Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Summer Window 2026 - Rumours and Discussion
Comments
-
Henry Irving said:
If the owners wanted to purely make money the would have been much better off just investing in Friedman's hedge fund or even a building society account.Braziliance said:
Joshua Friedman alone has triple the networth of Birmingham and Wrexhams owners combined almost. It isn't going to swallow his cash like it did Sandgaard or any other multi-millionaire. He is a multi-billionaire.NabySarr said:
This doesn’t make sense. The money they’ve lost already means they won’t make a profit by selling us unless we make it into the premier league.Braziliance said:
I don't believe the owners are here for the long run, they're here to just try and flip a profit at some stage, and it appears their strategy is to do the bare minimum in doing so, which to be fair so far has worked.mcgrandall said:
Sorry, but no they aren't. They were demerged from Bet365 in 24/25, transferred to Stoke City Holdings, and their debts wiped. Which is why their have been able to spend as they have.TheHerminator said:
They are owned by Bet365 essentially who keep investing in equity stakes in the football club. It isn’t a sustainable model but it means short term they can spend big on playersmcgrandall said:
I'm not advocating our owners spend more, but how come Stoke have spent so much this year? Not sold any players for large transfer fees in years and have a similar turnover to ours. Could be their owner selling the club to themselves and wiping £80m of debt, so they ended the year in "profit". There is always a way around the rules.SouthLincsAddick said:
Well said!elbiglad said:I am getting a bit bored of some of the negative and short sighted comments being posted on here. I don’t know what people were expecting.
I hate that we have so much squad turnover every year but we desperately needed reinforcements. The transition the club has gone through necessitates this overhaul. The depth wasn’t there and the loans ending meant we lost four or five starters. So it was clear a massive influx of players was needed.
Let’s say we needed to bring in a minimum of seven players. When you need this many and only have a budget of around £10m, then you have to be clever in how you spend your money. Really basic stuff. So, it makes sense to spend no money on a back up right back who has good champ experience. It makes sense to bring in a decent striking option for no money when you have decent depth there already and have assessed that other options are likely too expensive. It makes sense to concentrate your spending on positions of most serious need to to bring in extra quality where t matters when decent, cheaper options are available in other positions. This is just common-sense squad building.
It seems to me that some people didn’t understand what slow, sustainable and sensible growth meant. It never meant that if we stay in the Championship for one year we will then blow the league out the water. It won’t happen next summer either, by the way. As a side note, it’s also not how football finances work so it’s no good talking about how rich our owners are. At this moment in time, unless we sell someone for big money or agree a huge sponsorship deal with an American airline or streaming service, this is the only feasible way for us to improve.
Jones has made a rod for his own back (for some) with the ‘ruthless’ comments. When, in reality, he was most likely just talking about some of the business that needed to be done, not all. Letting a midfield prospect who is a hard worker and, by all accounts, amazing character that has been with the club since the age of 8 leave is quite ruthless. Letting a reliable squad option who scored the goal to promote the club leave is quite ruthless. The likely exit of a young academy striker who won League 2 player of the year is quite ruthless. Any additions in centre mid that move Coventry or Docherty down the pecking order should be considered ruthless. Why does signing a back up right back have to be judged by this metric? Who can name all of the Luke Young backups from the Curbishley years? It’s not an overly important position.I am not an ITK. But the signing of Alli for £1m shows, to me, that there is money to be spent. This was not necessarily a position of need and there are plenty of free agent wingers available. So to spend money on this player shows that firstly, they rate him, and secondly, it suggests there is money available for the right targets. It signals there is more to come.Jones is an outspoken man who finds it borderline impossible to bite his tongue. If there was no money or the board had let him down I think we’d have heard something, or picked up on a sly comment. It’s been quite the opposite. He has told fans to be patient. The season starts in just under three weeks and the window shuts in five. He has repeatedly said there is more to come and quality takes time.
We all want more in. We all want improved quality. I definitely don’t enjoy watching us hoof it up to Dykes. But the window isn’t done. They are implementing a formation change. Let’s just give things some time.
I think the negative posters don’t want to understand the financial situation we’re in. A small but vocal minority have always created a lot of noise mostly through wilful ignorance. Professional football people would wet themselves at some of the comments on here, it’s so far from reality. Remember, this is only a fans forum, none of us have any pro experience at coaching a football team or even understand the basics of football finance.
If the owners wanted to put more money in, they could find a way. I've seen it suggested that the recent change in the rules is a way to drive down players wages in the Championship. Which, considering the state of finances in the Championship, seems quite sensible.
As I said, if the owners wanted to spend big they could find a way. I think @Doucher is bang on the money and, unless we have some incredible recruitment, consigned to circle the drain.
It was heavily hinted at one of those Addicks meetings that Roland still owning the club held us back from improving the matchday experience and our plan is essentially waiting for an old man to die and hope his son offers a better deal for the stadium. You then look at Birmingham City and Wrexham's owners (who combined have a lower networth than one of ours) yet they're willing to pump millions into the infrastructure of the club. (A billion in Birminghams case)
The plan will be to keep using the TV money and whatever else to keep us afloat until someone comes along to buy us.
I don't mind by the way, as the alternative for us was a lot worse, but no one can convince themselves they're doing everything in their power to make us a competitive championship side, it is the bare minimum to avoid relegation.If the quick flip theory was correct they’d have sold us once we were promoted to the championship
There still wasn't much to flip as we still don't own our own ground. It's a hard sell selling a Championship club in debt, but someone eventually will come along and see the vision and that's what I believe they are waiting for. Time will tell.
Instead, they are losing money, around £10m to £13m, a season with no sign of that changing.
I think the more likely scenario is that they wanted some fun while having a possible pay day somewhere down the line.
It's like four or six of us on here buying a racehorse. It costs us, say, £5k a year but we can afford that. We go to races, enjoy the thrill of being an owner while sipping champagne but it's not going to bankrupt us. It's money we can afford to spend just as Josh Friedman can lose £3m pa
Sure, our horse might win a big race or go to stud and then we'd be quids in but it's not the whole plan.
I believe the owners agreed the amount to which they would subsidize the club each year ie their version of £5k a year, and are sticking to it.
We're not Wrexham or Birmingham, we have a completely different business model and funding streams regardless of how rich our owners are.
All the messaging, post Charlie, has been clear. Slow, steady growth and sustainability. It's not sexy and it requires patience.
We can be happy with that or not but it looks nothing like a quick flip model, to my eyes anyway.
Goodbye Horse2 -
I was surprised when Docherty and Coventry were considered regular starters this time last year after we were promoted.
Sadly/unbelieveably I won't be surprised again this time.6 -
The old adage that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts can apply - or not. Who can say how the new faces will blend in, particularly when we don’t know who is still to come. Other clubs will under- or over-perform. It’s far too early to say how this season will pan out. Admittedly, it’s more likely will be relegated than promoted but there are 18 other spots between these two extremes.3
-
We’d have probably got relegated last season if we’d signed a worse RWB and not held out for James Bree at the end of the windowAberystwythAddick said:
9 points would’ve seen us relegated last season.fenaddick said:
Would you rather play 43 games with option A&B on the list or 46 with C&D?DamoNorthStand said:Every single point and match counts when you are in the situation we are in.People saying we can wait until the end of the window to get people in are right in theory - but in practice we could be writing off multiple games going with a midfield of Doc and Coventry.
We can’t afford to do that. The best seasons we have had are when the players are in and up to speed ahead of the first gameThere’s also no guarantee that hypothetical A&B would be ready to be put straight into a game. So it would like be more than 3 games.Signings need to happen ASAP so we are in the best possible position come DerbyIn an ideal world the transfer window would end before the season starts. It’s crazy that it doesn’t, but this means you have to wait sometimes to get the best players possible for the rest of the season2 -
I think we can ask agree that we’d have gone down with 9 points.6
-
Ok, I like the analogy and understand.Henry Irving said:
If the owners wanted to purely make money the would have been much better off just investing in Friedman's hedge fund or even a building society account.Braziliance said:
Joshua Friedman alone has triple the networth of Birmingham and Wrexhams owners combined almost. It isn't going to swallow his cash like it did Sandgaard or any other multi-millionaire. He is a multi-billionaire.NabySarr said:
This doesn’t make sense. The money they’ve lost already means they won’t make a profit by selling us unless we make it into the premier league.Braziliance said:
I don't believe the owners are here for the long run, they're here to just try and flip a profit at some stage, and it appears their strategy is to do the bare minimum in doing so, which to be fair so far has worked.mcgrandall said:
Sorry, but no they aren't. They were demerged from Bet365 in 24/25, transferred to Stoke City Holdings, and their debts wiped. Which is why their have been able to spend as they have.TheHerminator said:
They are owned by Bet365 essentially who keep investing in equity stakes in the football club. It isn’t a sustainable model but it means short term they can spend big on playersmcgrandall said:
I'm not advocating our owners spend more, but how come Stoke have spent so much this year? Not sold any players for large transfer fees in years and have a similar turnover to ours. Could be their owner selling the club to themselves and wiping £80m of debt, so they ended the year in "profit". There is always a way around the rules.SouthLincsAddick said:
Well said!elbiglad said:I am getting a bit bored of some of the negative and short sighted comments being posted on here. I don’t know what people were expecting.
I hate that we have so much squad turnover every year but we desperately needed reinforcements. The transition the club has gone through necessitates this overhaul. The depth wasn’t there and the loans ending meant we lost four or five starters. So it was clear a massive influx of players was needed.
Let’s say we needed to bring in a minimum of seven players. When you need this many and only have a budget of around £10m, then you have to be clever in how you spend your money. Really basic stuff. So, it makes sense to spend no money on a back up right back who has good champ experience. It makes sense to bring in a decent striking option for no money when you have decent depth there already and have assessed that other options are likely too expensive. It makes sense to concentrate your spending on positions of most serious need to to bring in extra quality where t matters when decent, cheaper options are available in other positions. This is just common-sense squad building.
It seems to me that some people didn’t understand what slow, sustainable and sensible growth meant. It never meant that if we stay in the Championship for one year we will then blow the league out the water. It won’t happen next summer either, by the way. As a side note, it’s also not how football finances work so it’s no good talking about how rich our owners are. At this moment in time, unless we sell someone for big money or agree a huge sponsorship deal with an American airline or streaming service, this is the only feasible way for us to improve.
Jones has made a rod for his own back (for some) with the ‘ruthless’ comments. When, in reality, he was most likely just talking about some of the business that needed to be done, not all. Letting a midfield prospect who is a hard worker and, by all accounts, amazing character that has been with the club since the age of 8 leave is quite ruthless. Letting a reliable squad option who scored the goal to promote the club leave is quite ruthless. The likely exit of a young academy striker who won League 2 player of the year is quite ruthless. Any additions in centre mid that move Coventry or Docherty down the pecking order should be considered ruthless. Why does signing a back up right back have to be judged by this metric? Who can name all of the Luke Young backups from the Curbishley years? It’s not an overly important position.I am not an ITK. But the signing of Alli for £1m shows, to me, that there is money to be spent. This was not necessarily a position of need and there are plenty of free agent wingers available. So to spend money on this player shows that firstly, they rate him, and secondly, it suggests there is money available for the right targets. It signals there is more to come.Jones is an outspoken man who finds it borderline impossible to bite his tongue. If there was no money or the board had let him down I think we’d have heard something, or picked up on a sly comment. It’s been quite the opposite. He has told fans to be patient. The season starts in just under three weeks and the window shuts in five. He has repeatedly said there is more to come and quality takes time.
We all want more in. We all want improved quality. I definitely don’t enjoy watching us hoof it up to Dykes. But the window isn’t done. They are implementing a formation change. Let’s just give things some time.
I think the negative posters don’t want to understand the financial situation we’re in. A small but vocal minority have always created a lot of noise mostly through wilful ignorance. Professional football people would wet themselves at some of the comments on here, it’s so far from reality. Remember, this is only a fans forum, none of us have any pro experience at coaching a football team or even understand the basics of football finance.
If the owners wanted to put more money in, they could find a way. I've seen it suggested that the recent change in the rules is a way to drive down players wages in the Championship. Which, considering the state of finances in the Championship, seems quite sensible.
As I said, if the owners wanted to spend big they could find a way. I think @Doucher is bang on the money and, unless we have some incredible recruitment, consigned to circle the drain.
It was heavily hinted at one of those Addicks meetings that Roland still owning the club held us back from improving the matchday experience and our plan is essentially waiting for an old man to die and hope his son offers a better deal for the stadium. You then look at Birmingham City and Wrexham's owners (who combined have a lower networth than one of ours) yet they're willing to pump millions into the infrastructure of the club. (A billion in Birminghams case)
The plan will be to keep using the TV money and whatever else to keep us afloat until someone comes along to buy us.
I don't mind by the way, as the alternative for us was a lot worse, but no one can convince themselves they're doing everything in their power to make us a competitive championship side, it is the bare minimum to avoid relegation.If the quick flip theory was correct they’d have sold us once we were promoted to the championship
There still wasn't much to flip as we still don't own our own ground. It's a hard sell selling a Championship club in debt, but someone eventually will come along and see the vision and that's what I believe they are waiting for. Time will tell.
Instead, they are losing money, around £10m to £13m, a season with no sign of that changing.
I think the more likely scenario is that they wanted some fun while having a possible pay day somewhere down the line.
It's like four or six of us on here buying a racehorse. It costs us, say, £5k a year but we can afford that. We go to races, enjoy the thrill of being an owner while sipping champagne but it's not going to bankrupt us. It's money we can afford to spend just as Josh Friedman can lose £3m pa
Sure, our horse might win a big race or go to stud and then we'd be quids in but it's not the whole plan.
I believe the owners agreed the amount to which they would subsidize the club each year ie their version of £5k a year, and are sticking to it.
We're not Wrexham or Birmingham, we have a completely different business model and funding streams regardless of how rich our owners are.
All the messaging, post Charlie, has been clear. Slow, steady growth and sustainability. It's not sexy and it requires patience.
We can be happy with that or not but it looks nothing like a quick flip model, to my eyes anyway.
The bold is my concern. I would feel a lot more comfortable if our assets were being signed to longer deals, but it just hasn't happened yet, but there is time.
Until we see that, I will always be a touch skeptical, but that's just my personality I suppose.
What I am worried about, is the execution of the plan. I think the idea is fine, and like I have said, am more than happy seeing us remain a average champ club for a long time, just a bit concerned the higher ups are underestimating that task.
For now though as you like to say, the proof of the pudding is in the eating.
Hopeful of the best, expecting the worst. 😂
Apologies for the derail, back to the rumours. I now desperately want Kamara to sign not because I rate him, but it seems like it will wind Pompey fans up2 -
Any rumours lads?9
-
This is the rumours thread mate...'course there ain't any...🙄Chawlton said:Any rumours lads?1 -
A midfield of cov and doc will send us down no doubt! We need a playmaker who can make a forward pass and create ! So far not 1 has arrived yet1
-
Sponsored links:
-
Outside Dykes Kamara and Holsgrove absolutely no oneChawlton said:Any rumours lads?1 -
New midfielder on trial tonight, played against us last season for Sheff weds. Sure you can guess10
-
This x 100DamoNorthStand said:Every single point and match counts when you are in the situation we are in.People saying we can wait until the end of the window to get people in are right in theory - but in practice we could be writing off multiple games going with a midfield of Doc and Coventry.
We can’t afford to do that. The best seasons we have had are when the players are in and up to speed ahead of the first game0 -
Redmond again?21cws said:New midfielder on trial tonight, played against us last season for Sheff weds. Sure you can guess0 -
No new trialist CM0
-
Brother plays for Chelsea0
-
Ah, go on, put me out of my suspense. I can’t be arsed to look at last years line-ups.21cws said:No new trialist CM0 -
Chalobah!7
-
Barry BannanLargeAddick said:
Ah, go on, put me out of my suspense. I can’t be arsed to look at last years line-ups.21cws said:No new trialist CM
seriously it’s Chalobah2 -
Nathaniel Chalobah?5
-
Sponsored links:
-
Marvelous Nakamba?0
-
Sheff Wed fans ‘quality but always injured’5
-
Barry Bannan.21cws said:New midfielder on trial tonight, played against us last season for Sheff weds. Sure you can guess
0 -
Chalobah would fit the Cov competition role but he's injured all the time.2
-
For people who wanted febs back looks like he’s going to Blackburn0
-
Signing Alli probably put pay to it anywayCrispywood said:For people who wanted febs back looks like he’s going to Blackburn1 -
cafcsinger said:Sheff Wed fans ‘quality but always injured’
Welcome to the club Nathaniel Chlobah!
2 -
Once their was a song about a team full of Kermorgants. We could change it and sing about a team full of wingers.MarcusH26 said:
Signing Alli probably put pay to it anywayCrispywood said:For people who wanted febs back looks like he’s going to Blackburn0 -
Ideal! 😄cafcsinger said:Sheff Wed fans ‘quality but always injured’0
