January Transfer Window 2024

[manji]

58 minutes ago, Dman said:

Not sure - best part of 18 months out (potentially) stepping up to a level he's never played at. 

A real shame, if he'd stayed fit, I really reckon he'd have been siging of the season and we'd be in the top 2 right now. But he's not. 

He did play a couple of B games in fairly recently and looked really good. Our guys couldn’t have anticipated the last injury. But kind of irrelevant at the moment automatic promotion this season is the absolute priority.

[Ivan Katalinic's 'tache]

So, if Charly plays an inadequate number of games, the bigger the loan fee? Or, he does really well and we could get £40m-£45m? I'll be disappointed to see him go but it could be a financially sound deal for us:

Edited January 31 by Ivan Katalinic's 'tache

[Saint86]

I am excited by Brooks, but he is new to the system and will play on the wing in a position where he have relatively good strength.

Rothwell doesn't interest me at all as a starting 11 player. Maybe early days to write him off but wasn't excited when we signed him and haven't been impressed so far. I hope he is purely here to add depth rather than to become a starting 11 player.

Alcaraz is a class player, puts his all in whenever he is on the pitch, and has that ability to turn and drive with the ball or pick a defence splitting pass or quality finish. So he gives it away a few times... Equally he tries to do what precious few other players do, and often moves fail because other players just aren't as quick as he is / on his wavelength.

Long story short, i think we've effectively weakened the squad somewhat over the window. Rothwell shouldn't be in the side over the alternatives we already had on the books, and Alcaraz should have been getting more minutes imo. Only conclusion i can draw is that either Martin doesn't really fancy him, or that Alcaraz wants out (but then why the contract extension).

Brookes is an uncertainty re how he will impact the team, he was a very good player and i like that we've signed him, but is he any better than Alcaraz?... and equally we're 22 games unbeaten with Adam Armstrong largely playing on that wing, that will change with Brookes if he plays there, and there are no guarantees that will make the team better or more effective.

And underneath all of that, Alcaraz seemed to be committed to the club and a player with great potential - someone we could have developed and built a team around in the future - so i'm disappointed to see him leave, although hopefully he can come back a better player.

Perhaps, flipping it all around... we're going to get promoted with a lot of loanees, many of which we'll struggle to sign or who will need replacing. Alcaraz might benefit a lot from 4-5months in italy and then come back in next year, and perhaps the seemingly very high transfer clause is to discourage a transfer / make it worth our while.

Edited January 31 by Saint86

[Badger]

Disappointing news that Alcaras is off on loan, but can’t begrudge him an opportunity like this ( and it’s a lot more palatable than him going to Liverpool, or staying in the UK with another club).

Despite his poor showing on Sunday (not alone there though) I always had hope of him doing something when on the ball. 

Enjoyed watching him, he always seemed to play as if he meant it, not just going through the motions.

I expect Brooks can offer some flair going forward so might not miss him this season.

Of our own players CA was one of only a few I thought would make the step up in the EPL next year. 

[Farmer Saint]

It's fucking Juventus. I'd go, and I've supported Saints for 40 years. 

[saintant]

14 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

I am excited by Brooks, but he is new to the system and will play on the wing in a position where he have relatively good strength.

Rothwell doesn't interest me at all as a starting 11 player. Maybe early days to write him off but wasn't excited when we signed him and haven't been impressed so far. I hope he is purely here to add depth rather than to become a starting 11 player.

Alcaraz is a class player, puts his all in whenever he is on the pitch, and has that ability to turn and drive with the ball or pick a defence splitting pass or quality finish. So he gives it away a few times... Equally he tries to do what precious few other players do, and often moves fail because other players just aren't as quick as he is / on his wavelength.

Long story short, i think we've effectively weakened the squad somewhat over the window. Rothwell shouldn't be in the side over the alternatives we already had on the books, and Alcaraz should have been getting more minutes imo. Only conclusion i can draw is that either Martin doesn't really fancy him, or that Alcaraz wants out (but then why the contract extension).

Brookes is an uncertainty re how he will impact the team, he was a very good player and i like that we've signed him, but is he any better than Alcaraz?... and equally we're 22 games unbeaten with Adam Armstrong largely playing on that wing, that will change with Brookes if he plays there, and there are no guarantees that will make the team better or more effective.

And underneath all of that, Alcaraz seemed to be committed to the club and a player with great potential - someone we could have developed and built a team around in the future - so i'm disappointed to see him leave, although hopefully he can come back a better player.

Perhaps, flipping it all around... we're going to get promoted with a lot of loanees, many of which we'll struggle to sign or who will need replacing. Alcaraz might benefit a lot from 4-5months in italy and then come back in next year, and perhaps the seemingly very high transfer clause is to discourage a transfer / make it worth our while.

I think you are possibly seeing Alcaraz through rose-tinted glasses. He gives the ball away a lot and often very cheaply - ok, on occasions he loses it by trying something special but generally he is too careless with the ball for our style. Rothwell needs time and I think may prove an astute signing.

[Pat from Poole]

1 hour ago, BARCELONASAINT said:

I have a slightly cynical view on the whole Alcaraz thing.

So Rasmus our director of football has a brother who is the founder of a transfer platform called "transferRoom" We signed Alcaraz through the platform. They made quite a big thing at the time out of it and the signing was used massively to promote the platform. I believe it was the first transfer into the Premiership (at least from South America) done on the platform. We've since signed other players through the platform (which we have as a club now publicised as being thanks to TransferRoom. These to me are more than just footballing moves!!

The insinuation , particularly with Alcaraz, is that TransferRoom used Saints to advertise itself and position itself!

Really?

I didn't know it was Ankersen's brother who set that up.

Interesting.

[wild-saint]

4 minutes ago, saintant said:

I think you are possibly seeing Alcaraz through rose-tinted glasses. He gives the ball away a lot and often very cheaply - ok, on occasions he loses it by trying something special but generally he is too careless with the ball for our style. Rothwell needs time and I think may prove an astute signing.

Exactly this.  A player that whilst very talented who likes to run with the ball and take risks with the ball is not going to fit well into a system that absolutely revolves around keeping possession. He gives it away far too often particularly in dangerous areas where we are vulnerable to counter attacks to be a good fit in to our system. 

Ultimately he may be super talented but we have to back the system implemented or create a systems around his strengths. if we can get good money and replace with a better fit that in my opinion is great management.  

 

[Badger]

14 minutes ago, Pat from Poole said:

Really?

I didn't know it was Ankersen's brother who set that up.

Interesting.

If it provides a few gems along the way then perhaps only fair we can overlook the nepotism.

 

[gio1saints]

Does anyone else get the impression that Saints, despite saying otherwise, might be convincible about SM going out on loan? And that it largely depends on what happens with Che?

This is the set of circumstances in which that idea might be realised: 
 

IF Che leaves it’s not out the question that a front three of Ryan, Adam and DB is the new starting trio. With Mara clearly as sub. On paper thats arguably actually stronger than Ryan, Adam and Sekou Mara with DB as sub for instance.

 

BUT if Che stays then there is an argument that it might not be the end of the world to let Sekou go out on loan because our forward line up is essentially perm 3 from AA, RF, CA and DB or even play all four with DB as an attacking midfield. ( potentially displacing Stu - Jo or resting them) . 
 

The Che domino seems to be the key one. And that might not all fall - until late Thursday night, if at all. 
 

My ideal is : Keep Che, keep Sekou. Keep them for Strength in depth for the tough run in and retain powerful set of match changing players on bench and for matches coming close after each other fresh legs 
 

Edited January 31 by gio1saints

[Toussaint]

47 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

It's fucking Juventus. I'd go, and I've supported Saints for 40 years. 

Who would milk the cows an collect the eggs? You really haven't thought this through.

Edited January 31 by Toussaint

[Pat from Poole]

13 minutes ago, gio1saints said:

Does anyone else get the impression that Saints, despite saying otherwise, might be convincible about SM going out on loan? And that it largely depends on what happens with Che?

This is the set of circumstances in which that idea might be realised: 
 

IF Che leaves it’s not out the question that a front three of Ryan, Adam and DB is the new starting trio. With Mara clearly as sub. On paper thats arguably actually stronger than Ryan, Adam and Sekou Mara with DB as sub for instance.

 

BUT if Che stays then there is an argument that it might not be the end of the world to let Sekou go out on loan because our forward line up is essentially perm 3 from AA, RF, CA and DB or even play all four with DB as an attacking midfield. ( potentially displacing Stu - Jo or resting them) . 
 

The Che domino seems to be the key one. And that might not all fall - until late Thursday night, if at all. 
 

My ideal is : Keep Che, keep Sekou. Keep them for Strength in depth for the tough run in and retain powerful set of match changing players on bench and for matches coming close after each other fresh legs 
 

Keep them all.

But if Adam Armstrong and Che both get injured, we are in trouble.

And for that reason, I would be using some or all of the Alcaraz loan fee to loan in a striker.

Kiefer Moore would do; ideal to throw on in the last half-hour of a game if we need a goal in a close game.

Not sure if we can loan more than 2 players from Boscombe though....

[Toussaint]

Just now, Pat from Poole said:

Keep them all.

But if Adam Armstrong and Che both get injured, we are in trouble.

And for that reason, I would be using some or all of the Alcaraz loan fee to loan in a striker.

Kiefer Moore would do; ideal to throw on in the last half-hour of a game if we need a goal in a close game.

Not sure if we can loan more than 2 players from Boscombe though....

Kiefer Moore would be great for us, but I really don't see that happening. 

[Chez]

1 hour ago, Ivan Katalinic's 'tache said:

So, if Charly plays an inadequate number of games, the bigger the loan fee? Or, he does really well and we could get £40m-£45m? I'll be disappointed to see him go but it could be a financially sound deal for us:

I was just about to type a post about how I couldn't get my head around the €5-7m loan figure previously mentioned on twitter sources. I know football finances are on another level these days, but that amount just seemed too high, even if it included his wages - which is never clear - but £3m seems more realistic. The word "Fee" suggests in addition to wages, but it might not be. By my count, there is 16 weeks left of their season, so that's £187,500 a week they would be forking out. If it was €5m, it would €312,500 a week. 

£40-45m is also a huge number. To put that into perspective, Juventus spent €35m on Locatelli (which was a deferred payment from his 2021 transfer) and €30m on Moise Kean this summer - who they are trying to offload on loan to Athletico. Total spend was €90m, total departures €65m. So, perhaps it's not totally beyond them, but he's going to have to get some game time and score some goals for them to consider spending those sums.

[Lee On Solent Saint]

3 minutes ago, Chez said:

I was just about to type a post about how I couldn't get my head around the €5-7m loan figure previously mentioned on twitter sources. I know football finances are on another level these days, but that amount just seemed too high, even if it included his wages - which is never clear - but £3m seems more realistic. The word "Fee" suggests in addition to wages, but it might not be. By my count, there is 16 weeks left of their season, so that's £187,500 a week they would be forking out. If it was €5m, it would €312,500 a week. 

£40-45m is also a huge number. To put that into perspective, Juventus spent €35m on Locatelli (which was a deferred payment from his 2021 transfer) and €30m on Moise Kean this summer - who they are trying to offload on loan to Athletico. Total spend was €90m, total departures €65m. So, perhaps it's not totally beyond them, but he's going to have to get some game time and score some goals for them to consider spending those sums.

Am wondering if the £40m transfer fee is just a nod to the sort of fee we are wanting for him. We probably know the Juve aren't going to stump up that figure even if he has a stellar loan spell. Much better to put a figure out there that we are looking at if he does have a wonder spell for them. Lets other potential suitors know the figures we are looking for.

[Chez]

1 minute ago, Lee On Solent Saint said:

Am wondering if the £40m transfer fee is just a nod to the sort of fee we are wanting for him. We probably know the Juve aren't going to stump up that figure even if he has a stellar loan spell. Much better to put a figure out there that we are looking at if he does have a wonder spell for them. Lets other potential suitors know the figures we are looking for.

Yeah, makes sense. Plus, just because we have put that high price on him, it doesn't mean we won't accept a lower offer from Juve. Ask for £40m, maybe get £30m. 

I have to say it's disappointing to see him depart - it would be great to show a successful pathway for players from Argentina, thereby perhaps enticing others to follow. It's a market we need to exploit if we go back up.

Obviously we all love a guy that scores goals for us, especially in the shitshow of a team last season, but he was actually a bit and miss and nothing has changed this season, despite having more time, more ball and lessor opponents. He still gives the ball away far too much when not under massive pressure.  That has to improve for him to fulfill his potential.

I hope his loan spell goes really well. If he can get a work permit and come off the bench on Sunday to score the winner against Inter that would be one hell of a start...

 

[gio1saints]

Incidentally this might be our last window to get a fee for Alex. It’s obvious he’s played his last game so , thank you for your service, but the quicker he is off the books the better. I suspect his wages alone would pay for DB or Rothwell. There must be a decent team out there needs an experienced keeper? ( And can pay what wages he wants) 

Edited January 31 by gio1saints

[Challenger]

3 hours ago, manji said:

Ross Stewart won’t be ready until next season. Still have have high hopes for him.

Can't help thinking that the lack of a creditable target man is going to cost us this season, just as it did last.

[miserableoldgit]

My take on this is that we might not have seen the last of CA. If the reports that he would be happy to return if we get promoted are accurate, it all makes a bit of sense. Sadly he hasn't set the World alight this season and is not getting game time. Loaning him out (and getting a half-decent loan fee) to get game time/experience at a high level in Italy without burning bridges has to be good for everyone........but then again......what do I know!

[revolution saint]

4 minutes ago, Chez said:

Yeah, makes sense. Plus, just because we have put that high price on him, it doesn't mean we won't accept a lower offer from Juve. Ask for £40m, maybe get £30m. 

I have to say it's disappointing to see him depart - it would be great to show a successful pathway for players from Argentina, thereby perhaps enticing others to follow. It's a market we need to exploit if we go back up.

Obviously we all love a guy that scores goals for us, especially in the shitshow of a team last season, but he was actually a bit and miss and nothing has changed this season, despite having more time, more ball and lessor opponents. He still gives the ball away far too much when not under massive pressure.  That has to improve for him to fulfill his potential.

I hope his loan spell goes really well. If he can get a work permit and come off the bench on Sunday to score the winner against Inter that would be one hell of a start...

 

If we end up selling him to Juventus then I think that's a big enough demonstration of a pathway for most young Argentinians.

Think I'm like most - disappointing if he does go but realistically he isn't making the first team and it seems like a decent enough deal for a fringe player.  

 

[Christhetoerag]

Why on earth are we getting rid of Charlie Alcaraz. One of our better players

[Lee On Solent Saint]

8 minutes ago, Chez said:

I have to say it's disappointing to see him depart - it would be great to show a successful pathway for players from Argentina, thereby perhaps enticing others to follow. It's a market we need to exploit if we go back up.

You could argue that the pathway still exists to a degree. He spent six months or so as a Premier League player with us, and now he is on the verge of signing for Juventus. Almost as if we are acting us the middle man for Juventus. Perhaps they were also looking at him when he was in Argentina, were reluctant to take a punt, where as we did. Now they've seen there is a player there, its a bit more attractive for them to take him.

[Give it to Ron]

2 minutes ago, Christhetoerag said:

Why on earth are we getting rid of Charlie Alcaraz. One of our better players

Have a read last few pages

[Chez]

3 minutes ago, Lee On Solent Saint said:

You could argue that the pathway still exists to a degree. He spent six months or so as a Premier League player with us, and now he is on the verge of signing for Juventus. Almost as if we are acting us the middle man for Juventus. Perhaps they were also looking at him when he was in Argentina, were reluctant to take a punt, where as we did. Now they've seen there is a player there, its a bit more attractive for them to take him.

I think there is a good chance that they were. We seemed to act fast on an emerging talent when we signed him, so maybe beat them to the punch.  

[gio1saints]

Aberdeen just sacked the Manager. I’d say that Miovski is unlikely to be sold in this window if so. To us or anyone.

Unless ( and unlikely)  it was to give new Aberdeen Manager a transfer pot of his own to spend on a couple of new players in his place? 

IF he was ever a target I’d say the chances of him signing as a Che replacement just got reduced mightily. Not totally dead but major surprise if happened. 

[Wurzel]

23 minutes ago, gio1saints said:

Incidentally this might be our last window to get a fee for Alex. It’s obvious he’s played his last game so , thank you for your service, but the quicker he is off the books the better. I suspect his wages alone would pay for DB or Rothwell. There must be a decent team out there needs an experienced keeper? ( And can pay what wages he wants) 

How quickly we forget. Couldn't for the life of me think who Alex was untill I saw the word keeper in your penultimate sentence.

[Wurzel]

16 minutes ago, Lee On Solent Saint said:

You could argue that the pathway still exists to a degree. He spent six months or so as a Premier League player with us, and now he is on the verge of signing for Juventus. Almost as if we are acting us the middle man for Juventus. Perhaps they were also looking at him when he was in Argentina, were reluctant to take a punt, where as we did. Now they've seen there is a player there, its a bit more attractive for them to take him.

Or you could argue that on the quiet SR have added Juve to our multi-club model and are now being used to give game time to our up and coming youngsters. 🤣

[Oldandtired]

1 hour ago, gio1saints said:

Does anyone else get the impression that Saints, despite saying otherwise, might be convincible about SM going out on loan? And that it largely depends on what happens with Che?

This is the set of circumstances in which that idea might be realised: 
 

IF Che leaves it’s not out the question that a front three of Ryan, Adam and DB is the new starting trio. With Mara clearly as sub. On paper thats arguably actually stronger than Ryan, Adam and Sekou Mara with DB as sub for instance.

 

BUT if Che stays then there is an argument that it might not be the end of the world to let Sekou go out on loan because our forward line up is essentially perm 3 from AA, RF, CA and DB or even play all four with DB as an attacking midfield. ( potentially displacing Stu - Jo or resting them) . 
 

The Che domino seems to be the key one. And that might not all fall - until late Thursday night, if at all. 
 

My ideal is : Keep Che, keep Sekou. Keep them for Strength in depth for the tough run in and retain powerful set of match changing players on bench and for matches coming close after each other fresh legs 
 

Don’t get the love for Che Adams. He didn’t set the PL alight and he hasn’t done a lot in this league either. Neither an out and out striker nor a playmaker I just don’t get him. 

I’m not too sure we would miss him that much if he went.
 

 

 

Edited January 31 by Oldandtired

[Hatch]

Have we ever had a transfer deal with Juventus before ? 

[Lee On Solent Saint]

4 minutes ago, Hatch said:

Have we ever had a transfer deal with Juventus before ? 

Lemina?

[redkeith]

8 minutes ago, Hatch said:

Have we ever had a transfer deal with Juventus before ? 

Lemina came from Juve I think.

 

 

 

[hypochondriac]

12 minutes ago, Oldandtired said:

Don’t get the love for Che Adams. He didn’t set the PL alight and he hasn’t done a lot in this league either. Neither an out and out striker nor a playmaker I just don’t get him. 

I’m not too sure we would miss him that much if he went.
 

 

 

I don't think anyone really loves him but I would think it's absolutely undeniable that losing him at this stage of the window would weaken us significantly for the rest of the season. Personally I'd have got a decent replacement last summer but given that we didn't, we really need him to stay to continue our promotion charge. 

[WALK DMC]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

I don't think anyone really loves him but I would think it's absolutely undeniable that losing him at this stage of the window would weaken us significantly for the rest of the season. Personally I'd have got a decent replacement last summer but given that we didn't, we really need him to stay to continue our promotion charge. 

I agree. Che is currently 15th in the Championship leading scorers, but on goals per minute he is 5th (better than Adam A).  This is a very solid performance (which often sums Che up) and it would be a major risk trying to get a replacement who would be guaranteed to make the same contribution.  Keep him if we can. 

[Appy]

19 minutes ago, Hatch said:

Have we ever had a transfer deal with Juventus before ? 

Didn’t we punt Osvaldo out to them at some point? 

[gio1saints]

We could have had Roberto Baggio on loan from Juve in 1995 after he fell out of favour what with the WC final penalty miss and all that v Brazil - but the problem is he watched some Saints highlights and realised there was no way he was going to displace Shipperly from the starting line up so he stayed at Juventus a while. ( and got some more trophies and medals I think) 🤭

Edited January 31 by gio1saints

[miserableoldgit]

59 minutes ago, Christhetoerag said:

Why on earth are we getting rid of Charlie Alcaraz. One of our better players

Is he though? I would love to keep him but in all honesty he hasn't really done much this season. He has apparently said that he would be happy to come back next season if we get promoted 

[FarehamSaintJames]

2 hours ago, Saint86 said:

I am excited by Brooks, but he is new to the system and will play on the wing in a position where he have relatively good strength.

Rothwell doesn't interest me at all as a starting 11 player. Maybe early days to write him off but wasn't excited when we signed him and haven't been impressed so far. I hope he is purely here to add depth rather than to become a starting 11 player.

Alcaraz is a class player, puts his all in whenever he is on the pitch, and has that ability to turn and drive with the ball or pick a defence splitting pass or quality finish. So he gives it away a few times... Equally he tries to do what precious few other players do, and often moves fail because other players just aren't as quick as he is / on his wavelength.

Long story short, i think we've effectively weakened the squad somewhat over the window. Rothwell shouldn't be in the side over the alternatives we already had on the books, and Alcaraz should have been getting more minutes imo. Only conclusion i can draw is that either Martin doesn't really fancy him, or that Alcaraz wants out (but then why the contract extension).

Brookes is an uncertainty re how he will impact the team, he was a very good player and i like that we've signed him, but is he any better than Alcaraz?... and equally we're 22 games unbeaten with Adam Armstrong largely playing on that wing, that will change with Brookes if he plays there, and there are no guarantees that will make the team better or more effective.

And underneath all of that, Alcaraz seemed to be committed to the club and a player with great potential - someone we could have developed and built a team around in the future - so i'm disappointed to see him leave, although hopefully he can come back a better player.

Perhaps, flipping it all around... we're going to get promoted with a lot of loanees, many of which we'll struggle to sign or who will need replacing. Alcaraz might benefit a lot from 4-5months in italy and then come back in next year, and perhaps the seemingly very high transfer clause is to discourage a transfer / make it worth our while.

To say we’ve weakened the squad is a bit much.

Alcaraz leaving on his own - yes it’s a weakening.

Brooks was excellent pre-illness and was linked with plenty of bigger clubs. 
Rothwell was well thought of at Blackburn, but no he hasn’t set the world alight in his first two matches. He was decent for cover.

Alcaraz has been “decent” all season, but nothing more than that.

[Ekelund]

6 minutes ago, gio1saints said:

We could have had Roberto Baggio on loan from Juve in 1985 after he fell out of favour what with the WC final penalty miss and all that v Brazil - but the problem is he watched some Saints highlights and realised there was no way he was going to displace Steve Moran from the starting line up so he stayed at Juventus a while. ( and got some more trophies and medals I think) 🤭

94?

[Wade Garrett]

36 minutes ago, Oldandtired said:

Don’t get the love for Che Adams. He didn’t set the PL alight and he hasn’t done a lot in this league either. Neither an out and out striker nor a playmaker I just don’t get him. 

I’m not too sure we would miss him that much if he went.
 

 

 

I agree, but if he does go, it is imperative we replace him.  Adam Armstrong gets a knock and we’re in the mire.

[Convict Colony]

Jesus fucking Christ, Charly's agent and Wilcox have played an absolute blinder.

Charly gets to play and train with a top top team, get guaranteed amount of games otherwise Juve pay us more money and if they do fancy him or anyone else does we've established 40m and 5m in add-ons is the starting point and he's happy to come back at end of season.

Stoked for Charly, top geezer and a south America who through both winters he's always worn short sleeves and no gloves proper hard man.

Looks like I'm following Juventus a bit now, bit of a step change from gozteppe and valenciennes.

 

 

[gio1saints]

26 minutes ago, Ekelund said:

94?

Sorry yeah it was 94 and NeilShipperly was on fire -have changed original post as obvs I got dates wrong. 😂

Edited January 31 by gio1saints

[Badger]

2 hours ago, Pat from Poole said:

Kiefer Moore would do; ideal to throw on in the last half-hour of a game if we need a goal in a close game.

Not sure if we can loan more than 2 players from Boscombe though....

Revised draw for FA Cup 5th Round:

Liverhampton v Southampton & Boscombe Athletic 

[manji]

2 hours ago, gio1saints said:

Does anyone else get the impression that Saints, despite saying otherwise, might be convincible about SM going out on loan? And that it largely depends on what happens with Che?

This is the set of circumstances in which that idea might be realised: 
 

IF Che leaves it’s not out the question that a front three of Ryan, Adam and DB is the new starting trio. With Mara clearly as sub. On paper thats arguably actually stronger than Ryan, Adam and Sekou Mara with DB as sub for instance.

 

BUT if Che stays then there is an argument that it might not be the end of the world to let Sekou go out on loan because our forward line up is essentially perm 3 from AA, RF, CA and DB or even play all four with DB as an attacking midfield. ( potentially displacing Stu - Jo or resting them) . 
 

The Che domino seems to be the key one. And that might not all fall - until late Thursday night, if at all. 
 

My ideal is : Keep Che, keep Sekou. Keep them for Strength in depth for the tough run in and retain powerful set of match changing players on bench and for matches coming close after each other fresh legs 
 

Overthinking a bit there , which I do as well but an interesting assessment. Let’s just get this fucking window shut and keep going we have the squad to do it.

If you watch any videos of Brook and Martin working on the wings at Bournemouth they appeared devastating. 

 

I

[manji]

6 minutes ago, Convict Colony said:

Jesus fucking Christ, Charly's agent and Wilcox have played an absolute blinder.

Charly gets to play and train with a top top team, get guaranteed amount of games otherwise Juve pay us more money and if they do fancy him or anyone else does we've established 40m and 5m in add-ons is the starting point and he's happy to come back at end of season.

Stoked for Charly, top geezer and a south America who through both winters he's always worn short sleeves and no gloves proper hard man.

Looks like I'm following Juventus a bit now, bit of a step change from gozteppe and valenciennes.

 

 

Totally agree Russel Martin often said he was one of the hardest workers in the team. Only thing is he’s been struggling with his English teacher . How similar is Spanish to Italian ?

[gio1saints]

1 minute ago, manji said:

Totally agree Russel Martin often said he was one of the hardest workers in the team. Only thing is he’s been struggling with his English teacher . How similar is Spanish to Italian ?

He’s half Italian anyway being Argentinian. No problem getting the language at all. 

[Turkish]

54 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I don't think anyone really loves him but I would think it's absolutely undeniable that losing him at this stage of the window would weaken us significantly for the rest of the season. Personally I'd have got a decent replacement last summer but given that we didn't, we really need him to stay to continue our promotion charge. 

At risk of being accused of only backing up the usual suspects you're right. If he leaves we are one Adam Armstrong injury away from having to start Mara every week who doesn't look anywhere near ready, or perhaps even good enough. Huge risk when promotion is so tight.

[Osvaldorama]

Head: fair play Alcaraz, quality move for all parties considering that he doesn’t fit RM’s style

Heart: gutted we won’t see him again this season (or ever). 
 

Will certainly be watching his career with interest. He has so much potential to be a top player. 

[SaintsFan86]

20 minutes ago, Turkish said:

At risk of being accused of only backing up the usual suspects you're right. If he leaves we are one Adam Armstrong injury away from having to start Mara every week who doesn't look anywhere near ready, or perhaps even good enough. Huge risk when promotion is so tight.

I'm assure the hierarchy of Jason Wilcox will have told Che tonight at rhe latest that he surely must be staying.

[DT]

5 minutes ago, SaintsFan86 said:

I'm assure the hierarchy of Jason Wilcox will have told Che tonight at rhe latest that he surely must be staying.

I still hope Che is off and that we have irons in the fire about someone who can play football a bit better coming in the other direction.

[Convict Colony]

1 minute ago, DT said:

I still hope Che is off and that we have irons in the fire about someone who can play football a bit better coming in the other direction.

Danny Ings west ham ? or am I in too deep in the COT.