Transfers, 2024-25 season

[PaddockLad 18952]

The obvious players to sell iyam given their excellent form last season and their return to their more usual mediocrity this time out are Almiron and Longstaff. The latter in particular is more attractive given his home grown status. Sell one in this window if a replacement can be found and one in the summer likewise

[Dazzler 11679]

1 minute ago, PaddockLad said:

The obvious players to sell iyam given their excellent form last season and their return to their more usual mediocrity this time out are Almiron and Longstaff. The latter in particular is more attractive given his home grown status. Sell one in this window if a replacement can be found and one in the summer likewise

Think you're being a bit harsh on Longstaff. He's never had the opportunity to return to his form from last season - he came into the new season injured, came back and broke down again for a spell. He's been solid since - the only drawback was an ever-present one from last season - he toe pokes every shot, like he has drawing pins in his laces pointing directly at his foot.

[RobinRobin 12433]

29 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

We need Willock back fit, not to sell him. He's class imo. 

Becoming an issue keeping him fit though. Of course that then impacts his value. 

Back and fit would be good as he is class. 👍 

[PaddockLad 18952]

10 minutes ago, Dazzler said:

Think you're being a bit harsh on Longstaff. He's never had the opportunity to return to his form from last season - he came into the new season injured, came back and broke down again for a spell. He's been solid since - the only drawback was an ever-present one from last season - he toe pokes every shot, like he has drawing pins in his laces pointing directly at his foot.

Yeah we need a bigger goal threat from midfield. He has been unlucky with injuries this season but is unlikely to be good enough for where the owners want to end up. If we can bring a replacement in I’d get rid. Dave’s right, it’s time to be brutal 

[wykikitoon 22705]

Agreed.  How do people think we are going to raise revenue?  Just hope we get new sponsors?  That will only help in some ways.

[Dazzler 11679]

5 minutes ago, PaddockLad said:

Yeah we need a bigger goal threat from midfield. He has been unlucky with injuries this season but is unlikely to be good enough for where the owners want to end up. If we can bring a replacement in I’d get rid. Dave’s right, it’s time to be brutal 

The problem is that the replacement would probably cost more than we'd get selling him. Miggy is an easier one to shift IMO and would command a higher fee, and we can probably replace him value wise with that Roony Bardghji kid who terrorised Man Utd in the CL for a similar (if not smaller, fee).

[PaddockLad 18952]

1 minute ago, Dazzler said:

The problem is that the replacement would probably cost more than we'd get selling him. Miggy is an easier one to shift IMO and would command a higher fee, and we can probably replace him value wise with that Roony Bardghji kid who terrorised Man Utd in the CL for a similar (if not smaller, fee).

We paid 20 mill for Miggy, nothing for Longy. That’s the difference. Either fee would just go down as a down payment or two on incoming players. A lot of people have a wishlist a mile long but no real idea how to pay for anything..we have to start somewhere…

[The Fish 11313]

1 hour ago, spongebob toonpants said:

I think your underestimating Willocks value to the team, he carries the ball in transition faster and more efficiently than anyone else, and I feel a lot of the reason that Isak has spent a lot of time isolated this season is due to missing Willock's link up play

My probably naive hope is that we are underselling the value of our new marketing deals and we have more wiggle room than they are letting on

I think you're misunderstanding the central point. Say there are three groups within the squad, we can argue about which player fits in which group, but as a starter I put it like this.

 

Group 1 - The 'Purple players'

Group 2  - Squad players

Group 3-  the Fringe

 

Nobody in group 3 would command a decent fee, so lets rules them out as options to increase FFP wriggle room. So that leaves groups 1 and 2. Without spending a LOT of money on a replacement,  I can't see anyone in group 1 that we should sell and it would leave us in a similar position where we're either putting square pegs in round holes, or significantly dropping the standard of player by using a deputy from groups 2 or 3.

 

So that leaves group 2.

In that group you've got a couple of young lads coming through in Anderson and Miley, their stock is set to rise and we don't yet know what their real ceiling is, and you've got Hall who isn't our player yet so we can't sell him anyway, so lets scratch them off the list. Dan Burn and Longstaff have shown they can play on the biggest stage and while we will need to upgrade them both, right now they appear integral to how Howe wants us to play, so they're out. 

 

So, who does that leave you with?

 

And of those, who'd command the biggest fee? And who plays in a position we have depth in?

 

I mean, if everyone is fit, who does Willock get in ahead of? Bruno? Joelinton? Tonali? Longstaff? He's a great option to have on the bench, or for certain opponents, but he doesn't command a starting place ahead of those lads. So, if that is the case, and we need money to bring in players for expensive positions (DM, RW & CF), does it not make sense to sell our most valuable, least integral player?

Edited January 10, 2024 by The Fish

[Holden McGroin 7522]

Guess the poster who has too much time on their hands?

[OTF 8383]

30 minutes ago, wykikitoon said:

Agreed.  How do people think we are going to raise revenue?  Just hope we get new sponsors?  That will only help in some ways.

[spongebob toonpants 4345]

17 minutes ago, The Fish said:

I think you're misunderstanding the central point. Say there are three groups within the squad, we can argue about which player fits in which group, but as a starter I put it like this.

 

Group 1 - The 'Purple players'

Group 2  - Squad players

Group 3-  the Fringe

 

Nobody in group 3 would command a decent fee, so lets rules them out as options to increase FFP wriggle room. So that leaves groups 1 and 2. Without spending a LOT of money on a replacement,  I can't see anyone in group 1 that we should sell and it would leave us in a similar position where we're either putting square pegs in round holes, or significantly dropping the standard of player by using a deputy from groups 2 or 3.

 

So that leaves group 2.

In that group you've got a couple of young lads coming through in Anderson and Miley, their stock is set to rise and we don't yet know what their real ceiling is, and you've got Hall who isn't our player yet so we can't sell him anyway, so lets scratch them off the list. Dan Burn and Longstaff have shown they can play on the biggest stage and while we will need to upgrade them both, right now they appear integral to how Howe wants us to play, so they're out. 

 

So, who does that leave you with?

 

And of those, who'd command the biggest fee? And who plays in a position we have depth in?

 

I mean, if everyone is fit, who does Willock get in ahead of? Bruno? Joelinton? Tonali? Longstaff? He's a great option to have on the bench, or for certain opponents, but he doesn't command a starting place ahead of those lads. So, if that is the case, and we need money to bring in players for expensive positions (DM, RW & CF), does it not make sense to sell our most valuable, least integral player?

That's decent analysis, but for me I would have Willock in Group 1. Tbh I'd sell Miggy and Wison ahead of him. I haven't seen enough of Barnes or Tonali to have them in group 1.

[PaddockLad 18952]

Dave’s rolled out his own personal spreadsheets in the first couple of weeks of the new year  

 

xls-cellent

 

 

[ewerk 33076]

The best midfielders do not necessarily equate to the best midfield. Willock has been a massive miss to us with his running and ability to link the midfield with attack.

[PaddockLad 18952]

11 minutes ago, ewerk said:

The best midfielders do not necessarily equate to the best midfield. Willock has been a massive miss to us with his running and ability to link the midfield with attack.

All about “blend” … 

[The Fish 11313]

48 minutes ago, Holden McGroin said:

Guess the poster who has too much time on their hands?

Lets be honest, none of us are exactly snowed under.

[The Fish 11313]

40 minutes ago, spongebob toonpants said:

That's decent analysis, but for me I would have Willock in Group 1. Tbh I'd sell Miggy and Wison ahead of him. I haven't seen enough of Barnes or Tonali to have them in group 1.

 

Trouble is, neither of them have a decent deputy. Almiron's deputy is currently Murphy, Wilson's is Gordon or Barnes out of position. So, selling either would still leave us short in those areas. e,g, say we sold Almiron for €30m, signed Wirtz for €60m. Now we've got an upgrade on Almiron, but no sub. Any injury to Florian and we're Wirtz off. We'd probably only get around €15m for Wilson, that's not enough for a 3rd choice striker for a team with lofty ambitions, let alone a 2nd choice striker who will likely have to play a lot of games to cover for the injured Isak.

 

I take your point re: Tonali and Barnes, but given we've only just signed them, I'd be shocked if they were even considered for sale.

[Meenzer 16397]

Just now, The Fish said:

Any injury to Florian and we're Wirtz off.

 

[Gemmill 49696]

I think we need to move away from thinking about first 11 and who gets in ahead of them, and think more of it as a squad. I don't think you could strengthen by much, if at all, by selling Willock and using whatever that frees up to reinvest. 

 

Also, we bought Willock for 35m a couple of seasons ago, the FFP profit on him wouldn't be huge. 

[The Fish 11313]

40 minutes ago, ewerk said:

The best midfielders do not necessarily equate to the best midfield. Willock has been a massive miss to us with his running and ability to link the midfield with attack.

And if we could afford it, I'd strengthen the team without losing any good players, especially Willock. But we apparently have fuck all FFP room to manoeuvre .

[Gemmill 49696]

Also I think some might be forgetting how good a fit and firing Joe Willock is. 

[The Fish 11313]

1 minute ago, Gemmill said:

I think we need to move away from thinking about first 11 and who gets in ahead of them, and think more of it as a squad. I don't think you could strengthen by much, if at all, by selling Willock and using whatever that frees up to reinvest. 

 

Also, we bought Willock for 35m a couple of seasons ago, the FFP profit on him wouldn't be huge. 

 

That's a fair point. That might shift Longstaff into my crosshairs.

[The Fish 11313]

6 minutes ago, Meenzer said:

 

[PaddockLad 18952]

1 minute ago, The Fish said:

 

That's a fair point. That might shift Longstaff into my crosshairs.

Just a matter of time before you started to see things my way David my dear old chap  

[Gemmill 49696]

He just needed someone with some GRAVITAS to say it. 

[The Fish 11313]

Just now, PaddockLad said:

Just a matter of time before you started to see things my way David my dear old chap  

Genuinely think Tonali was bought to usurp Longstaff, and if he hadn't spent his time in the local Guglielmo Collina we might have been talking about Longstaff's imminent move to Fulham, but we are where we are.