ARTICLE: Obafemi becomes a Lion

[Goliath]

From memory weren’t we being quoted £10m in the summer of 2022 when VK tried to sign him ?
Swansea wouldn’t budge and Obafemi’s form and attitude deteriorated according to his manager (Martin).
When we beat Swansea 4-0 at home at the end of the game VK was seen with his arm round Obafemi talking to him.

Guess when the opportunity to sign him came around again at a much lower fee VK was still interested and by that time Martin wanted to cut his losses as he was not picking Obafemi at all.

I still never understood why we went in for him again though given at that time we were flying and pretty much promoted. We also had bought Foster and had plenty of strikers. In his fleeting appearances Obafemi looked like a player who had played little football.

I suppose the only blessing here is that we did not pay £10m for him in the summer. Hope he does well at Millwall though purely so we can get our money back if we sell him. The lad Bradshaw at Millwall looks a better player so would not be surprised to see Obafemi on bench

I think the answer to that is that Kompany likes to have pacey options to use in the number 9 role, so he decided he still wanted Obafemi at a cut price free for the rest of the season as backup. It was a pretty risk free move and basically was a small investment to help ensure we didnt lose the potential £100 and odd million we'd make for getting promoted. I still think it was a pretty clever transfer and helped get us over the line.

[ClaretTony]

I think the answer to that is that Kompany likes to have pacey options to use in the number 9 role, so he decided he still wanted Obafemi at a cut price free for the rest of the season as backup. It was a pretty risk free move and basically was a small investment to help ensure we didnt lose the potential £100 and odd million we'd make for getting promoted. I still think it was a pretty clever transfer and helped get us over the line.

Not sure how it helped us get over the line. We were virtually there when he signed and his one contribution was that late goal against Watford.

[Tribesmen]

I think Micheal's game is to run at defenders down the middle .
Never really saw this at Burnley , look there is still time for him as if he gets game time he will score goals at Millwall .

[Big Vinny K]

I think the answer to that is that Kompany likes to have pacey options to use in the number 9 role, so he decided he still wanted Obafemi at a cut price free for the rest of the season as backup. It was a pretty risk free move and basically was a small investment to help ensure we didnt lose the potential £100 and odd million we'd make for getting promoted. I still think it was a pretty clever transfer and helped get us over the line.

Don’t agree with that at all.
We simply did not need him.
We were miles ahead of 3rd place and had a team full of pace, goals and confidence.
He couldn’t get near the first eleven and was usually one of the last subs to get on.
It was and still is a baffling signing.

[Goliath]

Not sure how it helped us get over the line. We were virtually there when he signed and his one contribution was that late goal against Watford.

I think he made about 12 appearances last season for us so i think saying he made 1 contribution is harsh. But it was an important goal to keep our unbeaten run going against Watford. Really it seems like he was there for depth, wed have looked silly if wed have gone through an injury crisis and been left short.
It will have cost us basically nothing upfront to have him for those 6 months and gave us some extra squad depth, knowing that if we go up we can probably sell him eventually for a similar fee. I don't think he was ever going to be a long term signing, especially once Foster hit the ground running this season.

[ClaretPete001]

I think he made about 12 appearances last season for us so i think saying he made 1 contribution is harsh. But it was an important goal to keep our unbeaten run going against Watford. Really it seems like he was there for depth, wed have looked silly if wed have gone through an injury crisis and been left short.
It will have cost us basically nothing upfront to have him for those 6 months and gave us some extra squad depth, knowing that if we go up we can probably sell him eventually for a similar fee. I don't think he was ever going to be a long term signing, especially once Foster hit the ground running this season.

£4 million is a lot for a player in the Championship. Without wishing to re-iterate myself again - it's more than a quarter of Rovers turnover and a a quarter of the amount the Venyk's have to throw into the club to keep them competing in the top half of the Championship.

Players can earn big fees from Championship sides but it's usually from clubs who have been relegated or outstanding talents bought by PL clubs or other big European clubs.

We have pretty much made sure that no PL or decent sized European club will come in for him unless he seriously impresses for Millwall and I mean scores a goal a game till the end of the season.

The problem is he's a young man (23 years old) who hasn't played for a good while, probably suffering a lack of confidence and he's going into a club that is safely lower-mid table with not much to play for.....!

And if it doesn't work out what then..?

[Goliath]

£4 million is a lot for a player in the Championship. Without wishing to re-iterate myself again - it's more than a quarter of Rovers turnover and a a quarter of the amount the Venyk's have to throw into the club to keep them competing in the top half of the Championship.

Players can earn big fees from Championship sides but it's usually from clubs who have been relegated or outstanding talents bought by PL clubs or other big European clubs.

We have pretty much made sure that no PL or decent sized European club will come in for him unless he seriously impresses for Millwall and I mean scores a goal a game till the end of the season.

The problem is he's a young man (23 years old) who hasn't played for a good while, probably suffering a lack of confidence and he's going into a club that is safely lower-mid table with not much to play for.....!

And if it doesn't work out what then..?

Thats all relative though, 4 million is a lot for Rovers because they have hardly any revenue. We had parachute payments, and there was also a really good chance of us being premoted and getting another 100 mill at the very least. It was also initially a loan so there will have been a minimal upfront payment and then whatever the fee was ( i thought 3 million) when were promoted.

The only risk is if we didnt go up, but as people have said it was very probable that would go up and this protected us against the possibility of an injury crisis derailing us. The only real issue was if stayed down, but he would have been a much more important player for us if we had been in the Champ so we would have needed a striker anyway. It was close to being a no lose scenario.

[ClaretTony]

I think he made about 12 appearances last season for us so i think saying he made 1 contribution is harsh. But it was an important goal to keep our unbeaten run going against Watford. Really it seems like he was there for depth, wed have looked silly if wed have gone through an injury crisis and been left short.
It will have cost us basically nothing upfront to have him for those 6 months and gave us some extra squad depth, knowing that if we go up we can probably sell him eventually for a similar fee. I don't think he was ever going to be a long term signing, especially once Foster hit the ground running this season.

He made 12 sub appearances and of those the result remained as it was when he came on other than Watford when he scored the late equaliser and QPR when he came on at 1-1 and we lost.

It’s a baffling signing, not because I do or don’t rate him but because it’s never made any sense with the reluctance to play him.

[Big Vinny K]

Obafemi would have been on a decent wage so think we have quite a lot to lose if he does not do well at Millwall as we will be stuck with him. I doubt Millwall can afford to pay what we were paying him even if he does well.

[groove]

He was a bad signing.

[Papabendi]

I suspect the club first and foremost spotted the opportunity for resale on the player with an outside chance he might have more of a benefit for the first team.

This all being said, it's relatively early days. He's 23. Same age as Foster.

[ClaretPete001]

Thats all relative though, 4 million is a lot for Rovers because they have hardly any revenue. We had parachute payments, and there was also a really good chance of us being premoted and getting another 100 mill at the very least. It was also initially a loan so there will have been a minimal upfront payment and then whatever the fee was ( i thought 3 million) when were promoted.

The only risk is if we didnt go up, but as people have said it was very probable that would go up and this protected us against the possibility of an injury crisis derailing us. The only real issue was if stayed down, but he would have been a much more important player for us if we had been in the Champ so we would have needed a striker anyway. It was close to being a no lose scenario.

I agree if we have £4 million to chuck away then it was worth a punt. But championship clubs do not spend £4 million lightly.

And we have just about made sure that no club with PL aspirations will sign him. He will be on a good contract and unless he makes a real impression at Millwall he could well be back with us not playing again. And let's be honest he's not the only one.

If you want to commoditise players this is not the way to go about doing it.

[Goliath]

I agree if we have £4 million to chuck away then it was worth a punt. But championship clubs do not spend £4 million lightly.

And we have just about made sure that no club with PL aspirations will sign him. He will be on a good contract and unless he makes a real impression at Millwall he could well be back with us not playing again. And let's be honest he's not the only one.

If you want to commoditise players this is not the way to go about doing it.

Surely it was about reducing any risk of us blowing promotion due to an injury crisis and gave Kompany some extra pace to use off the bench which he seems to like having in his teams.
He had Barnes and Rodriguez if he wanted a target to hit and he had Obafemi or Foster for pace in behind, if Foater had been out for a long period and we didnt have Obafemi then we'd have had no pacey option as a number 9 which is why I think he hedged his bets by signing both.

[Big Vinny K]

Surely it was about reducing any risk of us blowing promotion due to an injury crisis and gave Kompany some extra pace to use off the bench which he seems to like having in his teams.
He had Barnes and Rodriguez if he wanted a target to hit and he had Obafemi or Foster for pace in behind, if Foater had been out for a long period and we didnt have Obafemi then we'd have had no pacey option as a number 9 which is why I think he hedged his bets by signing both.

We had Tella though….and the lad from Brentford on loan.

Was there ever a point from January last season when we had less than 4 or 5 strikers without Obafemi ?

Obafemi when he came in was 6th in the pecking order of strikers. So the chances of him being good enough in VK’s eyes for the Premier League were slim to none.

And as said given Obafemi was signed by Swansea from a premier league club and they wanted £10m for him 6 months before he will not have been on a small salary. The transfer fee, plus agents fees, his salary, promotion bonus and signing on fee could easily be anywhere between £7m and £10m in total.

It was a signing that made no sense on or off the field.

[ClaretTony]

Surely it was about reducing any risk of us blowing promotion due to an injury crisis and gave Kompany some extra pace to use off the bench which he seems to like having in his teams.
He had Barnes and Rodriguez if he wanted a target to hit and he had Obafemi or Foster for pace in behind, if Foater had been out for a long period and we didnt have Obafemi then we'd have had no pacey option as a number 9 which is why I think he hedged his bets by signing both.

Reducing the risk of blowing promotion? By then we were already 17 points clear of Middlesbrough (who were third) and with a game in hand. Promotion would have taken some blowing. This was a player we'd pushed hard to get in the previous summer, he was very definitely not an insurance signing to protect a promotion.

[Swizzlestick]

A slightly overblown reaction to a transfer that hasn’t worked out so far, for whatever reason that may be. Maybe things just didn’t click behind the scenes. No idea why we’re making comparisons to Rovers turnover, what’s that got to do with anything? It was still, relative to where we were going to be financially, a reasonably low risk signing, for a player of a decent age and it’s still possible we’ll recoup a decent proportion back if we do move him on.

[Big Vinny K]

A slightly overblown reaction to a transfer that hasn’t worked out so far, for whatever reason that may be. Maybe things just didn’t click behind the scenes. No idea why we’re making comparisons to Rovers turnover, what’s that got to do with anything? It was still, relative to where we were going to be financially, a reasonably low risk signing, for a player of a decent age and it’s still possible we’ll recoup a decent proportion back if we do move him on.

Don’t think there’s much of an over reaction but I agree that comparing to Blackburn’s finances is irrelevant.

A more relevant point would be that there have been a hell of a lot of threads and posts on this board in the last couple of years criticising the takeover and in particular burdening the club with debt (which personally I don’t have a big issue with).

The total cost of a Obafemi is equivalent to around a years worth of interest and commission charges on our debt and finance deals - so it’s not the insignificant amount being suggested by some.

And I think the main point is it’s difficult to understand why we signed him.

Hopefully the loan works out and we can recoup something but I expect it will be a case of trying to minimise our losses on him because of his wage and the potential clubs who would be interested in him.

[daveisaclaret]

Decision to sign him looks odd, I think that's clear. But it feels very possible we start next season sans Foster, Amdouni and Rodriguez. I'm not totally convinced VK sees it this way but in that scenario Obafemi will look like a decent player to have around.

[Goliath]

Don’t think there’s much of an over reaction but I agree that comparing to Blackburn’s finances is irrelevant.

A more relevant point would be that there have been a hell of a lot of threads and posts on this board in the last couple of years criticising the takeover and in particular burdening the club with debt (which personally I don’t have a big issue with).

The total cost of a Obafemi is equivalent to around a years worth of interest and commission charges on our debt and finance deals - so it’s not the insignificant amount being suggested by some.

And I think the main point is it’s difficult to understand why we signed him.

Hopefully the loan works out and we can recoup something but I expect it will be a case of trying to minimise our losses on him because of his wage and the potential clubs who would be interested in him.

Its not an insignificant amount but we got him at basically his lowest value. We aren't going to lose a ton of money on him if we decide to sell, in that sense it was pretty low risk. I really dont see a big issue with the signing, it's similar to when Dyche signed Sordell but Obafemi is a better player

[ClaretPete001]

A slightly overblown reaction to a transfer that hasn’t worked out so far, for whatever reason that may be. Maybe things just didn’t click behind the scenes. No idea why we’re making comparisons to Rovers turnover, what’s that got to do with anything? It was still, relative to where we were going to be financially, a reasonably low risk signing, for a player of a decent age and it’s still possible we’ll recoup a decent proportion back if we do move him on.

The point about Rovers' turnover is that they are an average Championship club and £4 million is more than a quarter of their turnover. Other than expecting posters to look at how much bog standard Championship clubs spend on players it's a fairly good way to get the point across.

The reason why it has become an interesting topic is because fundamentally if you want to be a club that develops players and makes money in the transfer market you have to behave in a way that increases their value.

Earlier in the season we lost Foster and we had a quick pacy forward in the squad who played over 30 PL games in his teens and scored goals in the Championship. Surely, worthy of a ten minute cameo to replace Jay Rod at the end of the game.

It would have kept him involved, increased his confidence and raised his profile in the market place. Just imagine if he had nabbed a goal or two. Instead we loan a player who has had a 'mare in the Bundesliga and only ever scored one goal outside of Norway.

Hoping that a player who hasn't played for a good long while, is likely low on confidence and is moving to a club 18th in the Championship will do well seems less sensible than giving him a few starts on the bench in the PL and trying to move him on in the summer as a player who has been in a PL squad or, alternatively, hope a good pre-season will put him at the same level as the others to play in the Championship if we lose the likes of Amdouni and Foster.

It doesn't seem to fit with the overall aims of the club. And I think the point made by one or two others is there is a raft of players who look to be short of PL quality who are presumably on decent contracts and will potentially impede the club's ability to progress.

Of course, the counter argument is that we'' sell them all at a profit when we want to and you know it's only £4 or £5 million - so who cares - and Fofana will score a hatful so why stress and bother to talk about it.

[Goliath]

The point about Rovers' turnover is that they are an average Championship club and £4 million is more than a quarter of their turnover. Other than expecting posters to look at how much bog standard Championship clubs spend on players it's a fairly good way to get the point across.

The reason why it has become an interesting topic is because fundamentally if you want to be a club that develops players and makes money in the transfer market you have to behave in a way that increases their value.

Earlier in the season we lost Foster and we had a quick pacy forward in the squad who played over 30 PL games in his teens and scored goals in the Championship. Surely, worthy of a ten minute cameo to replace Jay Rod at the end of the game.

It would have kept him involved, increased his confidence and raised his profile in the market place. Just imagine if he had nabbed a goal or two. Instead we loan a player who has had a 'mare in the Bundesliga and only ever scored one goal outside of Norway.

Hoping that a player who hasn't played for a good long while, is likely low on confidence and is moving to a club 18th in the Championship will do well seems less sensible than giving him a few starts on the bench in the PL and trying to move him on in the summer as a player who has been in a PL squad or, alternatively, hope a good pre-season will put him at the same level as the others to play in the Championship if we lose the likes of Amdouni and Foster.

It doesn't seem to fit with the overall aims of the club. And I think the point made by one or two others is there is a raft of players who look to be short of PL quality who are presumably on decent contracts and will potentially impede the club's ability to progress.

Of course, the counter argument is that we'' sell them all at a profit when we want to and you know it's only £4 or £5 million - so who cares - and Fofana will score a hatful so why stress and bother to talk about it.

Its not 'who cares' but we managed to get him for a relatively low fee, so even if he doesnt play for us, we aren't going to lose out massively financially. The only real risk is us losing maybe 1 or 2 million at the most, worst case scenario. He was a gamble that hasn't paid off but for me it was worth the risk. He wasnt going to Play Dervisoglu, so our other options were Foster who needed time to settle and was kept out of the firing line so couldnt be relied upon, Jay Rod picks up a lot of injuries and 2 games a week is pushing it for him and Barnes who had a decent season but was limited in what he offered us. We were also pretty confident of promotion, so really if you're ever going to take a gamble, that was the time.

[ClaretPete001]

Its not 'who cares' but we managed to get him for a relatively low fee, so even if he doesnt play for us, we aren't going to lose out massively financially. The only real risk is us losing maybe 1 or 2 million at the most, worst case scenario. He was a gamble that hasn't paid off but for me it was worth the risk. He wasnt going to Play Dervisoglu, so our other options were Foster who needed time to settle and was kept out of the firing line so couldnt be relied upon, Jay Rod picks up a lot of injuries and 2 games a week is pushing it for him and Barnes who had a decent season but was limited in what he offered us. We were also pretty confident of promotion, so really if you're ever going to take a gamble, that was the time.

Yes but you are assuming you can get him off the books. Worst case it's £4 million and a decent salary until the end of his contract.

It's not really about one player - it's about the attitude of the club towards players and their stated aiming of buying wisely, developing players and moving them on at a profit to make up for the shortfall we have because we are a relatively small club.

But yes - I don't dispute you make a decent case for his initial signing - it's what has happened subsequently that is more the issue.

[Goliath]

Yes but you are assuming you can get him off the books. Worst case it's £4 million and a decent salary until the end of his contract.

It's not really about one player - it's about the attitude of the club towards players and their stated aiming of buying wisely, developing players and moving them on at a profit to make up for the shortfall we have because we are a relatively small club.

But yes - I don't dispute you make a decent case for his initial signing - it's what has happened subsequently that is more the issue.

I think thered be queue of decent Champ clubs willing to take him from us for a few million at least, we didnt struggle to get rid of Nahki Wells who is a similar example.
But yes i see your point, there are others that i think were just daft signings (cough Tresor Cough) where the risk was much higher.

[wilks_bfc]

Starts todays game on the bench

[Neil]

Starts todays game on the bench

Familiar surroundings will help him then.

[ClaretPete001]

I think thered be queue of decent Champ clubs willing to take him from us for a few million at least, we didnt struggle to get rid of Nahki Wells who is a similar example.
But yes i see your point, there are others that i think were just daft signings (cough Tresor Cough) where the risk was much higher.

Fair point about Nakhi Wells. For completeness, I would say though that Nakhi Wells scored 1 in 2 for QPR in the season he was sold to Bristol City and 1 in 3 over a season and a half. And it took us 18 months to sell him.

He was also a fairly prolific scorer over a number of seasons prior to joining us including four seasons at just over 1 in 3 for Huddersfield.

I agree if Obafemi scores 1 in 2 for Millwall over an extended period, or for any other club, we would likely recoup some if not most of the money.

The issue is that with us being in a constant state of flux with relegation then promotion then likely relegation again that length of time and the level of performance in the Championship would make it hard for us to be flexible enough to transition between one and the other with the ultimate aim of creating a PL squad.

Going back 4 or 5 years we've only sold a handful of players for £4 - £5 million plus to Championship sides most notably Ben Gibson and Sam Vokes but clearly it does happen.

[ClaretPete001]

Actually on reflection Gibson may have been loaned to a Championship club and bought when Norwich got promoted to the PL.

[ClaretPete001]

Oh well grollox to it I've gone back over 10 years and I think only Wells, Vokes, Jason Shackell and Charlie Austin have accrued over £4 million.

[Goliath]

Oh well grollox to it I've gone back over 10 years and I think only Wells, Vokes, Jason Shackell and Charlie Austin have accrued over £4 million.

That was using a completely different transfer model tbf.we could have sold our squad to the champ if we wanted. We just didnt sign or sell many players generally. we managed to offload Juke, Vokes, Wells and Sordell without much problem.

[boatshed bill]

Your last para misses the fact that he signed on loan with an obligation to buy. Although we didn’t bother to confirm his signing, it had to be a done deal.

What baffled me with Obafemi was the fact that once promotion was secured when Kompany started to give other players an opportunity he still didn’t start a game.

I can only guess that he has not achieved the required fitness levels.

[dougcollins]

Starts todays game on the bench

Came on 77th minute and picked up a yellow.

[ClaretPete001]

That was using a completely different transfer model tbf.we could have sold our squad to the champ if we wanted. We just didnt sign or sell many players generally. we managed to offload Juke, Vokes, Wells and Sordell without much problem.

As far as I recall, Sordell left on a free and ended up at Colchester. Juke went to Birmingham for a million. Nakhi Wells was an experienced player who scored lots of goals before he came to us and on loan.

The only person who we really made serious money on was Sam Vokes who was a Welsh international played in a world cup and was reasonably successful in the PL but signed for Stoke in the Championship.

I've mentioned a couple of experienced players like Jason Shackell who was a club captain who we did well out of when Derby were spending money before they had none but no one like Obafemi.

There is no evidence that we've been able to offload players who have failed for us and then been sent out on loan to clubs like Millwall being sold for anything like £4 million to Championship clubs.

[ClaretPete001]

I can only guess that he has not achieved the required fitness levels.

As far as I understand it - CTs point was about the end of last season when he was featuring on the subs bench...!

Obviously I'm not an Obafemi expert but he'd played 19 games for Swansea and featured in 12 of ours at that point.

[ClaretTony]

Came on 77th minute and picked up a yellow.

Millwall manager doesn't expect him to be available to start next week either - he said he's some way behind because of not training at Burnley.

[spt_claret]

He made 12 sub appearances and of those the result remained as it was when he came on other than Watford when he scored the late equaliser and QPR when he came on at 1-1 and we lost.

It’s a baffling signing, not because I do or don’t rate him but because it’s never made any sense with the reluctance to play him.

I have similar views on Churlinov honestly (who scored on his Schalke redebut). I know he's had his injury woes, and didn't hit the ground flying like Zaroury, Tella, Benson, but he arrived for more money than either Zaroury or Benson and was pretty much forgotten by December. Given as you said earlier we were as good as up by the time Obafemi arrived, would have made more sense to me to not bother signing Obafemi, stick with Dervisoglu as a backup who also scored a gamewinner in marginal time, try re-integrate Churlinov once fit as he was already signed, and see if he can make a showing of himself in the final months of the season (I believe he was fit around April?). Or alternatively if we were to sign Obafemi, then actually play him if he's fit. People always talk about new signings needing time to bed in- he had calendar time to bed in but minimal match-time to do so.
Just been oddly handled all round to me and seems like we signed him and almost immediately went "actually he's not what we need".

[ClaretTony]

Just been oddly handled all round to me and seems like we signed him and almost immediately went "actually he's not what we need".

Looks that way to me

[dsr]

Millwall manager doesn't expect him to be available to start next week either - he said he's some way behind because of not training at Burnley.

Maybe that's the answer to why he didn't get much playing time.

[ClaretTony]

Maybe that's the answer to why he didn't get much playing time.

Edwards, the Millwall boss said: "“He hasn’t played in a long time. He had an injury a while ago but the biggest issue coming into this game was that with the Premier League break, Burnley had probably 10 days off. He arrived with us on Tuesday, at the training ground, having done very little training in that period. “I was keen to get him on the pitch to get him integrated but that was always going to be the limit, in terms of timeframe."

[dsr]

Edwards, the Millwall boss said: "“He hasn’t played in a long time. He had an injury a while ago but the biggest issue coming into this game was that with the Premier League break, Burnley had probably 10 days off. He arrived with us on Tuesday, at the training ground, having done very little training in that period. “I was keen to get him on the pitch to get him integrated but that was always going to be the limit, in terms of timeframe."

So why wasn't he training? The team may have had time off, but a self-motivated player who is (presumably) looking for a move to get game time, and who doesn't need a rest because he hasn't been playing, ought to have been training hard. Even if the first team is off, the under 21s and youths have been there and so have (surely) at least some of the first team trainers.

[Jellybean]

Agree DSR, remember seeing photos of players on hol I think during the dyche era working their backside off to keep fitness levels up, and as you say he could have stayed with the youth team to get fit.

Let's hope he does well at Millwall and they decide to buy him. I can't get my head around why we signed him.

[forzagranata]

From the promoted squad, players are now featuring for the following clubs -Norwich, Southampton, Bayer Leverkusen, Millwall, AGF, Schalke 04, Kasımpaşa and Chelsea.

Total revenue received in transfer fees: Zero.

[claretonthecoast1882]

From the promoted squad, players are now featuring for the following clubs -Norwich, Southampton, Bayer Leverkusen, Millwall, AGF, Schalke 04, Kasımpaşa and Chelsea.

Total revenue received in transfer fees: Zero.

Did you expect us to receive transfer fees for either players we had on loan from someone else or players released ?

[daveisaclaret]

From the promoted squad, players are now featuring for the following clubs -Norwich, Southampton, Bayer Leverkusen, Millwall, AGF, Schalke 04, Kasımpaşa and Chelsea.

Total revenue received in transfer fees: Zero.

It's a reasonable point in terms of the club's supposed model but I would assume in the cases of Obafemi, BPF, Bastien, Churlinov and Twine (assume he was omitted in error) that we have in fact been paid a loan fee.

[Kilson810]

I think we may be worrying too much about players like Obafemi, who we are likely to make a 'small' loss on. We really need to be concerned about the likes of Tresor or Amdouni because I don't see us getting all that money back. Probably end up doing a Weghorst and loaning them out till their contracts run down and we get nothing back (except offsetting wages).

[forzagranata]

Did you expect us to receive transfer fees for either players we had on loan from someone else or players released ?

Of course not but the famous, much vaunted 'model' is to buy players cheap, develop them and sell them high.

It's not happening and the reports suggest that Zaroury and Benson could also be leaving on loan.

Curiously the only player linked with a possible, actual transfer, is Connor Roberts.

[claretonthecoast1882]

Of course not but the famous, much vaunted 'model' is to buy players cheap, develop them and sell them high.

It's not happening and the reports suggest that Zaroury and Benson could also be leaving on loan.

Curiously the only player linked with a possible, actual transfer, is Connor Roberts.

People really need to move away from this every single player will be cheap and sold at a profit. Has it ever been said once that all players will be of this pattern ?

[Swizzlestick]

Still finding this thread, on the whole, slightly bizarre. It's not like we stumped up £12m for him. And maybe the strategy is a little more varied than just following a model that people seem to think we're fixated on. Was Redmond bought for his resale value?

[forzagranata]

Its been said time and time again that this is the 'model'.

Yet we seem to be buying players for around 10 million and then loaning others out.

It's almost as if there is an in-built problem with the model.

[claretonthecoast1882]

Its been said time and time again that this is the 'model'.

Yet we seem to be buying players for around 10 million and then loaning others out.

It's almost as if there is an in-built problem with the model.

Or when someone doesn't like the owners they find a problem.

Could you point me in the direction of either listening to or reading something that says all transfers will be this method. As mentioned above does Redmond fit into this strategy ? Obafemi was nearer the 3m mark rather than the 10 as was Twine.

So apart from not getting money in for THB, Tella, Maatsen or Barnes which ones are you unhappy with ?

[ClaretTony]

So why wasn't he training? The team may have had time off, but a self-motivated player who is (presumably) looking for a move to get game time, and who doesn't need a rest because he hasn't been playing, ought to have been training hard. Even if the first team is off, the under 21s and youths have been there and so have (surely) at least some of the first team trainers.

There’s a huge difference in doing some training and training at first team level