasn't called right for us, to sell papers. I get that's his job, but when we see it every transfer window with people getting excited, or worked up, or using it as their basis for all sorts of crazy hypotheses, it gets a bit annoying when people are always discussing Nixon as though he's at all accurate for those kinds of transfers. 

I don't know, I just get annoyed at people conflating "accurate when" with "always accurate".

[Day]

@Albert SDSR didn't join till January, 5 months after he signed. If it was said in another forum fair enough but can't see that being mentioned on here until Nixon called it.

Also not my "pet" source nor did I open this thread or approve, tbh I would open a new one for each player but there you go.

Gets very tiresome having to read through the same he's just a rumour merchant stuff every transfer window. This is the transfer talk board, 99% is from newspaper gossip columns that have such poor hit rates as well.

[Albert]

5 minutes ago, David said:

@Albert SDSR didn't join till January, 5 months after he signed. If it was said in another forum fair enough but can't see that being mentioned on here until Nixon called it.

Also not my "pet" source nor did I open this thread or approve, tbh I would open a new one for each player but there you go.

Gets very tiresome having to read through the same he's just a rumour merchant stuff every transfer window. This is the transfer talk board, 99% is from newspaper gossip columns that have such poor hit rates as well.

I'm going off memory, but I'm pretty sure the Carson rumours on here started before Nixon mentioned anything, and I heard something from the SDSR elsewhere around the same time, again before Nixon. The transfer was wrapped up quite quickly as well. 

It's worth pointing it out when I keep seeing people getting in a tizzy about "Nixon said it, must be something in it" when his strike rate for such transfers for us is no better than my RNG rumour mill. It's not about him having a terrible strike rate, it's about this odd cult of personality around him despite that poor strike rate.  

[Day]

4 minutes ago, Albert said:

I'm going off memory, but I'm pretty sure the Carson rumours on here started before Nixon mentioned anything, and I heard something from the SDSR elsewhere around the same time, again before Nixon. The transfer was wrapped up quite quickly as well. 

It's worth pointing it out when I keep seeing people getting in a tizzy about "Nixon said it, must be something in it" when his strike rate for such transfers for us is no better than my RNG rumour mill. It's not about him having a terrible strike rate, it's about this odd cult of personality around him despite that poor strike rate.  

Think it's more people don't just laugh it off as rubbish as Nixon said it. Read it, discuss if they'd like to see him at Derby, where would he fit in whilst remaining open minded to the possibility.

Every single newspaper has a poor strike rate, shall we remove this board and stop all discussions until it's been announced on the OS?

964 Topics in this board in the last 7 years. Not all are Nixon.

[Bris Vegas]

15 minutes ago, Albert said:

As I've said many times before, I have no doubt that he has sources. If he didn't, he wouldn't be able to call what he does. I just don't trust those sources for transfers involving actual fees for us, and that is based on watching his rumours long term.

Maybe there's a better way of putting what I don't like about it though. The ones he calls right, the things like loans, backroom staff and nominal/free transfers is that they happen quickly. Take Daveo's example of Carson (which again, I remember others calling first), from the time rumours surfaced to him signing? Pretty much instant, the same with most loans, backroom deals, etc. These are the transfers where there's a short turn around, and to be honest, not a lot of secrecy. The big ones that drag out though, the ones that get talked about on here for days, weeks, months, 400 pages of puns... Nope... The thing is, he bigs up, teases and builds up those ones, the ones that he hasn't called right for us, to sell papers. I get that's his job, but when we see it every transfer window with people getting excited, or worked up, or using it as their basis for all sorts of crazy hypotheses, it gets a bit annoying when people are always discussing Nixon as though he's at all accurate for those kinds of transfers. 

I don't know, I just get annoyed at people conflating "accurate when" with "always accurate".

The thing is, if you want pretty accurate stories your best bet is the BBC or Sky Sports. Even HITC are among the better ones as the exclusives are done by two renowned journalists.

The Sun and the Mirror are a mixed bag, and Nixon writes for both. They will no doubt get some right, but they are also used by agents/clubs/players etc. to stir stories and gain publicity.

Sky Sports and the BBC, while will never be 100% accurate as things in football change (both reported Jamie Vardy was heading to Arsenal before a change of heart), don't release stories for publicity. They want concrete stories only, which is good but it means their turnover in terms of articles published isn't anwhere near as big as say the Sun/Mirror/Daily Star as they avoid gossip pieces and hearsay.

Fans want to read stories, whether they are true or not, and that's where the Mirror/Sun come in. I doubt they have ever claimed to be an entirely accurate source, so people shouldn't take them as one.

Nixon is just doing his job, he ropes people in and gains the best publicity he can for his sites. I actually think he is very good at what he does, though I understand how he can rile up those wanting more accurate information.

 

 

[Day]

Here you go @Albert

 

[Albert]

1 minute ago, David said:

Think it's more people don't just laugh it off as rubbish as Nixon said it. Read it, discuss if they'd like to see him at Derby, where would he fit in whilst remaining open minded to the possibility.

Every single newspaper has a poor strike rate, shall we remove this board and stop all discussions until it's been announced on the OS?

964 Topics in this board in the last 7 years. Not all are Nixon.

I just don't think he deserves the special treatment he gets on here. 

Just now, Bris Vegas said:

The thing is, if you want pretty accurate stories your best bet is the BBC or Sky Sports. Even HITC are among the better ones as the exclusives are done by two renowned journalists.

The Sun and the Mirror are a mixed bag, and Nixon writes for both. They will no doubt get some right, but they are also used by agents/clubs/players etc. to stir stories and gain publicity.

Sky Sports and the BBC, while will never be 100% accurate as things in football change (both reported Jamie Vardy was heading to Arsenal before a change of heart), don't release stories for publicity. They want concrete stories only, which is good but it means their turnover in terms of articles published isn't anwhere near as big as say the Sun/Mirror/Daily Star as they avoid gossip pieces and hearsay.

Fans want to read stories, whether they are true or not, and that's where the Mirror/Sun come in. I doubt they have ever claimed to be an entirely accurate source, so people shouldn't take them as one.

Nixon is just doing his job, he ropes people in and gains the best publicity he can for his sites. I actually think he is very good at what he does, though I understand how he can rile up those wanting more accurate information.

 

 

Again, I have no issue with him having a poor strike rate. Most journalists do. I just have an issue with the high regard he's held in around here for those kinds of transfers, when he's not even called one before anyone else for us, at least none that I, nor anyone else here, seems to be able to suggest. We don't go around talking about anyone else by name on here, just the paper, and that's fine, it's just that there's this tendency of: "Bill Bob to Derby", "lol, from a rag, nothing to see here", "but it's Nixon", "HOLY MACKEREL!!! IT MUST BE HAPPENING!" It's not that he's inaccurate, most of them are, it's that there's undue weight given. 

[Albert]

8 minutes ago, David said:

Here you go @Albert

 

I'm uncertain of the relevance here. It's a list that gives Nixon as the source? Surely you'd link the thread on the forum.

As mentioned before though, he doesn't fit what I've been talking about either. He was a sudden, quick move for what I'm pretty sure was a nominal fee. For a long drawn out rumours with all the "bizarre" buildup with a proper fee involved. That one leaked like a sieve, heard it coming from multiple directions, Nixon included (and I'm pretty sure he wasn't the first). 

[Cam the Ram]

2 minutes ago, Albert said:

I just don't think he deserves the special treatment he gets on here. 

What special treatment does he get other than his own thread (which is surely helpful for the people who wish to ignore most of his rumours)? He tweets or writes about a rumour, it gets posted in here and people discuss it, no harm done to anyone.