Wes Burns (due to have medical, Percy / McGrath)

[hackneyfox]

35 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

The original tweet is here  

 

 

So how much do we now owe in transfer fees?

[FoxinNotts]

37 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

The original tweet is here  

 

 

Any chance all this negative financial shyte can be talked about on one of the negative financial shyte threads, rather than Wes Burns thread

[Big_Nige]

15 minutes ago, Dan said:

I completely understand that three of the last four years (and even part of the other year) were completely toxic, miserable and we're fed up of it. We're probably going to win more games than we lose this season. People want to be positive. I get that.

 

But some of the stuff I read on here about this sort of signing. Rudkin gets universally bashed but all of a sudden if we pay up a solid Championship level deal, in League One, for an ageing player who was pretty pace reliant, who has since had a bad injury, that isn't just something to shrug our shoulders at is it surely?

 

I remember the first time we got relegated and it was out with the toxicity of Tielemans, Maddison etc... whoever and in with the humble, good lads Coady and Winks.

 

Like I said above, if this is a loan, or a reasonable, one year deal - fair enough. But if we tie ourselves into yet another risky deal, all on the premise of "we have to do this to get out of the league" (not true, didn't see Lincoln or Cardiff doing this over and over again), to then hypothetically be promoted, still in the shit financially, still needing an overhaul, where the same sort of thing will be trotted out for the latest version of this sort of signing.

 

This isn't negativity for negativity's sake even though it feels like it. Even though we are scarred. I'm just not willing to overlook it in this position. Overlooking these sorts of things are why we're in this position in the first place. I'm being ultra picky and have good reason to.

I wonder if it’s a bit of a shit or bust strategy from KP. The sale valuation of the club is well below what they are willing to accept, if we go up it will increase to a level that would be acceptable, so signings like this that aren’t financially savvy will then be someone else’s problem. 

It’s a risky strategy and I’m sick of the club being treated like a gamblers play thing

 

Having said that, I do rate a fit Wes Burns. On the pitch it makes sense, off the pitch, not so much 

[Dan]

1 minute ago, Big_Nige said:

I wonder if it’s a bit of a shit or bust strategy from KP. The sale valuation of the club is well below what they are willing to accept, if we go up it will increase to a level that would be acceptable, so signings like this that aren’t financially savvy will then be someone else’s problem. 

It’s a risky strategy and I’m sick of the club being treated like a gamblers play thing

 

Having said that, I do rate a fit Wes Burns. On the pitch it makes sense, off the pitch, not so much 

They seem to have two methods which are shit or bust, or just do nothing and hope for the best.

 

The two times we went for the latter, we produced the two biggest underachievement relegations I can remember. Literally 1 and 2, on the podium.

 

They have an incredible knack of playing it wrongly. The comparisons every time we sign an ageing player to the Pearson years are really silly. Do people not remember that a little bit better, if they're going to bring it up? With the exception of Cambiasso (who was a huge coup anyway), and the likes of Wasilewski, I don't remember any of his veteran signings being anything other than squad supplementary types. If he'd signed a Burns (which actually I could see) it wouldn't have been from a position of needing him to work to achieve our aims. In this era we throw our eggs in risky baskets.

[coolhandfox]

1 hour ago, StriderHiryu said:

I don’t love either signing but I think your friend is correct. They played under McKenna, whose system isn’t a million miles away from Martin’s. The issue is what we do with them next season assuming we go up, but we were always going to sign a few players like this. 

You're always going to have that issue. You can't build a League One squad where every player is Championship-ready, just as you can't build a Championship squad where every player is Premier League-ready.

 

You're also going to have players who are reaching the end of their effectiveness. That's always going to be a problem, and it's something every club has to deal with, it about being more pro-active in moving players on. 

Edited 8 hours ago by coolhandfox

[stevostadium]

7 hours ago, Ryy said:

Blocking Carr’s and Alves pathway 😡 

Not at all.

Alves will feature heavily this season on RW.

Remember, he hasnt ever had a full season injury free so needs to be protected.

Riley needs to go out on loan and get some valuable experience.

 

So many doom merchants on here

[CosbehFox]

25 minutes ago, FoxinNotts said:

Any chance all this negative financial shyte can be talked about on one of the negative financial shyte threads, rather than Wes Burns thread

Every signing has been viewed through the prism of that because the negative financial shyte has been caused by shite signings and our transfer policy has to adapt to recover that. 
 

Winning League 1 this season isn’t anywhere near enough to get this club financially back on the straight 

Edited 8 hours ago by CosbehFox

[FoxinNotts]

2 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

Every signing has been viewed through the prism of that because of negative financial shyte has been caused by shite signings and our transfer policy has to adapt to recover that. 
 

Winning League 1 this season isn’t anywhere near enough to get this club financially back on the straight 

Agreed, but winning league one will make us a much more attractive purchase for a potential buyer.

That's where we are at. Top's pulled the rip cord, he wants out. 

[Happy Fox]

Just now, FoxinNotts said:

Agreed, but winning league one will make us a much more attractive purchase for a potential buyer.

That's where we are at. Top's pulled the rip cord, he wants out. 

 

Essentially it's promotion or bust.

[FoxinNotts]

2 minutes ago, Happy Fox said:

 

Essentially it's promotion or bust.

Looks that way. A gamble well and truely. A couple more mil spent here or there. Shit or bust. Get out of the division at the first time of asking. Get the ducks in a row to be sold now, ready for sale to coincide with promotion

Edited 7 hours ago by FoxinNotts

[Ryy]

13 minutes ago, stevostadium said:

Not at all.

Alves will feature heavily this season on RW.

Remember, he hasnt ever had a full season injury free so needs to be protected.

Riley needs to go out on loan and get some valuable experience.

 

So many doom merchants on here

Was sarcasm bud

[Richmondfox]

Another old player where the phrase ‘if he stays fit’ is being used.  Thats worked well for us the last few seasons. 

[stevostadium]

7 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

Alves definitely cannot be relied upon to be our starting LW/RW or 10 without competent back up but it's unneccessary signings like this that get in the way of the likes of Riley Carr. 

 

The wages we'll end up paying him you could get Abdulmalik from Boreham Wood for £1m and wages IMO.

Riley was literally a breath of fresh air in pre season, came out of nowhere.

But he really needs to go out on loan to get some valuable experience.

 

I was listening to a WYS podcast from a few weeks ago with Ian Barraclough. He said that the biggest step up is U21 to league football.

He had a rule of not taking any u21 without previous league experience as the step up was so immense.

Think that was when he was managing in L1/L2

[Miquel The Work Geordie]

8 minutes ago, stevostadium said:

I was listening to a WYS podcast from a few weeks ago with Ian Barraclough. He said that the biggest step up is U21 to league football.

He had a rule of not taking any u21 without previous league experience as the step up was so immense.

Think that was when he was managing in L1/L2

 

Ian Baraclough who of course has had a famously successful career as a manager. 

 

If you're managing in League Two and refuse to take on *any* loanees without league experience off the bat then you're an idiot. 

 

I don't dispute it's a different kind of game etc but to have that as a blanket rule is ridiculous 

[wardyfox86]

So according to this forum, our scouting requirements must be:

 

Not over 28. 

Free. 

Played in the Champ/Prem, but not relegated. 

Not free. 

Not on loan. 

Only on loan. 

Be better than our academy lads, but happy to drop down a division or 2, whilst in their prime, to be their backup. 

On a 1 year deal, in case we go up. 

 

How will they ever find the time to work through the extensive list of players fitting that criteria? 

 

[AKCJ]

54 minutes ago, FoxinNotts said:

Any chance all this negative financial shyte can be talked about on one of the negative financial shyte threads, rather than Wes Burns thread

Wish people would stop claiming that the financial side of football is being negative.

 

It's reality and it's about time a lot of you came to terms with how bad deals like this are for the future of Leicester City.

[Finnegan]

58 minutes ago, hackneyfox said:

So how much do we now owe in transfer fees?

 

To be clear, probably every club in the Premier League and a lot of the clubs in the Championship owe money on unpaid transfer fees. 

 

It's arguably not a healthy way to do business but it's not unique to us. 

 

That's not to play down our financial problems. 

 

But the unpaid transfer fee bit is nowhere near as damaging as the fact we keep gambling our future with Macquarie and then losing and getting relegated. 

 

Edited 7 hours ago by Finnegan

[AKCJ]

Just now, wardyfox86 said:

So according to this forum, our scouting requirements must be:

 

Not over 28. 

Free. 

Played in the Champ/Prem, but not relegated. 

Not free. 

Not on loan. 

Only on loan. 

Be better than our academy lads, but happy to drop down a division or 2, whilst in their prime, to be their backup. 

On a 1 year deal, in case we go up. 

 

How will they ever find the time to work through the extensive list of players fitting that criteria? 

 

Or maybe they could fit a few of those criteria? Rather than absolutely none.

[Miquel The Work Geordie]

1 minute ago, wardyfox86 said:

So according to this forum, our scouting requirements must be:

 

Not over 28. 

Free. 

Played in the Champ/Prem, but not relegated. 

Not free. 

Not on loan. 

Only on loan. 

Be better than our academy lads, but happy to drop down a division or 2, whilst in their prime, to be their backup. 

On a 1 year deal, in case we go up. 

 

How will they ever find the time to work through the extensive list of players fitting that criteria? 

 

 

Perhaps one of the stupidest posts I've ever read and I've done a lot of them, congratulations 

[stevostadium]

1 hour ago, Wasyls Pec Deck said:

Increasingly seems like the deal for BCDR. He’s dropping down at his age and injury record as I imagine that we’ve offered him a longer contract than Ipswich were prepared to offer 

He signed a 1 year deal last month mate??

We obviously fancy him and get him for a fee, i doubt we be offering more than 2 years.

RM aint no Cooperman, the DVD Recorder deal was inept beyond belief.

Great piece of business at the right price.

[Sunbury Fox]

Still finding it hard to reconcile that we're now reduced to making signings like this. 

[coolhandfox]

17 minutes ago, stevostadium said:

Riley was literally a breath of fresh air in pre season, came out of nowhere.

But he really needs to go out on loan to get some valuable experience.

 

I was listening to a WYS podcast from a few weeks ago with Ian Barraclough. He said that the biggest step up is U21 to league football.

He had a rule of not taking any u21 without previous league experience as the step up was so immense.

Think that was when he was managing in L1/L2

Words echoed by Braybrooke recently.

[Ryy]

3 year deal apparently 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[fox_favourite]

Just now, Ryy said:

3 year deal apparently 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Excellent. Hopefully when we have developed him, we can get a good return 

[jv1]

1 minute ago, Ryy said:

3 year deal apparently 🤣🤣🤣🤣

That will simply be a way to split the wages if so - if he was on 20k a week for 1 year at Ipswich he will come here for 10k over 3 years