Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 10:12 pm

He still looks very raw at this level, in my opinion.

He looks better than, the much more PL experienced, Hendrick did in centre mid, in my opinion (and the stats would back me up).

And I rated Hendrick before you suggest I'm one of the boo boys.

If it happens, let's hope Stephens turns out to be an Alexander or a Barton, rather than a Hart or a Lennon.

welsbyswife wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 10:19 pm

People talk some nonsense. "Looks raw at this level". Based on what? Lazy thing to say. Ok, the standard is higher but it's not a different sport. The lad knows how to play and you don't just lose that because you step up a league.

Why is it a lazy thing to say? I’ve been very impressed with Brownhill. He’s got a great engine, likes to drive forward with the ball and has a good tenacity to his play.

There were a number of occasions towards the end of last season where he gave the ball away in very dangerous areas of the pitch, a certain naivety, or ‘rawness’ that I expect he will learn to iron out of his game. Risks that may be worth taking in the Championship aren’t necessarily worthwhile in the PL. The opposition are cleverer, quicker and more clinical.

Hendrick was the same when we signed him, he’d ponder on the ball and before he knew it he would be dispossessed. Charlie Taylor took a long time to look comfortable with the step up. It’s hardly a novel concept and definitely not a lazy comment.

Mattster wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 10:22 pm

He looks better than, the much more PL experienced, Hendrick did in centre mid, in my opinion (and the stats would back me up).

And I rated Hendrick before you suggest I'm one of the boo boys.

Not sure what stats you have to prove that. But I think it’s obvious that in Hendrick’s time here he contributed in ways that were appreciated more by Dyche than the fans, and I’ll include myself in that. Brownhill looks a very good signing, he’s brought something different to the side and I’m looking forward to seeing him develop. I think that he, and Dyche would likely agree that he is ‘raw’ at this level though.

Signing Stephens is a stop gap/insurance policy in case we lose
Westwood or Brownhill to injury and/or Cork doesn't come
back too soon and then struggles to pick up where he left off.

At the same time I'd argue that it's important we bring on some of the youngsters
and the only one who may fit the bill in terms of midfield is probably Benson.
He didn't look out of place when he came against Sheff.Utd and looks as if he may
have the potential to do well.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 10:31 pm

Not sure what stats you have to prove that. But I think it’s obvious that in Hendrick’s time here he contributed in ways that were appreciated more by Dyche than the fans, and I’ll include myself in that. Brownhill looks a very good signing, he’s brought something different to the side and I’m looking forward to seeing him develop. I think that he, and Dyche would likely agree that he is ‘raw’ at this level though.

Look at the underlying stats, simple stuff such as dribble success, pass completion, etc to the deeper stuff such as open play shot creating actions. Outperforms Hendrick pretty much across the board.

And for all you thinking Dyche would say he's raw. Ask yourself, if Gudmundsson and Cork were both fit next week, does Brownhill lose his place. Because Hendrick did in those circumstances, I don't think Brownhill does.

This is going round in circles though. Clearly you think Dale Stephens is the best we can do and I won't change your mind. I strongly disagree and you're not going to change my mind either. Best just leave it.

66 pages and all we've managed to sign is Will 'fuckin' Norris

Devils_Advocate wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 11:15 pm

66 pages and all we've managed to sign is Will 'fuckin' Norris

I had no idea either of them were gay

Mattster wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 11:09 pm

Look at the underlying stats, simple stuff such as dribble success, pass completion, etc to the deeper stuff such as open play shot creating actions. Outperforms Hendrick pretty much across the board.

And for all you thinking Dyche would say he's raw. Ask yourself, if Gudmundsson and Cork were both fit next week, does Brownhill lose his place. Because Hendrick did in those circumstances, I don't think Brownhill does.

This is going round in circles though. Clearly you think Dale Stephens is the best we can do and I won't change your mind. I strongly disagree and you're not going to change my mind either. Best just leave it.

I certainly don’t think that Stephens is the best we can do, and I’ve definitely not said that. I’ve argued the case for why the signing, in the circumstance makes sense. Happy to leave it at that though.

With a very small fee plus wages Stephens might only cost us around about £1m per season. The optimist in me is hoping that frees up funds for more of a marquee signing whilst filling a gap in midfield where we were short. With Stephens on board and Cork back fit it could actually be the first time in Dyche's reign we haven't been a bit light in there. Good business.

!aiboforceN wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 10:24 pm

If it happens, let's hope Stephens turns out to be an Alexander or a Barton, rather than a Hart or a Lennon.

The former is far more likely as he's more that sort of player. I'm glad we're signing him.

If the fee (750k) is to be believed, Stephens represents a very astute signing.

Well capable at this level.

Given our crisis anything is better than nothing so a player like Stephens would be very welcome. Especially if so cheap..

Mattster wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 11:09 pm

Look at the underlying stats, simple stuff such as dribble success, pass completion, etc to the deeper stuff such as open play shot creating actions. Outperforms Hendrick pretty much across the board.

And for all you thinking Dyche would say he's raw. Ask yourself, if Gudmundsson and Cork were both fit next week, does Brownhill lose his place. Because Hendrick did in those circumstances, I don't think Brownhill does.

This is going round in circles though. Clearly you think Dale Stephens is the best we can do and I won't change your mind. I strongly disagree and you're not going to change my mind either. Best just leave it.

What stats are you using to decide that anyone has stated that they think Stephens is the best we can do. Nobody has said that anywhere, just because some aren't moaning about the signing with every post doesn't mean they think that is the best we can do.

I was horrified at the idea of signing Stephens but having thought about it if you go to Harrods with a quid, he’s probably the best possible value we could buy that fits SD’s needs.

superdimitri wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 6:53 am

Given our crisis anything is better than nothing so a player like Stephens would be very welcome. Especially if so cheap..

It’s such a sorry state of affairs that we’re looking at signings as purely additions.

We’re not looking at age, resale value, or improving the quality of the squad.

Just get someone in. Anyone.

What drugs are people on this board.
Since covid Burnleys income has probably dropped by about 50%.
Taking that into consideration we have no money or very little for transfers/wages etc.
Looking for us to spend 20m on a player is just utter madness in this environment.
So players like Stephens at that money is a very astute signing. 31 yes but solid with loads experience.
Stick with the club chairman manager players. They have given us 5 unbelievable years.

TsarBomba wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:19 am

It’s such a sorry state of affairs that we’re looking at signings as purely additions.

We’re not looking at age, resale value, or improving the quality of the squad.

Just get someone in. Anyone.

Haven't we just done that with Brownhill

TsarBomba wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:19 am

It’s such a sorry state of affairs that we’re looking at signings as purely additions.

We’re not looking at age, resale value, or improving the quality of the squad.

Just get someone in. Anyone.

How would signing Stephens not improve the quality of the squad?

TsarBomba wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:19 am

It’s such a sorry state of affairs that we’re looking at signings as purely additions.

We’re not looking at age, resale value, or improving the quality of the squad.

Just get someone in. Anyone.

Said it before a couple of years ago, and I'll say it again, Garlick stinks!

It’s getting a bit like arm tattoos. Just get some on there quick I don’t care what they are. We havnt even got half a sleave yet and will probably never have a full one.

I find it hard to believe all the negative comments about Stephens. What is there not to like in signing an experienced centre midfielder with bags of Premier league experience for next to nothing.

OK he is getting on a bit, even so if we get two seasons out of him on a 3 year contract he will only cost us around 7 million and could probably earn us 200 millions.

I honestly think that Stephens is far more capable than Brownhill, who due to circumstances as been thrown in at the deep end. Brownhill his form will dip as the season progresses, he will need time on the bench to catch his breath

He’s alright as a squad filler. He’s no better than what we have and as we have an ageing squad I’m not sure we should be signing 31 year olds unless they are real quality. A bit like buying a washing machine you don’t need as you have one but you have it because it’s cheap as back up.

The object now for Burnley is to survive this crisis... and hopefully stay in premier league.
On the Brighton forum every fan says hes a leader on field .... and thats what we need now.
Sit in front back four.... protect them ...
I think he will be a very good signing. And a Dyche type player that can go straight into team.

Boss Hogg wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:32 am

He’s alright as a squad filler. He’s no better than what we have and as we have an ageing squad I’m not sure we should be signing 31 year olds unless they are real quality. A bit like buying a washing machine you don’t need as you have one but you have it because it’s cheap as back up.

Why is ‘no better than what we’ve got’ trotted out as a bad thing when ‘what we’ve got’ have not only kept us the the Premier League but finished in the top half twice in the last three seasons.

Continue to give us players that are ‘no better than what we’ve got’ and I’ll be more than happy.

TsarBomba wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:19 am

It’s such a sorry state of affairs that we’re looking at signings as purely additions.

We’re not looking at age, resale value, or improving the quality of the squad.

Just get someone in. Anyone.

In fairness, Stephens would improve the quality of the squad given his experience - he was a first team regular last season, albeit in a team who’ve often finished below us.

The encouraging signs for me are that if we are bargain basement shopping we might not be selling JT.

I would rather we were going for a younger defensive midfielder though. Have mentioned him before but would not mind Billing at Bournemouth - doesn’t start every game to my knowledge, but thought he was excellent at the Turf, an absolute unit with decent feet. Think Dyche could turn him in to an excellent holding midfielder.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MU7YuFnes8k

Yes Billing. Have u got 18 million.

martin_p wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:38 am

Why is ‘no better than what we’ve got’ trotted out as a bad thing when ‘what we’ve got’ have not only kept us the the Premier League but finished in the top half twice in the last three seasons.

Continue to give us players that are ‘no better than what we’ve got’ and I’ll be more than happy.

Strive to improve or you stagnate or go backwards. Same for any team or business. This isn’t the same as saying what we already have isn’t good.

People keep saying that Stephens in not even a first team regular and that we finished stronger than Brighton last season. The reason we finished higher than them is "the Dyche factor". Brighton have an incredibly strong squad and first team.I would go as far to say that TODAY more of their squad would get into our first team than vice-versa. Before you shoot me down in flames remove your claret tinted spectacles and view it as an outsider

Stephens will be a much needed short term acquisition. Sadly our club in terms of recruitment is more short term than planned forward thinking

Blyclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:20 am

What drugs are people on this board.
Since covid Burnleys income has probably dropped by about 50%.
Taking that into consideration we have no money or very little for transfers/wages etc.
Looking for us to spend 20m on a player is just utter madness in this environment.
So players like Stephens at that money is a very astute signing. 31 yes but solid with loads experience.
Stick with the club chairman manager players. They have given us 5 unbelievable years.

I do t think the 50% bit is anywhere near correct. Our income is mainly from TV revenue, which will reduce but the big loss is Matchday revenue where we earn the lowest in the league I think.

So it impacts us, yes, but not by 50%. Some counter points to that argument:

- We had £40m cash in the bank at last accounts. Given they are historical, it’s not unreasonable to assume that had increased to say £50m when Covid hit. Unlike most (all?) clubs we carry no debt, so we’ve effectively got a cash surplus in the bank but no players on the bench. That’s not right.

- Also, fee’s are very rarely paid in full up front. I’d imagine less so this year than most. So buying a £20m player this year, who keeps us up comfortably, may only cost £5m up front, then payment over the following 3 years. Compare that to the £100m plus revenue from PL status each year and it seems very poor business sense. £20m to help secure £400m, sign me up!

- We’ve reduced our wage bill by ~£8m pa (a bit less because that includes all of Gibson’s salary, part of which we’ll pay).

- Assuming the cash is spent, the fees demanded up front are higher and the wage reduction offset by Matchday revenue reductions, we could still take on some low cost debt like Spurs have. I hate debt personally, prefer us to be run well with cash in the bank, but the consequences of continuing with this threadbare squad and getting relegated warrant some targeted debt raising to help liquidity if that’s what’s necessary.

Overall I think we need to see through the doom and gloom. Interest in top level sport is not going to wane long-term.

My hope is that as the deadline nears selling clubs begin to get nervy and there are some bargains available, both from the Championship and top end PL clubs with bloated squads. I’m hoping Garlick plays a blinder, saving all his pennies till the sales and we end up better off than the clubs that have rushed out spending. But it’s hard to remain hopeful of that given lack of activity in previous windows and the manager continually telling us there is “nothing close” with 13 days to go!!

Blyclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:54 am

Yes Billing. Have u got 18 million.

Think Bournemouth paid £4.5m didn’t they? May be wrong on that?

Blyclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:20 am

What drugs are people on this board.
Since covid Burnleys income has probably dropped by about 50%.
Taking that into consideration we have no money or very little for transfers/wages etc.
Looking for us to spend 20m on a player is just utter madness in this environment.
So players like Stephens at that money is a very astute signing. 31 yes but solid with loads experience.
Stick with the club chairman manager players. They have given us 5 unbelievable years.

If you are correct about your assessment of our finances/income you have to ask what drugs our manager is on too?

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 11:17 pm

I certainly don’t think that Stephens is the best we can do, and I’ve definitely not said that. I’ve argued the case for why the signing, in the circumstance makes sense. Happy to leave it at that though.

claretonthecoast1882 wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 7:55 am

What stats are you using to decide that anyone has stated that they think Stephens is the best we can do. Nobody has said that anywhere, just because some aren't moaning about the signing with every post doesn't mean they think that is the best we can do.

So he's "certainly" not the best we can do but you're happy with it and think it makes sense? Think that sums it up. If there's by far better we can do then why should we settle for much less than that on big wages (thus limiting our other options)?

Let's just think about this. We've got Hart, Lennon, Hendrick and Gibson off the wage bill that probably saves us around £120k a week (assuming we're still paying some of Gibson's). Norris in on ~£10k a week, so that's £110k. Then we'll want to save some money due to COVID losses, let's be kind and assume Garlick only wants to knock £20k a week off the budget. That's our available wage budget at £90k. Stephens isn't going to take a pay cut but let's be kind and assume no increase so he'll be on £30k. So potentially a third of our wage budget will be taken up by someone you're happy to admit is "certainly" not the best we can do, will eventually be 4th choice in his position in a matter of months then sit around on big wages for a what remains of his deal (at least a 2 year one) before eventually leaving for nothing, probably only just sneaking into double figures for starts.

He will be a better addidition to the squad than Drinkwater was.

Blyclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:20 am

What drugs are people on this board.
Since covid Burnleys income has probably dropped by about 50%.
Taking that into consideration we have no money or very little for transfers/wages etc.
Looking for us to spend 20m on a player is just utter madness in this environment.
So players like Stephens at that money is a very astute signing. 31 yes but solid with loads experience.
Stick with the club chairman manager players. They have given us 5 unbelievable years.

It's utter b s we don't have money for transfers.....we have spent the last 5 years in the premier league and all the money that comes with it. We don't spend anything like what all the other clubs do on transfers infact our spending is in the black, we have year in year out one of the smallest wage Bill's, we must of taken 600+ million out of the premier league over the last 5 year's

Just last season we made 127.3 million

league position: 10th
Equal share: £31.8m
Facility fees: £12.3m
Merit payment: £19.5m
Overseas TV income: £58.7m
Commercial revenue: £5m
Total: £127.3m

yet we still have no money ?????

rufus lumley wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:18 am

He will be a better addidition to the squad than Drinkwater was.

There's damning with faint praise and then there's that.

Firthy wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 21, 2020 5:58 pm

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

He has, very much so, written in the summer of 2016. I've probably made a mess of it by trying to make changes, might have been better writing a new one.

To those who still hold the view that we have money to spend, I suggest you look through the Magic Money Tree thread. It clearly shows how and why our projected income has gone down. Quite simply, we are going to be a lot less well off this season than was originally projected, and that of course means that the money available for transfers is much reduced. It is frustrating, but we are just about the most vulnerable to the decline in Premier League incomes, not least because we don't have rich owners to plug the gaps.

ClaretMov wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:28 am

It's utter b s we don't have money for transfers.....we have spent the last 5 years in the premier league and all the money that comes with it. We don't spend anything like what all the other clubs do on transfers infact our spending is in the black, we have year in year out one of the smallest wage Bill's, we must of taken 600+ million out of the premier league over the last 5 year's

Just last season we made 127.3 million

league position: 10th
Equal share: £31.8m
Facility fees: £12.3m
Merit payment: £19.5m
Overseas TV income: £58.7m
Commercial revenue: £5m
Total: £127.3m

yet we still have no money ?????

Not sure where you have got those figures from but I would think they will be heavily reduced because of the current situation.

And if you want to know what's happened to the money, take a look at the club's accounts for those years.

People going on and on about Stephen’s age. Watched City last night, someone should remind Fernandinho how old he is.

ClaretMov wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:28 am

It's utter b s we don't have money for transfers.....we have spent the last 5 years in the premier league and all the money that comes with it. We don't spend anything like what all the other clubs do on transfers infact our spending is in the black, we have year in year out one of the smallest wage 's, we must of taken 600+ million out of the premier league over the last 5 year's

Just last season we made 127.3 million

league position: 10th
Equal share: £31.8m
Facility fees: £12.3m
Merit payment: £19.5m
Overseas TV income: £58.7m
Commercial revenue: £5m
Total: £127.3m

yet we still have no money ?????

Me thinks thou hast forgotten the rebate to ST holders, the reduced coorporate monies, the reduced Sky monies the cost of SD and Covid testing and the continued payments to those under contract as well as the usual running cost for games.

ClaretMov wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:28 am

It's utter b s we don't have money for transfers.....we have spent the last 5 years in the premier league and all the money that comes with it. We don't spend anything like what all the other clubs do on transfers infact our spending is in the black, we have year in year out one of the smallest wage Bill's, we must of taken 600+ million out of the premier league over the last 5 year's

Just last season we made 127.3 million

league position: 10th
Equal share: £31.8m
Facility fees: £12.3m
Merit payment: £19.5m
Overseas TV income: £58.7m
Commercial revenue: £5m
Total: £127.3m

yet we still have no money ?????

I take it you’ve been sent our July 20 year end accounts ? That’s great - especially since they are a lot better than Garlick was saying...and no reduction in revenue from the TV contracts either as a result of Covid.
Brilliant news - if you can post a link with the accounts then we can all rejoice and look forward to spending all this spare cash you say we have on big money signings

ClaretMov wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:28 am

It's utter b s we don't have money for transfers.....we have spent the last 5 years in the premier league and all the money that comes with it. We don't spend anything like what all the other clubs do on transfers infact our spending is in the black, we have year in year out one of the smallest wage Bill's, we must of taken 600+ million out of the premier league over the last 5 year's

Just last season we made 127.3 million

league position: 10th
Equal share: £31.8m
Facility fees: £12.3m
Merit payment: £19.5m
Overseas TV income: £58.7m
Commercial revenue: £5m
Total: £127.3m

yet we still have no money ?????

And what is the net profit from what the club have been paid? This is what is being used to fund the transfers (Not betting the ranch).

Not exactly sure just how transfers are finalised these days, whether or not there are face to face talks with directors etc. but Brighton are at Preston tomorrow in the Carabao Cup, so it might be an easy opportunity to conclude the deal for Stephens. That said, we are of course at Millwall, but I'm sure Mike Garlick wouldn't be too upset at missing that game.

rufus lumley wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:18 am

He will be a better addidition to the squad than Drinkwater was.

A ham sandwich would be a better addition than Drinkwater.

Gordaleman wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:52 am

Not exactly sure just how transfers are finalised these days, whether or not there are face to face talks with directors etc. but Brighton are at Preston tomorrow in the Carabao Cup, so it might be an easy opportunity to conclude the deal for Stephens. That said, we are of course at Millwall, but I'm sure Mike Garlick wouldn't be too upset at missing that game.

I'd be a bit shocked if we had to wait for a fixture for it to be convenient to talk to somebody.

Stephens should have been making his way up here yesterday! He couldn't wait to get in his car and start the drive up north 4 years ago....

We need to improve the technical quality and creativity of the squad. Our play in the final third of the pitch needs more composure and "intelligence".

This should be the main criteria for new signings (imo).

Mattster wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:16 am

So he's "certainly" not the best we can do but you're happy with it and think it makes sense? Think that sums it up. If there's by far better we can do then why should we settle for much less than that on big wages (thus limiting our other options)?

Let's just think about this. We've got Hart, Lennon, Hendrick and Gibson off the wage bill that probably saves us around £120k a week (assuming we're still paying some of Gibson's). Norris in on ~£10k a week, so that's £110k. Then we'll want to save some money due to COVID losses, let's be kind and assume Garlick only wants to knock £20k a week off the budget. That's our available wage budget at £90k. Stephens isn't going to take a pay cut but let's be kind and assume no increase so he'll be on £30k. So potentially a third of our wage budget will be taken up by someone you're happy to admit is "certainly" not the best we can do, will eventually be 4th choice in his position in a matter of months then sit around on big wages for a what remains of his deal (at least a 2 year one) before eventually leaving for nothing, probably only just sneaking into double figures for starts.

Wow what a weird post.
Shall I look into my crystal ball and come up with a more positive prediction of what will happen in the next 3 years just to suit my opinion ?
Cork’s injury is worse than we thought...Westwood also picks up a serious injury - Stephens plays as many games for Burnley as he does for Brighton and is an integral part of us overturning the odds yet again etc etc

See it’s easy - but it’s pretty irrelevant which one of us is right because Sean Dyche is a lot better at this than either of us !!

Jakubs Tash wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:01 am

I'd be a bit shocked if we had to wait for a fixture for it to be convenient to talk to somebody.

Stephens should have been making his way up here yesterday! He couldn't wait to get in his car and start the drive up north 4 years ago....

I didn't say it was the only way, just a convenient one. You might be right about Stephens but it's not him that decides the fee.

Mala591 wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:02 am

We need to improve the technical quality and creativity of the squad. Our play in the final third of the pitch needs more composure and "intelligence".

This should be the main criteria for new signings (imo).

I agree. But budget and SD's preference to working hard vs being technically gifted, makes this unlikely. It is what we are crying out for though.