Paul mitchell

[Gemmill 48569]

"We have a specific set of targets in mind, none of whom were available this window. That, combined with our PSR situation, and the manager's preference to have a full pre season with any new signings, meant that we preferred to wait til the summer. Thank you and good night."

[PaddockLad 18379]

8 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

and the manager's preference to have a full pre season with any new signings

Since fuckin when?  

[Gemmill 48569]

Since he's said it on multiple occasions. But feel free to take that out if you like, the explanation still stands. 

[Gemmill 48569]

"I DEMAND an explanation". 

 

 - Karen Llewelyn Bowen. 

[David Kelly 1328]

17 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

Do we really need an explanation for why we didn't spend in January? 

Depends on how much you want to keep the supporters happy.  There's already rumblings that the Saudi's have lost interest and leaks to the media about the ground redevelopment/new ground and training ground are all just smoke screens.  Personally don't believe this is true but I can understand why others are thinking that way.  The general lack of understanding of PSR isn't helping at all.  I've heard lots of people say that selling Kelly for £20m immediately gives us £100m to spend in the summer but I'm pretty sure it's nowhere near that simplistic.  I agree with toonotl that it's a difficult position as we can't just come out and lay our position wide open for all of our competitors to see, but I think some communication is needed.  Howe is the only person we've heard from for ages and it's not his job to deal with this.  I don't think it's a case of explaining why we didn't spend, but I think some communication would be beneficial.

[OTF 8036]

29 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

Do we really need an explanation for why we didn't spend in January? 

No. Do you?

[Gemmill 48569]

The rumours about Saudi btw. I mean howay, rumours from who? You've just got to ignore shit like that. 

 

We've just engaged with an external party to do the training ground. Are they in on the smokescreen too? 

 

People should just be dismissing they as drivel. And they shouldn't need an explanation for January. It's fucking plainly obvious why we haven't spent. 

[RobinRobin 12118]

11 minutes ago, David Kelly said:

Depends on how much you want to keep the supporters happy.  There's already rumblings that the Saudi's have lost interest and leaks to the media about the ground redevelopment/new ground and training ground are all just smoke screens.  Personally don't believe this is true but I can understand why others are thinking that way.  The general lack of understanding of PSR isn't helping at all.  I've heard lots of people say that selling Kelly for £20m immediately gives us £100m to spend in the summer but I'm pretty sure it's nowhere near that simplistic.  I agree with toonotl that it's a difficult position as we can't just come out and lay our position wide open for all of our competitors to see, but I think some communication is needed.  Howe is the only person we've heard from for ages and it's not his job to deal with this.  I don't think it's a case of explaining why we didn't spend, but I think some communication would be beneficial.

This is actually good if other clubs think that there's no unlimited funds any more and that they may have done their job in getting rid of the Saudi problem.

[ewerk 32349]

7 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

The rumours about Saudi btw. I mean howay, rumours from who? You've just got to ignore shit like that. 

 

You don't think that Lee Ryder's little black book doesn't stretch into the upper echelons of PIF? You poor, naive fool.

[ewerk 32349]

Was there any player that moved in January where any of us thought, 'he'd have been a great addition'? Khusanov maybe but once Man City were in for him we had no chance.

[Howmanheyman 35456]

17 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

You don't think that Lee Ryder's little black book doesn't stretch into the upper echelons of PIF? You poor, naive fool.

 

"Woooah bonny lad! Ah protect me sources to the hilt, it's me opus memorandum! So don't be giving away me top Saudi source, Didi from Munchies whose uncle lives on the Saudi/Iraqi border, he's also got an Emre poster up on the wall with a 2005 shirt on so he's my go to man if we get any turks an aahl. Errr.......pretend ah never said Didi, it's definitely not him, errr.... it's the other miserable cunt who works there. The one with the tache. He's the source."

[PaddockLad 18379]

44 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

Since he's said it on multiple occasions. But feel free to take that out if you like, the explanation still stands. 

I actually don’t. The reasons are obvious. But as I pointed out the other day we’ve got into this relatively great position position via a series of calculated risks. The idea that any club doesn’t have to sell to buy is bollocks. Building up a plethora of youngsters to sell on is going to take a decade. So I’d have bitten the bullet in an attempt to ensure champions league revenues next season. I don’t need an explanation as to why that hasn’t happened, it’s a distinct change in policy at the top of the club. My point this morning is that I doubt we will get an explanation in the manner of “the transfer policy isn’t fit for purpose” due to the fact that the much heralded “recruitment specialist “ Mitchell is wholly responsible for this new direction and for that single reason there won’t be a similar post mortem with the local journos this time round. 
 

We might have sold a player, brought three in and still finished 8th. I completely understand that. But if we want to bring money into the club finishing as high up the league as possible would in my opinion be a logical idea. We’re likely to tread water again because nothing has changed again. Keeping our fingers crossed for another upturn in form this spring is another risk. I’d have personally tried to mitigate that. 

[ewerk 32349]

I'd agree that Mandy was more of a risk taker than the lot we're left with now but that's also the approach that led us to desperately trying to sell players at the end of last June.

 

If the right player was available this winter I think we'd have gone for him, like we did with Gordon but the most likely explanation is that none of our targets were available for a reasonable price. This isn't like the first January under PIF, we're choosing from a much narrower pool for players that can definitely improve our first XI.

[PaddockLad 18379]

12 minutes ago, ewerk said:

I'd agree that Mandy was more of a risk taker than the lot we're left with now but that's also the approach that led us to desperately trying to sell players at the end of last June.

 

If the right player was available this winter I think we'd have gone for him, like we did with Gordon but the most likely explanation is that none of our targets were available for a reasonable price. This isn't like the first January under PIF, we're choosing from a much narrower pool for players that can definitely improve our first XI.

Well yeah. Villa have tried to change it though in an attempt to finish in the top four/five. They could see doing nothing changes nothing…so they sold a player to do so…

[Gemmill 48569]

I doubt they wanted to sell Duran. 

 

It's entirely about whether a target is available and whether we have the funds in this window to prise them away from their team. The answer to one or both of those questions was obviously no. 

 

The worst thing we could do is buy a player that might be a fit between here and May, but we're not sure about him long term. 

Edited 4 hours ago by Gemmill

[Alex 36214]

Not necessarily on here but I’ve seen lots of stuff suggesting the investment has dried up etc. I don’t really see it, unless the new stadium and the state of the art training ground aren’t happening. I’m pretty sure that’s not the case, and I don’t see why the owners would be pressing ahead with that if investment wasn’t going to keep happening. The PSR discussions have been done to death but a few things to remember are the woeful inward revenue that was inherited, the massive squad overhaul that was needed (and has lead to position we didn’t really want to be in - selling two young assets in the summer to avoid repercussions). We’re clearly not the only ones feeling the need to tread carefully, just look at the lack of transfer activity in the January window compared to what it used to be like. All that means is we’re reliant on getting players we’re pretty sure about investing in. Players who’ll be here for years. There’s no point in looking at short term fixes in the Saudi league. There’s no guarantee they’d be sanctioned anyway as they’ve clearly been bought to raise the profile of the league with the World Cup in mind. What would be the point in signing a 37 year old Benzema for 6 months in any case? That’s an extreme example but it just doesn’t fit in with the way Howe or the hierarchy seem to want to do things. And if we start getting ‘creative’ it’ll just get outlawed the next time the cartel get together. I’d also say selling Kelly for £20m after getting him on a free is an incredible bit of business. 
It obviously needs to be a big summer but I don’t think there’s anything about the way we acted in January to suggest it won’t be. 

[David Kelly 1328]

Just now, Gemmill said:

I doubt they wanted to sell Duran. 

 

It's entirely about what is available and whether we have the funds in this window to prise them away from their team. The answer to one or both of those questions was obviously no. 

 

The worst thing we could do is buy a player that might be a fit between here and May, but we're not sure about him long term. 

That approach is what has resulted in Targett still being here.  Although we had the opportunity to send him back to Villa the first summer and bizarrely didn't take it. 

[ewerk 32349]

3 minutes ago, David Kelly said:

That approach is what has resulted in Targett still being here.  Although we had the opportunity to send him back to Villa the first summer and bizarrely didn't take it. 

 

Targett did well for us in his loan spell. We then spent the summer looking for a better option but couldn't come up with one so ended up signing him permanently later in the window.

[RobinRobin 12118]

4 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

Targett did well for us in his loan spell. We then spent the summer looking for a better option but couldn't come up with one so ended up signing him permanently later in the window.

And he seems to be injured as much as Wilson, making him difficult to shift. 

[David Kelly 1328]

5 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

Targett did well for us in his loan spell. We then spent the summer looking for a better option but couldn't come up with one so ended up signing him permanently later in the window.

And then still didn't use him (yes I know injuries played their part there).  I think it was obvious to most that he was never going to be a player who could move forward with us so it was a strange signing.  Wood is the only similar signing we made to Targett but we manage to move him on quickly.  Every other signing we have made up to last summer have been with a much longer term view.

[Toonpack 10913]

29 minutes ago, Alex said:

Not necessarily on here but I’ve seen lots of stuff suggesting the investment has dried up etc. I don’t really see it, unless the new stadium and the state of the art training ground aren’t happening. I’m pretty sure that’s not the case, and I don’t see why the owners would be pressing ahead with that if investment wasn’t going to keep happening. The PSR discussions have been done to death but a few things to remember are the woeful inward revenue that was inherited, the massive squad overhaul that was needed (and has lead to position we didn’t really want to be in - selling two young assets in the summer to avoid repercussions). We’re clearly not the only ones feeling the need to tread carefully, just look at the lack of transfer activity in the January window compared to what it used to be like. All that means is we’re reliant on getting players we’re pretty sure about investing in. Players who’ll be here for years. There’s no point in looking at short term fixes in the Saudi league. There’s no guarantee they’d be sanctioned anyway as they’ve clearly been bought to raise the profile of the league with the World Cup in mind. What would be the point in signing a 37 year old Benzema for 6 months in any case? That’s an extreme example but it just doesn’t fit in with the way Howe or the hierarchy seem to want to do things. And if we start getting ‘creative’ it’ll just get outlawed the next time the cartel get together. I’d also say selling Kelly for £20m after getting him on a free is an incredible bit of business. 
It obviously needs to be a big summer but I don’t think there’s anything about the way we acted in January to suggest it won’t be. 

 

They put another £15 Mill in the other week through a share sale, so I agree, don't see it.

 

The main problem is just perception IMO football supporters are "now, now, now" and PiF etc. all play the long game.

[ewerk 32349]

28 minutes ago, David Kelly said:

And then still didn't use him (yes I know injuries played their part there).  I think it was obvious to most that he was never going to be a player who could move forward with us so it was a strange signing.  Wood is the only similar signing we made to Targett but we manage to move him on quickly.  Every other signing we have made up to last summer have been with a much longer term view.

 

I think Targett was signed with the intention of being a first team player for that season at least but Dan Burn surprised everyone with how well he did at LB and that pretty much ended the chances of him starting regularly. If Howe had known Burn was going to be as good as he was then he might have had second thoughts about signing Targett permanently.

[Kid Dynamite 7447]

2 hours ago, David Kelly said:

  I've heard lots of people say that selling Kelly for £20m immediately gives us £100m to spend in the summer but I'm pretty sure it's nowhere near that simplistic.  

Yeah. That £20mil gives us the first installment of a £100m signing on a 5 year contract, but we've still got to find the extra £20m a season for the next 4 years to keep paying it off. 

[OTF 8036]

1 hour ago, Alex said:

Not necessarily on here but I’ve seen lots of stuff suggesting the investment has dried up etc. I don’t really see it, unless the new stadium and the state of the art training ground aren’t happening. I’m pretty sure that’s not the case, and I don’t see why the owners would be pressing ahead with that if investment wasn’t going to keep happening. The PSR discussions have been done to death but a few things to remember are the woeful inward revenue that was inherited, the massive squad overhaul that was needed (and has lead to position we didn’t really want to be in - selling two young assets in the summer to avoid repercussions). We’re clearly not the only ones feeling the need to tread carefully, just look at the lack of transfer activity in the January window compared to what it used to be like. All that means is we’re reliant on getting players we’re pretty sure about investing in. Players who’ll be here for years. There’s no point in looking at short term fixes in the Saudi league. There’s no guarantee they’d be sanctioned anyway as they’ve clearly been bought to raise the profile of the league with the World Cup in mind. What would be the point in signing a 37 year old Benzema for 6 months in any case? That’s an extreme example but it just doesn’t fit in with the way Howe or the hierarchy seem to want to do things. And if we start getting ‘creative’ it’ll just get outlawed the next time the cartel get together. I’d also say selling Kelly for £20m after getting him on a free is an incredible bit of business. 
It obviously needs to be a big summer but I don’t think there’s anything about the way we acted in January to suggest it won’t be. 

 

If you were a know nought outsider looking on it may seem that way simply because the spending on players has eased up dramatically.

 

Of course as you've noted it only needs a modicum of knowledge to know that we were starting with a grossly underpowered squad that needed a massive overhaul and now that we have a much stronger roster we're heavily limited by PSR.

[David Kelly 1328]

1 hour ago, Kid Dynamite said:

Yeah. That £20mil gives us the first installment of a £100m signing on a 5 year contract, but we've still got to find the extra £20m a season for the next 4 years to keep paying it off. 

I'm still not convinced it's quite that straightforward.  I understand where those figures come from, but I get the impression it's not quite as easy as that.