Ipswich have spent 900k on left back Leif Davis from Leeds.
Think it was said elsewhere on this thread earlier but i just dont understand how these clubs, in the same league as us and of a similar size can seemingly just go out and spend the way they do? Are they not subject to the same spending caps as us then? Find it all very strange.
Yes they just ignore them, post truth world now innit.
Can't wait until the football starts - there is nothing new left to say about transfers at this point. 99% of us agree we need a striker winger and left back, I'm sure the club know it and are working on it
Chucks is an absolute shambles for our club the decision to bring him home was a shocker. How we are going into the season relying on this injury prone player says we are not going anywhere fast
Chuks will be ideal for 30 minute cameos, especially with 5 subs now being allowed. The thing that a lot of us seem to feel is that we need at least one other striker who can play a whole game. FWIW I think we’ll sign a striker and an attacking forward/winger but we’ll have to make a couple of tough calls to balance the books. Ultimately I think we have to back Garner.
Chucks is an absolute shambles for our club the decision to bring him home was a shocker. How we are going into the season relying on this injury prone player says we are not going anywhere fast
Chuks will be ideal for 30 minute cameos, especially with 5 subs now being allowed. The thing that a lot of us seem to feel is that we need at least one other striker who can play a whole game. FWIW I think we’ll sign a striker and an attacking forward/winger but we’ll have to make a couple of tough calls to balance the books. Ultimately I think we have to back Garner.
Who wants a cameo player? Put it this way I bet BG would rather have his wages and the £300k to invest than be stuck with someone who unfortunately just cannot be relied on at anytime
You always have a striker on the bench. You bring them on 90% of the time.....
At 1-1 or 1-0 either way would you rather bring on Chuks, Washington or Davison? If your doing that 35 times a season what's the problem?
You do indeed. The thing is that striker you bring on 90% of the time also usually ends up filling in for 90 minutes when others are suspended, injured, or it’s a busy schedule and they need a rest.
Aneke cant do any of them. Aneke can’t even get through a pre season where there’s less intensity and his minutes were more managed than any other player.
That's why you need at least 1 more striker. Someone to replace/alternate with Stockley and that can play 90 mins week in & week out. Then you have Aneke to come off the bench for 20-30 mins. With 5 subs allowed to come on surely you can have 2 out & out strikers in your 7 man bench.
I agree, but the problem is that striker will need to get us goals because there may be periods of the season where they play the full 90 minutes of games. So we don’t want a Josh Parker. However which ‘prolific’ striker is going to want to come in knowing that they won’t get a chance off the bench because of Aneke and may only be used if the main striker is injured or suspended.
Of course maybe there may be someone young and hungry who wants to take that chance dislodging Stockley, but I expect most decent strikers will want to move somewhere where they will get lots of guaranteed minutes.
And how much of the budget do we spend on this player who may only have very limited game time? When we already have a good chunk of the said budget being spent on Stockley and a player who can’t play more than 20-30 minutes a game.
The answer I guess is that we need someone who could play right or left of Stockley but is also decent upfront, that way they'll be there an an option to compete with Stockley, CBT, Kirk etc, not just Stockley.
A League One Rashford/Son type player (positionally, obviously I'm not expecting us to sign a Son-quality player!).
Easier said than done, though, there's not a ton of them about.
Ipswich have spent 900k on left back Leif Davis from Leeds.
Think it was said elsewhere on this thread earlier but i just dont understand how these clubs, in the same league as us and of a similar size can seemingly just go out and spend the way they do? Are they not subject to the same spending caps as us then? Find it all very strange.
I thought the rules were based on club income, whether that be through receipts or loans. If that is the case, we had the 4th largest attendance average last season, Sunderland promoted, thereafter Wednesday and Ipswich. In Weds case and an average £15 per ticket, I think their income would be c£1.75m greater than ours, delivering about a £1m more in squad fund allowance should they choose to spend that much.
May have interpreted the basic rules incorrectly but in general the much larger average attendances for Weds and Ipswich contributes to their competitiveness. Add to that the three that have come down (particularly based on new Derby investors) and suspect we will have the 6th-8th highest wage and transfer fee bill combined.
The lad has got some composure, bag of tricks twisting and turning, quick feet, acceleration and change of pace. It's in tight spaces that he does the damage - faced with packed defences; he's a tin-opener.
When someone is this excited about a player on CL you know the chances of it happening are a whopping 0.01% 😉
Spoke to my Palarse mate (I know 🤢) and he said that Ray-Sakyi has played a lot of minutes on the preseason tour; v Man U (65 mins) v Liverpool (74 mins) v Leeds (90 mins)
Spoke to my Palarse mate (I know 🤢) and he said that Ray-Sakyi has played a lot of minutes on the preseason tour; v Man U (65 mins) v Liverpool (74 mins) v Leeds (90 mins)
im not hopeful of getting him
Palace mate? With all due respect there is a high probability thar your pal is on some kind of register. Ignore him.
Spoke to my Palarse mate (I know 🤢) and he said that Ray-Sakyi has played a lot of minutes on the preseason tour; v Man U (65 mins) v Liverpool (74 mins) v Leeds (90 mins)
im not hopeful of getting him
Palace mate? With all due respect there is a high probability thar your pal is on some kind of register. Ignore him.
Chucks is an absolute shambles for our club the decision to bring him home was a shocker. How we are going into the season relying on this injury prone player says we are not going anywhere fast
Chuks will be ideal for 30 minute cameos, especially with 5 subs now being allowed. The thing that a lot of us seem to feel is that we need at least one other striker who can play a whole game. FWIW I think we’ll sign a striker and an attacking forward/winger but we’ll have to make a couple of tough calls to balance the books. Ultimately I think we have to back Garner.
Chucks is an absolute shambles for our club the decision to bring him home was a shocker. How we are going into the season relying on this injury prone player says we are not going anywhere fast
Chuks will be ideal for 30 minute cameos, especially with 5 subs now being allowed. The thing that a lot of us seem to feel is that we need at least one other striker who can play a whole game. FWIW I think we’ll sign a striker and an attacking forward/winger but we’ll have to make a couple of tough calls to balance the books. Ultimately I think we have to back Garner.
Who wants a cameo player? Put it this way I bet BG would rather have his wages and the £300k to invest than be stuck with someone who unfortunately just cannot be relied on at anytime
You always have a striker on the bench. You bring them on 90% of the time.....
At 1-1 or 1-0 either way would you rather bring on Chuks, Washington or Davison? If your doing that 35 times a season what's the problem?
You do indeed. The thing is that striker you bring on 90% of the time also usually ends up filling in for 90 minutes when others are suspended, injured, or it’s a busy schedule and they need a rest.
Aneke cant do any of them. Aneke can’t even get through a pre season where there’s less intensity and his minutes were more managed than any other player.
That's why you need at least 1 more striker. Someone to replace/alternate with Stockley and that can play 90 mins week in & week out. Then you have Aneke to come off the bench for 20-30 mins. With 5 subs allowed to come on surely you can have 2 out & out strikers in your 7 man bench.
I agree, but the problem is that striker will need to get us goals because there may be periods of the season where they play the full 90 minutes of games. So we don’t want a Josh Parker. However which ‘prolific’ striker is going to want to come in knowing that they won’t get a chance off the bench because of Aneke and may only be used if the main striker is injured or suspended.
Of course maybe there may be someone young and hungry who wants to take that chance dislodging Stockley, but I expect most decent strikers will want to move somewhere where they will get lots of guaranteed minutes.
And how much of the budget do we spend on this player who may only have very limited game time? When we already have a good chunk of the said budget being spent on Stockley and a player who can’t play more than 20-30 minutes a game.
You do know we have 2 fewer strikers than last season? Even if we only play with one striker/ goalscorer at a time ( which I am really not sure we should), we still need one more. None of Washington, Stockley or Aneke were guaranteed starts for long periods during the season due to injury, loss of form or suspension. That is why its a squad game.
If Stockley gets injured, suspended or loses form, who takes his starting place with the current squad? And please don't say Leaburn. (Or Aneke obviously)
You do know that you’ve completely missed my point right? I’ve not said at any point that we don’t need another striker.
I’ve made a comment arguing that I think it will be difficult to get a decent striker because they will effectively be seen as third choice, and only used to cover games that Stockley is suspended, injured, or needs resting from, due to them not getting a chance during normal games as Aneke will be put on in front of them.
So how come 91 other clubs seem to have more than 2 strikers in their squads. When Liverpool signed Jota do you think they said " dont worry, we're selling Salah & Mane.....you'll be our main striker this season". Bollox did they.
We have been in for Rak-sakyi for at least the last few weeks, he nearly signed before the Sutton game but two Championship clubs came in for him. Not sure if we will get him but we stand the best chance out of the league one clubs that are interested.
Interesting, thanks for sharing. I would guess it comes down to having a very good chance of regular football here
Let's hope Palace dont speak to Spurs then about Nile John.......
Chucks is an absolute shambles for our club the decision to bring him home was a shocker. How we are going into the season relying on this injury prone player says we are not going anywhere fast
Chuks will be ideal for 30 minute cameos, especially with 5 subs now being allowed. The thing that a lot of us seem to feel is that we need at least one other striker who can play a whole game. FWIW I think we’ll sign a striker and an attacking forward/winger but we’ll have to make a couple of tough calls to balance the books. Ultimately I think we have to back Garner.
Chucks is an absolute shambles for our club the decision to bring him home was a shocker. How we are going into the season relying on this injury prone player says we are not going anywhere fast
Chuks will be ideal for 30 minute cameos, especially with 5 subs now being allowed. The thing that a lot of us seem to feel is that we need at least one other striker who can play a whole game. FWIW I think we’ll sign a striker and an attacking forward/winger but we’ll have to make a couple of tough calls to balance the books. Ultimately I think we have to back Garner.
Who wants a cameo player? Put it this way I bet BG would rather have his wages and the £300k to invest than be stuck with someone who unfortunately just cannot be relied on at anytime
You always have a striker on the bench. You bring them on 90% of the time.....
At 1-1 or 1-0 either way would you rather bring on Chuks, Washington or Davison? If your doing that 35 times a season what's the problem?
You do indeed. The thing is that striker you bring on 90% of the time also usually ends up filling in for 90 minutes when others are suspended, injured, or it’s a busy schedule and they need a rest.
Aneke cant do any of them. Aneke can’t even get through a pre season where there’s less intensity and his minutes were more managed than any other player.
That's why you need at least 1 more striker. Someone to replace/alternate with Stockley and that can play 90 mins week in & week out. Then you have Aneke to come off the bench for 20-30 mins. With 5 subs allowed to come on surely you can have 2 out & out strikers in your 7 man bench.
I agree, but the problem is that striker will need to get us goals because there may be periods of the season where they play the full 90 minutes of games. So we don’t want a Josh Parker. However which ‘prolific’ striker is going to want to come in knowing that they won’t get a chance off the bench because of Aneke and may only be used if the main striker is injured or suspended.
Of course maybe there may be someone young and hungry who wants to take that chance dislodging Stockley, but I expect most decent strikers will want to move somewhere where they will get lots of guaranteed minutes.
And how much of the budget do we spend on this player who may only have very limited game time? When we already have a good chunk of the said budget being spent on Stockley and a player who can’t play more than 20-30 minutes a game.
You do know we have 2 fewer strikers than last season? Even if we only play with one striker/ goalscorer at a time ( which I am really not sure we should), we still need one more. None of Washington, Stockley or Aneke were guaranteed starts for long periods during the season due to injury, loss of form or suspension. That is why its a squad game.
If Stockley gets injured, suspended or loses form, who takes his starting place with the current squad? And please don't say Leaburn. (Or Aneke obviously)
You do know that you’ve completely missed my point right? I’ve not said at any point that we don’t need another striker.
I’ve made a comment arguing that I think it will be difficult to get a decent striker because they will effectively be seen as third choice, and only used to cover games that Stockley is suspended, injured, or needs resting from, due to them not getting a chance during normal games as Aneke will be put on in front of them.
So how come 91 other clubs seem to have more than 2 strikers in their squads. When Liverpool signed Jota do you think they said " dont worry, we're selling Salah & Mane.....you'll be our main striker this season". Bollox did they.
If you’re going to compare clubs and players, at least be consistent, if you’re including wide forwards we also have more than two.
Spoke to my Palarse mate (I know 🤢) and he said that Ray-Sakyi has played a lot of minutes on the preseason tour; v Man U (65 mins) v Liverpool (74 mins) v Leeds (90 mins)
im not hopeful of getting him
It's pre-season though, clubs always give minutes to kids. Liverpool and City have been playing kids in pre-season, but they won't be anywhere near the team come the first game.
Palace have Benteke, Mateta, Edouard, Zaha, Ayew, Eze, Olise and Ebiowei for their forward positions. So Rak-Sakyi is hardly going to get a game and he's already proven he's too good for U23 football.
So do they loan him out so he can get regular games or do they keep him where he'll play in the Papa Johns trophy, might play a league cup game and might sit on the bench once every couple of months?
Ipswich have spent 900k on left back Leif Davis from Leeds.
Think it was said elsewhere on this thread earlier but i just dont understand how these clubs, in the same league as us and of a similar size can seemingly just go out and spend the way they do? Are they not subject to the same spending caps as us then? Find it all very strange.
I thought the rules were based on club income, whether that be through receipts or loans. If that is the case, we had the 4th largest attendance average last season, Sunderland promoted, thereafter Wednesday and Ipswich. In Weds case and an average £15 per ticket, I think their income would be c£1.75m greater than ours, delivering about a £1m more in squad fund allowance should they choose to spend that much.
May have interpreted the basic rules incorrectly but in general the much larger average attendances for Weds and Ipswich contributes to their competitiveness. Add to that the three that have come down (particularly based on new Derby investors) and suspect we will have the 6th-8th highest wage and transfer fee bill combined.
Someone said on a different page that it also has to do with how the club is funded. In our case Sandgaard is loaning us money. Therefore as a debt it’s included in the restriction.
Let's be honest if we had CBT on one side and that kid on the other, teams would absolutely hate playing us.
Until we put the ball in the area, then they would love us!!😂
Absolutely,CBT got away loads of times on Saturday and squared the ball,no one in sight.They did it once in the second half,squared the ball,goal.Until we get a quick player be it striker or midfielder who can make these late runs into the area,our good wing play will be wasted.
The lad has got some composure, bag of tricks twisting and turning, quick feet, acceleration and change of pace. It's in tight spaces that he does the damage - faced with packed defences; he's a tin-opener.
The lad has got some composure, bag of tricks twisting and turning, quick feet, acceleration and change of pace. It's in tight spaces that he does the damage - faced with packed defences; he's a tin-opener.
Never one to decide on a player with clips on You Tube. I am sure that Leko looks top draw on his clips, need I say more ? is another winger a priority at this moment in time? With Kirk, CBT, DJ and the option or Leaburn ? Given Chucks is already out, and there is no way he can play more than ten games before getting another injury I would have thought that we would need two strikers as well as a left back before signing another wide player
Never one to decide on a player with clips on You Tube. I am sure that Leko looks top draw on his clips, need I say more ? is another winger a priority at this moment in time? With Kirk, CBT, DJ and the option or Leaburn ? Given Chucks is already out, and there is no way he can play more than ten games before getting another injury I would have thought that we would need two strikers as well as a left back before signing another wide player
I’m sure we’re after a striker as well but if we can get this palace kid then we should, comes with a great pedigree. Still a month left of the window I’d rather wait and get the right striker/strikers.
Never one to decide on a player with clips on You Tube. I am sure that Leko looks top draw on his clips, need I say more ? is another winger a priority at this moment in time? With Kirk, CBT, DJ and the option or Leaburn ? Given Chucks is already out, and there is no way he can play more than ten games before getting another injury I would have thought that we would need two strikers as well as a left back before signing another wide player
Definitely a priority, playing a 4-3-3 we need a wide player with goals in him. Swindon had McKirdy in that role, our current wide players don’t offer that.
That’s not to say a striker and a left back aren’t just as important, but it doesn’t matter which one joins first.
The lad has got some composure, bag of tricks twisting and turning, quick feet, acceleration and change of pace. It's in tight spaces that he does the damage - faced with packed defences; he's a tin-opener.
Better than Leko?
From all the clips I’ve seen he has less explosive pace, but is more refined in his dribbling and looks like he can make some decent forwards passes as well.
His weakness (as with many that age) seems to be his decision making and tendency to hold onto the ball. But can’t say he does not look like an exciting prospect.
The lad has got some composure, bag of tricks twisting and turning, quick feet, acceleration and change of pace. It's in tight spaces that he does the damage - faced with packed defences; he's a tin-opener.
Cawley doesn’t believe Watson and Gunter were on big wages. I remember some on here claiming Watson was. If Cawley is right then releasing them wouldn’t have freed up quite as much as we might think. Same with Washington who also signed while the cap was in place.
The lad has got some composure, bag of tricks twisting and turning, quick feet, acceleration and change of pace. It's in tight spaces that he does the damage - faced with packed defences; he's a tin-opener.
Better than Leko?
From all the clips I’ve seen he has less explosive pace, but is more refined in his dribbling and looks like he can make some decent forwards passes as well.
His weakness (as with many that age) seems to be his decision making and tendency to hold onto the ball. But can’t say he does not look like an exciting prospect.
Cawley doesn’t believe Watson and Gunter were on big wages. I remember some on here claiming Watson was. If Cawley is right then releasing them wouldn’t have freed up quite as much as we might think. Same with Washington who also signed while the cap was in place.
Comments
post truth world now innit.
A League One Rashford/Son type player (positionally, obviously I'm not expecting us to sign a Son-quality player!).
Easier said than done, though, there's not a ton of them about.
v Man U (65 mins)
v Liverpool (74 mins)
v Leeds (90 mins)
im not hopeful of getting him
I think you may have been disappointed even if it did work.
Palace have Benteke, Mateta, Edouard, Zaha, Ayew, Eze, Olise and Ebiowei for their forward positions. So Rak-Sakyi is hardly going to get a game and he's already proven he's too good for U23 football.
So do they loan him out so he can get regular games or do they keep him where he'll play in the Papa Johns trophy, might play a league cup game and might sit on the bench once every couple of months?
is another winger a priority at this moment in time? With Kirk, CBT, DJ and the option or Leaburn ?
Given Chucks is already out, and there is no way he can play more than ten games before getting another injury I would have thought that we would need two strikers as well as a left back before signing another wide player
That’s not to say a striker and a left back aren’t just as important, but it doesn’t matter which one joins first.