Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Summer 2022 transfer rumours (Gilbey loan confirmed p513, a signing falls through last minute p541)
Comments
-
The order they sign isn’t important, it would have been madness to miss out on Payne just because another position is more urgent. Garner has made it clear they’ll be bringing more in.Hartleypete said:
At the expense of not having a forward, madness, get rid of a midfielder to replace a midfielder when you are clearly short of forwards,, simples.ForeverAddickted said:
So that we could bring in a goalscoring Midfielder (which we also needed) in Jack Payne - As its been explained to us in the past - You dont pass up on a player you want, to prioritise on another position, as what happens if you end up with neither player that you're chasing?Hartleypete said:
Why let Davidson go if we hadn’t replaced him, madness.ForeverAddickted said:
Have you read the article that Cawley put out? - I'm sure he'd love to sign a Striker before SaturdayHartleypete said:Can’t believe Garner is so thick to go into the season with just 2 experienced strikers, particularly with one almost permanently injured.
Its another season where it looks like we start with a massive weakness in an unbalanced squad, even before more injuries/ suspensions kick in.5 -
SoundAsa£ said:
So it’s Burstow on loan then.Jac_52 said:sammy391 said:It’ll either be
“Charlton trying for McKirdy arrival”
or
“leaburn has shown he’s capable of being 3rd choice”
even worse would be
“ *unknown* premier league striker set to sign for Charlton”
I'd actually prefer the last scenario.
Unknown premier league loans are my favourite genre of signing.
Nah I've heard of him.
Premier league loans I've heard of are my least favourite genre of signing.0 -
I'd have thought our first choice midfield 3 would be McGrandles, Payne and Frasier. That means you have JFC, GD, Albie, Gilbey as backup, that's already 1 too many (assuming 2 per position) before you add in Henry and Clare as potential cover. So that means at least 1, probably 2 will be moved on.
We know JFC wants out, so that means 1 of GB, Albie or Gilbey going as well. There's been previous comments about them being willing to hear offers for Gilbey. But as much as I loved watching GB last season, he's struggled to adapt to Garner-ball the most out of anyone on that list. That doesn't mean he can't/won't adapt, it's just not happening as fast as some of the others.
George is probably worth more than Gilbey, and also may not be happy going from POTY to bit part player, so if a decent offer came in I'm sure both the player and club would be interested. If both went and a loan came in as extra cover I don't think it would weaken us appreciably.
tldr; we have plenty of midfield cover whilst having 2-3 positions that we definitely need to strengthen in, therefore it's inevitable that we're going to ship midfielders out to free up the squad places and funds to achieve that. Sad as I would be to see him go, it would be far from the disaster some are painting it as if GD was one of those to go.
2 -
Genuine question as I'm not too clued up on FFP etc - by all accounts people like Wednesday, Ipswich etc are spending more, we've made.money on Burstow, Pope,.we've signed free transfers so far etc... how are we close to being in breach of them?0
-
Best thing to do is read this...North Lower Neil said:Genuine question as I'm not too clued up on FFP etc - by all accounts people like Wednesday, Ipswich etc are spending more, we've made.money on Burstow, Pope,.we've signed free transfers so far etc... how are we close to being in breach of them?
There are no restrictions (in themselves) on the amount a club can lose or spend on transfer fees.
http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/scmp.php#:~:text=Clubs in the League 1,, the limit is 55%.
0 -
7
-
Last I heard he was standing outside Eoghan O'Connell's house, holding a boombox over his headBR7_addick said:13 -
addick1956 said:
And neither do you pretend Aneke is a promotion changing sub. He doesn't do enough minutes. Selling a player to get another forward is how it is in L2 and L1supaclive said:
NonsenseNabySarr said:
A fee for Dobson could be worth 3 players wages. That’s a huge difference if we are struggling to juggle FFP. Hopefully we can shift others like MacGillivray and Gilbey and then we can keep Dobson and get the signings we need. This is obviously what we will be trying to do but it’s not easy to sell shit. If it’s a choice between keeping Dobson and only signing 1 more or selling Dobson and signing 3/4 more then it’s a no brainerAthletico Charlton said:thenewbie said:
But if we use the money to improve the squad overall then it's good common sense. If he goes but a striker comes in that fits the system better than Stockley, we're better off overall.supaclive said:Garrymanilow said:There's a lot of flap about Dobson based on no evidence so far but I'm fairly calm about whether he stays or goes. I do think he's a better passer of the ball than he's given credit for and I think he could play higher up the pitch if we're playing a deep-lying playmaker at the base of the midfield rather than a destroyer. Having said that though, if Garner has decided that he doesn't suit what he's going to do then in terms of a sale his stock will never be higher than it is now after winning POTY, and with our well-stocked midfield we could afford to move him on more than we can afford to go into the bulk of the season without another winger and another striker. Some players just don't suit how a manager wants to play, and if Dobson falls into that category and Garner feels we don't need him because we have McGrandles doing a similar but slightly different role, and we use the money from his sale to get in a goal-scoring winger and some competition for Stockley then I'm happy. The most viable strategy any team has these days is to get decent players in and sell them on at a profit to bring in more decent players. We got Dobson for nothing, if Garner doesn't play with a player like him and we sell him for cash then that's not necessarily a bad thing. If this is all smoke though then I'm sure he can play in front of a deeper midfielder and play well. We'll just have to see what happens.
I simply disagree
Dobson is better than McGrandles
Payne
Gilbey
Morgan
JFC
Fraser
He was our RUNAWAY player of the year.
Selling him because he's valuable is stupid economics if it makes us worse, which it will.
The only one of those players you can realistically compare him to is McGrandles as the others just don't play in the same way or position. Certainly he is much, much better than Fraser or Payne defensively but I doubt he would bring as much going forward so I can't get behind the idea he's objectively THAT much better.
Near enough every season since relegation from the PL we have sold our best player at the end of the year and fans on here have written what you have written. Every season it has failed which ultimately has led to something like 8-9 seasons in L1 and us establishing ourselves as a mid table team in the lower leagues.
Dobson should be in the team, no arguments. He is decent but won't command a fee of sufficient size to make a difference to us imo.
You don't sell your best players if you want to get promoted
I feel like your obsession with Aneke is personal. Did he do something to you, or is there another reason you don't like him?
1 -
I'm scratching my head a little bit as to how we are seemingly at the salary cap limit?5
-
More than anything else this season we need a lot of luck with injuries. The Powell squad wasn't really complete, it just benefited from being able to bring in emergency loans whenever needed and an unbelieveable run of good health. Other than Stephens no-one was out for any extended period. Wiggins, Morrison and Taylor didn't miss a single game for fitness reasons, Yann, BWP, Hollands and Waggy/Green were always there. Jackson missed a bit but we had more injuries in a week last year than in that whole season. If Stockley plays well and doesn't get injured he can play 40+ games this season and we won't have to worry. If Sessegnon remains fit as well then we're laughing in terms of our gaps, we just have to pray that we've resolved our ridiculous injury form and pray for a bit of luck. You absolutely shouldn't plan for it, we need to get the cover in, but how nice would it be to have a season with only one or two injuries of a month or more? Egbo hasn't exactly got us off to a good start there mind..
4 -
Sponsored links:
-
Yeah... Nine First-Team players released or sold last summer (including some players who must have been on high wages, e.g. Watson | Gunter | Matthews | Washington) - Yet we've only signed five players.J BLOCK said:I'm scratching my head a little bit as to how we are seemingly at the salary cap limit?
The only ridiculous reason I can think of (but we've seen some really stupid rules in League One of late), is released player wages dont count towards the percentage of turnover, so had we sold Washington, the money for him would have counted. Instead because we've released him, we've basically reduced what we can spend.3 -
He might genuinely think that but he also can't really come out and say that we need a new striker to start for us, as that then pushes the price up of anyone we're interested in.Scoham said:Right, here we go, get the popcorn out 🍿 some interesting points from Garner.
https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/garner-says-addicks-will-work-within-budget-constraints-when-asked-if-aneke-knock-highlights-need-for-extra-striker/
- When asked if this brings back into focus the need for further recruitment up top, Garner said: “We’re still looking to strengthen without doubt. First port of call, we’re hoping that isn’t serious with Chuks.
- talks about players to strengthen us which suggests we’re looking for more than one signing
- signings could come in before any outgoings.
- and the big one, brace yourselves… he believes Stockley fits the system and praised his link up play on Saturday.8 -
Transfer window don’t shut tillHartleypete said:Can’t believe Garner is so thick to go into the season with just 2 experienced strikers, particularly with one almost permanently injured.
Its another season where it looks like we start with a massive weakness in an unbalanced squad, even before more injuries/ suspensions kick in.
end of Aug ..3 -
Their income will still be higher than ours I would guess. Not sure we can use Burstow money as it counts to last year and as people have said we might only get the Pope money in instalments. The rule is we can spend 60% of our turnover on player wages, I am also a bit surprised we are already at that limit as we’ve had bigger squads at L1 level previously and these have always been the rules apart from the year they brought in the salary capNorth Lower Neil said:Genuine question as I'm not too clued up on FFP etc - by all accounts people like Wednesday, Ipswich etc are spending more, we've made.money on Burstow, Pope,.we've signed free transfers so far etc... how are we close to being in breach of them?1 -
At last, a post from you where I can't question its accuracy!RonnieMoore said:
Transfer window don’t shut tillHartleypete said:Can’t believe Garner is so thick to go into the season with just 2 experienced strikers, particularly with one almost permanently injured.
Its another season where it looks like we start with a massive weakness in an unbalanced squad, even before more injuries/ suspensions kick in.
end of Aug ..
Thanks, Colin.4 -
Window actually closes on the 1st September @ 11pmbobmunro said:
At last, a post from you where I can't question its accuracy!RonnieMoore said:
Transfer window don’t shut tillHartleypete said:Can’t believe Garner is so thick to go into the season with just 2 experienced strikers, particularly with one almost permanently injured.
Its another season where it looks like we start with a massive weakness in an unbalanced squad, even before more injuries/ suspensions kick in.
end of Aug ..
Thanks, Colin.18 -
Damn!ForeverAddickted said:
Window actually closes on the 1st Septemberbobmunro said:
At last, a post from you where I can't question its accuracy!RonnieMoore said:
Transfer window don’t shut tillHartleypete said:Can’t believe Garner is so thick to go into the season with just 2 experienced strikers, particularly with one almost permanently injured.
Its another season where it looks like we start with a massive weakness in an unbalanced squad, even before more injuries/ suspensions kick in.
end of Aug ..
Thanks, Colin.13 -
I get you're trying to think outside the box but I don't think that would be the case at all. The amount of playing turnover in Leagues 1 and 2, mostly on loan/free is way too big for that criteria to work.ForeverAddickted said:
Yeah... Nine First-Team players released or sold last summer (including some players who must have been on high wages, e.g. Watson | Gunter | Matthews | Washington) - Yet we've only signed five players.J BLOCK said:I'm scratching my head a little bit as to how we are seemingly at the salary cap limit?
The only ridiculous reason I can think of (but we've seen some really stupid rules in League One of late), is released player wages dont count towards the percentage of turnover, so had we sold Washington, the money for him would have counted. Instead because we've released him, we've basically reduced what we can spend.
It's obviously a real concern but I'm with J Block, I cannot understand how this is affecting us. Unless it's a ploy from Sandgaard to get another couple of thousand season tickets sold!1 -
The other issue is that we don't have goalscoring wingers/wide forwards who can provide an alternative goal threat. When Harry Kane, for example, drops deep, Spurs still have Son as a major goal threat high up the pitch. The likes of CBT, Kirk and DJ just aren't that sort of playerFishCostaFortune said:
His link up play was perfectly fine, as it has been over the whole of pre season. People for some reason just choose not to see it.NabySarr said:
Tbf we did press very well on Saturday especially in the first half which was one worry with Stockley playing up front in this system. Stockleys link play wasn’t great though, and it is better when he receives it in the air than to his feet which doesn’t really suit. Hopefully Stockley can get better as the season goes on which is possible as it’s the first time he’s probably played in a team playing this way so will take some getting used tooScoham said:Right, here we go, get the popcorn out 🍿 some interesting points from Garner.
https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/garner-says-addicks-will-work-within-budget-constraints-when-asked-if-aneke-knock-highlights-need-for-extra-striker/
- When asked if this brings back into focus the need for further recruitment up top, Garner said: “We’re still looking to strengthen without doubt. First port of call, we’re hoping that isn’t serious with Chuks.
- talks about players to strengthen us which suggests we’re looking for more than one signing
- signings could come in before any outgoings.
- and the big one, brace yourselves… he believes Stockley fits the system and praised his link up play on Saturday.I’ve lost count of the amount of times he has dropped in short, received a good pass to feet from a CB/CDM, controlled it and spread the play out wide or to another player, often under pressure from opposing players.
The problem is that he is not dynamic enough to get back up with play, or interchange positions with an attacking winger who can fill in centrally when he does this. Plus he’s also not great on the edge of an opponents box where he will often find himself. It makes our attacking patterns far to rigid, and easy to defend against, which is why I’d rather we had someone a little more mobile up there.1 -
Yeah thats very true actually - thats a relief.cafcfan1990 said:
I get you're trying to think outside the box but I don't think that would be the case at all. The amount of playing turnover in Leagues 1 and 2, mostly on loan/free is way too big for that criteria to work.ForeverAddickted said:
Yeah... Nine First-Team players released or sold last summer (including some players who must have been on high wages, e.g. Watson | Gunter | Matthews | Washington) - Yet we've only signed five players.J BLOCK said:I'm scratching my head a little bit as to how we are seemingly at the salary cap limit?
The only ridiculous reason I can think of (but we've seen some really stupid rules in League One of late), is released player wages dont count towards the percentage of turnover, so had we sold Washington, the money for him would have counted. Instead because we've released him, we've basically reduced what we can spend.
It's obviously a real concern but I'm with J Block, I cannot understand how this is affecting us. Unless it's a ploy from Sandgaard to get another couple of thousand season tickets sold!
Certainly agree with J Block as well, as the nine gone vs five incoming really doesnt add up1 -
Sponsored links:
-
PWR
Interesting, Garners view on Stockley in this mornings news article.
Obviously he’s unlikely to say anything negative but seems to contradict so many peoples views on here?0 -
What's the penalty for exceeding the cap ?NabySarr said:
Their income will still be higher than ours I would guess. Not sure we can use Burstow money as it counts to last year and as people have said we might only get the Pope money in instalments. The rule is we can spend 60% of our turnover on player wages, I am also a bit surprised we are already at that limit as we’ve had bigger squads at L1 level previously and these have always been the rules apart from the year they brought in the salary capNorth Lower Neil said:Genuine question as I'm not too clued up on FFP etc - by all accounts people like Wednesday, Ipswich etc are spending more, we've made.money on Burstow, Pope,.we've signed free transfers so far etc... how are we close to being in breach of them?0 -
Stockley is our only fit, senior striker. Would be naive to publicly slag him off to the local press.sillav nitram said:PWR
Interesting, Garners view on Stockley in this mornings news article.
Obviously he’s unlikely to say anything negative but seems to contradict so many peoples views on here?9 -
Transfer embargo’s and points deductions. I think Reading broke the championships rules and got both those punishmentsgolfaddick said:
What's the penalty for exceeding the cap ?NabySarr said:
Their income will still be higher than ours I would guess. Not sure we can use Burstow money as it counts to last year and as people have said we might only get the Pope money in instalments. The rule is we can spend 60% of our turnover on player wages, I am also a bit surprised we are already at that limit as we’ve had bigger squads at L1 level previously and these have always been the rules apart from the year they brought in the salary capNorth Lower Neil said:Genuine question as I'm not too clued up on FFP etc - by all accounts people like Wednesday, Ipswich etc are spending more, we've made.money on Burstow, Pope,.we've signed free transfers so far etc... how are we close to being in breach of them?1 -
Ever since we had an injury crisis a few years ago, we've consistently had too many midfielders in the squad, relative to other positions. We've struggled in midfield, so we keep adding new options, without removing the old ones.
In the second half of last season we had Dobson, Gilbey, Fraser, Morgan as regulars plus Lee who sometimes played there, Clare who was moved to defence, Watson who was still on the books and Nile John who never troubled the Valley grass.
We lost Watson, John and Lee, but to the main 4 added JFC back from injury, McGrandles and Payne, still have Clare as an option and have the likes of Henry available too. Indeed I bet Sessegnon would be very comfortable in midfield too. That's far too many, in relation to other parts of the squad.
0 -
It looks like we have two of the best strikers to come out of the academy in recent years in Kanu and Leaburn - I think both will get plenty of first team action this coming season.
One, or hopefully both, will score goals in L1.10 -
Also 75% of the football league are in the market for a striker.RonnieMoore said:
Transfer window don’t shut tillHartleypete said:Can’t believe Garner is so thick to go into the season with just 2 experienced strikers, particularly with one almost permanently injured.
Its another season where it looks like we start with a massive weakness in an unbalanced squad, even before more injuries/ suspensions kick in.
end of Aug ..1 -
It’s worth remembering that at no point is it wise or necessary to say to the media “we’ve got dosh to spend and we want a striker”.What‘s to say this is just us being coy so we don’t have our pants pulled down over fees. My advice, don’t threat too much over such quotes for now and see what happens.17
-
We could be nowhere near the cap and its a just a move to pay as little as we can for our targets? We seem to have been much more savvy this window than previous seasons.17
-
It really doesn't add up, I can't see any reason for any of the five to be on particularly lucrative contracts. Four were stepping up from League 2, McGrandles probably the highest of the five. And I know Swindon are one of the richer clubs in League 2, but I believe they offered both Egbo and Payne more money than we did. So it sounds like we've been a bit tight with the wages all summer to be honest.ForeverAddickted said:
Yeah thats very true actually - thats a relief.cafcfan1990 said:
I get you're trying to think outside the box but I don't think that would be the case at all. The amount of playing turnover in Leagues 1 and 2, mostly on loan/free is way too big for that criteria to work.ForeverAddickted said:
Yeah... Nine First-Team players released or sold last summer (including some players who must have been on high wages, e.g. Watson | Gunter | Matthews | Washington) - Yet we've only signed five players.J BLOCK said:I'm scratching my head a little bit as to how we are seemingly at the salary cap limit?
The only ridiculous reason I can think of (but we've seen some really stupid rules in League One of late), is released player wages dont count towards the percentage of turnover, so had we sold Washington, the money for him would have counted. Instead because we've released him, we've basically reduced what we can spend.
It's obviously a real concern but I'm with J Block, I cannot understand how this is affecting us. Unless it's a ploy from Sandgaard to get another couple of thousand season tickets sold!
Certainly agree with J Block as well, as the nine gone vs five incoming really doesnt add up2
