|
Post by Detective Boyle on Jan 24, 2015 11:07:42 GMT 1
I'm glad we're not rushing into things, the last thing we need are under-performing 'they'll do' signings
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2015 12:35:47 GMT 1
Even Turnip signed Gary Roberts.....When I say Grayson was the only one, I mean the only one with a decent proportion of good signings. Sorry I disagree, for a league one side an absolute fortune was wasted. I dont Dissagree money was wasted it was no doubt, but not as much as is reported and it has all been recouped in the sales,lucky or not,wages wasnt though and paying those is where the waste was, especially like you say the amount of players brought in,a high proportion that were i agree shit....however the fact remains we sold well,and other managers brought decent players in not just grayson, that statement was plain daft;) Not really daft I don't think.... Not saying other managers didn't sign any decent players All I'm saying is a higher proportion of Grayson's signings were decent/successful; Vaughan (loan), Norwood, Scannell, Dixon, Clayton, Lynch, Southern, Beckford (loan), Hammill (loan), even Gerrard was overall ok arguably....
|
|
|
Post by specialun on Jan 24, 2015 12:37:14 GMT 1
Clark one of the few managers to make profit on our players
Powell isn't less or more I spring than Grayson or Robins
They're all very similar - low key, quiet, boring if you like. All different and all had different qualities and many negatives. They're not my kind of managers, I don't fe Inspired listening to them nor wod I if I was looking to sign for them. But that's not my choice, but these are the types of managers Hoyle likes.
Who would I rather play for Neil Lennon or Chris Powell? I don't think I need to answer but that's the route we've gone down
I also think Powell likes a certain type of player - whether he likes it or not he's the most defensive minded manager we've had since Lou Macaro IMO. Our mindset away is do not lose by more than 1 and we may get a point, that's not my way if playing football, nor Would I say 7 defensive players to 4 offensive is balance, Again, I don't like it but if if it works but not yet the case overall. The point is he's not a fan of flair or risk or the unknown - Butterfield aside hes lost Hammill and ward and doesn't like using Lolley and won't give madjeski a chance.
So he'll be going for defensive minded players, tall players, players with pace or someone he knows via Charlton to remove any risk or and experienced player. There will be exceptions to the rule.
That changes what Wilson needs to look for but back to a striker, manager is largely irrelevant here - what he's looking for has not changed in the last 9 months. And how we are on 24 January without resolving is not good enough. Someone will say grant holt, I'd say fine for the rest of the season, but beyond? Helped us but not the answer
|
|
|
Post by terrierng on Jan 24, 2015 12:55:02 GMT 1
I dont Dissagree money was wasted it was no doubt, but not as much as is reported and it has all been recouped in the sales,lucky or not,wages wasnt though and paying those is where the waste was, especially like you say the amount of players brought in,a high proportion that were i agree shit....however the fact remains we sold well,and other managers brought decent players in not just grayson, that statement was plain daft;) Not really daft I don't think.... Not saying other managers didn't sign any decent players All I'm saying is a higher proportion of Grayson's signings were decent/successful; Vaughan (loan), Norwood, Scannell, Dixon, Clayton, Lynch, Southern, Beckford (loan), Hammill (loan), even Gerrard was overall ok arguably.... you never originally mentioned a higher proportion,hence my reply.......think we more or less agree on the wastage but imo due to the Rhodes fee<maybe luck> it wipes a lot out,not all but a lot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2015 13:31:38 GMT 1
Not really daft I don't think.... Not saying other managers didn't sign any decent players All I'm saying is a higher proportion of Grayson's signings were decent/successful; Vaughan (loan), Norwood, Scannell, Dixon, Clayton, Lynch, Southern, Beckford (loan), Hammill (loan), even Gerrard was overall ok arguably.... you never originally mentioned a higher proportion,hence my reply.......think we more or less agree on the wastage but imo due to the Rhodes fee<maybe luck> it wipes a lot out,not all but a lot. I did say proportion... 'Even Turnip signed Gary Roberts.....When I say Grayson was the only one, I mean the only one with a decent proportion of good signings.
Sorry I disagree, for a league one side an absolute fortune was wasted.' But anyway were on the same side, so who cares
|
|
|
Post by 007Berlin on Jan 24, 2015 13:40:29 GMT 1
Hunt came through the youth system And I doubt very much a profit was made on Ainsworth, they paid about 250k for him and he hardly played. And yes, wages.....a hell of a lot of money was wasted (especially for a league 1 club) on rubbish, and after that I would find it difficult to trust another manager again. I think only Grayson signed decent players since Hoyles been here Youth system or not he was sold for big bucks, you cant take him out just to suit,Ainswoth was a profit,albeit a small one,grayson was the only one to sign decent players.... Wow,our record sale,our record signing wernt signed by him,nor were pilks,roberts,page,Butterfield, coady afobe,kelly,drinkwater...i could go on but you get the point,not saying money wasn't wasted but it wasnt as much ad is often thought. Throw enough shit and some will stick! LC threw plenty so was bound to hit a few times minimum!
|
|
|
Post by terrierng on Jan 24, 2015 13:47:52 GMT 1
Youth system or not he was sold for big bucks, you cant take him out just to suit,Ainswoth was a profit,albeit a small one,grayson was the only one to sign decent players.... Wow,our record sale,our record signing wernt signed by him,nor were pilks,roberts,page,Butterfield, coady afobe,kelly,drinkwater...i could go on but you get the point,not saying money wasn't wasted but it wasnt as much ad is often thought. Throw enough shit and some will stick! LC threw plenty so was bound to hit a few times minimum! Žzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz,doesnt matter, millions were brought in,doesnt matter how, luck,judgement, flukes,skill,doesnt matter which manager spent well or bad,the money spent over the yrs has been offsett, mostly,by money coming in.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Jan 24, 2015 13:54:54 GMT 1
Didn't we pay £400,000 for Pilkington, Stockport need the cash to keep going, even then it was considered we had got a bargain. Thats quite a lot for a league 1 side to fork out... Didn't Stan bring Pilks in?
|
|
|
Post by terrierng on Jan 24, 2015 13:55:50 GMT 1
Thats quite a lot for a league 1 side to fork out... Didn't Stan bring Pilks in? No clark.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Jan 24, 2015 14:03:48 GMT 1
Didn't Stan bring Pilks in? No clark. Think Stan did the spade work for it and then it was actually pen to paper during Clark's early days - so I always think of him as a Ternant signing.
|
|
|
Post by terrierng on Jan 24, 2015 14:09:05 GMT 1
Think Stan did the spade work for it and then it was actually pen to paper during Clark's early days - so I always think of him as a Ternant signing. Do you think the promotion we got under grayson was down to clark then? You know seen as he did the spade work;)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2015 14:12:13 GMT 1
Chis Powell is very well liked in football doubt he wouldn't be able to attract players if he had the funds
At the end of the day money talks.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Jan 24, 2015 15:10:39 GMT 1
Think Stan did the spade work for it and then it was actually pen to paper during Clark's early days - so I always think of him as a Ternant signing. Do you think the promotion we got under grayson was down to clark then? You know seen as he did the spade work;) That's a bit of a strange comparison. All I'm saying is that Ternant worked on getting Pilks to the club, so I wouldn't really class him as a Clark signing.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Jan 24, 2015 15:11:43 GMT 1
Chis Powell is very well liked in football doubt he wouldn't be able to attract players if he had the funds At the end of the day money talks. It's not the end of the day day yet?
|
|
|
Post by terrierng on Jan 24, 2015 15:18:25 GMT 1
Do you think the promotion we got under grayson was down to clark then? You know seen as he did the spade work;) That's a bit of a strange comparison. All I'm saying is that Ternant worked on getting Pilks to the club, so I wouldn't really class him as a Clark signing. He signed under clark, his signing.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Jan 24, 2015 15:21:02 GMT 1
That's a bit of a strange comparison. All I'm saying is that Ternant worked on getting Pilks to the club, so I wouldn't really class him as a Clark signing. He signed under clark, his signing. I give in.
|
|
|
Post by willsmeaton on Jan 24, 2015 22:42:43 GMT 1
Yep, they were great days. How I wish we still had a seemingly revolving door with players such as Jon Parkin joining us week in week out. Let's see what the comments are when we lose the next 3 matches. All 6 pointers. Too fucking laid back. so pessimistic. Town have 16 good quality championship players. It's okay signing so & so but if they don't fit the ethos or a style of play we want what's the point in making the signing. It's a team sport and if you get 11 players playing for each other and the manager then there is no reason why we can't progress year on year. Burnley are a fantastic example, spent minimal money on Ings ( I think Wells will be similar) then it is being shrewd IE Arfield. On topic to the thread, I think CP can attract players but he won't make signings for the sake.
|
|
|
Post by gledholt terrier on Jan 25, 2015 0:13:32 GMT 1
Yep, they were great days. How I wish we still had a seemingly revolving door with players such as Jon Parkin joining us week in week out. Let's see what the comments are when we lose the next 3 matches. All 6 pointers. Too fucking laid back. We won't have to now, will we? Too fucking miserable.
|
|
deo1
Andy Booth Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 3,858
|
Post by deo1 on Jan 25, 2015 1:00:59 GMT 1
I think in the past the previous managers under Hoyle have wanted to bring in as many players as they can and have been left to get on with it, they've also refused to deny rumours of the long list of players linked with us all of the time. Now we seem to have a manager who wants a settled team and not a massive squad where quite a few players are not up to Championship standard and end up getting carried by the rest of the squad. I'm pretty confident Powell is the right man to take us forward in the short and long term and think under his tutelidge we will go from strength to strength. It's good having a manager who's quite cautious in the transfer and loan market and has a good reputation and name for himself in the game where players will want to come and play for him and the club.
|
|
|
Post by Beech's Nuts on Jan 25, 2015 1:38:22 GMT 1
I think in the past the previous managers under Hoyle have wanted to bring in as many players as they can and have been left to get on with it, they've also refused to deny rumours of the long list of players linked with us all of the time. Now we seem to have a manager who wants a settled team and not a massive squad where quite a few players are not up to Championship standard and end up getting carried by the rest of the squad. I'm pretty confident Powell is the right man to take us forward in the short and long term and think under his tutelidge we will go from strength to strength. It's good having a manager who's quite cautious in the transfer and loan market and has a good reputation and name for himself in the game where players will want to come and play for him and the club. That is far too sensible to appease the splurgeaholics: The club lacks ambition!
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Jan 25, 2015 1:40:00 GMT 1
Do you think the promotion we got under grayson was down to clark then? You know seen as he did the spade work;) That's a bit of a strange comparison. All I'm saying is that Ternant worked on getting Pilks to the club, so I wouldn't really class him as a Clark signing. I really don't see this...... Ternent was sacked on Nov 4th and we bought Pilks on Jan 23rd.... your argument may have held water if he signed at the start of the window but IMO theres no way that Pilks could ever be classed as a Ternent signing. We've seen this week that transfers are the most delicate of things that aren't done until they're done so to speculate that Ternent did the spadework when he was more interested in where he ate his Christmas dinner after the first few games of the season and was sacked fully 80 days before Pilkington put pen to paper.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Jan 25, 2015 3:50:48 GMT 1
That's a bit of a strange comparison. All I'm saying is that Ternant worked on getting Pilks to the club, so I wouldn't really class him as a Clark signing. I really don't see this...... Ternent was sacked on Nov 4th and we bought Pilks on Jan 23rd.... your argument may have held water if he signed at the start of the window but IMO theres no way that Pilks could ever be classed as a Ternent signing. We've seen this week that transfers are the most delicate of things that aren't done until they're done so to speculate that Ternent did the spadework when he was more interested in where he ate his Christmas dinner after the first few games of the season and was sacked fully 80 days before Pilkington put pen to paper. Ok. My understanding was that Stan instigated proceedings with Pilks. I'm happy to be corrected by anyone who actually knows . In truth I couldn't give a toss. Great 3 points today and I'm in the camp that Coady had a look up and curled it in to the top corner as deliberately as he did at Wolves. I've drunk a lot this evening though.
|
|
|
Post by Tanzanian Terrier on Jan 25, 2015 6:12:37 GMT 1
So what's your underlying point? There is no underlying point, I was just asking a question. Question it might be but a badly phrased one
|
|