PBW Ram Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 This place will lilkely be a bit doom and gloom over the next few hours, especially if the Shackell fee is confirmed at 1.1m. BUT..... NC said at the start of close season that our net spend would be neutral. No mention of having to cover losses on Maguire. So let's expect that we've only got 1.1m for shack, 250k for Maguire, if it's barnsley in for Bailey then he'l go for 500k max, davies a cautious 750k. I'm not counting on massive fees for Tyson if he goes and Addison, 150k for Miles with Nathan hanging on for a bit longer...just to keep it a nice round figure. By my reckoning thats 2.75m to spend. We got 9 players for that last summer. Keogh OR that lad Magnus O from colchester in at centre half, the young utility lad from bristol or crewe at left back cover and we'd still have enough to offer 1.5m plus for the loan of Maynard, or the signing of Fryatt or of Waghorn or of Salmon.. I'd take that now. For the record I would not have sold shackell but again I'll say I'm really looking forward to seeing who comes in and how they fit. I think his targets must be pretty secure if he's shifting Shackell to bring them in.. and I do think it would have been NC's decision to sell Shackell to fund the other signings. If he wasn't getting the cash from the board then there was no other way to do it. It's a ballsy decision and one which I'm sure he knows, he has to have got it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martyn Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 So let's expect that we've only got 1.1m for shack, 250k for Maguire, if it's barnsley in for Bailey then he'l go for 500k max, davies a cautious 750k. I'm not counting on massive fees for Tyson if he goes and Addison, 150k for Miles with Nathan hanging on for a bit longer...just to keep it a nice round figure. By my reckoning thats 2.75m to spend. Don't forget we've already bought Jacobs out of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBW Ram Posted July 4, 2012 Author Share Posted July 4, 2012 I did count him in that total but of course it's total guess work from me Martyn!! Just thought I'd try to get a thread in that wasn't going to have us all off the edge of a cliff. I'm thinking either keogh at 600k or that Magnus fella free, Jacobs 500k (?) either of the two young left backs at 150k(?) then BOOM. We shpunt the rest on any combination of TWO strikers loan or permanent. Surely there's got to be a pleasant surpirse or two around the corner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Teale Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 Has clough ever mentioned Keogh? Ive not heard anything offical or even in the DET about us going for him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RhodesTheRam Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 The barnsley fans reckon the have a sell on clause so even if he does for 1.1mill then we won't get that much for him either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 This place will lilkely be a bit doom and gloom over the next few hours, especially if the Shackell fee is confirmed at 1.1m. BUT..... NC said at the start of close season that our net spend would be neutral. No mention of having to cover losses on Maguire. So let's expect that we've only got 1.1m for shack, 250k for Maguire, if it's barnsley in for Bailey then he'l go for 500k max, davies a cautious 750k. I'm not counting on massive fees for Tyson if he goes and Addison, 150k for Miles with Nathan hanging on for a bit longer...just to keep it a nice round figure. By my reckoning thats 2.75m to spend. We got 9 players for that last summer. Keogh OR that lad Magnus O from colchester in at centre half, the young utility lad from bristol or crewe at left back cover and we'd still have enough to offer 1.5m plus for the loan of Maynard, or the signing of Fryatt or of Waghorn or of Salmon.. I'd take that now. For the record I would not have sold shackell but again I'll say I'm really looking forward to seeing who comes in and how they fit. I think his targets must be pretty secure if he's shifting Shackell to bring them in.. and I do think it would have been NC's decision to sell Shackell to fund the other signings. If he wasn't getting the cash from the board then there was no other way to do it. It's a ballsy decision and one which I'm sure he knows, he has to have got it right. what makes you think that we will get 750k Davies and 500k for Bailey, both of whom are on the transfer list, we have argubably just sold our best defender for 1.1M, and we wasnt one the list. Even if you assumed the 2.75m was available and was availble to reinvest, you think we will break our wage structure to bring the likes of Salmon in, and in the unlikely event we did, why would they want to come here ? The only message we are giving out, is that we are a club treading water at best, any player with ambition wont join us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 Sorry but your calculations are simply wrong, with Davies we have no bargaining chips he wants to go and his contract is soon up. Hussey will not go for 700k, they rejected an 800k bid from Cardiff, a million would be needed. Again why would bailey go for 500k? on the transfer list and he hasn't done anything special. Considering we have to replace our joint top striker, our two best center backs 1 sold 1 injured, a replacement for green who was a versatile midfielder who could cover anywhere, a left back to cover for roberts and a center midfielder there are a lot of bases to cover. We are looking at 2 million maximum with little wages to offer and it doesn't look good. The strikers you cite how would we afford their wages? even on loan we would be expected to cover a proportion of their wages and with our wage budget being tight then i doubt we could afford these. How many goals has waghorn and salmon scored in this division? the answer is waghorn not many and salmon did it in the scottish premier division and has flopped at wigan. Essentially for 2 million possibly less we have got to buy the core of our first team which are the keys to keeping us up and pushing on. It is a ballsy decision but an idiotic one from clough, if he thinks he can 'improve' the team on what we had in place for 2 million and little wages then he is living in cloud cuckoo land as far as I am concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBW Ram Posted July 4, 2012 Author Share Posted July 4, 2012 Sorry but your calculations are simply wrong, with Davies we have no bargaining chips he wants to go and his contract is soon up. Hussey will not go for 700k, they rejected an 800k bid from Cardiff, a million would be needed. Again why would bailey go for 500k? on the transfer list and he hasn't done anything special. Considering we have to replace our joint top striker, our two best center backs 1 sold 1 injured, a replacement for green who was a versatile midfielder who could cover anywhere, a left back to cover for roberts and a center midfielder there are a lot of bases to cover. We are looking at 2 million maximum with little wages to offer and it doesn't look good. The strikers you cite how would we afford their wages? even on loan we would be expected to cover a proportion of their wages and with our wage budget being tight then i doubt we could afford these. How many goals has waghorn and salmon scored in this division? the answer is waghorn not many and salmon did it in the scottish premier division and has flopped at wigan. Essentially for 2 million possibly less we have got to buy the core of our first team which are the keys to keeping us up and pushing on. It is a ballsy decision but an idiotic one from clough, if he thinks he can 'improve' the team on what we had in place for 2 million and little wages then he is living in cloud cuckoo land as far as I am concerned. 1) How do you know? 2) who is hussey - do you mean keogh? 3) we've alraeady got him it's Jacobs. 4) on the strikers coming in I'm allowing myself to dream a little bit. I saw a stupid rumour that Maynard was done and dusted this week and I've got carried away with that. I like the look of Waghorn, when he was first at Leicester he scored all types of goals, brave, spectacular, headed, left and right footed, he looked to have everything. We've been after fryatt for ages and Conor Salmon has looked very useful the few times I saw him play for Wigan, his general play was really good even though he missed a couple of chances. he might need to come down a level to find his feet. You say it's as far as you are concerned YR. You don't know what's going to happen but you've already judged it wont work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trekkie_ram Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 We won't get a fee for Addison, he'll move on a free. We surely didn't make a significant loss on Maguires transfer fee, the loss was paying him a years wage and not using him. Any Barnsley interest in Shackell will almost certainly be a % of profit, not a % of fee. So we will make money (albeit not much). I'd definitely like to see more names mentioned as incoming, but I suspect Nigel has already been in touch with a few clubs about a few players, and the replacement for Shackell will arrive soon after the departure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBW Ram Posted July 4, 2012 Author Share Posted July 4, 2012 what makes you think that we will get 750k Davies and 500k for Bailey, both of whom are on the transfer list, we have argubably just sold our best defender for 1.1M, and we wasnt one the list. Even if you assumed the 2.75m was available and was availble to reinvest, you think we will break our wage structure to bring the likes of Salmon in, and in the unlikely event we did, why would they want to come here ? The only message we are giving out, is that we are a club treading water at best, any player with ambition wont join us. I could be wrong of course but I don't think it will be by much. Strikers always go for more money than defenders, Davies has got a record of 23 goals in 55 starts since he joined Derby, so if he's fit he'll score goals. I think we want a million for him but we'll settle for pretty much anything between 650 and 750. Bailey, I think half a million for him is about right, maybe 450k. I';d say we paid 300k for him as part of the deal from Crewe (Brayford was definitely the main signing of the two) . He's young, he's english and he can spot a pass. I DONT THINK WE SHOULD BE SELLING HIM JUST YET. As it seems we are then I'd hope for close to 500k. That's just my opinion though. What do two you think we'll get for the pair of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBW Ram Posted July 4, 2012 Author Share Posted July 4, 2012 Sorry but your calculations are simply wrong, with Davies we have no bargaining chips he wants to go and his contract is up soon His contract is up in 12 months. We don't HAVE to let him leave, If he wants to leave so badly he can forego his signing on fee, at his age over a 3 year deal he'd probably get 150k as a signing bonus. If Jewell is in charge of the terms then maybe more. Let them keep the signing on fee it if he wants out, the other club can add it onto our fee and Steve can leave quicker. I'd say that's a fairly strong bargaining chip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 I could be wrong of course but I don't think it will be by much. Strikers always go for more money than defenders, Davies has got a record of 23 goals in 55 starts since he joined Derby, so if he's fit he'll score goals. I think we want a million for him but we'll settle for pretty much anything between 650 and 750. Bailey, I think half a million for him is about right, maybe 450k. I';d say we paid 300k for him as part of the deal from Crewe (Brayford was definitely the main signing of the two) . He's young, he's english and he can spot a pass. I DONT THINK WE SHOULD BE SELLING HIM JUST YET. As it seems we are then I'd hope for close to 500k. That's just my opinion though. What do two you think we'll get for the pair of them? I would be suprised if we got 750k for the pair, simply because that once you put someone on the transfer list, its a buyers market, and the interest in them has not been forthcoming. Taking out the equation what we did or didnt get for Shackell, Bailey is a player that couldnt get into a mid table Div 1 team last year, and Davies only has 12 months of his contract left along with a injury record. Hope im wrong though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 His contract is up in 12 months. We don't HAVE to let him leave, If he wants to leave so badly he can forego his signing on fee, at his age over a 3 year deal he'd probably get 150k as a signing bonus. If Jewell is in charge of the terms then maybe more. Let them keep the signing on fee it if he wants out, the other club can add it onto our fee and Steve can leave quicker. I'd say that's a fairly strong bargaining chip. I wouldn't since all that will happen is that he will rot in the reserves. Even Glick has said in the fans forum that we are limited in what we can bargain for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 1) How do you know? 2) who is hussey - do you mean keogh? 3) we've alraeady got him it's Jacobs. 4) on the strikers coming in I'm allowing myself to dream a little bit. I saw a stupid rumour that Maynard was done and dusted this week and I've got carried away with that. I like the look of Waghorn, when he was first at Leicester he scored all types of goals, brave, spectacular, headed, left and right footed, he looked to have everything. We've been after fryatt for ages and Conor Salmon has looked very useful the few times I saw him play for Wigan, his general play was really good even though he missed a couple of chances. he might need to come down a level to find his feet. You say it's as far as you are concerned YR. You don't know what's going to happen but you've already judged it wont work. 1) Because they are widely optimistic based on the supposition a team will pay 750k for a player soon to be out of contract who no longer wants to play for us and 500k for bailey who is on the transfer list, again widely optimistic. 2) Fair point, 3) Jacobs isn't a replacement for green, Jacobs is a right sided midfielder, green was primarily a center mid who was versatile and could play anywhere jacobs is nothing like this. 4) you failed to answer my question, how many goals did they score? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackNwhites Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 It'll all be rate in't mornin'. We don't know who we're getting in yet, barring Jacobs. Patience is key, as it has been for the last 4 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 While I do not know who we are going to exactly sign, I don't see how improvements can be made on this wage and transfer budget and to let go your captain for pittance strikes me as an absurd decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBW Ram Posted July 4, 2012 Author Share Posted July 4, 2012 Sorry YR, I thought it was one of those questions that you asked becasue you already knew the answer. Waghorn has got 19 goals in 45 starts at this level. Conor Salmon has never played at this level. He got one in 21 for Wigan. I dont know how many of those 21 apps were starts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBW Ram Posted July 4, 2012 Author Share Posted July 4, 2012 1) Because they are widely optimistic based on the supposition a team will pay 750k for a player soon to be out of contract who no longer wants to play for us and 500k for bailey who is on the transfer list, again widely optimistic. 2) Fair point, 3) Jacobs isn't a replacement for green, Jacobs is a right sided midfielder, green was primarily a center mid who was versatile and could play anywhere jacobs is nothing like this. 4) you failed to answer my question, how many goals did they score? Not for us he wasn't. Primarily he was "doing a job" as a ride sided midfielder or as cover at right back, neither of which were his natural position. We got better central midfieders than him when we signed Bryson and threw Jeff in at the deep end. We got better "natural" cover at right back when we gave Tom Naylor a chance. We only needed to replace him as a right sided midfielder, and we did that with Jacobs (and possibly hughes?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 Not for us he wasn't. Primarily he was "doing a job" as a ride sided midfielder or as cover at right back, neither of which were his natural position. We got better central midfieders than him when we signed Bryson and threw Jeff in at the deep end. We got better "natural" cover at right back when we gave Tom Naylor a chance. We only needed to replace him as a right sided midfielder, and we did that with Jacobs (and possibly hughes?) He certainly acted as cover for our center midfield when we needed it and also who is going to play on the left wing of midfield? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 Sorry YR, I thought it was one of those questions that you asked becasue you already knew the answer. Waghorn has got 19 goals in 45 starts at this level. Conor Salmon has never played at this level. He got one in 21 for Wigan. I dont know how many of those 21 apps were starts. It's okay I am not so hot on football stats in honesty 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.