Jump to content

Transfer rumours, targets & new signings


Doha

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Joe B said:

Think it was £1,900 a week was the max anyone was on, according to that interview (seems a bit daft to announce it imo), but lots of incentives.

Whether people want to moralise about it being right or wrong, good strikers in League 2 will set you back more than that. That's just the market now.

Flitcroft must trust himself to sign players for cheaper who can offer the same. It's very ballsy. Hemmings would have cost more but a player who regularly gets 15 a season is going to.

I wouldn't have been blown away with Hemmings in all honesty, Loft would have been a decent pick up (didn't realise he was only 24).

Announcing the limitations of the wage structure is a peculiar move, and what the motivation for it was i don't know.

That being said, I would say 90% of the transfer business done under the new structure has been great, difficult to argue against it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


1 hour ago, maccapvfc said:

On what evidence do you basis that on? So every club that gets out of league two, spends above their means do they? No one at the club has said that we can't afford new signings, we're just not signing players that want more money than we're willing to spend. It makes complete commercial sense - it's not difficult to comprehend.

There's a difference between not exceeding the overall budget Carol has set (good!) and not giving an individual player more than an amount which is above the arbitrary limits of a wage structure (bad and daft!).

I wouldn't want us to overspend, but as long as we remain within the overall budget then in my view it doesn't matter whether player X earns more than Tom Pett and Nathan Smith. Just get out the league before Wrexham and Stockport arrive.

It's a strawman argument to defend the wage structure by saying 'don't want to spend beyond our means', as no one is asking for that.

Edited by Joe B
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Joe B said:

Think it was £1,900 a week was the max anyone was on, according to that interview (seems a bit daft to announce it imo), but lots of incentives.

Whether people want to moralise about it being right or wrong, good strikers in League 2 will set you back more than that. That's just the market now.

Our current players fit in to the wage structure and they got us in to the automatics.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, valiant_593 said:

Can’t say I’m jumping at the prospect of another loan signing. 
 

Potentially:

Cass, Harrat, Edmonson, the guy from Aberdeen, striker at Villa and now Holy all on loan. That’s not the way to go, we’ve tried that before and failed miserably 

(if they all sign of course) all very young as well. Not a receipt for success that. 

Any time a loanee comes in i can't but help have that recurring nightmare of Browns 26( huge exaggeration )  loan signings of which some weren't even able to be sub as we had the full quota. 

A couple who i got attached too with a view to signing after doing so well were Mitch Clark and obviously Politic. Any loan deal can get hijacked by a bigger fish impressed with their form and jumping in to scupper our hopes.

January notorious though for panic and poor signings, ideally we want a Hall type from a ' lesser ' club or someone with just 6 months left on current contract. I have to agree with others a striker with reasonable pedigree is an absolute must. The young lads will run all day, Wilson still nowhere near at it in my opinion. So an experienced figurehead with a midfielder are top of my own wish list. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Joe B said:

Holy will 100% start over both Lucas and Stone if he comes. Absolutely no question about it. He's been a regular League 1 player and will not come cheaply.

If the highlighted is the case, I understand this move even less

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


Just now, Walka003 said:

I wouldn't have been blown away with Hemmings in all honesty, Loft would have been a decent pick up (didn't realise he was only 24).

Announcing the limitations of the wage structure is a peculiar move, and what the motivation for it was i don't know.

That being said, I would say 90% of the transfer business done under the new structure has been great, difficult to argue against it.

I'm a fan of the new set-up by 90% is generous. There's been a few average-dud signings.

Hemmings has two seasons in League 2 and got 15 and 14 in them. His career record is over 1 in 3. Would have been ideal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mr.hobblesworth said:

Our current players fit in to the wage structure and they got us in to the automatics.

Yeah and now the captain is out, the forwards aren't fit and we're 10th, losing 5 in 10. 

We need excellent signings to rekindle the season. Some of these players will want more than an incentive-laden £1,900 a week. Just how football is.

Edited by Joe B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange to announce RE the 1.9k. Surely that alerts teams to players like Conlon who could quite easily increase that wage even at this level. Is our budget not as impressive as we thought? 

Edited by valiant_593

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Joe B said:

I'm a fan of the new set-up by 90% is generous. There's been a few average-dud signings.

Hemmings has two seasons in League 2 and got 15 and 14 in them. His career record is over 1 in 3. Would have been ideal.

Off the top of my head, Martin and Johnson have been the only two I think have been below average duds, and some how we managed to turn a profit on Johnson. The rest I would say have had a positive impact on the team and squad, and all the Jan signings look positive (albeit on a small sample of games played).

Not saying Hemmings is a bad player, but given the choice i would rather take Loft if we were going to break the wage structure, especially given his age and potential resale.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, valiant_593 said:

Strange to announce RE the 1.9k. Surely that alerts teams to players like Conlon who could quite easily increase that wage even at this level. Is out budget not as impressive as we thought? 

From Henry Winter's Times article:

In League Two, at Vale, Clarke has cut the wage bill. “The top wage here is £1,850,” he says. “Me and ‘Flickers’ [David Flitcroft], the director of football, we’re trying to build an even wage cap, £1,000 to £1,850.”

Edited by Joe B
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


9 minutes ago, valiant_593 said:

Strange to announce RE the 1.9k. Surely that alerts teams to players like Conlon who could quite easily increase that wage even at this level. Is our budget not as impressive as we thought? 

Would tend to agree, Shanghais us slightly in negotiations.

Might be why we're struggling to get Smithy/Gibbo to the negotiating table.

Edited by Walka003

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Joe B said:

From Henry Winter's Times article:

In League Two, at Vale, Clarke has cut the wage bill. “The top wage here is £1,850,” he says. “Me and ‘Flickers’ [David Flitcroft], the director of football, we’re trying to build an even wage cap, £1,000 to £1,850.”

That’s just a mental thing to say to the papers. Clarke won’t mention injuries ect but is happy to tell the whole footballing world what our best players are on. Someone like Wrexham could quite easily see that, offer a decent sum for Conlon and triple his wage.
 

Surely will just put some players off straight away as well. i know there other incentives in the contracts but we shouldn’t be detailing what we’re prepared to offer players. Really odd. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Joe B said:

There's a difference between not exceeding the overall budget Carol has set (good!) and not giving an individual player more than an amount which is above the arbitrary limits of a wage structure (bad and daft!).

I wouldn't want us to overspend, but as long as we remain within the overall budget then in my view it doesn't matter whether player X earns more than Tom Pett and Nathan Smith. Just get out the league before Wrexham and Stockport arrive.

It's a strawman argument to defend the wage structure by saying 'don't want to spend beyond our means', as no one is asking for that.

It does matter if you load a larger portion of your salary on one player and he gets injured. Your remaining players are of lesser quality and now the premium element of your budget isnt availabvle.

Balanced wages structures with bonuses and add on's being used to differentiate is a sensible approach.

Yes when we all desperately want a known goal scorer it seems a shame.. but long term its the right thing to do.

I would also hazard a guess that the "I have heard of them therefore they must be good" players will also attract a premium over and above that they deserve.... worsening my first point because they may not actually deserve the extra they command.

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, valiant_593 said:

Strange to announce RE the 1.9k. Surely that alerts teams to players like Conlon who could quite easily increase that wage even at this level. Is our budget not as impressive as we thought? 

What you don't see in that article is everything else.

Pension matching and salary sacrifice benefits.

Goal bonus.

Win bonus.

Top 7 bonus.

Finishing place + promotion bonus.

They're trying to incentivise success rather than reward complacency. As Hobblesworth said it was working extremely well until the injuries struck.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


7 minutes ago, valiant_593 said:

Surely will just put some players off straight away as well. i know there other incentives in the contracts but we shouldn’t be detailing what we’re prepared to offer players. Really odd. 

If a player wont join because they want more than our wage bracket, then they wouldnt have joined anyway... the article wouldnt have made a difference.

Its only going to put off players we cant afford anyway.

If anything saved us time in your example.

Edited by Iron Curtain
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Doha said:

What you don't see in that article is everything else.

Pension matching and salary sacrifice benefits.

Goal bonus.

Win bonus.

Top 7 bonus.

Finishing place + promotion bonus.

They're trying to incentivise success rather than reward complacency. As Hobblesworth said it was working extremely well until the injuries struck.

100%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Walka003 said:

Would tend to agree, Shanghais us slightly in negotiations.

Might be why we're struggling to get Smithy/Gibbo to the negotiating table.

Smith's in contract for another 18 months. Gibbo has likely just lost the chance of a summer move even with today's news from Phil Bowers that it might not be too bad after all.

Not sure what's worse with Gibbo, whether it was the same hamstring as before or the other one. Either way has negative connotations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Reporting Posts and Ignoring Users

    Admin don't read everything. Don't assume we'll spot rule breaking. Please report posts and we'll act on ASAP. If you're logged in use the orange report post button. If you're not logged in, please use the contact form

    If you can't get on with another user you can "ignore" them. Follow the link, type in their username and save - Click here

    Check with admin if you wish to sell/auction any items. We're happy to support good causes but check first - Contact us here

  • Friends of OVF




×
×
  • Create New...