Jump to content

January Transfer Window - 2020 Edition


SuperSAINT

Recommended Posts

It's really not that odd being that people suggest and recommend we do exactly the same thing with our own young players all the time for years and years and years.

 

The difference being that we send our young players to a team where they will be first choice to get experience. If we were to send Josh Sims to Leeds or something so he could warm their bench instead of ours for 6 months with little chance of meaningful minutes we'd be equally confused. This guy won't play above Bertrand likely in the next 6 months so what's the point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference being that we send our young players to a team where they will be first choice to get experience. If we were to send Josh Sims to Leeds or something so he could warm their bench instead of ours for 6 months with little chance of meaningful minutes we'd be equally confused. This guy won't play above Bertrand likely in the next 6 months so what's the point?

 

What if Bertrand gets injured or suspended Vokins looks very small with Cedric our defence will look u12s

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference being that we send our young players to a team where they will be first choice to get experience. If we were to send Josh Sims to Leeds or something so he could warm their bench instead of ours for 6 months with little chance of meaningful minutes we'd be equally confused. This guy won't play above Bertrand likely in the next 6 months so what's the point?

 

That presumes Bertrand stays fit for the rest of the season. What are the odds on that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that we shouldn't get someone in, I'm just saying what's the point in loaning an inexperienced teenager for cover? We don't get any of the rewards for developing him and from PSG's perspective there is every chance he won't get developed as Bertrand will probably play most games, its a lose lose situation. It would make more sense for us to loan a reliable if uninspiring journeyman as cover and for PSG to send their teenager where he is guaranteed to get regular first team football.

 

From this I'd say its more likely we will get an option/obligation to buy or it will just be a permanent deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I can tell just after PSG signed him they disbanded their reserve/U23 team, so Bakker had to play U19 football which was probably a level beneath him, so he needs games and has lost his NL Youth spot due to not playing.

 

A loan only makes sense if either:

 

A.) Its a cheap cover for Bertrand, who will play every game if fit between now and the end of the season and Bakker can get some U23 games whilst PSG figure out what to do with him.

 

B.) it has a purchase option for the summer and gives us a chance to look at him in the U23s between now and then. Either the club see him as potentially better than Vokins as a second choice, or a potential Bertrand replacement when RB leaves.

 

A lot depends on Bertrand's future this summer as to whether we need a backup challenger or a first choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that we shouldn't get someone in, I'm just saying what's the point in loaning an inexperienced teenager for cover? We don't get any of the rewards for developing him and from PSG's perspective there is every chance he won't get developed as Bertrand will probably play most games, its a lose lose situation. It would make more sense for us to loan a reliable if uninspiring journeyman as cover and for PSG to send their teenager where he is guaranteed to get regular first team football.

 

From this I'd say its more likely we will get an option/obligation to buy or it will just be a permanent deal.

 

Bertrand isn't getting any younger, plus he's wanted to leave for at least two years. This guy sounds the sort of player that that fits the mould of what we Ralph wants, we get to look at him, make sure he's good enough, fits the dynamic of the dressing room and if he's not we don't have to sign them, Hard to see what's not to like about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a loan with a view to purchase, so long as we tie it down better than we did for Toby, seems the ideal scenario for most signings to me. Just like any normal job, a trial period gives the employer a chance to see what the player is all about at close quarters and get rid if the player doesn't cut the mustard. With our recent record in the transfer market, perhaps that ought to be our policy of choice...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever loan left back we get is coming in short term at least not to play much unless there's an injury to our first choice.

Kind of a hard brief. What's motivating the parent club (are we offering them the view to permanent or just waiting for them to get desperate to have the player out on loan) , so probably be quite late in the window before it gets sorted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that we shouldn't get someone in, I'm just saying what's the point in loaning an inexperienced teenager for cover? We don't get any of the rewards for developing him and from PSG's perspective there is every chance he won't get developed as Bertrand will probably play most games, its a lose lose situation. It would make more sense for us to loan a reliable if uninspiring journeyman as cover and for PSG to send their teenager where he is guaranteed to get regular first team football.

 

From this I'd say its more likely we will get an option/obligation to buy or it will just be a permanent deal.

 

The first part of your message makes sense but the second half not so. We need to be bringing in more established players so the club/team can actually benefit plus the academy/emerging players can learn from the best but not journeymen. Sign capable players who will hit the ground running, so to speak. We did that with our last manager (Hughes) and look where that left us. We have had enough disinterested people happy to pick up a pay cheque. We need leaders. Our entire ethos as a feeder club is flawed and uninspiring. Other fans criticise this aspect of our strategy and you can’t disagree. Our ethos about developing youth has logic but what’s the point if we don’t benefit from their best years, or at least some of them. In the past, a player hit form, they were sold.

 

Look at the results of our behaviour as a club. Upper table, European contenders. Sold off all the talent. Back to the unambitious days of old. Relegation fodder whilst Liverpool look set to win the league for the first time in circa 30 years, partly down to the hard work of our previous and much more robust and competent scouting network. It would be nice to see SFC & the fans to enjoy the fruit of our labours. We briefly did enjoy relative success despite what Gary Neville once said (we aren’t a top tier, top 6 club although his short, biased memory didn’t register we finished 6th, 8th & 10th when our club was actually managed).

 

We (or Gao) need to decide what they actually want from the club. Just to make do as we always did before Markus arrived, zero ambition, uninspiring, incompetent, deceitful, divisive and self serving ownership (Askham, Lowe * spit*) or actually a club that competed and made the city proud. Of all the owners, the Liebherrs were the most successful and profitable. You get out what you put in, sometimes. You certainly won’t benefit from abject neglect.

 

Sign some defenders. Wasn't Maehle a Ralph target? I have more confidence in these type of signings but don’t understand why we appear to be sitting on our hands. I appreciate transfers are complex but come on, sort it out Saints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a loan with a view to purchase, so long as we tie it down better than we did for Toby, seems the ideal scenario for most signings to me. Just like any normal job, a trial period gives the employer a chance to see what the player is all about at close quarters and get rid if the player doesn't cut the mustard. With our recent record in the transfer market, perhaps that ought to be our policy of choice...

 

Ideally it sounds sensible but this option hasn’t been well used by our current board whom are naive at best. Not helped none of them know football. Under that proviso, Danso should be returned since they won’t play him or play him in position?! He doesn’t figure but didn’t we pay an extortionate loan fee of 3.5 million for him? We never intended to sign Ings as we had. We made a mistake and played him as a sub which knocked us over the limit and activated the obligation to buy. So our biggest success from this season, Ings, stems from an alleged mistake by the club in how we manage & operate our loans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your personality involved petty personal insults when asked a reasonable question... you may need to work on that!

 

Its true though. Get out from behind your computer games, talk to people and you might find some information out too. The reason I know what I know is not because I declined a transfer request from him on FM2018 version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ideally it sounds sensible but this option hasn’t been well used by our current board whom are naive at best. Not helped none of them know football. Under that proviso, Danso should be returned since they won’t play him or play him in position?! He doesn’t figure but didn’t we pay an extortionate loan fee of 3.5 million for him? We never intended to sign Ings as we had. We made a mistake and played him as a sub which knocked us over the limit and activated the obligation to buy. So our biggest success from this season, Ings, stems from an alleged mistake by the club in how we manage & operate our loans.

 

Not read that before, I read it as an obligation to buy at the end of the season, without caveats (other than if we'd been relegated and the player declined the move).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bertrand isn't getting any younger, plus he's wanted to leave for at least two years. This guy sounds the sort of player that that fits the mould of what we Ralph wants, we get to look at him, make sure he's good enough, fits the dynamic of the dressing room and if he's not we don't have to sign them, Hard to see what's not to like about it.

 

No Bertrand has not been wanting to leave for a couple of years. Total bull**** on that one.

Would we sell Targett if he wanted out?

Edited by Pilchards
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Bertrand has not been wanting to leave for a couple of years. Total bull**** on that one.

Would we sell Targett if he wanted out?

 

No it isn't.

 

We had to sell to fund the Adams move, we had a buyer for Targett at the price we wanted, we didn't for Bertrand, simple

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bertrand is 30 years old. Too old for England, too old to go to a better club. Probably very well settled family life due to how long he's been here. His best option is to stay here and be first choice LB. He's not stupid either and will know this.

 

His last chance of a big move has gone and his England chances, you're right, that doesn't mean he didn't want one though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ideally it sounds sensible but this option hasn’t been well used by our current board whom are naive at best. Not helped none of them know football. Under that proviso, Danso should be returned since they won’t play him or play him in position?! He doesn’t figure but didn’t we pay an extortionate loan fee of 3.5 million for him? We never intended to sign Ings as we had. We made a mistake and played him as a sub which knocked us over the limit and activated the obligation to buy. So our biggest success from this season, Ings, stems from an alleged mistake by the club in how we manage & operate our loans.

 

 

Incorrect. Danny Ings was a loan with an obligation to buy.

 

All of you long winded and critical posts are based on you having absolutely no information on what is happening within the club. You do not know what Mr Gao thinks, or what his intentions are with Southampton FC. You know nothing about what transfers are or are not going to take place and you do not know how much money has been allocated for transfers.

 

In fact everything you write is based on what you think, what you feel and your in built negativity towards people within our club that you personally know nothing about.

 

The fact that the whole club are now making an immense effort to correct previous mistakes and create something that may well turn out to be quite special is being done on a sustainable basis. You are wrong to accuse the club of breaking promises when the club have made no promises, other than to do the very best it can in an incredibly competitive league.

 

The people involved with Southampton FC are working flat out to make it a success and rather than keep sniping at them perhaps you should get behind the club 100%. No one is perfect and no human being can be right all the time. Things go wrong and mistakes are made but throwing criticism at what the club is or isn't doing, based on nothing but your opinion, is pathetic and very tiresome.

 

There are very positive things happening within the club that can not be made public. No company holds its management meetings in public when it discusses future development or other sensitive matters. Southampton FC are no different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That isn't relevant

 

What isn’t relevant, someone correcting one of the many misapprehensions on this board?

 

The difference being that we send our young players to a team where they will be first choice to get experience. If we were to send Josh Sims to Leeds or something so he could warm their bench instead of ours for 6 months with little chance of meaningful minutes we'd be equally confused. This guy won't play above Bertrand likely in the next 6 months so what's the point?

 

How do you know we will even sign this guy and even more so, how do you know future team selections? That’s even more mystical. TWarstradamus! What with Egg having the inside info on the club budget and wage bill and others a direct line to the transfer targets and wage capacity, some members of this board really do have their finger on the pulse which is even stranger when you consider so many of the assertions never come to fruition yet so many criticise opinions outside of their own, many of whom aren’t even making predictions based on logic. Oh well. Time will tell.

 

Just because someone is on the books of PSG, doesn’t mean they’re necessarily good or suited to the rigours of the Premier League.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bertrand is 30 years old. Too old for England, too old to go to a better club. Probably very well settled family life due to how long he's been here. His best option is to stay here and be first choice LB. He's not stupid either and will know this.

 

Lives in London, always has done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What isn’t relevant, someone correcting one of the many misapprehensions on this board?

 

 

 

How do you know we will even sign this guy and even more so, how do you know future team selections? That’s even more mystical. TWarstradamus! What with Egg having the inside info on the club budget and wage bill and others a direct line to the transfer targets and wage capacity, some members of this board really do have their finger on the pulse which is even stranger when you consider so many of the assertions never come to fruition yet so many criticise opinions outside of their own, many of whom aren’t even making predictions based on logic. Oh well. Time will tell.

 

Just because someone is on the books of PSG, doesn’t mean they’re necessarily good or suited to the rigours of the Premier League.

 

Haha, I like the nickname, very creative. I don't know whether he will sign, I was discussing the idea of him signing (whether it is a good idea or not etc.) such is the purpose of a transfer thread. As for future team selections, it doesn't require psychic powers to notice Bertrand is in fine form and is unlikely to be readily replaced by a 19 year old with no experience in the league. I don't mind the idea of signing a young up and comer like this to deputise Bertrand, its a great idea to plan for the future, but it is hardly planning for the future if it is just a short term loan with no signing clause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not read that before, I read it as an obligation to buy at the end of the season, without caveats (other than if we'd been relegated and the player declined the move).

 

Don’t quote me on that. I was told by a couple of sources &, really, I should do my due diligence and ask around and check but it seemed plausible as we spent out while under the ownership of an owner determined to not part with a single penny. Was a lot of money and had all the hallmarks or a Les ‘agreement’. Had anyone heard about this? I thought it was common knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What with Egg having the inside info on the club budget and wage bill and others a direct line to the transfer targets and wage capacity, some members of this board really do have their finger on the pulse which is even stranger when you consider so many of the assertions never come to fruition yet so many criticise opinions outside of their own, many of whom aren’t even making predictions based on logic. Oh well. Time will tell..

 

Gordon, as much as I'm delighted that you're thinking about me, my financial information has long since passed so in terms of actual facts / information, I'm almost as clueless as you are pal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incorrect. Danny Ings was a loan with an obligation to buy.

 

All of you long winded and critical posts are based on you having absolutely no information on what is happening within the club. You do not know what Mr Gao thinks, or what his intentions are with Southampton FC. You know nothing about what transfers are or are not going to take place and you do not know how much money has been allocated for transfers.

 

In fact everything you write is based on what you think, what you feel and your in built negativity towards people within our club that you personally know nothing about.

 

The fact that the whole club are now making an immense effort to correct previous mistakes and create something that may well turn out to be quite special is being done on a sustainable basis. You are wrong to accuse the club of breaking promises when the club have made no promises, other than to do the very best it can in an incredibly competitive league.

 

The people involved with Southampton FC are working flat out to make it a success and rather than keep sniping at them perhaps you should get behind the club 100%. No one is perfect and no human being can be right all the time. Things go wrong and mistakes are made but throwing criticism at what the club is or isn't doing, based on nothing but your opinion, is pathetic and very tiresome.

 

There are very positive things happening within the club that can not be made public. No company holds its management meetings in public when it discusses future development or other sensitive matters. Southampton FC are no different.

 

Interesting.

 

Your posts suggest you are privy to news of positive developments around the club and ownership?

 

Without compromising the sensitivity of this information, can you tell us about timescales involved for any of this or opine even?

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incorrect. Danny Ings was a loan with an obligation to buy.

 

All of you long winded and critical posts are based on you having absolutely no information on what is happening within the club. You do not know what Mr Gao thinks, or what his intentions are with Southampton FC. You know nothing about what transfers are or are not going to take place and you do not know how much money has been allocated for transfers.

 

In fact everything you write is based on what you think, what you feel and your in built negativity towards people within our club that you personally know nothing about.

 

The fact that the whole club are now making an immense effort to correct previous mistakes and create something that may well turn out to be quite special is being done on a sustainable basis. You are wrong to accuse the club of breaking promises when the club have made no promises, other than to do the very best it can in an incredibly competitive league.

 

The people involved with Southampton FC are working flat out to make it a success and rather than keep sniping at them perhaps you should get behind the club 100%. No one is perfect and no human being can be right all the time. Things go wrong and mistakes are made but throwing criticism at what the club is or isn't doing, based on nothing but your opinion, is pathetic and very tiresome.

 

There are very positive things happening within the club that can not be made public. No company holds its management meetings in public when it discusses future development or other sensitive matters. Southampton FC are no different.

Great Post in many respects. There's too much negativity and naivety from many posters, and a belief that if we don't get transfers over the line then promises (!) are somehow being broken and/or the club and it's senior staff are incompetent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incorrect. Danny Ings was a loan with an obligation to buy.

 

All of you long winded and critical posts are based on you having absolutely no information on what is happening within the club. You do not know what Mr Gao thinks, or what his intentions are with Southampton FC. You know nothing about what transfers are or are not going to take place and you do not know how much money has been allocated for transfers.

 

In fact everything you write is based on what you think, what you feel and your in built negativity towards people within our club that you personally know nothing about.

 

The fact that the whole club are now making an immense effort to correct previous mistakes and create something that may well turn out to be quite special is being done on a sustainable basis. You are wrong to accuse the club of breaking promises when the club have made no promises, other than to do the very best it can in an incredibly competitive league.

 

The people involved with Southampton FC are working flat out to make it a success and rather than keep sniping at them perhaps you should get behind the club 100%. No one is perfect and no human being can be right all the time. Things go wrong and mistakes are made but throwing criticism at what the club is or isn't doing, based on nothing but your opinion, is pathetic and very tiresome.

 

There are very positive things happening within the club that can not be made public. No company holds its management meetings in public when it discusses future development or other sensitive matters. Southampton FC are no different.

 

Amen! At last a post with some sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incorrect. Danny Ings was a loan with an obligation to buy.

 

All of you long winded and critical posts are based on you having absolutely no information on what is happening within the club. You do not know what Mr Gao thinks, or what his intentions are with Southampton FC. You know nothing about what transfers are or are not going to take place and you do not know how much money has been allocated for transfers.

 

In fact everything you write is based on what you think, what you feel and your in built negativity towards people within our club that you personally know nothing about.

 

The fact that the whole club are now making an immense effort to correct previous mistakes and create something that may well turn out to be quite special is being done on a sustainable basis. You are wrong to accuse the club of breaking promises when the club have made no promises, other than to do the very best it can in an incredibly competitive league.

 

The people involved with Southampton FC are working flat out to make it a success and rather than keep sniping at them perhaps you should get behind the club 100%. No one is perfect and no human being can be right all the time. Things go wrong and mistakes are made but throwing criticism at what the club is or isn't doing, based on nothing but your opinion, is pathetic and very tiresome.

 

There are very positive things happening within the club that can not be made public. No company holds its management meetings in public when it discusses future development or other sensitive matters. Southampton FC are no different.

 

Hi Jordan. Do you collect Semmens dry cleaning now instead of Corteses?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hardly a massive commute that many others don’t do though. In the car at 7.30 isn’t that terrible.

 

That’s not the point. The argument was that he and his family are probably settled. They are, in Surrey. Anywhere south of Birmingham is a commutable distance (which in a way is why he’s still here).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There are very positive things happening within the club that can not be made public. No company holds its management meetings in public when it discusses future development or other sensitive matters. Southampton FC are no different.

 

Are these things written down as 5 pledges and sat on the CEOs desk?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...