| furlong 10:33 - Jul 22 with 36956 views | LowerloftLad |
looks like he could be going to west brom for a fee of 1.5mill didnt see that deal on the cards |  |
| |  |
| furlong on 12:32 - Jul 22 with 2301 views | Antti_Heinola |
| furlong on 12:04 - Jul 22 by DejR_vu |
Fair enough Antti, you think it's a good deal, I think it's another in a long line of failures. Different opinions I guess.
What I do think is beyond dispute is that we're in a right old mess and things seem to be getting worse, not better. |
I didn't say it was a good deal. i said it's a fair price for the player. A small distinction, but an important one. Would I sell him? No. But clearly we need to sell. We're not selling to finance Warbs' buys necessarily, we're selling to plug a black hole left by parachute payments ending - the club might simply have to raise £10m - £5m Freeman, £400k Smith, £3m Mass, £2m Furlong. I don't like it any more than you do, but we've all been reading Clive's pieces for years on the finances for ages and i find it weird some people are shocked we're 'in a right old mess'.
Of course we are - we just lost the last parachute payments.
I mean, it is horrible. But you've got people who genuinely think we could afford Charlie Austin, or people who genuinely think we could afford Knockaert (!) at one end of the scale, and those people are going to be forever angry because they are living in a dreamworld - perhaos they're younger fans whose first real memory of us is the transfer windows 6 or 7 years ago, not walking to Brentford to raise money for the club 18 years ago, or watching our best players systematically sold off 25 years ago.
Then you have people who are more realistic, but still angry at losing a good young player for around £2m. This is more valid, and I have a foot in that camp, but at the same time it's a natural consequence of the constraints of FFP. People are saying we're bringing a lot in, but we've lost Freeman, Bids, Cameron, Hemed, Wells, Lynch, likely Mass and Smith. I mean, you look at that and it's almost all our senior pros from last season isn't it? They have to be replaced somehow. And if selling Furs for £2m helps us get two new ones in, or maybe gives us the extra leeway to land a striker we want, then it might be a tough call that needs to be taken.
I'm not happy about it, I'm not happy about this pre-season, I suspect we're way under-cooked, we're lacking firepower big time (that should change this week) and I strongly think we're in for a hiding on the opening day, in the same way I saw the thrashing at West Brom from a mile off (and, embarrassed to say, made a fair few quid off it). But objectively, £2m seems a fair price!
On the other hand, it's potentially a great move for Furs. |  |
| |
| furlong on 12:33 - Jul 22 with 2289 views | davman |
| furlong on 11:41 - Jul 22 by RblockPrior |
People need to remember we will be heavily reliant on a 37 year old RB who imo will definitely not start more than 20 games this season, add to that Kakay is league 1 at best we have put ourselves in a state where we are now short in another position or we play someone out of position. We are screwed this season, having £100 on us to be relegated at 4/1 |
Forget the fact that we need to make money, forget the fact that he is "one of our own", but what I really do not get is the model is a conveyer belt of talent. One gets off at the top end (sold for a profit) and a cheap one gets on at the start of the belt ready to move along.
The replacement is hardly going to be sold for a profit and is hardly likely to stay injury free for the season.
I popped on to the Internet to see if my mild panic could be allayed by a striker signing and I see this news. Anyone explain how I can sell this as "it'll be OK" to my son tonight when I speak to him?
Josh Scowen or Dom Ball at Right Back is a disaster waiting to happen.
It's going to be a shocking 9 months, isn't it?
Ipswich Mark II. |  |
| |
| furlong on 12:33 - Jul 22 with 2285 views | Hayesender |
Got a horrible feeling we could turn into this season's Ipswich. No wonder I drink |  |
| |
| furlong on 12:37 - Jul 22 with 2244 views | francisbowles |
| furlong on 12:10 - Jul 22 by ElHoop |
Very good concise posting.
If we must always accept any offer for a player then we don't have a future. We will never produce enough Championship quality players to survive if we only get a few million from our sales. We need to keep enough of the players worth only a million or two to build a solid platform upon which more 'valuable' players can grow and bloom. Cash in on those valuable players when they come along, but keep the solid base. Without that there's only relegation and misery ahead. |
and if we keep them and fail profit and sustainability, then we get a points deduction and the r word is even more likely! |  | | |
| furlong on 12:42 - Jul 22 with 2188 views | DejR_vu |
| furlong on 12:32 - Jul 22 by Antti_Heinola |
I didn't say it was a good deal. i said it's a fair price for the player. A small distinction, but an important one. Would I sell him? No. But clearly we need to sell. We're not selling to finance Warbs' buys necessarily, we're selling to plug a black hole left by parachute payments ending - the club might simply have to raise £10m - £5m Freeman, £400k Smith, £3m Mass, £2m Furlong. I don't like it any more than you do, but we've all been reading Clive's pieces for years on the finances for ages and i find it weird some people are shocked we're 'in a right old mess'.
Of course we are - we just lost the last parachute payments.
I mean, it is horrible. But you've got people who genuinely think we could afford Charlie Austin, or people who genuinely think we could afford Knockaert (!) at one end of the scale, and those people are going to be forever angry because they are living in a dreamworld - perhaos they're younger fans whose first real memory of us is the transfer windows 6 or 7 years ago, not walking to Brentford to raise money for the club 18 years ago, or watching our best players systematically sold off 25 years ago.
Then you have people who are more realistic, but still angry at losing a good young player for around £2m. This is more valid, and I have a foot in that camp, but at the same time it's a natural consequence of the constraints of FFP. People are saying we're bringing a lot in, but we've lost Freeman, Bids, Cameron, Hemed, Wells, Lynch, likely Mass and Smith. I mean, you look at that and it's almost all our senior pros from last season isn't it? They have to be replaced somehow. And if selling Furs for £2m helps us get two new ones in, or maybe gives us the extra leeway to land a striker we want, then it might be a tough call that needs to be taken.
I'm not happy about it, I'm not happy about this pre-season, I suspect we're way under-cooked, we're lacking firepower big time (that should change this week) and I strongly think we're in for a hiding on the opening day, in the same way I saw the thrashing at West Brom from a mile off (and, embarrassed to say, made a fair few quid off it). But objectively, £2m seems a fair price!
On the other hand, it's potentially a great move for Furs. |
Well, I'm certainly not shocked we're in a right old mess, hence why I suggested it's something we can all agree on.
I guess where we differ is that I think, given the market, the fee being mentioned for Furlong is low, and I think that is a realistic view, and as such I'm annoyed by it. Whereas you seem to be suggesting, unless I've misinterpreted, that my view is unrealistic and I'm getting irrationally angry. I'm certainly not one of those who's ever mentioned Austin.
I'm well aware of the situation we're in, but I am angry that we're in it and continue to slide towards the abyss. We've got owners who haven't a clue, who gave the keys to the safe to two charlatans, and then asked a novice to clear up the mess. Everyone makes mistakes, we just seem to keep making them and then making things worse. If this is the future, we have no future. | |
| |
| furlong on 12:43 - Jul 22 with 2176 views | ozexile |
When you look at a club our size it seems now we should be in the division below and FFP will send us there.
I still can't believe a group of clubs haven't got together to challenge FFP. Us being one of them. | | | |
| furlong on 12:45 - Jul 22 with 2149 views | Match82 |
Assuming this happens, will this be the first time we've got some money for someone that has come through our youth academy and played a decent number of games for the first team since...Langley? Have I missed someone? |  | | |
| furlong on 12:47 - Jul 22 with 2131 views | DejR_vu |
| furlong on 12:43 - Jul 22 by ozexile |
When you look at a club our size it seems now we should be in the division below and FFP will send us there.
I still can't believe a group of clubs haven't got together to challenge FFP. Us being one of them. |
We're told we had the casting vote. Then we were hit with a world-record fine. And now we're trying to sell anything that isn't nailed own. You really couldn't make it up. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| furlong on 12:51 - Jul 22 with 2090 views | ridethewave |
If this is to be the state of our club, I'd rather gamble on promotion. We won't last long in this division conducting business like this anyway. |  | | |
| furlong on 12:55 - Jul 22 with 2058 views | Gloucs_R |
We've just brought a young lad in for free from Liverpool who was highly rated. So isn't this a case of one in one out?
£1.5m and assuming we have a sell on clause included, I think it's quite a good deal. |  |
| |
| furlong on 12:56 - Jul 22 with 2050 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| furlong on 12:43 - Jul 22 by ozexile |
When you look at a club our size it seems now we should be in the division below and FFP will send us there.
I still can't believe a group of clubs haven't got together to challenge FFP. Us being one of them. |
Most of the clubs voted for it in the first place.
FFP is a good thing, just not applied fairly. |  | | |
| furlong on 13:01 - Jul 22 with 2003 views | Antti_Heinola |
| furlong on 12:42 - Jul 22 by DejR_vu |
Well, I'm certainly not shocked we're in a right old mess, hence why I suggested it's something we can all agree on.
I guess where we differ is that I think, given the market, the fee being mentioned for Furlong is low, and I think that is a realistic view, and as such I'm annoyed by it. Whereas you seem to be suggesting, unless I've misinterpreted, that my view is unrealistic and I'm getting irrationally angry. I'm certainly not one of those who's ever mentioned Austin.
I'm well aware of the situation we're in, but I am angry that we're in it and continue to slide towards the abyss. We've got owners who haven't a clue, who gave the keys to the safe to two charlatans, and then asked a novice to clear up the mess. Everyone makes mistakes, we just seem to keep making them and then making things worse. If this is the future, we have no future. |
no you did misinterpret it, that bit was not aimed at you - me and you are roughly on the same page I think.
I think here's the point. Last year, as I understand it, we had a £9m parachute payment. Now we do not have this. We can only afford to lose £39m over 3 years. We have probably lost close to that already becaus eof mistakes made prior to that. So no one wants to sell - the board would happily cover that loss if they could, but they can't. It's not about sliding further into the abyss, it's about stabilisation.
If we get to the end of the three year period uynder £39m, we start again and at the same time we have a much lower wage bill and *at that point* we can turn down bids, we can spend a bit again and so on, knowing that losses are more in hand than they were. It's all very well people saying 'we can't accept the first offer' etc (although there's little evidence we have done this - the opposite with both Freeman and Furlong in fact) but we HAVE to get under £39m. So we HAVE to sell. Yes that's a sh!t bargaining position, but that's what we have and it wouldn't matter who was owners or who was negotiating. My view is they are desperately trying to get under that wire, and once we do, things will be a little easier.
But all things equal, what would you say is a fair price for Furlong? I cannot believe you would find a buyer for a 23-year-old who's not a regular, and never has been at this level who would pay more than that. If it was a prem club with prem budgets and he was that good, then of course. But given the circumstances, it seems a decent price to me - and I'm genuinely probably his biggest fan on here. £3m? £4m? for 50-odd Champ apps by the time he's 23? | |
| |
| furlong on 13:02 - Jul 22 with 1995 views | johnhoop |
| furlong on 12:55 - Jul 22 by Gloucs_R |
We've just brought a young lad in for free from Liverpool who was highly rated. So isn't this a case of one in one out?
£1.5m and assuming we have a sell on clause included, I think it's quite a good deal. |
Wasn’t aware of anyone coming in from Liverpool but I may have missed something. You may mean Matt Smith from Man City but he’s just a loan signing (if he ever appears). | | | |
| furlong on 13:06 - Jul 22 with 1971 views | Antti_Heinola |
| furlong on 13:02 - Jul 22 by johnhoop |
Wasn’t aware of anyone coming in from Liverpool but I may have missed something. You may mean Matt Smith from Man City but he’s just a loan signing (if he ever appears). |
we signed a cb from liverpool, masterson. | |
| |
| furlong on 13:09 - Jul 22 with 1937 views | OldPedro |
| furlong on 11:52 - Jul 22 by Rangersw12 |
My worry is all we're doing is selling assets so we can waste the money on short term loans it seems we haven't learnt a thing from last season
Genuinely fed up with the club at the moment |
I wonder how much we're paying Rangel per week to play at right back instead of Furs. I guess a fair chunk of any transfer fee we get for Furs will be covering Rangels wages. I'd have rather kept Furs and not given Range another contract. |  |
| Extra mature cheddar......a simple cheese for a simple man |
| |
| furlong on 13:10 - Jul 22 with 1929 views | BostonR |
I assume this is an opening bid? Anything north of £2M will do nicely. Not the best defender and not a great footballer. Prone to mistakes and the opposition often target him. Sounds like a good move for all parties and good luck to him. |  | | |
| furlong on 13:10 - Jul 22 with 1929 views | flynnbo |
Don't like the idea of one of ours being replaced by one of theirs but we get a fee and will probably save on wages. It's going to be the case for the foreseeable, unfortunately. |  | | |
| furlong on 13:15 - Jul 22 with 1868 views | OldPedro |
How many loans are we allowed in the squad on a matching? 2 midfielders on loan, a right back on loan if from Chescum if this report is right and maybe a striker or 2.
Beggining to think Redknapp is back.... | |
| Extra mature cheddar......a simple cheese for a simple man |
| |
| furlong on 13:16 - Jul 22 with 1856 views | sexton |
His distribution is pretty dreadful. He's not a great full back but he is a promising CB, though apparently he doesn't want to play there.
£1.5-£2m for someone who isn't all that good, hasn't been a regular and didn't cost a penny looks like decent business. |  | | |
| furlong on 13:17 - Jul 22 with 1846 views | connell10 |
| furlong on 13:01 - Jul 22 by Antti_Heinola |
no you did misinterpret it, that bit was not aimed at you - me and you are roughly on the same page I think.
I think here's the point. Last year, as I understand it, we had a £9m parachute payment. Now we do not have this. We can only afford to lose £39m over 3 years. We have probably lost close to that already becaus eof mistakes made prior to that. So no one wants to sell - the board would happily cover that loss if they could, but they can't. It's not about sliding further into the abyss, it's about stabilisation.
If we get to the end of the three year period uynder £39m, we start again and at the same time we have a much lower wage bill and *at that point* we can turn down bids, we can spend a bit again and so on, knowing that losses are more in hand than they were. It's all very well people saying 'we can't accept the first offer' etc (although there's little evidence we have done this - the opposite with both Freeman and Furlong in fact) but we HAVE to get under £39m. So we HAVE to sell. Yes that's a sh!t bargaining position, but that's what we have and it wouldn't matter who was owners or who was negotiating. My view is they are desperately trying to get under that wire, and once we do, things will be a little easier.
But all things equal, what would you say is a fair price for Furlong? I cannot believe you would find a buyer for a 23-year-old who's not a regular, and never has been at this level who would pay more than that. If it was a prem club with prem budgets and he was that good, then of course. But given the circumstances, it seems a decent price to me - and I'm genuinely probably his biggest fan on here. £3m? £4m? for 50-odd Champ apps by the time he's 23? |
I agree with a lot you say but maybe by the time we get to the end of this FFP three years we could be playing our football in division 1 . Our club has been totally and utterly mismanaged for years and I can't see a way out of this mess. All we are doing year on year is circling the drain. |  |
| AND WHEN I DREAM , I DREAM ABOUT YOU AND WHEN I SCREAM I SCREAM ABOUT YOU!!!!! | | Poll: | best number 10 ever? |
| |
| furlong on 13:17 - Jul 22 with 1844 views | rsonist |
Take twitter fanalysts with a big pinch of salt but if true then would make some sense from a tactical perspective at least. Cov fans seem to like him too. |  | | |
| furlong on 13:19 - Jul 22 with 1821 views | DejR_vu |
| furlong on 13:01 - Jul 22 by Antti_Heinola |
no you did misinterpret it, that bit was not aimed at you - me and you are roughly on the same page I think.
I think here's the point. Last year, as I understand it, we had a £9m parachute payment. Now we do not have this. We can only afford to lose £39m over 3 years. We have probably lost close to that already becaus eof mistakes made prior to that. So no one wants to sell - the board would happily cover that loss if they could, but they can't. It's not about sliding further into the abyss, it's about stabilisation.
If we get to the end of the three year period uynder £39m, we start again and at the same time we have a much lower wage bill and *at that point* we can turn down bids, we can spend a bit again and so on, knowing that losses are more in hand than they were. It's all very well people saying 'we can't accept the first offer' etc (although there's little evidence we have done this - the opposite with both Freeman and Furlong in fact) but we HAVE to get under £39m. So we HAVE to sell. Yes that's a sh!t bargaining position, but that's what we have and it wouldn't matter who was owners or who was negotiating. My view is they are desperately trying to get under that wire, and once we do, things will be a little easier.
But all things equal, what would you say is a fair price for Furlong? I cannot believe you would find a buyer for a 23-year-old who's not a regular, and never has been at this level who would pay more than that. If it was a prem club with prem budgets and he was that good, then of course. But given the circumstances, it seems a decent price to me - and I'm genuinely probably his biggest fan on here. £3m? £4m? for 50-odd Champ apps by the time he's 23? |
Agree with most of that. We just never seem to get a decent fee, even from Premier League sides with Premier League budgets. Smithies, Freeman, Furlong, all seem very cheap to me in the general context.
Where I disagree is with your confidence in the owners and people running the club. I think FFP is a convenient smokescreen (how’s that training ground that we were given for free coming along?), and I don’t think the people running the club are up to it. Time will tell i guess. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
