His goal scoring record isn’t the best but he’s scored 13 and 6 in his last two seasons in the Bundesliga, which would be very handy to back up our main man Chris Wood. He can also play from the left and as an attack on midfielder . Could we go back in for him on a free?

Still can't understand why we're not in for players like Rangers Ryan Kent ? 24 years old, good experience, plays both wings, (bear with me with this one as I might have to explain in great depth) but this guy commits and takes on defenders !!! And scores 1-2 goals - around 15m - ok we know Leeds will probably roll us on our belly and tickles us but still - worth a punt IMO

Hungary have some decent players and this is a much cheaper market than England
Could we usefully scout in Eastern Europe?

Woodleyclaret wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 19, 2021 3:16 pm

Hungary have some decent players and this is a much cheaper market than England
Could we usefully scout in Eastern Europe?

more difficult with the Brexit rules - would need to be a regular international in the last 2 years to get enough points, it would help if they play regularly in a top ranked league

Chester Perry wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 19, 2021 3:19 pm

more difficult with the Brexit rules - would need to be a regular international in the last 2 years to get enough points, it would help if they play regularly in a top ranked league

I’m not sure what the rules are now but it is going to be far more difficult for clubs other than those at the top to sign players from clubs within Europe.

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 19, 2021 3:22 pm

I’m not sure what the rules are now but it is going to be far more difficult for clubs other than those at the top to sign players from clubs within Europe.

Effectively another rule that benefits the haves as opposed to the have nots.

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 19, 2021 3:22 pm

I’m not sure what the rules are now but it is going to be far more difficult for clubs other than those at the top to sign players from clubs within Europe.

Not necessarily, fewer players are eligible but that's mostly from the smaller national leagues. The flipside is it's much easier to get a permit (GBE) non-European nationals.

No Burnley transfer news from Nixon tomorrow.

Blyclaret wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 19, 2021 7:07 pm

No Burnley transfer news from Nixon tomorrow.

Not that I believe Nixon has a clue what’s going on, but it’s all very quiet at the moment.

DCWat wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 19, 2021 4:51 pm

Effectively another rule that benefits the haves as opposed to the have nots.

What a surprise!

DCWat wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 19, 2021 4:51 pm

Effectively another rule that benefits the haves as opposed to the have nots.

Not a football rule though

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 20, 2021 1:30 pm

Not a football rule though

A government rule yes, but one they asked the FA to shape, the PL and EFL contested what was put forward but the FA walked away with about 80% of what they wanted from it (yes it could have been worse for clubs).

The fall out is likely to mean that the biggest clubs will not only own multiple clubs across the continent and the world to develop players around the rule and them bring them into the country by effectively selling to themselves but perhaps more significantly they will open multiple academies across the country and hoover up all the domestic talent. I have posted before of Chelsea's plans to open a further six academies around the UK for that purpose.

Doubt it very much

ewanrob wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 20, 2021 7:29 pm

Screenshot_20210620-192701_Twitter.jpg

Doubt it very much

Would we say "yes, please" if it was £50 million?

Euro 50m is somewhere around £43m.

UTC

ewanrob wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 20, 2021 7:29 pm

Screenshot_20210620-192701_Twitter.jpg

Doubt it very much

376 followers.

So do I

Be lucky to get into the 18 man match day squad.They would ruin him. Needs to stay put at where he belongs as its the only PL club he can develop further and then he can consider his future

Are we going to sign at least four high quality players very soon? Because if we don’t we are going down.

ewanrob wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 20, 2021 7:29 pm

Screenshot_20210620-192701_Twitter.jpg

Doubt it very much

His previous tweet was that it was €80m + Alonso + Mount

Papabendi wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 20, 2021 10:19 pm

Are we going to sign at least four high quality players very soon? Because if we don’t we are going down.

What is it that makes four the magic number?

I don’t disagree that quality is needed, perhaps even in greater numbers than you’ve highlighted, but that can’t reasonably be done in one window.

We’ve missed out on a number of years of gradual progression of the squad. That can’t be resolved so quickly, either financially or practically - it doesn’t mean relegation though.

DCWat wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 12:53 am

What is it that makes four the magic number?

I don’t disagree that quality is needed, perhaps even in greater numbers than you’ve highlighted, but that can’t reasonably be done in one window.

We’ve missed out on a number of years of gradual progression of the squad. That can’t be resolved so quickly, either financially or practically - it doesn’t mean relegation though.

It could & can be done but it won’t be done, it can easily be resolved it just means committing to spend money on player recruitment.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:09 am

It could & can be done but it won’t be done, it can easily be resolved it just means committing to spend money on player recruitment.

good old magic money

I'm going out in the morning to buy a house that cost 20 million but I don't have the money for it, be-reet

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:09 am

It could & can be done but it won’t be done, it can easily be resolved it just means committing to spend money on player recruitment.

Problem is you can't really commit to spending money you haven't got, unless you want to get into debt

Our new owners have already been successful in saddling the club with a debt figure the likes of which BFC have never had to deal with in the past

Any new incomings will no doubt have to be covered with monies received from outgoings unless a rabbit is pulled out of the hat with new money (from investors rather than additional loans)

Additional revenues from matchdays/corporate facilities will not be enough on their own

Vegas Claret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:44 am

good old magic money

I'm going out in the morning to buy a house that cost 20 million but I don't have the money for it, be-reet

Have you never heard of mortgages?

Socrates wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:37 am

Have you never heard of mortgages?

To be fair Socrates you need to be able to pay a mortgage.

Newcastleclaret93 wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:42 am

To be fair Socrates you need to be able to pay a mortgage.

If you are implying we have no money then you have no need to open any transfer thread and pollute it with your boring negativity

Newcastleclaret93 wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:42 am

To be fair Socrates you need to be able to pay a mortgage.

Are we reneging on our repayment obligations?

Vegas Claret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:44 am

good old magic money

I'm going out in the morning to buy a house that cost 20 million but I don't have the money for it, be-reet

Well people are saying we do have money & some people are saying we don’t have money or not very much, is it not possible to sell 1 player & use that money (we already have with BG) or another player & combine that money with what’s already allocated, it’s easily possible to sign 4 players on reasonable wages, you are already offloading 2 wages already with that idea & including Brady that’s 3, the money is there & the wage money??? So the good old magic money can do a magical reappearing act can’t it?

So we've still got no money to spend despite the owners already taking steps to improve advertising revenue, have openly stated they'll back the manager and are making other changes to the club?

I think some people would still see the negatives if we were taken over by someone like the City owners

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 8:28 am

So we've still got no money to spend despite the owners already taking steps to improve advertising revenue, have openly stated they'll back the manager and are making other changes to the club?

I think some people would still see the negatives if we were taken over by someone like the City owners

There’s got to be at least enough to sign two players worth 10m.

That would strengthen us for season starting, especially if we can get a couple of freebies in.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 8:28 am

Well people are saying we do have money & some people are saying we don’t have money or not very much, is it not possible to sell 1 player & use that money (we already have with BG) or another player & combine that money with what’s already allocated, it’s easily possible to sign 4 players on reasonable wages, you are already offloading 2 wages already with that idea & including Brady that’s 3, the money is there & the wage money??? So the good old magic money can do a magical reappearing act can’t it?

Problem is we may have to sell before we can buy

And who is certain that replacements can be brought in given tough competition from other clubs

Scenario is that any Tarks money will cover Collins and maybe others

Given past history will SD allow Tarks to go before any replacement is found

I doubt it hence we are stuck in a difficult situation

4 signings should be achievable, in my opinion, but we should go for quality over quantity.

The important thing to consider is net debt. We know we were saddled with some debt at the takeover but we also know we had some healthy cash reserves. What none of us know is the difference between the two figures today, so speculation is pointless. Hopefully it’s more favourable than we all fear.

We also have £0 transfer funds owing, meaning the new owners have some scope to commit to future instalments and have helpfully had the decks cleared of high-earners like Lennon, Hart, Hendrick, Brady, Gibson, meaning there should be some scope in the salary budget.

Then you have to consider the value a new player can add. It is supposed to be £3m per place (not sure if that is still true given the Covid upheaval). If we take Armstrong as an example, were he available for £15m and he scored a similar number to Woody in the Prem, he’d only need to improve our league position by 5 places to repay himself in the first year. It’s not infeasible that adding goals like that could help us climb from 17th to 12th. Every improvement he helped us make after that would in effect be “profit”. Plus of course you hope they’ll succeed and you’ll sell on for double/treble your money in a few years time.

Armstrong is just an example, but looking at it from that perspective the economics make sense. But it does require some initial speculation/risk, which we’re not used to seeing. Or “smart bets” in Alan’s words.

I’d personally spend on a couple of younger, more attacking players - wide right in particular or possibly a new nippy striker. Then make use of the loan market with a few short-term fixes until we can cycle through and replace them with youth also.

jojomk1 wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 8:35 am

Problem is we may have to sell before we can buy

And who is certain that replacements can be brought in given tough competition from other clubs

Scenario is that any Tarks money will cover Collins and maybe others

Given past history will SD allow Tarks to go before any replacement is found

I doubt it hence we are stuck in a difficult situation

It’s only difficult because we are making it that way, agree a fee with Stoke for NC & sell JT, & we have already sold before we can buy unless Gibsons transition from TM to CR was done FOC, you are adding money upon money, you have that much money you could bloat the squad if you downgraded on quality, I’m not advocating that approach.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 8:42 am

It’s only difficult because we are making it that way, agree a fee with Stoke for NC & sell JT, & we have already sold before we can buy unless Gibsons transition from TM to CR was done FOC, you are adding money upon money, you have that much money you could bloat the squad if you downgraded on quality, I’m not advocating that approach.

I'd be amazed and extremely worried if we replaced Tarks with a 20yo that has never kicked a ball in the Premiership, only played a handful of games in the Championship (most of which are at RB) and has yet to return from a serious injury that kept him out for half a season. For those reasons, I think some of the numbers the Stoke fans are discussing are very unrealistic.

I don't buy that United, Arsenal, Leicester (latter might be plausible) are interested in him; suspect its just paper talk. I'd let him get another half a season/season under his belt in the Championship.

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:05 pm

I'd be amazed and extremely worried if we replaced Tarks with a 20yo that has never kicked a ball in the Premiership, only played a handful of games in the Championship (most of which are at RB) and has yet to return from a serious injury that kept him out for half a season. For those reasons, I think some of the numbers the Stoke fans are discussing are very unrealistic.

I don't buy that United, Arsenal, Leicester (latter might be plausible) are interested in him; suspect its just paper talk. I'd let him get another half a season/season under his belt in the Championship.

Problem with that approach is he has a stand out season and is then valued at a price we can't pay and the club gets accused of not acting quick enough

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:05 pm

I'd be amazed and extremely worried if we replaced Tarks with a 20yo that has never kicked a ball in the Premiership, only played a handful of games in the Championship (most of which are at RB) and has yet to return from a serious injury that kept him out for half a season. For those reasons, I think some of the numbers the Stoke fans are discussing are very unrealistic.

I don't buy that United, Arsenal, Leicester (latter might be plausible) are interested in him; suspect its just paper talk. I'd let him get another half a season/season under his belt in the Championship.

This is exactly why we need the ‘production line’. Be ready to sell someone with the next one ready to step in, having been bedded in over the previous 12 to 18 months.

We have an awful lot of work to do on that production line over the next year or two given the number of over 30s in the squad who are going to have to be replaced soon. The lack of sufficient activity over several windows will catch up with us if we're not careful

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:05 pm

I'd be amazed and extremely worried if we replaced Tarks with a 20yo that has never kicked a ball in the Premiership, only played a handful of games in the Championship (most of which are at RB) and has yet to return from a serious injury that kept him out for half a season. For those reasons, I think some of the numbers the Stoke fans are discussing are very unrealistic.

I don't buy that United, Arsenal, Leicester (latter might be plausible) are interested in him; suspect its just paper talk. I'd let him get another half a season/season under his belt in the Championship.

So if we are going the same way as signing somebody to just sit on the bench we haven’t learnt 1 thing from Gibson, Collins won’t be coming in at 10m plus (if he does) to hang around twiddling his thumbs he’ll be the heir to JT. The valuation isn’t unrealistic because of his age.

randomclaret2 wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:14 pm

We have an awful lot of work to do on that production line over the next year or two given the number of over 30s in the squad who are going to have to be replaced soon. The lack of sufficient activity over several windows will catch up with us if we're not careful

The only thing that the recruitment team and SD were busy at over the last few windows was in kicking the tin can further down the road.

Several on this board posted at the time that this policy would come back to bite us in the backside.

No hindsight necessary.

According to Fabrizio city have bid 100m for Kane.

THFC set to reject It

Newcastleclaret93 wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:42 pm

According to Fabrizio city have bid 100m for Kane.

THFC set to reject It

If he completely flops at the Euros perhaps the asking price may not be so over inflated?

kentonclaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:36 pm

The only thing that the recruitment team and SD were busy at over the last few windows was in kicking the tin can further down the road.

Several on this board posted at the time that this policy would come back to bite us in the backside.

No hindsight necessary.

Was it the recruitment team and SD responsible, or was it the board , or more specifically, the then Chairman ?

According to the athletic Neco Williams is available for 10m this summer.

Not sure if we are interested but could be a good signing.

It would appear.
No money for transfers until Dyche signs a new contract, Dyche won't sign a contract until the players he wants are signed.

kentonclaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:36 pm

The only thing that the recruitment team and SD were busy at over the last few windows was in kicking the tin can further down the road.

Several on this board posted at the time that this policy would come back to bite us in the backside.

No hindsight necessary.

And where exactly has it bitten the club on the backside? 6th consecutive year in the premiership, core of squad easily good enough to achieve at least the minimum requirement of staying up, whilst other areas of the club, like the academy and U23's are strengthened to provide a flow of players in the future.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:09 am

It could & can be done but it won’t be done, it can easily be resolved it just means committing to spend money on player recruitment.

If four quality players were to sign, everyone would expect them all to play, pretty much straight away.

And if four new players replace four existing ones from the start of next season we will only head in one direction and follow Fulham through the trap door.

It never works out well when too many good players sign all at once.

Spijed wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:16 pm

If four quality players were to sign, everyone would expect them all to play, pretty much straight away.

And if four new players replace four existing ones from the start of next season we will only head in one direction and follow Fulham through the trap door.

It never works out well when too many good players sign all at once.

Well firstly I don’t think we’ve ever had the luxury of finding that out & secondly I don’t see how replacing 4 existing players with new upgrades would lead to relegation, if anything it’s the other way around doing nothing will lead to relegation or definitely flirt for sure, it’s a bizarre way of thinking that improving something will make something worse.

Not sure if he was a legitimate target or not but looks like Christie is on the move to either Leicester or Nice.

dandeclaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:05 pm

And where exactly has it bitten the club on the backside? 6th consecutive year in the premiership, core of squad easily good enough to achieve at least the minimum requirement of staying up, whilst other areas of the club, like the academy and U23's are strengthened to provide a flow of players in the future.

A 17th place finish doesnt suggest 'easily' good enough to stay up to me.The idea of not strengthening for several windows eventually biting us on the backside is exactly that...it will eventually reach a point where an already old squad, geting older, low on numbers, will not be able to compete.We got away with it, by one place, last season .As for the 'flow' of players from the academy and Under 23s , thete is no sign of that happening as yet.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:25 pm

Well firstly I don’t think we’ve ever had the luxury of finding that out & secondly I don’t see how replacing 4 existing players with new upgrades would lead to relegation, if anything it’s the other way around doing nothing will lead to relegation or definitely flirt for sure, it’s a bizarre way of thinking that improving something will make something worse.

Replacing so many players all at once means they've got to get used to our methods straight away.

Fulham has some good loans but they should have kept the same core of players that got them up, rather than making too many changes.

claretonthecoast1882 wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:59 am

If you are implying we have no money then you have no need to open any transfer thread and pollute it with your boring negativity

no, he's implying that whatever you spend you have to be able to afford it otherwise you get yourself into a whole heap of trouble. That's not negativity, them's the facts