Lyanco

[Roo1976]

1 hour ago, Delmary said:

Looks a waste of money. Hope this is not our main CB signing. If so, it’s going to be a long hard season.

Only we can do this sort of dealings.................just hope the Croatian lad is still on and/or the guy from Forest,aswell as these who look likely to sign.

[Dusic]

I know nothing of Lyanco but if he is good on the ball then that makes a lot of sense as both Bednarek & Salisu are awkward in that respect and whilst defending is clearly the primary aspect, it would certainly be a useful option to have a more technical player in that position.

[TWar]

12 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

You aren't allowed to say that apparently. You were allowed to say the opposite for Armstrong and Livramento though. 

That's because those were good signings and this isn't. You can say what you want, but you shouldn't be surprised when people can work out if a player is good or not. The consensus weren't wrong on arma or livra, they probably won't be wrong here. 

[Toadhall Saint]

3 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Where was this reported? 

Adam leach I think

[CB Fry]

This is reminiscent of the time Brian Clough signed Robert Rosario. 

[S-Clarke]

1 minute ago, TWar said:

That's because those were good signings and this isn't. You can say what you want, but you shouldn't be surprised when people can work out if a player is good or not. The consensus weren't wrong on arma or livra, they probably won't be wrong here. 

Out of interest, what is everyone basing their views on? I'll be honest, I know absolutely nothing about him. I've heard of him, but I don't know much bar looking at his attributes online.

I'm just a bit confused as to why it's getting these sorts of reactions when we don't really know much about him.

[stknowle]

4 minutes ago, TWar said:

That's because those were good signings and this isn't. You can say what you want, but you shouldn't be surprised when people can work out if a player is good or not. The consensus weren't wrong on arma or livra, they probably won't be wrong here. 

TBF you can't say that they were and this isn't at this premature stage.

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, TWar said:

That's because those were good signings and this isn't. You can say what you want, but you shouldn't be surprised when people can work out if a player is good or not. The consensus weren't wrong on arma or livra, they probably won't be wrong here. 

Exactly we agree. Not sure why people get so annoyed at stating the obvious. He could tur the put to be decent just like Livramento could turn out to be rubbish but it's more likely than not to be the opposite. 

[Baird of the land]

1 hour ago, S-Clarke said:

There are a lot of quick judgements on here. Let's be honest, hardly any one had heard of him this morning and all of a sudden we're all experts on his inability to add anything to us.

He may be great, he may be shit. No one actually knows. But he's a CB, we needed one of those. He's tall, we needed that. He's quick, we needed that too. He can play in CM if required or full back. We needed that too. He's cheap, we needed that too.

Not sure what everyone expected really, we were never spending 20m on a CB. Calata-Carr was the biggest non-event, we're not attractive to those levels of players at the moment.

This possibly leaves some funds for that highly rated left back to add even more squad depth. And we've also used some of our budget to renew JWP's contract too.

We don't have the experience we had last season, but we have a level of youthfulness in the squad that could either sink or swim. Impossible to say yet.

In what way is he tall? He's a smidge taller than Stephens and smaller than both Bednarek and Salisu, neither of whom are giants.

I didn't expect us to spend £20M but i did expect something more in the 10-15M bracket.

Maybe he'll turn out to be great but on surface he doesn't seem to address at all the need for more aerial power.

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

Out of interest, what is everyone basing their views on? I'll be honest, I know absolutely nothing about him. I've heard of him, but I don't know much bar looking at his attributes online.

I'm just a bit confused as to why it's getting these sorts of reactions when we don't really know much about him.

I think mostly the fact that he couldn't get in a poor team that finished way down the league, their fans are happy to see him go, he's cheap and doesn't seem to be the dominant and experienced type that we really need in that back line. 

 

Obviously it could be wrong but I'd be more comfortable if we were signing someone exciting from another club that I think would be more of a sure thing. 

Edited 20 August, 2021 by hypochondriac

[ChrisPY]

3 minutes ago, Toadhall Saint said:

Adam leach I think

Think this was an interpretation of an answer around new signings and replacing Vestergaard.

Not saying we will see more new signings but based on rumours, finances and weaknesses in the squad, I reckon we could see up to 2 of: a young left back, a CB used to the style of English football and an experienced DM.

Don’t think we’ve got any chance of a new keeper though.

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, ChrisPY said:

Think this was an interpretation of an answer around new signings and replacing Vestergaard.

Not saying we will see more new signings but based on rumours, finances and weaknesses in the squad, I reckon we could see up to 2 of: a young left back, a CB used to the style of English football and an experienced DM.

Don’t think we’ve got any chance of a new keeper though.

I'd be delighted with a dm but I don't think we will. A really competent dm would provide greater protection for the cbs and their competence will be slightly less of an issue. 

[S-Clarke]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

I think mostly the fact that he couldn't get in a poor team that finished way down the league, their fans are happy to see him go, he's cheap and doesn't seem to be the dominant and experienced type that we really need in that back line. 

There could be loads and loads of reasons behind that though, it may not be down to ability. Sometimes players just don't fit at a club, as we've seen here. Then they go on and become successful elsewhere, it's not unheard of. I don't know enough about him to be blown away by this signing, or equally devastated by the signing. I'm willing to actually give him an opportunity. This is where we are now, we are in this 10m bracket - 15m at a push when we have enough $$.

So we've just got to trust that the club can get us some gems - and players like this, who have the attributes but aren't necessarily settled at their club fit that kind of remit we are shopping in.

I remember this forum when we'd sold Shaw and then brought in Ryan, exact reactions. ''Cheap option'' ''Not good enough'' ''Was shit in a shit team last year'' ''Villa didn't want him back'' etc etc. I just don't think you can ever truly judge a player based on what their outgoing clubs fans are saying.

[Chez]

7 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

Out of interest, what is everyone basing their views on? I'll be honest, I know absolutely nothing about him. I've heard of him, but I don't know much bar looking at his attributes online.

I'm just a bit confused as to why it's getting these sorts of reactions when we don't really know much about him.

I've watched his youtube videos. Not a lot there to suggest he is a dominant defender. Hard to make a good judgement as there are so many clips of him dribbling with the ball, juggling over forwards heads etc. He doesn't look outstanding in the air. Not sure about the other stuff. We will have to wait and see.

I'd say he looks very tidy with the ball indeed - just as you would expect of a Brazilian.  He can work his way out of tight spaces just as Vestegaard could. Passing looks OK too. He can play and that should not be underestimated. Whether he is the complete package, a strong defender that can play...

[hypochondriac]

6 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

There could be loads and loads of reasons behind that though, it may not be down to ability. Sometimes players just don't fit at a club, as we've seen here. Then they go on and become successful elsewhere, it's not unheard of. I don't know enough about him to be blown away by this signing, or equally devastated by the signing. I'm willing to actually give him an opportunity. This is where we are now, we are in this 10m bracket - 15m at a push when we have enough $$.

So we've just got to trust that the club can get us some gems - and players like this, who have the attributes but aren't necessarily settled at their club fit that kind of remit we are shopping in.

I remember this forum when we'd sold Shaw and then brought in Ryan, exact reactions. ''Cheap option'' ''Not good enough'' ''Was shit in a shit team last year'' ''Villa didn't want him back'' etc etc. I just don't think you can ever truly judge a player based on what their outgoing clubs fans are saying.

Of course it could but you're just stating the obvious. I don't think anyone is discounting the possibility that he could be good and we may have nabbed a bargain. Most people are simply saying that on the balance of probabilities and without having seen him play yet, this seems like quite a gamble of a signing and less of a sure thing than some other signings we could have made. Our backup rb doesn't really matter that much if he's pretty bad but given how absolutely vital it is to our season that our centre back signing is decent and can hit the ground running straight away, on the face of it it does seem curious that we've gone for this option given the factors I've already outlined. We splashed out big for the ings replacement and got in an exciting player and we spent the money because we recognised the importance of getting in some quality to the team in that area. Imo we should have done similar for the defence or got in someone like this alongside a more experienced name like Cahill. 

Doesn't mean he won't be good, doesn't mean he didn't have a tough time at Torino and will actually be decent but it does mean that that is less probable than some other names that would probably cost more. 

Edited 20 August, 2021 by hypochondriac

[danjosaint]

20 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

This is reminiscent of the time Brian Clough signed Robert Rosario. 

As long as he gets goal of the season 

[stknowle]

5 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Of course it could but you're just stating the obvious. I don't think anyone is discounting the possibility that he could be good and we may have nabbed a bargain. Most people are simply saying that on the balance of probabilities and without having seen him play yet, this seems like quite a gamble of a signing and less of a sure thing than some other signings we could have made. Our backup rb doesn't really matter that much if he's pretty bad but given how absolutely vital it is to our season that our centre back signing is decent and can hit the ground running straight away, on the face of it it does seem curious that we've gone for this option given the factors I've already outlined. 

Doesn't mean he won't be good, doesn't mean he didn't have a tough time at Torino and will actually be decent but it does mean that that is less probable than some other names that would probably cost more. 

Yes. Let's face it he's more likely to turn out shit than someone with a bit more pedigree and who costs more as a result. It's that simple really. 

[Shroppie]

 

Edited 20 August, 2021 by Shroppie

[Badger]

Was hoping for Caletas-  Car , or even Worrall from Forest, this seems a bizarre selection from the little we've read of him.

[Badger]

4 minutes ago, Shroppie said:

 

Hoedt MkII from that description.

[hypochondriac]

5 minutes ago, Shroppie said:

 

See things like this are not a good sign. I'd be alright with it and more prepared to take a pint if he was take Jack Stephens role or something but we need this bloke to be our best centre back and a nailed on starter. 

[Chez]

19 minutes ago, Shroppie said:

 

I don't recall Celtic fans saying stuff like this when we signed VVD.

Edited 20 August, 2021 by Chez

[Soggy Bottom]

Can he play as a DM and we get the lad from Fulham 

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, Soggy Bottom said:

Can he play as a DM and we get the lad from Fulham 

It's a cunning plan! 

[TWar]

29 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

Out of interest, what is everyone basing their views on? I'll be honest, I know absolutely nothing about him. I've heard of him, but I don't know much bar looking at his attributes online.

I'm just a bit confused as to why it's getting these sorts of reactions when we don't really know much about him.

People are basing it off a mixture of every stat, interactions with torino fans on social media, interactions with Italian fans in general, torinos overall performance, his inability to get into torinos team, his abject performances when he does get in (his only start in the last 15 ended 7-0) and a range of video clips.

Its not as good as watching him week in week out but it's enough reason to be pretty irritated that this is the guy we are bringing in to replace our best CB last season. 

[Turkish]

3 hours ago, egg said:

They do, but some clubs can absorb them, but skint clubs probably can't. If we've £45m of fees, £4.5m will probably go on loyalty payments, plus some on signing on fees, some on agents. In reality I suspect that £45m has turned into £35m. 

But that surely applies to every club on every deal. If villa for example received £100m in transfer fees from Grealish then I reality it’s £75-£80m. If Burnley got £20m it’s probably more like £13m. I don’t see why agents fees bonuses and loyalty payments have suddenly become the reason why we don’t have any money. In fact saints pride themselves on their low agent bills, so if anything it should lessen the impact on our bottom line for every deal compared to other clubs

 

In fact check this out, https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/mar/31/premier-league-clubs-spending-on-agents-fees-rises-to-272m-amid-covid-chelsea

saints have the fourth lowest agents fees of premier league teams last season. So I’m not really sure that agents fees washes 

Edited 20 August, 2021 by Turkish

[Dman]

4 hours ago, Nordic Saint said:

He's going to be worth watching for his comedy value alone. He's #4 in this video:

(34) Torino 0-7 Milan | Milan thumps Torino 7-0! | Serie A TIM - YouTube

He looks absolutely fucking awful 😂😂😂 

I, maybe naively, thought that we’d spend a decent part of the Vestergaard money improving an already weak area of the squad. It looks like we’ve just made it even weaker. 

With what this fool Will cost us, we could have got a championship CB in to prepare for it next season. This muppet doesn’t even look good enough for that. 

[egg]

8 minutes ago, Turkish said:

But that surely applies to every club on every deal. If villa for example received £100m in transfer fees from Grealish then I reality it’s £75-£80m. If Burnley got £20m it’s probably more like £13m. I don’t see why agents fees bonuses and loyalty payments have suddenly become the reason why we don’t have any money. In fact saints pride themselves on their low agent bills, so if anything it should lessen the impact on our bottom line for every deal compared to other clubs

Other clubs finances are completely irrelevant to ours. It's as relevant as comparing my finance to yours.

The simple reality is that some clubs can afford to cover the associated costs from transfers and invest the gross receipts, others can't do can only afford to spend the net receipts. 

[Turkish]

1 minute ago, egg said:

Other clubs finances are completely irrelevant to ours. It's as relevant as comparing my finance to yours.

The simple reality is that some clubs can afford to cover the associated costs from transfers and invest the gross receipts, others can't do can only afford to spend the net receipts. 

Of course they’re relevant. Not really sure how anyone can say they’re not when we all play in the richest league in the world. Saints have the fourth lowest agent fees of all club in the premier league last season. So we can’t really use this as a reason why we’re skint https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/mar/31/premier-league-clubs-spending-on-agents-fees-rises-to-272m-amid-covid-chelsea

Edited 20 August, 2021 by Turkish

[egg]

6 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Of course they’re relevant. Not really sure how anyone can say they’re not when we all play in the richest league in the world. Saints have the fourth lowest agent fees of all club in the premier league last season. So we can’t really use this as a reason why we’re skint https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/mar/31/premier-league-clubs-spending-on-agents-fees-rises-to-272m-amid-covid-chelsea

They're not relevant. Sure all PL clubs play in the same league, but all clubs have different incomes, different outgoings Inc wage bills etc. If Burnley, or Brighton, or Palace, etc, can afford something, it doesn't mean we can. 

 

[Turkish]

5 minutes ago, egg said:

They're not relevant. Sure all PL clubs play in the same league, but all clubs have different incomes, different outgoings Inc wage bills etc. If Burnley, or Brighton, or Palace, etc, can afford something, it doesn't mean we can. 

 

Surely for all the reasons you state is why they are relevant. Their finances might not have an impact on ours, but what money they get and how they use it absolutely is relevant when comparing us with clubs that our peers of ours. Why do they bother printing tables of spend on agents fees and always listing clubs incomes if they’re completely irrelevant to each other?

Edited 20 August, 2021 by Turkish

[Saint Garrett]

This signing reaction reminds me of Carrillo. 
 

Hopefully he works out better than him….

[Turkish]

2 minutes ago, Saint Garrett said:

This signing reaction reminds me of Carrillo. 
 

Hopefully he works out better than him….

It’s impossible to see how it couldn’t. 

[egg]

1 minute ago, Turkish said:

Surely for all the reasons you state is why they are relevant. Their finances might not have an impact on ours, but what money they get and how they use it absolutely is relevant when comparing us with clubs that our peers of ours. Why do they bother printing tables of spend on agents fees and always listing clubs incomes if they’re completely irrelevant to each other?

This is a circular discussion between us and we'll never agree on it. I look at numbers all day every day, and I'm quite happy with my view that the finances of one similar business can never sensibly be compared with another. We can only afford what we can afford, and if others are in a different position, so be it. 

[Saint Garrett]

1 minute ago, Turkish said:

It’s impossible to see how it couldn’t. 

A few 9-0’s and you never know… let’s be fair, Carrillo might have been pretty shit, but he didn’t put in any horrific performances, he just wasn’t very good. 

[Suhari]

Not a signing that breeds confidence, is it?

Very strange if he is intended as our main CB; and if not, are we really trusting the current guys as starters?

Surprised we haven't gone for Worrell, who seems like the leader we need.

That said, I have more trust in our transfers nowadays than in the days of wee Ross.

Guess we'll need to give him the benefit of the doubt, back him, and hope!

Edited 20 August, 2021 by Suhari

[Toadhall Saint]

1 minute ago, Suhari said:

Not a signing that breeds confidence, is it?

Very strange if he is intended as our main CB; and if not, are we really trusting the current guys as starters?

Surprised we haven't gone for Worrell, who seems like the leader we need.

That said, I have more trust in our transfers nowadays then in the days of wee Ross.

Guess we'll need to give him the benefit of the doubt, back him, and hope!

We shouldn’t be hopeing tho. 

[Turkish]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

This is a circular discussion between us and we'll never agree on it. I look at numbers all day every day, and I'm quite happy with my view that the finances of one similar business can never sensibly be compared with another. We can only afford what we can afford, and if others are in a different position, so be it. 

Happy to agree to disagree. I just fail to see how you can think that comparing saints financial situation with other clubs of a similar size, with similar income is irrelevant. As you said we play in the same league, have the same TV deal, same agents to deal with, similar knob head mercenary players to work with. Surely the well run club mantra which has been trotted out verbatim for years says that actually how we are run financially verses others is very relevant. Anyway it’s quite boring so I’ll leave it there. 

[SuperSAINT]

 

[Turkish]

9 minutes ago, Saint Garrett said:

A few 9-0’s and you never know… let’s be fair, Carrillo might have been pretty shit, but he didn’t put in any horrific performances, he just wasn’t very good. 

That’s it though he didn’t do anything. It’s not like he tried hard but wasn’t good enough. He was just there, then he was out on loan, then he was gone. Considering the circumstances he had to be one of the worst signings made by any club ever 

[Turkish]

1 minute ago, SuperSAINT said:

 

I’ve not been this excited since Kevin Danso

[gammon cheeks]

Seems a strange one this....linked with quite a few decent centre backs all over the Europe ...and out of the blue Lyanco!  Hopefully the club have seen something in him but seems like a cheap option to me ......time will tell.

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, gammon cheeks said:

Seems a strange one this....linked with quite a few decent centre backs all over the Europe ...and out of the blue Lyanco!  Hopefully the club have seen something in him but seems like a cheap option to me ......time will tell.

I'll be interested to hear the clubs justification. Hopefully they've been scouting him for ages and know all about him. 

[Turkish]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

I'll be interested to hear the clubs justification. Hopefully they've been scouting him for ages and know all about him. 

Like we did with Elyanoussi you mean?

[hypochondriac]

Just now, Turkish said:

Like we did with Elyanoussi you mean?

Different regime now though innit. I'm just hoping Crocker knows what he's doing because the other signings look pretty good this summer. 

[saint77]

We must have the most fickle fans in the league give the guy a few games and see what happens alah Bertrand,Armstrong etc etc 

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, saint77 said:

We must have the most fickle fans in the league give the guy a few games and see what happens alah Bertrand,Armstrong etc etc 

You've not really read any of this thread then have you. 

[Turkish]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

Different regime now though innit. I'm just hoping Crocker knows what he's doing because the other signings look pretty good this summer. 

Yes I get that. Fingers crossed because he certainly doesn’t seem like what we need. I really hope I’m wrong 

[TWar]

I don't know what the actual fucking point in this is.

The way Ralph is talking today saying things like "Hopefully these signings will be good and we can sell them to big sides" he seems annoyed. And why wouldn't he be. We get to keep what we make is what they always said, and frankly that should be a bare minimum, so where has all the money gone?

[Turkish]

1 minute ago, TWar said:

I don't know what the actual fucking point in this is.

The way Ralph is talking today saying things like "Hopefully these signings will be good and we can sell them to big sides" he seems annoyed. And why wouldn't he be. We get to keep what we make is what they always said, and frankly that should be a bare minimum, so where has all the money gone?

This obsession with resale value and talking about selling them before they’ve even signed is really starting to get on my tits