January transfer window

[cheshirevaliant]

On 19/01/2020 at 21:14, Joe B said:

I don't get your point.

Smith hasn't had a serious leg injury. He's played nearly 200 games for the club and has been able to play professional football partly due to the coaching we gave him as a lad.

I get most players are mercenaries but I always hope players produced by us would be decent enough to ensure we get a bit of cash from bringing him through. I would be very disappointed if this situation is manipulated so that some very decent offers from the club are rejected to enable Smith to leave for free in the summer.

Maybe those morals don't exist any more; I just assumed Smith would be one of the players who'd want the best for the club who got him to this point, being local. Would tarnish my view of him personally.

I suppose on the flip side of that is we've had 200 games out of him for a relatively low weekly wage. If you suggest he should sign a 1 year extension out of loyalty, then surely we will be in the same boat again next year? I'd like to think a decent League 1 club will take a punt on him (not sure he's quick enough to play Championship regularly). 

[Aussie Rules]

1 hour ago, philmpv said:

"a few hundred quid" can mean a lot of different things, particularly in such a limited context. Is it "a few hundred quid" a month? A week? A year? Is it £100? Or £900? Unwise the declare the Club 'mad' without knowing any of the facts (particularly given that Birchall's comments are hearsay). Trust in the Club to make offers they consider to be fair and reasonable, both for the Club and the player. It's not Norman in charge anymore you know? 

Absolutely. Chris makes an off the cuff comment, the substance of which is akin to three fifths of five-eights of nothing.

Does he know? I don't know - nor do I care.

When it comes from JA, Carol & Kevin then we'll know.

[Joe B]

14 hours ago, toyahw said:

 

He took a few years as target of the boo boys, Don't ask me why. But still taking young player of the year.

He is low maintenance, rocks up does his job. 

That is why he is my hero. And he is a bloody good footballer in my opinion. 

Bar Vale Fan in Alsager its very exaggerative to claim he's been the target of 'boo boys'. I've never heard him criticised at a match or in any way 'booed' in the manner Lloyd and Amoo have been this year. Maybe one call on Radio Stoke about 12 months ago?

I think most fans have widely commended his consistency. Stop pretending he's been hard done by.

[Joe B]

14 hours ago, Jacko51 said:

Puyol and Cannovaro were both smaller than Smith yet they won the World Cup.  You can still be a successful centre half even if you're not a giant.

Not saying you can't, but its a attribute which will count against him.

Seems to be the perception I'm arguing Smith isn't good; I'm not. There was an article I wrote on this website's front page in which I said he was one of our best players this year, with a shout for overall Player of the Year.

I just don't think he'll go the Championship, and questioned the veracity of the Birmingham link. The gap between our League and the Championship is monumental.

I also criticised the Birchall 'in the know' business on Radio Stoke; why on earth is he privy to contractual negotiations between Smith and the club, apparently down the disparity in sums being offered by us and demanded by Smith/his agent? That, or he's making things up.

Just don't want this become a 'storyline' for the rest of the season. Unwelcome distraction. If he doesn't want to sign, we shake his hand, thank him for 4 seasons of service, and see him on his way. People arguing 'we give him what he wants' are talking crazy. We pay him what he's worth.

[Joe B]

If you can't tell, I really, really dislike protracted, 'he said she said' contractual negotiations. Worst part of football.

[philmpv]

6 minutes ago, Joe B said:

Not saying you can't, but its a attribute which will count against him.

Seems to be the perception I'm arguing Smith isn't good; I'm not. There was an article I wrote on this website's front page in which I said he was one of our best players this year, with a shout for overall Player of the Year.

I just don't think he'll go the Championship, and questioned the veracity of the Birmingham link. The gap between our League and the Championship is monumental.

I also criticised the Birchall 'in the know' business on Radio Stoke; why on earth is he privy to contractual negotiations between Smith and the club, apparently down the disparity in sums being offered by us and demanded by Smith/his agent? That, or he's making things up.

Just don't want this become a 'storyline' for the rest of the season. Unwelcome distraction. If he doesn't want to sign, we shake his hand, thank him for 4 seasons of service, and see him on his way. People arguing 'we give him what he wants' are talking crazy. We pay him what he's worth.

Completely agree. It's been the same with many players over the years, the most recent being Gavin bleeding Gunning, whom some on here seemed to consider that he was so crucial that he could write his own cheque

[JRC]

14 hours ago, Paul6754 said:

Birchall said on Saturday Nathan Smith didn't want to move from Madeley, if true then if Vale offer him something he considers reasonable he''l take it, I hope he does.

I heard him make the comment on iPlayer and it didn't seem that well informed. Bottom line is next year the budget will be increased from about 1.5 million to maybe 1.8. Realistically the club can stretch to 2k a week for a few players. That's about the limit with employee NI and pension contributions.  There comes a point where it goes far enough and the extra 200 a week is too much. You would hope what they end up with as a final offer would put him on a par with the top earners. If he doesn't sign that's the limit of what we can afford and good wishes to the lad for what he has done.

[Aussie Rules]

8 minutes ago, philmpv said:

Completely agree. It's been the same with many players over the years, the most recent being Gavin bleeding Gunning, whom some on here seemed to consider that he was so crucial that he could write his own cheque

Oi you, behave. Today in the several topics we've seen mention of Jim Gannon, Norman thingy abob, and now Gavin 'bleeding' Gunning 😯

Enough already 😉

[Jacko51]

58 minutes ago, Joe B said:

The gap between our League and the Championship is monumental.

Having watched the crap served up by WBA and Sjoke last night I'd have to disagree with that!!

[valefan16]

Taylor Loan extended officially now!

[Playa Amodores]

Taylor loan extended, clubs wanting astronomical fees for loan players. I’d say we’ve done our business so let’s shut up shop and concentrate on the players we have out of contract. It would be good if Nathan became our modern day Roy Sproson, however the game and life have evolved immensely since then. Perhaps the promise of a statue of him outside the ground when he retires might just swing an extension deal.

 

[JRC]

6 minutes ago, valefan16 said:

Taylor Loan extended officially now!

We will do well to make another signing of similar quality. Looking at Askey's comments today it's not an easy window to be doing business. Any value likely to be during the last couple of days. Very positive news.

[osprey]

Taylor Loan extended officially now!

Hope it gets fit soon

[JRC]

2 minutes ago, Playa Amodores said:

Taylor loan extended, clubs wanting astronomical fees for loan players. I’d say we’ve done our business so let’s shut up shop and concentrate on the players we have out of contract. It would be good if Nathan became our modern day Roy Sproson, however the game and life has evolved immensely since then.

 

Agree although decent deals do materialise in the last 2 or 3 days. This year we aren't desperate so we can hold on and wait and see if something better comes along.

[Joe B]

Good news regarding Taylor, and a situation where all parties seem to benefit.

I get what Askey's saying but I still imagine a forward will come in on loan; even if its a young lad.

Any news on Gabriel? Is he training?

Taylor, Gabriel, and a forward may have to suffice for now, on the basis that we extend Worrall et al (possibly not Smith).