Chairman January transfer window DIDNT lack ambition

BrockBuster

Junior Member
Joined
21 Aug 2018
Messages
69
Full Programme notes from Tiger below:

I’d like to start by thanking everyone who came along on Saturday for the Sunderland game. Those were horrible conditions to watch football in, with the rain and cold testing even the toughest fans. But you came along in numbers again and to have over 9,000 people here was excellent.

Unfortunately, the result did not go our way, although I thought the performance was good. I wonder if it is worse to lose to a first-minute goal or a last-minute one? On Saturday it felt like we were chasing the game all the way through, and I was convinced that we would at least score the equaliser. Sadly, it was not to be, but I thought that in those conditions it was a very entertaining game.

I was here for the game and let me tell you, landing at Heathrow in that storm was quite an experience! As usual, I talked to a lot of fans throughout the day. There were two questions that kept coming up, so let me try to address them.

During the transfer window we sold two players: Tariqe Fosu and Shandon Baptiste. Both of them are young players who are a credit to their families. I have known Tariqe since he was a boy so seeing him leave was difficult, but there was a clause in his contract that said that if a club met the valuation then he could leave. I know he took a long time thinking about it because he loved being here, but the chance to play in the Championship was a very big opportunity for him and so he moved on.

With Shandon we did not want to sell him, but Brentford made an offer and we owed him at least the chance to talk to them. When he said he would like to leave then we negotiated a good deal with add ons and future payment,. and he left with our good wishes for the future.

Did it show a lack of ambition? No. We had already brought in Marcus Browne, Nathan Holland, George Thorne and Liam Kelly, plus Rob Atkinson for the future, and knew that James Henry, Cameron Brannagan, Anthony Forde and Ben Woodburn would be back very soon. We always knew it was likely that Chris Cadden would move to America, but we bid half a million pounds to keep him: that is a lot of money for a full back. We also made a bid that would have made a player the highest paid in the club’s history, fully aware that it would then raise wages for other players in the future.

Neither bid was successful, but I would not say that is a lack of ambition. Money from the player sales will strengthen the team and the whole club and to answer the other question that people asked me on Saturday: no, the season is not over. Three of our next four games are at home where we have been very strong. We have players hitting form, others to come back, and there is still a very long way to go.

Tiger
 

Scotchegg

Well-known member
Joined
14 Dec 2017
Messages
4,023
claims Tiger .......'signing (more) loanees doesnt show ambition ( says Me)

Bidding big money for players does show ambition, and although these were unsuccessful, I'd rather we were looking at top class signings rather than those at the cheaper end of the scale.
 

SteMerritt

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
8 Dec 2017
Messages
2,964
Bidding big money for players does show ambition, and although these were unsuccessful, I'd rather we were looking at top class signings rather than those at the cheaper end of the scale.
Only if the bids have a realistic chance of coming off. We could have bid for Messi and claimed ambition, knowing there was no chance in hell he would sign.
 

Scotchegg

Well-known member
Joined
14 Dec 2017
Messages
4,023
Only if the bids have a realistic chance of coming off. We could have bid for Messi and claimed ambition, knowing there was no chance in hell he would sign.
That's of course true. But I have it on pretty good authority that we met the asking price for Will Grigg, and I suspect that he is player mentioned that would have increased our wage structure. Sunderland then changed their minds, due to them not wanting to strengthen a rival. So, I would say that the ambition was very much there, but that doesn't mean that a deal will happen. As for the £500k offer for Cadden, I think that was a fair valuation, especially on a player who has cost nothing 6 months ago. Paying more would have stretched our playing budget and could have been an expensive mistake.

Of course, this is all irrelevant. Neither deal happened and we are where we are. But I have confidence that we can find the right players, and have the finances available to compete hopefully better in the summer.
 

Northernyellow

Junior Member
Joined
20 Feb 2019
Messages
134
I read Tiger's notes.
Reminds me of the Venkey's when they took over Blackburn Rovers.
They 'bid' for players like Ronaldo, Beckham, and so on.... None of them signed, but- hey- they put in a bid.
All depends on whether you think Tiger is credible, I suppose.
Check out his track record at Reading.
This is all following a very similar pattern.
 

Scotchegg

Well-known member
Joined
14 Dec 2017
Messages
4,023
I read Tiger's notes.
Reminds me of the Venkey's when they took over Blackburn Rovers.
They 'bid' for players like Ronaldo, Beckham, and so on.... None of them signed, but- hey- they put in a bid.
All depends on whether you think Tiger is credible, I suppose.
Check out his track record at Reading.
This is all following a very similar pattern.
What is the similar pattern to Reading?
 

uptheus

Well-known member
Joined
8 Dec 2017
Messages
2,239
However you look at it, it was poorly managed. Started off well, but capitulated miserably by not achieving priority objectives whilst offloading key players at a time they could not be replaced. Poor management.
 

Bigfella72

Active member
Joined
13 Dec 2017
Messages
774
I read Tiger's notes.
Reminds me of the Venkey's when they took over Blackburn Rovers.
They 'bid' for players like Ronaldo, Beckham, and so on.... None of them signed, but- hey- they put in a bid.
All depends on whether you think Tiger is credible, I suppose.
Check out his track record at Reading.
This is all following a very similar pattern.
A tiger can change its spots 🤔
 

Oxymoron

Active member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
385
From the notes the telling point is that both players wanted to leave - they weren't sold on or shoved our the door, they looked at the grass on the other side of the fence & opted to go and play there.

Once a player, any player, had decided that he doesn't want to be at the club, any club, the best thing you can do is realise a price for him and move on - and after last night, it would seem that others have now stepped up to the challenge of replacing them in the team....
 

Scotchegg

Well-known member
Joined
14 Dec 2017
Messages
4,023
I know our business model is all around bringing in young talent to develop and progress with us, or elsewhere for a large profit. But I think our dealings in the loan market have been unfairly dismissed this season. At the beginning of last season we spent a large chunk of wages on Carrathurs, Holmes, Garbutt and Sam Smith. It then got better with the introduction of Kashi, Graham and Sinclair as well as realising where Garbutt can play.

However, this season has been much more successful and shows signs of our ambitions just as much as with the players we've bought. Cadden and Taylor were great deals, as was Woodburn and (less so) Thorne until their injuries. In January, the addition of Holland and Browne (and glimpses of Kelly) have taken our play on to another level. These deals are not cheap, and we would have been competing with some big clubs for these players.

Of course the criticism is that they all return to their clubs in the summer, never to be seen again. But with Woodburn likely to stay, Thorne will probably do a deal if he stays fit, Taylor out of contract, and Browne enjoying his football once more, we may well keep many of these players here and be in a good place to attract more.

So I do think we have shown ambition for this season as well as looking to continue building next season. Loanees or not, we have the players that can bring us the success we all want without breaking the bank. Surely that's not a bad thing?
 

Bigfella72

Active member
Joined
13 Dec 2017
Messages
774
I know our business model is all around bringing in young talent to develop and progress with us, or elsewhere for a large profit. But I think our dealings in the loan market have been unfairly dismissed this season. At the beginning of last season we spent a large chunk of wages on Carrathurs, Holmes, Garbutt and Sam Smith. It then got better with the introduction of Kashi, Graham and Sinclair as well as realising where Garbutt can play.

However, this season has been much more successful and shows signs of our ambitions just as much as with the players we've bought. Cadden and Taylor were great deals, as was Woodburn and (less so) Thorne until their injuries. In January, the addition of Holland and Browne (and glimpses of Kelly) have taken our play on to another level. These deals are not cheap, and we would have been competing with some big clubs for these players.

Of course the criticism is that they all return to their clubs in the summer, never to be seen again. But with Woodburn likely to stay, Thorne will probably do a deal if he stays fit, Taylor out of contract, and Browne enjoying his football once more, we may well keep many of these players here and be in a good place to attract more.

So I do think we have shown ambition for this season as well as looking to continue building next season. Loanees or not, we have the players that can bring us the success we all want without breaking the bank. Surely that's not a bad thing?
Stop being so positive 😉
 
Top Bottom