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)

13940424445569

Comments

  • Leuth said:
    Scoham said:
    PWADDICK said:

    1 follower account
    No tweets since being set up last November, 8 tweets relating to lower league rumours today.
    Everything will have been deleted once disproven
    Yeah I wondered if that was the case.
  • Chunes said:
    As someone said before, we don't need decent or alright players... We had plenty of those and finished 13th. 
    Hear hear.

    We have enough "squad" players. What we now need is 3 or 4 "dynamic" ones to get us promoted. 
    We also need to make sure our loans are good enough to start. We’ve taken too many recently who were just a waste of resources. 
  • mendonca said:
    Marquis at the Valley wins the award for miss of the season. That was quite awful. I didn't realise it would lead to us chasing him for more of the same.
    It was that miss that made us decide that he was the man for us.
  • I personally wouldn’t be upset with Stockley, Aneke, Marquis and another, as long another is of high quality.
  • Scoham said:


    This has been mentioned before...

    Oh only once or twice a week. 

    Maybe now it's been confirmed by a credible source, those doubting Thomases ( No NOT that one !) will begin to believe the rumours..
  • RedJohn said:
    PopIcon said:
    PWADDICK said:

    1 follower account
    Charge your phone ffs!
    Sorry I am old, what does the red circle signify please.
    Nothing, its just a red circle to denote our colours
  • Scoham said:
    Marquis isn't anywhere near as bad as everyone is making out. 3rd/4th choice he's a very good option
    In theory he’d be a decent squad player, but we won’t improve unless the majority of signings are first choices that improve on this seasons squad.
    Nail on the head. We have to be signing better than we already have and making those players that are already here the 3rd/4th options.

    Filling out a squad with players as good as what we had last season will result in another mid table finish.
    Washington plays as a striker. 

    Marquis plays as a striker. 

    Washington's best goalscoring seasons are 12, 11 and 11 in a season. 

    Marquis's best goalscoring seasons are 25, 21, 16, 14 in a season. 

    For a back-up to Stockley, seems like a more reliable goal-scorer to me doesn't it? 
    We shouldn't be looking for better backups, that's the issue.

    We need to be looking for the players coming in to be better than the current first choices.  Simple improving on Gunter, Matthews, Watson or whoever isn't good enough, we need to improve on MacGillivray, Clare, Gilbey, Lavelle, Stockley.

    If Stockley, for example, then raises his game and wins his place back off the new bloke, good, but the point remains.

    I would like to think we are looking at better players but we still need a better 4th choice than Davison, burstow and Kanu. I would say marquis is a better 4th choice than those. On the hopeful basis that he is 4th choice!!!!

    The club have received criticism for acting slowly last year but are now being criticised for a possible early signing. The first signing in Powell's good summer was Pritchard!!! Although he did well, he was not signed as an immediate first teamer.

    if we sign marquis, I'm not going to judge our transfer policy on one signing, when the season isn't officially over!!
  • Scoham said:
    Marquis isn't anywhere near as bad as everyone is making out. 3rd/4th choice he's a very good option
    In theory he’d be a decent squad player, but we won’t improve unless the majority of signings are first choices that improve on this seasons squad.
    Nail on the head. We have to be signing better than we already have and making those players that are already here the 3rd/4th options.

    Filling out a squad with players as good as what we had last season will result in another mid table finish.
    Washington plays as a striker. 

    Marquis plays as a striker. 

    Washington's best goalscoring seasons are 12, 11 and 11 in a season. 

    Marquis's best goalscoring seasons are 25, 21, 16, 14 in a season. 

    For a back-up to Stockley, seems like a more reliable goal-scorer to me doesn't it? 
    What’s their overall record in comparison? Marquis has played as a striker more but his goals return doesn’t show that. You can refer to best goal scoring seasons but that’s because he has played more. Mainly because a championship club fancied taking a punt on Washington, nobody ever has on Marquis. 
  • Sponsored links:


  • Putting aside the injury spell, when we had no fit strikers, I never saw our forwards as being our problem over the last season. The issue was the complete lack of supply and support from midfield. With the likes of Gilbey, Morgan and Lee offering nothing more than a hopeful punt upfield, even the best strikers would struggle with absolutely no service. Hopefully, Fraser, JFC and (hopefully) an addition or two with help with that side of our game.
  • edited May 2022
    Strip out Washington's Championship appearances and Marquis's League Two appearances. At L1 level only, Washington has 49 goals in 152 appearances. Marquis has 68 goals in 202 appearances.

    Marquis goals per game ratio is marginally better (0.3366 vs 0.3223). Moving away from the comparisons for a second, I would argue his career is already on a downwards slope at the age of 29. He's not wanted by Portsmouth and didn't pull up any trees while at Lincoln. I thought we were meant to be moving away from players that have already played their best football.



    EDIT: I forgot to include the 11 appearances, 0 goals Marquis made for Millwall at this level. That makes his record 68 in 213 appearances for 0.3192 average.
  • Weren't people crying that Washington was leaving because of his goals? 

    Marquis has a better goal-scoring record than Washington. Would clearly be a better back-up to Stockley + Aneke than Washington would be. 

    Washington's lack of assists shows that Stockley won't miss him either. 
    Yes but Marquis has been shit for the last couple of years, hasn't been decent since he left Doncaster. Washington's hit double figures in the last two seasons. 

    Signing Marquis because he was good a few years ago is ridiculous. Gunter and Souare also used to be good a few years ago...
  • I’m thinking we can expect a few signings along the lines of Dobson and Clare. Quite under the radar and at first glance at least underwhelming. 
  • Scoham said:
    Marquis isn't anywhere near as bad as everyone is making out. 3rd/4th choice he's a very good option
    In theory he’d be a decent squad player, but we won’t improve unless the majority of signings are first choices that improve on this seasons squad.
    Nail on the head. We have to be signing better than we already have and making those players that are already here the 3rd/4th options.

    Filling out a squad with players as good as what we had last season will result in another mid table finish.
    Washington plays as a striker. 

    Marquis plays as a striker. 

    Washington's best goalscoring seasons are 12, 11 and 11 in a season. 

    Marquis's best goalscoring seasons are 25, 21, 16, 14 in a season. 

    For a back-up to Stockley, seems like a more reliable goal-scorer to me doesn't it? 
    We shouldn't be looking for better backups, that's the issue.

    We need to be looking for the players coming in to be better than the current first choices.  Simple improving on Gunter, Matthews, Watson or whoever isn't good enough, we need to improve on MacGillivray, Clare, Gilbey, Lavelle, Stockley.

    If Stockley, for example, then raises his game and wins his place back off the new bloke, good, but the point remains.

    It’s a bit of a generalisation to say we shouldn’t be looking at back ups, because in certain positions that’s exactly what we should be doing.

    We have Stockley, a proven goal scorer at this level, excellent goals per minute ratio, we need back up to him, that’s what Marquis would be.

    We have Dobson, POTY last season in DM, we need back up to him.

    We have Fraser, untested for us, but proven at this level in CAM, we need back up to him.

    JFC, proven at this level, did fairly well at the level above in various positions, we need back up to him.  

    It’s the other positions we need players better than what we have (which in some cases is no one).  

    I don’t get the uproar over the potential Marquis move, he’s similar to Stockley, but not quite as good, he’s a first choice generally speaking at this level, but he wouldn’t start for us.  Let’s get a little perspective here, there’s loads of things to point fingers at currently, signing a back up striker who has a decent strike rate at this level to support our already good striker at this level is not one of them.
  • Scoham said:


    This has been mentioned before...

    Oh only once or twice a week. 

    Maybe now it's been confirmed by a credible source, those doubting Thomases ( No NOT that one !) will begin to believe the rumours..
    If they did not believe Thomas, Gallen and Jackson why the hell would they believe Cawley?
  • I can’t even see Marquis joining us 
  • I think we're in he same place on principle, but it's just use of the word owe that I don't really agree with. We did something that helped him, with the hopeful effect that it would benefit us down the line but knowing that we might get nothing out of it other than helping an employee out. I don't think Jake 'owes' us in terms of an obligation bing put on him, I think he's free to make that decision and you hope that the support he received makes him want to give back. He may feel that he owes us but that's something he generates for himself.
    The bottom line - he didn’t have to sign the contract which allowed this to happen. If he thought we’d get him through his rehab, pay him for not playing and then let him walk, he’s utterly deluded. If he is unhappy about this turn of events ( and we only have here say evidence of that), then the only person he can blame is himself. 
  • I can’t even see Marquis joining us 
    Looking to my eyes, what do you see?
    It's Marquis at the Valley
    Like Ben Watson and Elliot Lee
    It's Marquis at the Valley

    I don't see it happening either tbh.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Even if the rumour is true, Marquis would clearly not be a replacement for Washington so it’s irrelevant. He’d be back up/competition/replacement (hopefully not) for Stockley.

    Our replacement for Washington needs to be far more of the BWP/Lyle Taylor role.
  • Scoham said:


    This has been mentioned before...

    Oh only once or twice a week. 

    Maybe now it's been confirmed by a credible source, those doubting Thomases ( No NOT that one !) will begin to believe the rumours..
    As this tweet points out to is is nothing new. What are you suggesting we should do about it? Boycott? Protest?

    https://twitter.com/londonpaul82/status/1524783279915905024?s=21&t=9gIf337AhdlK--Wtms80yg
  • I think we're in he same place on principle, but it's just use of the word owe that I don't really agree with. We did something that helped him, with the hopeful effect that it would benefit us down the line but knowing that we might get nothing out of it other than helping an employee out. I don't think Jake 'owes' us in terms of an obligation bing put on him, I think he's free to make that decision and you hope that the support he received makes him want to give back. He may feel that he owes us but that's something he generates for himself.
    The bottom line - he didn’t have to sign the contract which allowed this to happen. If he thought we’d get him through his rehab, pay him for not playing and then let him walk, he’s utterly deluded. If he is unhappy about this turn of events ( and we only have here say evidence of that), then the only person he can blame is himself. 
    Tbf we are on our third (as yet unappointed) manager since he signed it. 
  • I personally wouldn’t be upset with Stockley, Aneke, Marquis and another, as long another is of high quality.
    To play what kind of football?  How does this fit in with Sandgaard's grand plan to play high pressing, attacking football.  No thanks.
  • Not that we would have stood a chance with signing him but you'd imagine Kane Wilson would be more likely to go to Watford now that Edwards has taken up the reins.
  • Does it work like this?
    Martin Sandgaard says to Steve Gallen I need a left back. Gallen (and a manager) then suggests three, in rank order according to him/them, and then Martin Sandgaard runs the stats.
  • Or does Martin Sandgaard suggest specific players?
  • seth plum said:
    Or does Martin Sandgaard suggest specific players?
    I think I might start inviting family members into my workplace and see how they do.  
  • I’m thinking we can expect a few signings along the lines of Dobson and Clare. Quite under the radar and at first glance at least underwhelming. 
    I think this too. Like last season we wont be signing the players mentioned on here but also rans from other clubs rather than thoroughbreds - not saying that they might not come good like the 2 aforementioned but I'm not expecting "names" that will get you off your seat. 
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!