Firthy wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 5:58 pm

The big question is. Has Tony got an article ready for the Stephens signing ?

Can probably save it until the fifth. There are days of wages to be saved here.

Firthy wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 5:58 pm

The big question is. Has Tony got an article ready for the Stephens signing ?

Probably just edit the one from years ago

He scored against us in the 2-2 draw didn't he?

boatshed bill wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 6:18 pm

I have to say it's a bit sad if we're picking up Brighton's chuck-outs.
A couple of seasons back it wouldn't have happened.
i've always thought we are much better than them. But they have money!

You have to understand. Brighton fans have big dreams. You only need to read their comments on the Argus site. They're actually focusing on top four and beyond based on their win at the weekend.

Same deal with Westwood when we got him from villa 'why are we signing their cast offs?' you could argue the same with Cork...

Solid signing, cheap and a good fit for the squad. Great work.

Claretmatt4 wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 6:40 pm

Same deal with Westwood when we got him from villa 'why are we signing their cast offs?' you could argue the same with Cork...

Solid signing, cheap and a good fit for the squad. Great work.

And Heaton from a relegated club - he can't be good if he was in goal when they went down!...

Would be happy enough with Dale Stephens, actually. He'd be a solid, low-risk acquisition and given the precarious position we find ourselves in he could be exactly what's needed. He won't set the world alight for us, and neither will he be sold on for a profit, but he's hugely experienced and we know Dyche is a big fan.

Buying Stephens would be a bit like shopping at Argos. Some good bargains to be had there

Keeping Tarkowski, signing Stephens and Dawson and then adding a wide player or two would be great business. If we have to buy a couple of slightly older/cheaper players to get through the next 12 months then so be it. At least they are first XI ready. The main thing is that we retain our Premier League status through this uncertain period. Maybe the rebuild will just have to wait until next year.....perhaps with a different manager.

Firthy wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 6:59 pm

Buying Stephens would be a bit like shopping at Argos. Some good bargains to be had there

Maybe Rigg should look in the middle aisle at Aldi for a bargain right winger.

Jakubs Tash wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:05 pm

Keeping Tarkowski, signing Stephens and Dawson and then adding a wide player or two would be great business. If we have to buy a couple of slightly older/cheaper players to get through the next 12 months then so be it. At least they are first XI ready. The main thing is that we retain our Premier League status through this uncertain period. Maybe the rebuild will just have to wait until next year.....perhaps with a different manager.

I was about to give your post a "like" .... until I read your last 5 words.

I believe foundations for the rebuild are already being laid in the U23.

UTC

Claretmatt4 wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 6:40 pm

Same deal with Westwood when we got him from villa 'why are we signing their cast offs?' you could argue the same with Cork...

Solid signing, cheap and a good fit for the squad. Great work.

Westwood was 27 when we signed him, Stephens is 32 (I think) big difference.

Paul Waine wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:11 pm

I was about to give your post a "like" .... until I read your last 5 words.

I believe foundations for the rebuild are already being laid in the U23.

UTC

Haha!

I think that the damage has been done and no matter how much we 'back' Dyche now he won't be our manager next season. Of course, I could be wrong - that's just my opinion. I'm a huge Sean Dyche fan and don't want him to go but it doesn't look too promising and when the inevitable posts become available I think he will leave.

Now reading the Tarky to West Ham deal is not yet dead and Burnley are mulling over a £35m offer.

I just wonder, what would be the point in picking him for the cup game tomorrow, if that was in anyway true?

Claretmatt4 wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 6:40 pm

Same deal with Westwood when we got him from villa 'why are we signing their cast offs?' you could argue the same with Cork...

Solid signing, cheap and a good fit for the squad. Great work.

We signed Westwood 3 and a half years ago. 3 and a half years later he's still younger than Stephens is now.

We signed Cork 3 years ago. He's days older than Stephens.

Since signing them we've finished 7th and 10th, we should be progressing. This is going backwards on where we were when we signed Westy and Cork.

FactualFrank wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:24 pm

Now reading the Tarky to West Ham deal is not yet dead and Burnley are mulling over a £35m offer.

I just wonder, what would be the point in picking him for the cup game tomorrow, if that was in anyway true?

They throwing in Lanzini or Antonio?

Jakubs Tash wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:19 pm

Haha!

I think that the damage has been done and no matter how much we 'back' Dyche now he won't be our manager next season. Of course, I could be wrong - that's just my opinion. I'm a huge Sean Dyche fan and don't want him to go but it doesn't look too promising and when the inevitable posts become available I think he will leave.

I think he might be gone mid season depending which jobs become available.

I think we are at the time now where we need a clean start both at board room level with a team in who will invest and a manager who isn’t so rigid, and able to rebuild our old ageing squad.

BenWickes wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:30 pm

They throwing in Lanzini or Antonio?

It's from Twitter, from an account with around 50,000 followers and seems to get engagement, so there might be some truth in it.

As for including players, I don't think so. Just money.

Mattster wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:28 pm

We signed Westwood 3 and a half years ago. 3 and a half years later he's still younger than Stephens is now.

We signed Cork 3 years ago. He's days older than Stephens.

Since signing them we've finished 7th and 10th, we should be progressing. This is going backwards on where we were when we signed Westy and Cork.

Only if you are basing everything on age. Signing a 31 year old on a 3 year deal and them walking away for free at the end of their contract is not a whole lot different than signing a 24 year old on a 4 year deal and them walking away for free. I think people are obsessing a little too much about age.

FactualFrank wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:24 pm

Now reading the Tarky to West Ham deal is not yet dead and Burnley are mulling over a £35m offer.

I just wonder, what would be the point in picking him for the cup game tomorrow, if that was in anyway true?

We should accept £45m and no less due to the sell on clause

£35m upfront sounds about right to me.

Giftonsnoidea wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:33 pm

We should accept £45m and no less due to the sell on clause

Well if he starts vs Millwall, then surely that says we aren't mulling over an offer for him.

If we were in anyway tempted on selling for an existing offer, we wouldn't risk him getting injured.

Right_winger wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:30 pm

....and a manager who isn’t so rigid, and able to rebuild our old ageing squad.

How rigid is the manager?
He only advises the board which players he’d like to keep and which he’d like to sign. If they don't take his advise he is managing with his hands tied.
He has made it crystal clear he wants to continue building the team, nothing rigid about that.

Harry Mcguire is shite and worth £80m, Tarks still must be near £40m even with COVID discount

Giftonsnoidea wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:38 pm

Harry Mcguire is shite and worth £80m, Tarks still must be near £40m even with COVID discount

I'll have to try that line when I buy my mince Not suggesting I call Asda and say 'Well Harry Maguire is worth £80 million so your Mince.....actually I'll give it a go!

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:33 pm

Only if you are basing everything on age. Signing a 31 year old on a 3 year deal and them walking away for free at the end of their contract is not a whole lot different than signing a 24 year old on a 4 year deal and them walking away for free. I think people are obsessing a little too much about age.

No it's not that much different if you let them walk away for nothing but I think you're missing the point of considering resale value when signing a player.

Who do you think has the best chance of getting a fee with one year left on their deal in your scenarios? The 33 year old or the 27 year old?

And that's without factoring in which player is in their prime years and which is past them.

Signings like this are very much backwards steps from the ones we were making 3 seasons ago, despite all the progress we've made. They also put us in a position where we'll be in the same position for the foreseeable future as these depreciating assets drain the finances for years. You have to work really hard to see it any other way.

Getting fringe players on massive wages off the wage bill in Lennon, Hart amd Gibson was such an opportunity. Why are we just going all in on putting ourselves back in that mire? It's pathetic.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:33 pm

Only if you are basing everything on age. Signing a 31 year old on a 3 year deal and them walking away for free at the end of their contract is not a whole lot different than signing a 24 year old on a 4 year deal and them walking away for free. I think people are obsessing a little too much about age.

Not really our team and squad is too old now never mind with another 30 something

It's a dyche signing alright so must have kissed and made up with Garlick

BOYSIE31 wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:50 pm

Not really our team and squad is too old now never mind with another 30 something

It's a dyche signing alright so must have kissed and made up with Garlick

I doubt it for £750k.

Pretty powerful piece by Chris Boden in the Express, first time I've read a journo openly having a massive dig at a club chairman.

huw.Y.WattfromWare wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:37 pm

How rigid is the manager?
He only advises the board which players he’d like to keep and which he’d like to sign. If they don't take his advise he is managing with his hands tied.
He has made it crystal clear he wants to continue building the team, nothing rigid about that.

I’d say he’s pretty rigid.

The type of players he goes for are the one that cost a premium and are often way over priced.

Rigg might be coming up with a whole host of foreign targets but as Dyche can’t cook them an omelette he might not want to know.

Nothing against Stephens, and it'll fill a gap in the squad but that's all it would be - another stop gap. It just pushes the issue another 12 months down the line. At some point we have to reduce the age of the squad - too many are approaching their twilight years with no resale value. It's a dangerous game to play particularly when we clearly need to buy players with big potential sell on fees. IF it means we can spend much needed funds on a wide player then so be it, not convinced we will though.

ewanrob wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:58 pm

Pretty powerful piece by Chris Boden in the Express, first time I've read a journo openly having a massive dig at a club chairman.

Oh I dunno think the sports journo of the Burnley Express. Could be getting his name wrong. Granville Shackleton had a go at Teasdale at least once back in the day.

NickBFC wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:00 pm

Nothing against Stephens, and it'll fill a gap in the squad but that's all it would be - another stop gap. It just pushes the issue another 12 months down the line. At some point we have to reduce the age of the squad - too many are approaching their twilight years with no resale value. It's a dangerous game to play particularly when we clearly need to buy players with big potential sell on fees. IF it means we can spend much needed funds on a wide player then so be it, not convinced we will though.

Completely agree with all of this

NickBFC wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:00 pm

Nothing against Stephens, and it'll fill a gap in the squad but that's all it would be - another stop gap. It just pushes the issue another 12 months down the line. At some point we have to reduce the age of the squad - too many are approaching their twilight years with no resale value. It's a dangerous game to play particularly when we clearly need to buy players with big potential sell on fees. IF it means we can spend much needed funds on a wide player then so be it, not convinced we will though.

well maybe that's what Garlick is thinking, maybe he is looking to sell up and thinking why bother spending ? Just conjecture obviously

Mattster wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:49 pm

No it's not that much different if you let them walk away for nothing but I think you're missing the point of considering resale value when signing a player.

Who do you think has the best chance of getting a fee with one year left on their deal in your scenarios? The 33 year old or the 27 year old?

And that's without factoring in which player is in their prime years and which is past them.

Signings like this are very much backwards steps from the ones we were making 3 seasons ago, despite all the progress we've made. They also put us in a position where we'll be in the same position for the foreseeable future as these depreciating assets drain the finances for years. You have to work really hard to see it any other way.

Getting fringe players on massive wages off the wage bill in Lennon, Hart amd Gibson was such an opportunity. Why are we just going all in on putting ourselves back in that mire? It's pathetic.

We don’t need to get a fee for a player we sign for £750k though. We could have done with one on the £10m+ we paid for Hendrick though. Stephens is 2.5 years older than Jeff, as a like for like squad replacement his age is fairly irrelevant.

I would like us to sign more younger players, but the fact of the matter is that the young players that are in our price bracket probably won’t be good enough to walk into the starting eleven - whereas Stephens has proven that he is.

Amusingly, a number of the people wanting us to sign younger players are up in arms about a 22 year old starting in our defence.

NickBFC wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:00 pm

Nothing against Stephens, and it'll fill a gap in the squad but that's all it would be - another stop gap. It just pushes the issue another 12 months down the line. At some point we have to reduce the age of the squad - too many are approaching their twilight years with no resale value. It's a dangerous game to play particularly when we clearly need to buy players with big potential sell on fees. IF it means we can spend much needed funds on a wide player then so be it, not convinced we will though.

The problem is, if our younger players start to play really well in the Prem they will ultimately leave anyway - Pope, Taylor, McNeil etc.

As soon as they have one or two good seasons they will get noticed and we will have to replace them anyway.

Spijed wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:17 pm

The problem is, if our younger players start to play really well in the Prem they will ultimately leave anyway - Pope, Taylor, McNeil etc.

As soon as they have one or two good seasons they will get noticed and we will have to replace them anyway.

Nothing wrong with that if we have other young players coming through, actually that would be as good as it gets.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:07 pm

We don’t need to get a fee for a player we sign for £750k though. We could have done with one on the £10m+ we paid for Hendrick though. Stephens is 2.5 years older than Jeff, as a like for like squad replacement his age is fairly irrelevant.

I would like us to sign more younger players, but the fact of the matter is that the young players that are in our price bracket probably won’t be good enough to walk into the starting eleven - whereas Stephens has proven that he is.

Amusingly, a number of the people wanting us to sign younger players are up in arms about a 22 year old starting in our defence.

Stephens has proven he is good enough to walk into our starting eleven? He's not good enough to walk into Brighton's starting eleven and we finish above them every single season.

He's not a signing for the starting eleven, if he was it'd frankly be even more pathetic, he's for depth. Unfortunately he's depth that will decline physically and technically whilst simultaneously stopping us signing someone who may actually develop to be good enough to start in the future by draining large wages for 2 to 3 years until he walks away for nothing and we are back at square one (minus his wages).

We should be looking at signings like Tarkowski, Westwood, Taylor and Brownhill. Players that weren't good enough to start but could do a job when needed and had time to settle in, develop into players that can start week in week out and would demand good fees if we sold them.

Stephens is another Lennon, Hart type signing. We plead poverty then throw money away like this - self fulfilling prophecy.

Mattster wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:21 pm

Stephens has proven he is good enough to walk into our starting eleven? He's not good enough to walk into Brighton's starting eleven and we finish above them every single season.

He's not a signing for the starting eleven, if he was it'd frankly be even more pathetic, he's for depth. Unfortunately he's depth that will decline physically and technically whilst simultaneously stopping us signing someone who may actually develop to be good enough to start in the future by draining large wages for 2 to 3 years until he walks away for nothing and we are back at square one (minus his wages).

We should be looking at signings like Tarkowski, Westwood, Taylor and Brownhill. Players that weren't good enough to start but could do a job when needed and had time to settle in, develop into players that can start week in week out and would demand good fees if we sold them.

Stephens is another Lennon, Hart type signing. We plead poverty then throw money away like this - self fulfilling prophecy.

Just to clarify. You don't think it's a good signing?

Spijed wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:17 pm

The problem is, if our younger players start to play really well in the Prem they will ultimately leave anyway - Pope, Taylor, McNeil etc.

As soon as they have one or two good seasons they will get noticed and we will have to replace them anyway.

That's my point though - Keane signed for £3m odd, sold for £30, Tarkowski signed for £3m, might be sold for £35m+, Pope, McNeil - all will bring in significant funds. We're a selling club, I have no problem with it if the money is reinvested in the squad. The problem with the last couple of years is we seem to have moved from promising players and blooding them in slowly to come in when someone is sold, to signing experienced pros who short term offer us something, but long term offer no resale value. The transfer market seems to move on every window so each time we bring in a Stephens etc it's making things even harder next year. We have to find a way to sign younger players or it'll bite us in the backside eventually.

ewanrob wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:06 pm

https://www.burnleyexpress.net/sport/fo ... -2-2978079

Well written article which sums up a lot of how some of us are feeling right now.

Do you think Boden will be banned for that?

Spijed wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:17 pm

The problem is, if our younger players start to play really well in the Prem they will ultimately leave anyway - Pope, Taylor, McNeil etc.

As soon as they have one or two good seasons they will get noticed and we will have to replace them anyway.

How's that a problem?

That's what we want.

Give me a player that plays well, develops and sells for tens of millions more than they cost us over an older one who "does a job" for a bit then eventually walks away for nothing after months of not playing.

Or put simply: Who was the better signing, Pope or Hart?

Zlatan wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:26 pm

Well written article which sums up a lot of how some of us are feeling right now.

Do you think Boden will be banned for that?

Banned? Garlick has already put a bounty on him

Mattster wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:21 pm

Stephens has proven he is good enough to walk into our starting eleven? He's not good enough to walk into Brighton's starting eleven and we finish above them every single season.

He's not a signing for the starting eleven, if he was it'd frankly be even more pathetic, he's for depth. Unfortunately he's depth that will decline physically and technically whilst simultaneously stopping us signing someone who may actually develop to be good enough to start in the future by draining large wages for 2 to 3 years until he walks away for nothing and we are back at square one (minus his wages).

We should be looking at signings like Tarkowski, Westwood, Taylor and Brownhill. Players that weren't good enough to start but could do a job when needed and had time to settle in, develop into players that can start week in week out and would demand good fees if we sold them.

Stephens is another Lennon, Hart type signing. We plead poverty then throw money away like this - self fulfilling prophecy.

I phrased that wrongly. I meant to put he is good enough to ‘step’ into our starting eleven. My error. I didn’t mean to insinuate that he would dislodge any of our three midfielders. He’s proven that he’s a capable player at this level that’s all.

You say we need to sign young players, and I don’t disagree with you there. Where I do disagree with you is that it is a binary choice. You mention Lennon and Hart as examples of experienced signings not working out, but why haven’t you mentioned Bardsley and Pieters who are recent examples of experienced and underwhelming signings that have contributed to our success?

It’s a balance, and I agree that the scales are tipping in the wrong direction, but signing Stephens doesn’t prevent us from signing a younger player to develop. In many ways it may facilitate it.

We have got ourselves into a position where holes in the squad need plugging fairly urgently, and an experienced player is likely to be a better option in these positions than an ‘up and comer’.

Giftonsnoidea wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:38 pm

Harry Mcguire is shite and worth £80m, Tarks still must be near £40m even with COVID discount

This.

Second only to VVD in the defensive statistics last year, who cost £70m from Southampton. Maguire £80m. Are £40m from a Championship club. I’d argue he’s worth more than £50m.

We don't plead poverty.

NickBFC wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:26 pm

That's my point though - Keane signed for £3m odd, sold for £30, Tarkowski signed for £3m, might be sold for £35m+, Pope, McNeil - all will bring in significant funds. We're a selling club, I have no problem with it if the money is reinvested in the squad. The problem with the last couple of years is we seem to have moved from promising players and blooding them in slowly to come in when someone is sold, to signing experienced pros who short term offer us something, but long term offer no resale value. The transfer market seems to move on every window so each time we bring in a Stephens etc it's making things even harder next year. We have to find a way to sign younger players or it'll bite us in the backside eventually.

Isn't this what the Academy is for?

Zlatan wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:26 pm

Well written article which sums up a lot of how some of us are feeling right now.

Do you think Boden will be banned for that?

Might get told to stand down two weeks before deadline day

ewanrob wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 8:06 pm

https://www.burnleyexpress.net/sport/fo ... -2-2978079

"So I ask, again, please Mr Chairman, with two weeks and two games remaining before the transfer window closes, give this remarkable motivator and organiser of men the basic tools to continue the quite brilliant job he continues to perform."

Well said Chris Boden