Conor Chaplin joins on deal to 2029

[Jattdogg]

Good signing for our level right now.

 

Hope he does well and gets back to his prime scoring days.

[LcFc_Smiv]

Tactical play from Rudkin, Foxestalk have cottoned on to the Southampton connection so hes gone for an ex Pompey player. And you lot think hes an idiot 

[STUHILL]

Decent signing. 

[Dandy king]

1 hour ago, Katy said:

As long as he’s less of a twat than what we already have then he’ll do. I wonder what nickname social admin will give him 🤔

Chaplinsy 

[Stadt]

 

Rubbish season for Portsmouth last year, hopefully that was a one off, obviously not a PL player so 24/25 can be written off so his last good season was 23/24 and he's 29 with a three year deal. Seemingly a great pro but the extra year burdens with more risk than I'd like.  I'd be sanguine with a 2+1 option.

 

The other concern is he's 5'6, our midfield options are already lightweight. Overall I'd give it a 6.75, depending on wages.

[Brizzle Fox]

1 hour ago, Katy said:

As long as he’s less of a twat than what we already have then he’ll do. I wonder what nickname social admin will give him 🤔

Tbf it's hard to be a bigger twat than what we already have...

 

Know a few Ipshit fans and they love him as a player and as a "good human", always first to get involved in community activities etc.

 

Feels like Captain material, as tbf they're ain't any other options amongst our current range of spineless senior players.

[RowlattsFox]

You'd like to think he's got enough about him at this level still. Probably prefer not to offer 3 year contracts but he's under 30 still so probably demands it. 

 

 

 

[MPH]

couple of Ipswich town fans I know saying their head has gone at the thought of him dropping down to 1st Division. They expected him to get a contract at a newly promoted prem team!

Edited 11 hours ago by MPH

[Loxm]

3 hours ago, moore_94 said:

I have to say it is quite a bit more enjoyable putting up about new signings sat next to a pool though 

 

Come on we all know it is @Loxm who cheats

Now now no need for that. 

[AjcW]

25 minutes ago, Stadt said:

 

Rubbish season for Portsmouth last year, hopefully that was a one off, obviously not a PL player so 24/25 can be written off so his last good season was 23/24 and he's 29 with a three year deal. Seemingly a great pro but the extra year burdens with more risk than I'd like.  I'd be sanguine with a 2+1 option.

 

The other concern is he's 5'6, our midfield options are already lightweight. Overall I'd give it a 6.75, depending on wages.

I think his last 2 seasons look significantly different if he hadn't been clung on to in the Premier League by Ipswich.

 

He's clearly a "promoted at best then sold" Championship level player. If he'd dropped back down after promotion I think his last two seasons are double figures too.

 

But for him i'm sure it was an amazing experience making that many appearances in the Premier League.

[Dandy king]

I'm surprised at people moaning about a three year deal. 

 

It's a permeant signing. Remember those ? 

[UniFox21]

2 minutes ago, Dandy king said:

I'm surprised at people moaning about a three year deal. 

 

It's a permeant signing. Remember those ? 

We've been burnt so many times on players on long contracts

[STUHILL]

10 minutes ago, MPH said:

couple of Ipswich town fans I know saying their head has gone at the thought of him dropping down to 1st Division. They expected him to get a contract at a newly promoted prem team!

When I watched him for Ipswich, he was a menace and always caused teams problems. I don't think he has ever been Premier League quality, but he is a decent Championship player. 

We likely had to give him 3 years, otherwise he would have gone to a Championship club. I am happy with this signing, but we have to remember we are a League 1 club now, so let's have some perspective too. 

 

If we are signing Ings as well, then we have to then bring in or through, a host of talented youngsters as well

[OntarioFox]

Pretty happy with this one. Took their sweet time but the window is ticking along nicely now.

 

Is 3 years too long? I guess we'll find out. Doubt he's going to be on much money in our current state and as long as he's good enough to help us scrap out of this division he'll have paid his way already.

 

The most Leicester City thing to do would be to get back to back promotion then offer him a 3 year extension on 50k a week, based on him being a standout performer 2 years prior against the likes of Bromley and Peterborough. I'm talking theoreticals here of course - we'll do well to even manage promotion at the first time of asking given the depth of the rot at our club, but who knows?

[Cincinnati Fox]

Length of this deal and the GK concern me. Both a year too long

[whoareyaaa]

1 minute ago, Cincinnati Fox said:

Length of this deal and the GK concern me. Both a year too long

Not many players sign a 2 year deal unless there 33/34 it’s just standard really.

 

Decent signing tbh.

Edited 11 hours ago by whoareyaaa

[South Shire Fox]

47 minutes ago, Dandy king said:

I'm surprised at people moaning about a three year deal. 

 

It's a permeant signing. Remember those ? 

I remember Bertrand and Bobby Reid yeah 

[Jon the Hat]

Let’s gets this guy more posts than the ****s leaving us.  I for one think he looks great for L1 and will take us up.

[Pliskin]

Steady operator at this level! Can’t grumble at this on a free.

[Cincinnati Fox]

16 minutes ago, whoareyaaa said:

Not many players sign a 2 year deal unless there 33/34 it’s just standard really.

 

Decent signing tbh.

1-Year Contracts: These are the most common. Many squad players, veterans, or those proving themselves after a free transfer sign short, 1-year 'show and prove' agreements. [1, 2, 3]

2-Year Contracts: Standard deals for established first-team starters or players brought in with a transfer fee. These provide a slight bit of job security while giving the club the flexibility to move them on if they aren't promoted or suffer financial hardship. [1, 2, 3, 4]

3-Year Contracts: The upper limit for most League One clubs. These are usually reserved for young, highly promising prospects the club hopes to sell for a profit, or rare marquee signings who anchor the team. [1]

 

chaplin has realistically zero sell on value so 3 years is not standard and a year too long. 
The GK simply should be 1 year and 2 is wrong.

But I am not surprised as we are horrifically run financially.

Edited 10 hours ago by Cincinnati Fox

[Ric Flair]

3 hours ago, honeybradger said:

This is a gutting transfer from the perspective of those 3. At least one of them will struggle for playing time this season because of Chaplin coming in.

I disagree as none of them should be playing in his position which is a support striker. Alves should be LW or an 8, likewise Page and Braybrooke is a 6.

[Nolucklcfc]

Don’t mind the contract length with Chaplin. If we do get back up, then he’s more than good enough for the championship as well. 

[CarolinaFox]

I think his value to the club goes well beyond any potential resale fee. The main reason he's been given a three-year contract is because of what he can contribute on the pitch and his ability to help us get back to the Premier League. If, over the next three years, he plays a major role in securing back-to-back promotions and getting us back to the top flight, that would be worth far more to the club than any transfer profit we might have made. Sometimes the biggest return on a player isn't resale value—it's the success they help deliver. Overall this feels like a solid signing. 

[whoareyaaa]

5 minutes ago, Cincinnati Fox said:

1-Year Contracts: These are the most common. Many squad players, veterans, or those proving themselves after a free transfer sign short, 1-year 'show and prove' agreements. [1, 2, 3]

2-Year Contracts: Standard deals for established first-team starters or players brought in with a transfer fee. These provide a slight bit of job security while giving the club the flexibility to move them on if they aren't promoted or suffer financial hardship. [1, 2, 3, 4]

3-Year Contracts: The upper limit for most League One clubs. These are usually reserved for young, highly promising prospects the club hopes to sell for a profit, or rare marquee signings who anchor the team. [1]

 

chaplin has realistically zero sell on value so 3 years is not standard and a year too long. 
The GK simply should be 1 year and 2 is wrong.

But I am not surprised as we are horrifically run financially.

Is Chaplin not a marquee signing ? Seems highly rated by Ipswich fans he probably wouldn’t have accepted a 2 year deal

[Wigston Tractor Boy]

One of my favourite Town players of the last few years. Always gave his all and scored a bucketload of goals in League 1 plus some crucial goals in the Championship. The way he was used at Ipswich was as a central 10 and he bagged most of those goals coming into the box late for the cutback.

 

His limitations are really his size and speed. He's a smart player who can pick out a great crossfield ball and knows where the goal is, but unfortunately he was cursed to live in a child's body.

 

As mentioned already, he does lots in the community and an all round good egg too.