Summer Transfer Window 2021

[SKD]

9 minutes ago, woodsaint1 said:

Underwhelmed. We're that skint we've no other option but to consider players out on loan to provide much needed depth. They're out on loan for a reason. Buzzing for the return of Elyounoussi, Hoedt, Valery, Lemina and Vokins in the summer 😒💩💩

Elyounoussi won’t be first choice (unless he impresses). We’ve not got £15m to spend on a back up and Elyounoussi has done enough at Celtic and previous clubs to be that. 
 

I’m pretty sure that the others won’t be in the squad and will be either sold or loaned out again. 
 

if keeping Elyounoussi means we can strengthen in other key areas, like full back and up top, I’m all for it. 
 

Iirc, Ralph wanted to look at Elyounoussi this season, but Celtic had a take it or we move on offer on the table before we could take a look. 

[Turkish]

8 minutes ago, SKD said:

Elyounoussi won’t be first choice (unless he impresses). We’ve not got £15m to spend on a back up and Elyounoussi has done enough at Celtic and previous clubs to be that. 
 

I’m pretty sure that the others won’t be in the squad and will be either sold or loaned out again. 
 

if keeping Elyounoussi means we can strengthen in other key areas, like full back and up top, I’m all for it. 
 

Iirc, Ralph wanted to look at Elyounoussi this season, but Celtic had a take it or we move on offer on the table before we could take a look. 

It amuses how as we approach the 4th transfer window in a row Where Ralph is saying strengthing the full back areas is a priority we’re probably the weakest we’ve ever been there.

[Saint Garrett]

Elyounoussi is woeful, doesn’t have the fundamentals to be an effective Premier league player, he’ll never make it in this league. 

[SKD]

9 hours ago, Saint Garrett said:

Elyounoussi is woeful, doesn’t have the fundamentals to be an effective Premier league player, he’ll never make it in this league. 

Maybe, maybe not. Hasn’t been given a real chance imo. Only played in 16 premier league games, so too early to say ‘he’ll never make it in this league’. 
 

21 goals in 2 seasons (all competitions) for Celtic is a pretty decent return. We’re not going to get a backup who has a better record than that within our budget. 
 

It’s clear we need to add quality in certain positions, but if we need to add depth, starting with players that won’t cost us anything is a good place to start. 

[SKD]

9 hours ago, Turkish said:

It amuses how as we approach the 4th transfer window in a row Where Ralph is saying strengthing the full back areas is a priority we’re probably the weakest we’ve ever been there.

Our transfer strategy in the late les Reed / Ross Wilson years was a bit bizarre. Just a complete scatter hun approach. Especially bizarre when considering how he’s pretty much nailed it at Rangers. 

Seems to be improving, but we always go into a season a player short. I feel like we must get used and played by agents in the market to get a better move. 

[Hodgey]

I’ve kept an eye on Elynoussi and Celtic and he seems injury prone and incredibly erratic, he also seems to miss a lot of chances and has been frequently dropped. He’ll also be on £50k a week. No better than Simms who we let go for free and was on a lot less. Take whatever we can get for him and get rid - or get Walcott in for a season on same wages. Redmond / Armstrong / Djenepo / Tella and then possibly Walcott is enough. Need to use loans / tiny transfer budget on full back and striker 

[woodsaint1]

39 minutes ago, SKD said:

Maybe, maybe not. Hasn’t been given a real chance imo. Only played in 16 premier league games, so too early to say ‘he’ll never make it in this league’. 
 

21 goals in 2 seasons (all competitions) for Celtic is a pretty decent return. We’re not going to get a backup who has a better record than that within our budget. 
 

It’s clear we need to add quality in certain positions, but if we need to add depth, starting with players that won’t cost us anything is a good place to start. 

All for giving Elyounnoussi a chance, as you say hes done well at Celtic. Could probably do a better job than Redmond right now tbh. The rest - Valery, Vokins, Hoedt, Lemina etc are just not good enough (Lemina could be but hes never arsed). If we see attempts to reintegrate these players upon return then it points to a clear lack of transfers and proof we're in deep s***

[stevy777_x]

8 minutes ago, woodsaint1 said:

All for giving Elyounnoussi a chance, as you say hes done well at Celtic. Could probably do a better job than Redmond right now tbh. The rest - Valery, Vokins, Hoedt, Lemina etc are just not good enough (Lemina could be but hes never arsed). If we see attempts to reintegrate these players upon return then it points to a clear lack of transfers and proof we're in deep s***

Just as a matter of interest, how exactly are we supposed to bring in players with the current covid situation and our finances.

The way i see us bringing players in is via the free agent and loan market.

[Matthew Le God]

7 minutes ago, stevy777_x said:

Just as a matter of interest, how exactly are we supposed to bring in players with the current covid situation and our finances.

The way i see us bringing players in is via the free agent and loan market.

We spent £35m last summer during the pandemic and that was after the loan was taken out. It didn't stop us spending.

[Billy the Kidd]

1 hour ago, SKD said:

Maybe, maybe not. Hasn’t been given a real chance imo. Only played in 16 premier league games, so too early to say ‘he’ll never make it in this league’. 
 

21 goals in 2 seasons (all competitions) for Celtic is a pretty decent return. We’re not going to get a backup who has a better record than that within our budget. 
 

It’s clear we need to add quality in certain positions, but if we need to add depth, starting with players that won’t cost us anything is a good place to start. 

That’s a fair comment. If we were looking at spending £10-£15m we would likely be looking at Ely with that type of return. 

I said a while back i thought we may keep him for a season, he may be more useful to us with depth of squad.

My other thought is are we saying this now so the players start looking at perm move away, giving us a small fee and release of wages from budget, considering he is likely to barely play.

[John D]

24 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

We spent £35m last summer during the pandemic and that was after the loan was taken out. It didn't stop us spending.

And since then zero match day income, additional cost associated with Covid and no guarantee we will have full capacity next season. 

The unknown is how much of the loan we have had to use during this period. The figure of £3m a month losses was mentioned in one of Siemmens or the CFO interview so possible we are £30m into it or will be by May.

Whilst no need to repay for 5 years will need to start to budget to repay it. 

I can't see us spending much unless we sell first. 

 

 

Edited 13 March, 2021 by John D
Poor maths

[stevy777_x]

1 hour ago, Matthew Le God said:

We spent £35m last summer during the pandemic and that was after the loan was taken out. It didn't stop us spending.

Only because we sold Hojbjerg and Reed which accounted for most of our summer outlay...

This year we have the loan interest and unless we sell Ings or Vestergaard i can t see spending much.

[S-Clarke]

1 hour ago, Matthew Le God said:

We spent £35m last summer during the pandemic and that was after the loan was taken out. It didn't stop us spending.

To be fair the majority of that came from the sales of Reed, PEH and the loan fees we got for Hoedt and Lemina. You'll notice we didn't actually confirm the signings for Diallo and KWP until PEH and Reed had been sold, which I think tells you all you need to know in terms of what was funding those.

We did seem to find some loose change to fund the Salisu deal before hand though, but anything else that happened after that was only as a result of selling.

[Turkish]

7 minutes ago, stevy777_x said:

Only because we sold Hojbjerg and Reed which accounted for most of our summer outlay...

This year we have the loan interest and unless we sell Ings or Vestergaard i can t see spending much.

Semmens already alluded to some sales when he spoke a few weeks ago. He said that we can hopefully generate some funds to improve the squad. We all know that means sales

[S-Clarke]

7 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Semmens already alluded to some sales when he spoke a few weeks ago. He said that we can hopefully generate some funds to improve the squad. We all know that means sales

The last thing we should be doing is reducing the squad further, that's why I find it hard to align Semmens comments with Ralphs.

Ralph is out there publicly wanting 2 for each position, yet the club are here saying we have to sell before we can buy. Given we don't already have 2 for each position, I don't see how the selling does anything other than make the situation even worse.

 I guess the only way we could facilitate that is through a really, really large sale or two. Let's prepare for that I guess. £60m for JWP? £30m for Ings?

[Turkish]

7 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

The last thing we should be doing is reducing the squad further, that's why I find it hard to align Semmens comments with Ralphs.

Ralph is out there publicly wanting 2 for each position, yet the club are here saying we have to sell before we can buy. Given we don't already have 2 for each position, I don't see how the selling does anything other than make the situation even worse.

 I guess the only way we could facilitate that is through a really, really large sale or two. Let's prepare for that I guess. £60m for JWP? £30m for Ings?

Vestergaard maybe? 1 year left on his contract end of the season and zero talk of extending it. Him and Ings out, maybe a few fringe players too, hopefully somehow get rid of Lemina and Hoedt. The problem is that leaves us needing to sign two just to stay still. 

[hypochondriac]

24 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

The last thing we should be doing is reducing the squad further, that's why I find it hard to align Semmens comments with Ralphs.

Ralph is out there publicly wanting 2 for each position, yet the club are here saying we have to sell before we can buy. Given we don't already have 2 for each position, I don't see how the selling does anything other than make the situation even worse.

 I guess the only way we could facilitate that is through a really, really large sale or two. Let's prepare for that I guess. £60m for JWP? £30m for Ings?

I think everyone realises that Ings is off in the summer. 

[Lighthouse]

20 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

The last thing we should be doing is reducing the squad further, that's why I find it hard to align Semmens comments with Ralphs.

Ralph is out there publicly wanting 2 for each position, yet the club are here saying we have to sell before we can buy. Given we don't already have 2 for each position, I don't see how the selling does anything other than make the situation even worse.

 I guess the only way we could facilitate that is through a really, really large sale or two. Let's prepare for that I guess. £60m for JWP? £30m for Ings?

We still need to get rid of some of the wastage on our wage bill so we can bring in other players. We could quite reasonably lose Moi, Forster, Lemina, Hoedt, Long, Valery and Walcott from our current salary outgoings, save a huge amount of money and not really lose anything of note from the playing squad. Add to that the likely departures of Ings, Bertrand and possibly Vest, that's even more wages saved and hopefully some reasonable transfer income.

[sad saints fan]

Tottenham are looking at a move for Southampton centre-back Jannik Vestergaard, with the 28-year-old Denmark international's contract with the south coast club running until summer 2022. (Sunday Mirror)

[Convict Colony]

Southampton are reportedly interested in signing goalkeeper Fernando Pacheco from Deportivo Alaves this summer and, if he were to join, he could usurp both Alex McCarthy and Fraser Forster and become first choice under Ralph Hasenhuttl

According to reports from Spanish outlet El Gol Digital, Leeds United and Southampton are keen on signing the 28-year-old shot-stopper this summer, with both reportedly willing to pay the €10m (£8.6m) that Alaves would demand for their number one.

The former Real Madrid youngster has been a mainstay in Alaves’ side for the past six years since joining on a free transfer from Los Blancos, making 207 appearances, in which he has conceded 257 goals and kept 67 clean sheets.

The football scouting website FBref rates Pacheco highly when it comes to passing, as he scores 95/100 for his passes over 40 yards completed. In the same statistic, McCarthy scores a measly 2/100.

https://www.footballfancast.com/southampton-fc-news/southampton-saints-fernando-pacheco-ralph-hasenhuttl-alex-mccarthy

[Matthew Le God]

16 minutes ago, LeG said:

We should refuse to do business with them. It's clear that Levy waits until there's a year left on contracts, taps up, gets the idea in their heads, and then waits until the very end to buy at a knockdown price. Vestergaard needs to be tied down on a big contract. He can probably do better than spurs.

Levy isn't doing anything wrong. It is sensible business to get a player at this point in his contract.

For what purpose would Spurs need to 'tap up' Vestergaard? What could they possibly tell him that he wouldn't already know? 

[IFHP]

To be homest i think most players and clubs "tap up" a simple "would you be interested in a move to so and so" etc.

As for Vestergaard it shows how he's now viewed , this time last year many fans would have been pleased with him leaving.

[S-Clarke]

1 hour ago, LeG said:

We should refuse to do business with them. It's clear that Levy waits until there's a year left on contracts, taps up, gets the idea in their heads, and then waits until the very end to buy at a knockdown price. Vestergaard needs to be tied down on a big contract. He can probably do better than spurs.

I don't think they're doing anything wrong really, whilst it's frustrating to read, they're just operating a sensible strategy with who they are approaching.

It's us who is doing it wrong - letting these first team players slip down to 1 year remaining. Poor squad management.

[Matthew Le God]

Just now, LeG said:

I agree that there's nothing wrong with it, and that it's poor management from us (though Vesty was written off not so long ago so i doubt the club had plans to extend) but i just wish we would deal with Levy better....cos hes coming in for a few of ours. I just dont want to be strung along all summer by Levy. We need to play hardball for once. 

Hardball doesn't work when players only have a year left of contract. Either we sell cheap or keep an unmotivated player for a year and he leaves for nothing.

[SKD]

11 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Hardball doesn't work when players only have a year left of contract. Either we sell cheap or keep an unmotivated player for a year and he leaves for nothing.

At some point you need to make a stand though, otherwise it’ll continue to happen. 
 

A lesson kids learn early on in school. Stand up to the bully or continue to be bullied. 

[Chapel End]

4 minutes ago, SKD said:

At some point you need to make a stand though, otherwise it’ll continue to happen. 
 

A lesson kids learn early on in school. Stand up to the bully or continue to be bullied. 

How do we make a stand against a player who wants to leave and get a big pay rise? 

And play for a bigger club

[SKD]

3 minutes ago, Chapel End said:

How do we make a stand against a player who wants to leave and get a big pay rise? 

And play for a bigger club

Tell them they have a contract, which they signed, with us. Until said contract ends, they are an employee of us....  

They move on our terms. Not rocket science. 

Edited 14 March, 2021 by SKD

[Chapel End]

Just now, SKD said:

Tell them they have a contract, which they signed, with us. Until said contract ends, they are an employee of us....  not rocket science. 

Yep and if they wind the contract down to nothing and leave on a free like MLG said, how does that constitute making a stand?

We have no option, no matter how annoying it is, to sell before the value is too low.

This is how it works for clubs like us

[Streaky]

3 minutes ago, SKD said:

Tell them they have a contract, which they signed, with us. Until said contract ends, they are an employee of us....  

They move on our terms. Not rocket science. 

Then what they leave on a free a year later when we could have recouped 20 to 30m for him 🤔 

[Lighthouse]

4 minutes ago, SKD said:

Tell them they have a contract, which they signed, with us. Until said contract ends, they are an employee of us....  

They move on our terms. Not rocket science. 

Yep, let’s screw ourselves out of £20m, just to teach Levy a lesson. He can sign Vest on a free next summer, that’ll sure show him who’s boss.

[SKD]

How much is premier league survival to us? I’m sure it outweighs 20-40m we might get for ings and Vestergaard. 
 

And you’re also missing the point. We haven’t said not to sell, just make a stand against Levy who is known for these tactics. 
 

[Billy the Kidd]

14 minutes ago, SKD said:

How much is premier league survival to us? I’m sure it outweighs 20-40m we might get for ings and Vestergaard. 
 

And you’re also missing the point. We haven’t said not to sell, just make a stand against Levy who is known for these tactics. 
 

Literally, what difference does it make who we have to sell to?  Vesty would get c. £15m, same as PEH. I don’t blame the club for a second with this one, he was dog shit for us until this season.  And who knows, maybe he will sign a new deal.

or go to Spuds for a big £rise and playing for a better club (in the eyes of the neutral).

[Matthew Le God]

41 minutes ago, SKD said:

At some point you need to make a stand though, otherwise it’ll continue to happen. 

What does that achieve? Losing out on a transfer fee, an unmotivated player for a season and future potential players thinking they'll also be put in same situation. So where is the upside that outweighs that? 

Edited 14 March, 2021 by Matthew Le God

[SKD]

1 minute ago, Matthew Le God said:

What does that achieve? Losing out on a transfer fee, an unmotivated player for a season and future potential players thinking they'll also be put in same situation. So where is the upside that outweighs that? 

That’s nonsense, especially in vestergaard case. He’s had 1 good season, if he wants to move, he can’t be unmotivated or he won’t get a big move. 

[Matthew Le God]

Just now, SKD said:

That’s nonsense, especially in vestergaard case. He’s had 1 good season, if he wants to move, he can’t be unmotivated or he won’t get a big move. 

Ok, even if that bit is 'nonsense'. What about the rest of my reply and the answer to the two questions I asked.

[Lighthouse]

26 minutes ago, SKD said:

How much is premier league survival to us? I’m sure it outweighs 20-40m we might get for ings and Vestergaard. 
 

And you’re also missing the point. We haven’t said not to sell, just make a stand against Levy who is known for these tactics. 
 

Quite a lot. It will be somewhat easier to achieve with £40m to spend on two replacements, as opposed to zero, a year later.

[Chapel End]

6 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

Quite a lot. It will be somewhat easier to achieve with £40m to spend on two replacements, as opposed to zero, a year later.

Precisely, this "making a stand"  is futile and just costly

[SKD]

8 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

Quite a lot. It will be somewhat easier to achieve with £40m to spend on two replacements, as opposed to zero, a year later.

Yes, we could spend that £40m on Carrlio and Hodet. That would make it much easier! 
 

There is significantly more risk relying on untested players who you bring in, than tried and tested. By which point we could well have a new owner, with new ambitions and money to invest. 
 

unfortunately it’s our business model to roll over and get fucked by the bigger clubs. It’s part of the food chain, I get that, but if you continually let it happen due to fear of losing a player for nothing, then you’ll never progress 

[S-Clarke]

The people asking us to make a stand....would be exactly the same people throwing the club under a bus once he leaves for free and we don't replace him.

Because that's what will happen.

We can't replace players without having the money in the bank first, so letting players go on frees will eventually leave us with no squad.

[SKD]

1 minute ago, S-Clarke said:

The people asking us to make a stand....would be exactly the same people throwing the club under a bus once he leaves for free and we don't replace him.

Because that's what will happen.

We can't replace players without having the money in the bank first, so letting players go on frees will eventually leave us with no squad.

Yes. This is the issue, isn’t it. What a terribly run club we are. 

Impossible to actually progress as every time someone has a decent season we’re forced to sell and rebuild. 
 

The biggest issue is that our recruitment won’t be spot on every time and we’ll be stuck with shit players on big wages whilst losing the better ones. 

Edited 14 March, 2021 by SKD

[Lighthouse]

16 minutes ago, SKD said:

Yes, we could spend that £40m on Carrlio and Hodet. That would make it much easier! 

Excellent point, let’s never sign any more players ever again, in case they turn out to be Hoedt or Carrillo.

 

I'm done, cheerio.

[SKD]

11 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

Excellent point, let’s never sign any more players ever again, in case they turn out to be Hoedt or Carrillo.

 

I'm done, cheerio.

Not what I’m saying. 
 

But having proven premier league quality will make it “some what easier” to secure premier league football than doubling £40m on potentially 2 duds. 

[BotleySaint]

...

Edited 14 March, 2021 by BotleySaint

[Matthew Le God]

2 hours ago, SKD said:

Yes. This is the issue, isn’t it. What a terribly run club we are. 

Impossible to actually progress as every time someone has a decent season we’re forced to sell and rebuild. 

Selling your best players is not a sign of being terribly run, it can be quite the opposite and a sign you are doing things right. If we sign a player who has the potential to be good enough for a bigger club that shouldn't be a stick to hit the club with. It is a sign that in that case the recruitment process worked well. We will never hold on to players who turn out to be good enough for the 'big 6', it is unrealistic to think we can compete financially with them. Even Leicester who are doing extremely well sell their top players.

[S-Clarke]

1 minute ago, Matthew Le God said:

Selling your best players is not a sign of being terribly run, it can be quite the opposite and a sign you are doing things right. If we sign a player who has the potential to be good enough for a bigger club that shouldn't be a stick to hit the club with. It is a sign that in that case the recruitment process worked well. We will never hold on to players who turn out to be good enough for the 'big 6', it is unrealistic to think we can compete financially with them. Even Leicester who are doing extremely well sell their top players.

No, it's not a sign. But we've managed to make an art out of doing it wrong.

It's impossible to not agree that we are terribly run. We are as in a big of a mess off the field than I can remember since our championship youth team days.

Edited 14 March, 2021 by S-Clarke

[Matthew Le God]

8 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

We've managed to make an art out of doing it wrong.

1) Which players being sold do you think were a sign the club is poorly run?

2) What would you suggest should have been done with those players instead? Let their contracts run down so their value becomes £0?

Edited 14 March, 2021 by Matthew Le God

[SKD]

11 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Selling your best players is not a sign of being terribly run, it can be quite the opposite and a sign you are doing things right. If we sign a player who has the potential to be good enough for a bigger club that shouldn't be a stick to hit the club with. It is a sign that in that case the recruitment process worked well. We will never hold on to players who turn out to be good enough for the 'big 6', it is unrealistic to think we can compete financially with them. Even Leicester who are doing extremely well sell their top players.

No, selling your best players doesn’t mean your a badly run club. Look at Dortmund or Leicester as an example. 
 

We are a terribly run club because we rely on the money we make on selling them to buy the next one and absolutely no leeway to spend elsewhere. To make it worse, we’re losing them for under their true value as their contract is running out. It relies on your transfer strategy being spot on every single time, which simply won’t happen, what ever club you are (but it’s even more risk when you’re shopping in bargain basket, in hope that they’ll develop). 

Being 100% ‘sustainable’ is all well and good until you have 2 bad windows and no good players left to sale leaving you skint. 

Shite players on big wages in the championship is not a sign of a well run club and not at all sustainable. 

[Ivan Katalinic's 'tache]

Tenuous link to a new striker:
Premier League sides monitoring Hatayspor striker Aaron Boupendza (90min.com)

[the saint in winchester]

I would prefer this link to have some basis, but appreciate it's at clickbait level now.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/football/southampton-signing-65k-p-w-beast-could-unleash-13-5m-rated-saints-gem-under-ralph-opinion/ar-BB1eCaWI?ocid=spartan-ntp-feeds

Sell Ings, buy Abraham, pay him £65-70k pw wages. Mind you, if we continue recycling the ball backwards, we could have Haaland up front and still rarely score.

 

[disconnect]

5 minutes ago, the saint in winchester said:

I would prefer this link to have some basis, but appreciate it's at clickbait level now.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/football/southampton-signing-65k-p-w-beast-could-unleash-13-5m-rated-saints-gem-under-ralph-opinion/ar-BB1eCaWI?ocid=spartan-ntp-feeds

Sell Ings, buy Abraham, pay him £65-70k pw wages. Mind you, if we continue recycling the ball backwards, we could have Haaland up front and still rarely score.

 

Yep, seems unfortunately very unrealistic. Chelsea would want 30mil+ I'd imagine and he would want to up his salary to come here.