Summer Transfer Window 2022

[Peter Griffin]

Just now, Villatillidie95 said:

he dosent need to play as the main striker, he is useful cutting in from the side too. for some games him and Bailey for example would be awesome as inverted forward types cutting in and unleashing shots around the box. we need to be able to have the players to vary it up and he fits the bill imo, especially if traore is on the way out

He has looked exciting at times, but I just can't get the picture out of my head of the sitters he missed in the run in last season. He should have kept Burnley in the PL and he was dire

[Villatillidie95]

15 minutes ago, duke313 said:

Just the type of signing we need, another winger.  Maybe he can replace Traore on the bench.

cornet is less of a winger and more a forward imo, not a main striker but not a winger either. He would do better than Traore and we need someone who can make a bigger impact and is affordable, he is that guy. Guarantee he will do well in the prem next season and probably get a goal or 2 against us if he ends up at newcastle/hammers/everton

[Zatman]

1 minute ago, Peter Griffin said:

I know, I didn't say he is a striker, but we would expect goals from a winger and his finishing is not good enough imo, not that we even want a winger. The point of the comment is about the quality of his finishing

He scored nearly double his XG last season 

[Vive_La_Villa]

I’ve been impressed by Cornet whenever I’ve seen him. He’s pretty clinical. Probably not the type of signing that is a priority though. 
 

Any links or we just talking about who we’d like?

[The_Steve]

2 minutes ago, Villatillidie95 said:

cornet is less of a winger and more a forward imo, not a main striker but not a winger either. He would do better than Traore and we need someone who can make a bigger impact and is affordable, he is that guy. Guarantee he will do well in the prem next season and probably get a goal or 2 against us if he ends up at newcastle/hammers/everton

I really like Cornet as an inside forward and hybrid wide option. He’s a big upgrade on Traore. 

[nick76]

2 minutes ago, Pez1974 said:

I suspect 'net spend' is becoming less important to the club financially, as the wages go up. This is not to say unimportant, but if the wage bill has gone up £20m a season, then the net spend has to balance that, unless we're getting money from elsewhere. 

We also need to be focusing on buying 'starters' in my opinion. That's not the 11, but those 15/16 players who play a lot, rather than those who will fill in.
They are harder to come by, and we can't be fleeced by other clubs, so it's often better to wait for the right players than get another body in to fill the squad, but then who we can't shift for 3 seasons and become the so-called 'bomb squad'.

I agree but if we are wanting to progress our wages are going to up and we have to match that with increasing revenue.  At the same time if our competitors are progressing, we need to progress more to have a chance of catching them.  We have done some great business this summer but we need to do a lot more imo to really progress into the top half.  Quality players cost money and net spend is relevant because it suggests we should still have a transfer chest for at least one more quality signing.

Ins:
Diego Carlos   £26M
Philipe Coutinho £17M
Robin Olsen £3M
Boubacar Kamara   free
Ludwig Augustinsson   loan

Outs:
Carney Chukwuemeka   £20M
Matt Targett   £15M
Trezeguet   £3M

Net spend: £8M

These values can be argued but I still think our net spend is under £15m.

We have a big squad which is good but we need more quality to progress imo.  If that means more outs, so be it, but we need better quality coming in even if it is just one.

[Villatillidie95]

Just now, The_Steve said:

I really like Cornet as an inside forward and hybrid wide option. He’s a big upgrade on Traore. 

we need a livewire in the team especially if traore is off, however the thing with cornet is he is a bit more direct and seems to be among the goals more which is what we need. take the burden of the strikers aswell by chipping in with some goals, plus will create some chances for Watkins/Ings/Archer. I can't understand the opposition to the signing personally especially as he will be under £20 million probably and not break the bank in wages.

[Peter Griffin]

1 minute ago, Villatillidie95 said:

cornet is less of a winger and more a forward imo, not a main striker but not a winger either. He would do better than Traore and we need someone who can make a bigger impact and is affordable, he is that guy. Guarantee he will do well in the prem next season and probably get a goal or 2 against us if he ends up at newcastle/hammers/everton

Yeah, I would tend to agree that he is more of a striker than a winger, I just didn't want to delve into a childish debate with Zatman where is constantly moves the goal posts and tries to deflect as he just wants to troll what I say. He does his best to find reasons to find me wrong and bad mouth Gerrard and Purslow and it just gets tiresome and ruins the forum.

Re Cornet, as I said, lots of exciting things about him but I think there are too many dodgy Traore like moments too. I don't see him as a player for the top half of the PL, I think he is much better suited lower down. But who know, Moyes or Howe could prove me wrong and I may think why the f*** did we not buy him for 17m when he was available.

[Jas10]

 

[CVByrne]

We're back to discussing something that is total nonsense "net spend". Have people learned anything about transfers? 

[sne]

Not keen on Cornet.

We have Ings, Watkins, Archer (KD) as attackers and Coutinho, Buendia, Bailey (Traore) in midfield. We generally use a combination of 3 of those at the same time.

If we spend money on an attacking position I much rather it be for someone who improves the starting 11 than a squad option. I don't think Cornet walks into our starting 11.

5 subs sure but not yet convinced we will be that active with subs. If we intent to be then sure he might be an option, But so would a lot of other players too.

[Peter Griffin]

2 minutes ago, CVByrne said:

We're back to discussing something that is total nonsense "net spend". Have people learned anything about transfers? 

I don't think it is total nonsense but I do fully understand the point u are making. Transfers like Kamara make the 'net spend' meaningless and even more so as we compete towards the top of the food chain with regard to wages.

Net spend is a good indication as to how effective our transfer team is and how effective our coaching and development it. 

[CVByrne]

1 minute ago, sne said:

Not keen on Cornet.

We have Ings, Watkins, Archer (KD) as attackers and Coutinho, Buendia, Bailey (Traore) in midfield. We generally use a combination of 3 of those at the same time.

If we spend money on an attacking position I much rather it be for someone who improves the starting 11 than a squad option. I don't think Cornet walks into our starting 11.

5 subs sure but not yet convinced we will be that active with subs. If we intent to be then sure he might be an option, But so would a lot of other players too.

Yes we have 6 attackers for the season and AEG/Traore still in the squad. We need to move those two on before considering another attacking option. 

Ramsey / McGinn / Young can all operate further forward too if needed.

[PieFacE]

I'm unsure what we need really. Could argue another CM but we're pretty packed there already. Need some outs more than anything. 

[Peter Griffin]

1 minute ago, CVByrne said:

Yes we have 6 attackers for the season and AEG/Traore still in the squad. We need to move those two on before considering another attacking option. 

Ramsey / McGinn / Young can all operate further forward too if needed.

Its funny how we discuss transfers for varying different positions and what options we have and it usually ends up with the determination that we don't need anyone else. Maybe we should listen to our own logic 

[CVByrne]

5 minutes ago, Peter Griffin said:

I don't think it is total nonsense but I do fully understand the point u are making. Transfers like Kamara make the 'net spend' meaningless and even more so as we compete towards the top of the food chain with regard to wages.

Net spend is a good indication as to how effective our transfer team is and how effective our coaching and development it. 

Net spend is meaningless. It's not a thing. Counting part of a transfer in the fee paid to another club for the players registration and then netting these off is ridiculous.

It ignores wage and the fact the fee appears the same way wages do in the accounts over the period of the contract. 

Transfers with fee's are just two things. Annual wages to the player and the annual fee to the club we bought player off. Both are over the life of the contract. That's how it's accounted for in our accounts Wages + Fee Amortisation, they're both just annual costs

Edited August 3, 2022 by CVByrne

[NeilS]

3 minutes ago, CVByrne said:

We're back to discussing something that is total nonsense "net spend". Have people learned anything about transfers? 

You are right, it is a pointless statistic. The more pertinent and important factor moving forward is the playing staff wage bill, if that increases signifcantly and unaligned with our income we could find ourselves hamstrung on the FFP front in upcoming years. I imagine Kamara, Coutinho and Diego Carlos have arrived on significant contracts, more so than we have reduced the wage bill so far with the sales of Carney and Trezeguet.

[est1874]

5 minutes ago, PaulMcGrath_5 said:

Maybe some Calpol too?

Give over. It's pretty obvious I'm not the one acting obnoxiously childish here.

[Peter Griffin]

2 minutes ago, CVByrne said:

Net spend is meaningless. It's not a thing. Counting part of a transfer in the fee paid to another club to for the players registration and then netting these off is ridiculous.

It ignores wage and the fact the fee appears the same way wages do in the accounts over the period of the contract. 

Transfers with fee's are just two things. Annual wages to the player and the annual fee to the club we bought player off. Bother over the life of the contract. That's how it's accounted for in our accounts Wages + Fee Amortisation, they're both just annual costs

I agree they are both just costs, but as i said, it is an indication of how effective our transfer team is and how our coaching is. The lower the cost allocated to fees the better we are at transfers (providing that we are not suffering on the pitch)

[PaulMcGrath_5]

1 minute ago, est1874 said:

Give over. It's pretty obvious I'm not the one acting obnoxiously childish here.

But I am a child..