Confirmed Transfers Summer 2013

[il_serpente]

One thing that seems to be overlooked by those complaining that Lambert hasn't been backed is the fact that, unless you have loads of money at your disposal to suddenly raise everyone's wages, introducing one or two higher priced players into the team can actually have a negative overall impact on the team's performance.  Given that there is an undisputed need to limit the overall wage bill, particularly as compared to the wealthy clubs, one of the most important qualities of the squad is to play well as a team rather than a collection of gifted players whose individual talents are enough to ensure good performances.  This is extremely dependent on team spirit, which is greatest when everyone is working for each other and feels there is relative equity in the wages and differences are based on merit.   With the exception of the bomb squad, everyone currently in the squad is either on modest wages or was started on modest wages and were given new contracts only after they proved to the manager, fans and fellow players that they merited an increase.  I'm sure the lower earners don't begrudge Benteke his big increase because they know he earned it.   If you bring in a player whose transfer fee is significantly higher, his wages are almost certainly going to be higher than the others started on as well.  At some point, regardless of whether club can afford the fee and wages, a player whose skills could fill a gap will be judged to not be worth it because it upsets the meritocracy and team unity that will allow the club to punch above their weight.  I believe that a large part of the decision not to pursue Kiyotake and possibly other targets is a result not of Lerner failing to back Lambert, but rather a result of Lambert deciding the benefits are outweighed by the combination of  negative impact  on the wage bill and potential impact on team unity.

 

Lambert's approach avoids costly mistakes and will not leave us with expensive dead wood sitting on the bench or out of the squad, which is what caused the crisis to begin with.   After a couple of years of signing players on low wages and giving increases only to those who perform, he should be able to have a high performing team with the better players earning enough to make them think twice about leaving and hungry squad players on lower wages who know that they will be rewarded if they kick on.  We may even be able to bring in the occasional proven target on higher wages at a higher fee, particularly since any gaps to be filled will be a result of quality players on decent wages leaving for large fees to the bigger clubs. 

[AndyBM]

i cant see how paul hasnt been backed.

 

oneill was backed with huge amounts of money, sqaundered it on tripe and got us hugely into debt

 

mcleish was a bad signing from the off and wasnt given any money to help clear the debt (and he couldnt be trusted clearly)

 

lambert spends the money he wants on players he think is of the correct value, good business, he wont break the bank, hes buying cheap better foreign lads than buying home born, who are over pried, so just because he didnt spend £10m on a brittsh player but instead paid £2m for a better european player doesnt mean hes not backed.

 

also, im sure i read on here a few months back that from lamberts kitty, that has to cover the players first years salary as well

 

so to be fair, even if he did have £20m to spend (and any players sold the fees went to the loan) he not going to be left with much after this window surely?

[Big_John_10]

I'm sure that when things were awful last year one of the most common reasons used to defend the manager on here was that he had a very limited budget to work with, especially in terms of wages.

Now it turns out he was clearly backed.

Confusing.

Edited September 7, 2013 by Big_John_10

[abdulaziz1]

I'm sure that when things were awful last year one of the most common reasons used to defend the manager on here was that he had a very limited budget to work with, especially in terms of wages.

Now it turns out he was clearly backed.

Confusing.

 

Not everybody defended the manager because he had a limited budget .. Maybe some did ..

 

But some thought it was going to be a hard season anyway .. For me I was thinking that we had a good chance of getting relegated yet I defended the manager .. We were rubbish for three seasons .. Acatually under Mcleash we were in less points than SHA did when they relegated .. But we somehow managed to stay because Bolton weren't up in their last games although they beat us ..

 

Under Eck , we only won 2 games in 2012 ! 5 months with only two wins and couple of draws ! So we had to change the team anyway , Not only because we want a new approach and policy .. We were actually bad .. So when the re-building began .. We had to either take the road that Lambert did .. Or MON .. I think the two ways would fail in the first season .. An changing a whole team would be always a gambling .. But that was our only choice at the time .. Fortunatly , We upped our game towards the end of the season .. and stayed up and now we're hopefully progressing ..