Jump to content

Saints Transfers Thread - Deadline Day

Saint Charlie

By Saint Charlie
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

GGalpin

GGalpin

Posted
Posted
I think the club should have moved beyond developing young players for other clubs. Just blocks the route for our own players and gives us little long term benefit.

 

All for it if there's a buyout clause to be honest, but if not no point like you say.

Lighthouse

Lighthouse

Posted
Posted
Would it? Not sure u like the idea of improving a player for a bigger club with no return.

 

I think the club should have moved beyond developing young players for other clubs. Just blocks the route for our own players and gives us little long term benefit.

 

If he's better than what we have then it's an obvious and cheap way to improve the squad, we don't have to make money out of every deal we do.

Mr Saints

Mr Saints

Posted
Posted
I think the club should have moved beyond developing young players for other clubs. Just blocks the route for our own players and gives us little long term benefit.

 

But the club won't be bringing him in to develop him, they'll bring him in to do a job NOW. Won't think twice about it if he's better than what we have. Simples.

Dusic

Dusic

Posted
Posted

Agree with others. If its a loan to buy then great. If its a loan to improve him for Chelsea then its uninspiring for a club that continually bigs up its recruitment ability.

 

We need quality over quantity but not a lot of good links around at the moment as far as we are concerned. Shame not to have anyone of note in for the start of pre-season.

qwertyell

qwertyell

Posted
Posted

Loftus-Cheek is a highly talented young central midfielder who can play as a 10 or in a deeper role, and isn't a weedy midget unlike most of our midfielders. He would probably improve an area of the squad where we're weak, albeit he's totally unproven in senior football.

 

But I agree with those saying we really shouldn't be loaning other team's kids and doing their development work for them. It seems unlikely to be a "try before you buy" deal like we had with Bertrand - and who Chelsea were eager to move on.

 

Make a commitment: bid for him on a permanent deal, or look elsewhere.

shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted
But the club won't be bringing him in to develop him, they'll bring him in to do a job NOW. Won't think twice about it if he's better than what we have. Simples.

 

 

He's hardly established though - its not as if he's head and shoulders better than the rest of our squad.

 

The flipside is that he'd potentially block the progression of our youngsters - for example, are we giving up Hojbjerg who many also viewed as a top prospect.

Lighthouse

Lighthouse

Posted
Posted
He's hardly established though - its not as if he's head and shoulders better than the rest of our squad.

 

The flipside is that he'd potentially block the progression of our youngsters - for example, are we giving up Hojbjerg who many also viewed as a top prospect.

 

I don't know enough about RLC to compare styles but if it was the option of selling Clasie and bringing him in I'd be happy enough with that. There's nothing to say we can't buy him at a later date, like we did with Bertrand.

SaintBobby

SaintBobby

Posted
Posted
My thoughts exactly. We are in danger of becoming the new Arsenal but at a level below in that we concentrate too much on potential and forget about improving the now.

 

This is seriously what we're whining about now? We might become the new Arsenal. Sigh.

northam soul

northam soul

Posted
Posted
This is seriously what we're whining about now? We might become the new Arsenal. Sigh.

 

 

I know all those champions league seasons and F A cup wins but we are not going to win the league so it's a no from me meh

whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
This is seriously what we're whining about now? We might become the new Arsenal. Sigh.

 

I think you should be sighing at missing the point.

Shance

Shance

Posted
Posted
I think the club should have moved beyond developing young players for other clubs. Just blocks the route for our own players and gives us little long term benefit.

 

Loftus Cheek is better than any youngster we have in midfield and tbf, Reed has just gone out on loan to Norwich.

Nolan

Nolan

Posted
Posted
I think the club should have moved beyond developing young players for other clubs. Just blocks the route for our own players and gives us little long term benefit.

Chance is we may emulate the Bertrand Deal. Season long loan turned permanent in the January window.

 

Try before you buy...

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Posted
Posted
Chance is we may emulate the Bertrand Deal. Season long loan turned permanent in the January window.

 

Try before you buy...

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

Or the try before you buy **** up with Toby Alderweireld

hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
But the club won't be bringing him in to develop him, they'll bring him in to do a job NOW. Won't think twice about it if he's better than what we have. Simples.

But we could just as easily buy a player who is better than what we have, develop them and then sell them for a massive profit. It's worked for us so far, why bother to change it now?

hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
Agree with others. If its a loan to buy then great. If its a loan to improve him for Chelsea then its uninspiring for a club that continually bigs up its recruitment ability.

 

We need quality over quantity but not a lot of good links around at the moment as far as we are concerned. Shame not to have anyone of note in for the start of pre-season.

I'm really not bothered about links in the media. We've often got players in layer during the window and normally one or two decent buys. Our recruitment was poor last summer but I don't think we will repeat that again.

Plastic

Plastic

Posted
Posted
Not keen on Loftus Cheek, sounds like a character from Life of Brian.

 

He completely dominated some of the England U21 games last year. I'd be very happy to see him here.

Faz

Faz

Posted
Posted
He completely dominated some of the England U21 games last year. I'd be very happy to see him here.

 

Yes, but you're looking at his footballing ability, and ignoring his potential as a character in a Minty Python skit. Are you mad?

Plastic

Plastic

Posted
Posted
Yes, but you're looking at his footballing ability, and ignoring his potential as a character in a Minty Python skit. Are you mad?

 

Surely that just increases his value?

angelman

angelman

Posted
Posted
Maybe pellegrino is just having some time to assess the squad in person before making any moves .could be clutching at straws though

 

It would make sense.

 

Ostensibly though, the squad at this time is the same as last season (save for Fonte and JRod), and we managed to finish 8th. We think that we have made a big upgrade on the manager, so if he can get the squad that finished 8th to fire properly......... I wouldn't advocate that, as I do think that the CM definitely needs some creativity added to it, and DM needs bolstering.

GGalpin

GGalpin

Posted
Posted

General rule of thumb on transfer stories like this involving three clubs is one is not interested whatsoever, one is sort of interested but not seriously just yet, and the third is very interested but the story is leaked to try and gain more interest from the 2nd club or others. Where Saints fit in, no idea.

Donatello

Donatello

Posted
Posted

Ugh, the idea of perpetuating Chelsea's hoarding policy is slightly off-putting. So as others have said, unless there's a buy clause, we shouldn't be going anywhere near it.

tajjuk

tajjuk

Posted
Posted

Loftus Cheek would be good but I agree with others we should be buying him (like Bournemouth with Ake) not loaning him, we should be talking to the guy saying it could be years before he gets any regular football there and use Romeu and Bertrand as examples.

davefizzy14

davefizzy14

Posted
Posted

Loftus Cheek would be good, would prefer a loan with an option to buy but there are other options too out there, Krychowiak is out of favour at PSG, he's absolute class or Carvalho from Sporting.

Baird of the land

Baird of the land

Posted
Posted

Not interested in developing lotus cheek for Chelsea. If we bought him at least we would get benefit of knocking the very rough edges off him this season but a loan means we get all the risk on an unproven player , they get all the benefit. I'd say let him go to a rival. We should focus on getting a permanent transfer in.

Dusic

Dusic

Posted
Posted
Imagine if Romeu gets an injury. CM is the position we need to strengthen and with Reed going out on loan, i can see us bringing someone in. Probably Armstrong or RLC by the looks of it.

 

I'm starting to get excited about this season... Could it be the first one where LR has said, no one is leaving?. With the new manager coming in and maybe VVD staying, other players, such as Bertrand, may have thought twice about going.

 

I'll believe it when I see it, but maybe the ambition has returned and LR hasn't got it easy this season. After all, sounds like he'll have a new boss at some point.

Armstrong and RLC are attacking midfielders not Romeu style players at all.

 

Totally agree its the main priority position.

 

If we play 4-2-3-1 none of our currnt midfielders supplement Romeu well. All are too slow and Romeu's main weakness is mobility so a pairing of Clasie and Romeu or JWP and Romeu would just be lacking agility.

 

If Romeu got injured then we lose any sort of physicality in there and any two from Davis, JWP and Clasie would be too weak a pairing for PL football.

 

I would ship out Clasie (can't play alongside Romeu, not a good like for like replacement either) and sign someone in the Gueye, Schneiderlin mould who can run all day.

Dusic

Dusic

Posted
Posted
The 'imagine is X gets an injury' argument just leads to signing back up players, which is no way to progress. Any good season needs a bit of luck with injuries, that's just football isn't it. If Romeu got injured we need Hojbjerg, Davis, Clasie, JWP and whoever else we sign there to step up. Or maybe we'd switch to a back three for more cover.

No. We need to sign someone to partner Romeu who actually compliments his strengths and weaknesses. We don't have anyone like that now as Romeu is slow and most of our other central midfielders are either slow, short, weak or in some cases all three.

 

Sign a proper partner for Romeu and then if he were to be unavailable we would be able to find a better combination than would be possible today.

 

In general we could use a couple of more physically imposing players as must be one of the smallest/weakest sides in the league, especially when VVD wasn't playing.

Leo_ARG

Leo_ARG

Posted
Posted
No. We need to sign someone to partner Romeu who actually compliments his strengths and weaknesses. We don't have anyone like that now as Romeu is slow and most of our other central midfielders are either slow, short, weak or in some cases all three.

 

Sign a proper partner for Romeu and then if he were to be unavailable we would be able to find a better combination than would be possible today.

 

In general we could use a couple of more physically imposing players as must be one of the smallest/weakest sides in the league, especially when VVD wasn't playing.

 

 

 

 

If Pellegrino wants to apply high pressure to recover the ball quickly as it is believed he will try to do, this team will get killed because they don't have enough aggressiveness.

 

This is a glaring weakness on the squad. I would say the only one that really worries me.

 

We miss Wanyama. And Oriol is more of a positional player. He can't go roaming all over the pitch because he then would to leave a huge hole.

 

We need someone who harasses opponents, gets in their faces. Clasie does give you that but just isn't quick, strong nor big enough. What Oriol needs is a partner of Kante/Gueye/Mendy type.

Lukee

Lukee

Posted
Posted

Why did we sign Hojbjerg if we're going to sign another player with potential and avoid playing him? Would really love for Hojbjerg to be given more of a chance this season.

Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted
Nacer Chadli has apparently fallen out with Pulis and be might looking for a new club likes to play AM better than what we have?

 

good player on his day

Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted
Chadli is supposedly on £75k a week which I presume would be a stumbling block. Maybe West Ham??

 

that is going to be the norm soon for decent premier league players.

we will be stuck buying unknowns/unearthing gems from europe at this rate. Soon, that will become an expensive market

angelman

angelman

Posted
Posted

Probably. I like it that we aren't there yet, but I realise my thoughts are old fashioned and football has moved on. Wolves have just broken their transfer record and spent £16m on a player (the same as our record fee). Bournemouth have spent £20m. Palace have done £30m. Not that that guarantees any success, but it is a sign of things and no doubt we will be there soon enough. But as things are, someone at the club should be congratulated on what they have done in the past. For example, our last 2 Italians. A net £11m paid (£10m + £14 less £13 the Chinese paid us) for 2 centre forwards, who are usually notoriously over priced, who both have played and scored for the national side.

doddisalegend

doddisalegend

Posted
Posted
Chadli is supposedly on £75k a week which I presume would be a stumbling block. Maybe West Ham??

 

 

I was under the impression a lot of our senior players where in the 65-75k a week bracket now are they not?

Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted
Probably. I like it that we aren't there yet, but I realise my thoughts are old fashioned and football has moved on. Wolves have just broken their transfer record and spent £16m on a player (the same as our record fee). Bournemouth have spent £20m. Palace have done £30m. Not that that guarantees any success, but it is a sign of things and no doubt we will be there soon enough. But as things are, someone at the club should be congratulated on what they have done in the past. For example, our last 2 Italians. A net £11m paid (£10m + £14 less £13 the Chinese paid us) for 2 centre forwards, who are usually notoriously over priced, who both have played and scored for the national side.

 

just proves that what we need to spend to stand still, if anything.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...