• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Summer 2022 Transfer Window

Tony Towner said:
Agree with all that except the Chiquinho bit. I doubt it was related, just a standard low risk punt a couple of weeks before Adama went
Click to expand...
OK, call it a bonus from the deal that meant our Chairman didn't have to get his calculator out and ask Vinny to pop another £1 on the ticket prices
 
Think thats being too generous to the club. They let him go because they thought they had enough in the tank at the club with Hwang and Neto returning to fitness, Trincao hopefully getting better and Podence being available. So let him go, and expect Barca to sign him.

Unfortunately that wasn’t the case and was all forseeable that Hwang was rubbish, Neto going to be miles off it for a while, Trincao not suitable and Podence made of biscuits. Plus that Adama Traore was never going to be good enough for Barca.

So they weakened us, decreased the value of our asset all on the assumptions that we had better at the club already and at worse Adama was going to showcase his skills.
 
PuntsWolf said:
Think thats being too generous to the club. They let him go because they thought they had enough in the tank at the club with Hwang and Neto returning to fitness, Trincao hopefully getting better and Podence being available. So let him go, and expect Barca to sign him.
Click to expand...
My thoughts on it come from how we were dealing with Spurs. Fee had to be spot on before we would let him talk to them.
Barca came along and all that went out the window. No doubt Adama said he wanted to go there, so we panicked and pushed through a deal that got us 1 good thing, all on the back of fearing a stroppy player staying until the summer.

If Barca hadn't come in, I think Traore stays as the deal from Spurs was for them to play him at RWB and he wasn't up for that (based on reports from various decent journos)
 
Kenny said:
My thoughts on it come from how we were dealing with Spurs. Fee had to be spot on before we would let him talk to them.
Barca came along and all that went out the window. No doubt Adama said he wanted to go there, so we panicked and pushed through a deal that got us 1 good thing, all on the back of fearing a stroppy player staying until the summer.

If Barca hadn't come in, I think Traore stays as the deal from Spurs was for them to play him at RWB and he wasn't up for that (based on reports from various decent journos)
Click to expand...
It didn’t get one good thing. Unless you are saying saving 40k for 21 weeks is a good thing whilst simultaneously throwing away millions in league placing money.

There was also no evdicence Traore would strop. If anything the opposite.
 
PuntsWolf said:
It didn’t get one good thing. Unless you are saying saving 40k for 21 weeks is a good thing whilst simultaneously throwing away millions in league placing money.

There was also no evdicence Traore would strop. If anything the opposite.
Click to expand...
I'm being generous with the one thing, which is the wages.

I know there is no evidence he would strop. Do not take any of my ramblings on the Traore deal as any kind of defence of it. It was a shambles.

To flip from how we were dealing with Spurs to how we bent over for Barca though means there was something they panicked over. Only thing that could be is a Barca fan not being allowed to return to Barca = unhappy player. Let's not forget, he was so keen to join he deferred his wages and agreed to get them as part of the phantom 5 year contract he was signing this summer.
 
Unless I'm reading incorrectly Kenny isn't defending the Traore deal, he's explaining his view of the flawed thought process and that it being a shite deal doesn't make the structure of the Trincao one unusual
 
And I said I thought his view of the flawed thought process was too generous
 
PuntsWolf said:
Didn’t panick. Just complacent/incompetent
Click to expand...
All part of the same thing really.

My description of the saved wages being good is not from a well done on the deal lads

Barca come in. Adama wants to join. Our A Team lose their shit (just deal with it the same as Spurs lads)
 
There were a good few on here that thought the Adama deal was a perfect example of clandestine dealings to get around FFP, and make sure cash moved after a certain date. It was obviously just shit. Anybody that argued it was just shit was dismissed as being stupid and/or naive, and not understanding the dark mechanisms in play.

Those boys moving to grasshoppers won't be clever, it won't make us more money, it's not a clandestine laundering operation, its not circumnavigating loan rules, it's just two players that aren't going to make it being given to a club that owes us a favour or two.

When are people going to learn that our club just don't do 'clever'? Mendes gave us fruit for a couple of years, but now we're nothing but a cash cow for him. He probably made more out of the Adama loan than we did. He'll have made more out of Trincao than we did (mind you, beating -£4m isn't hard). He'll have made a fortune out of Nuno and team's compensation. He'll have made money handpicking Bruno. Hell make a fortune from picking his successor. He'll make money because of us on Palhinha and we haven't even got him.

Sellars and Shi are his bitches. Nothing more. It's fucking embarrassing
 
Kenny said:
All part of the same thing really.

Barca come in. Adama wants to join. Our A Team lose their shit (just deal with it the same as Spurs lads)
Click to expand...
Well it’s not at all. You are suggesting that they felt they had to do a deal otherwise there was a consequence (absolutely zero evidence for this), so there is some kind of justicification.

I am saying they did a deal because they thought they couldn’t lose in doing so, as we already had better players (we didn’t), and Adama was going to boost his rep (he didn’t). Which is incompetence and complacency (tons of evidence for this).

Pointless discussion anyway, so I’ll leave that there.
 
Del Woppio said:
There were a good few on here that thought the Adama deal was a perfect example of clandestine dealings to get around FFP, and make sure cash moved after a certain date. It was obviously just shit. Anybody that argued it was just shit was dismissed as being stupid and/or naive, and not understanding the dark mechanisms in play.

Those boys moving to grasshoppers won't be clever, it won't make us more money, it's not a clandestine laundering operation, its not circumnavigating loan rules, it's just two players that aren't going to make it being given to a club that owes us a favour or two.

When are people going to learn that our club just don't do 'clever'? Mendes gave us fruit for a couple of years, but now we're nothing but a cash cow for him. He probably made more out of the Adama loan than we did. He'll have made more out of Trincao than we did (mind you, beating -£4m isn't hard). He'll have made a fortune out of Nuno and team's compensation. He'll have made money handpicking Bruno. Hell make a fortune from picking his successor. He'll make money because of us on Palhinha and we haven't even got him.

Sellars and Shi are his bitches. Nothing more. It's fucking embarrassing
Click to expand...
I think my view at the time was that the club “can’t be that stupid”. I was wrong and will now think they are stupid until proven otherwise.
 
Del Woppio said:
There were a good few on here that thought the Adama deal was a perfect example of clandestine dealings to get around FFP, and make sure cash moved after a certain date. It was obviously just shit. Anybody that argued it was just shit was dismissed as being stupid and/or naive, and not understanding the dark mechanisms in play.
Click to expand...
To be fair, Barcelona absolutely made the deal out to be that way.

They lied, because of course they did.

On the face of it, he wasn't getting in our team and he is never ever going to contribute reliably for anyone. Losing him wasn't the issue, the lack of acceptable recompense and not really replacing him (Chiquinho probably played more than we expected him to, and he still didn't play that much) was.
 
PuntsWolf said:
I think my view at the time was that the club “can’t be that stupid”. I was wrong and will now think they are stupid until proven otherwise.
Click to expand...
That's where I was at. I wouldn't even say Barcelona played us, no goalposts were moved from what we can see, just they took advantage of a badly structured deal. Even the money we saved on his wages we've more than lost on his depreciation.
 
Tony Towner said:
That's where I was at. I wouldn't even say Barcelona played us, no goalposts were moved from what we can see, just they took advantage of a badly structured deal. Even the money we saved on his wages we've more than lost on his depreciation.
Click to expand...
Are we even sure that Barcelona paid his wages for the loan spell? Wasn't there talk that we were paying them for the season as they couldn't register any new contracts.
 
Lycan said:
Are we even sure that Barcelona paid his wages for the loan spell? Wasn't there talk that we were paying them for the season as they couldn't register any new contracts.
Click to expand...
That's what I thought too
 
Lycan said:
Are we even sure that Barcelona paid his wages for the loan spell? Wasn't there talk that we were paying them for the season as they couldn't register any new contracts.
Click to expand...
I thought it was that he was deferring them?
 
Del Woppio said:
Those boys moving to grasshoppers won't be clever, it won't make us more money, it's not a clandestine laundering operation, its not circumnavigating loan rules, it's just two players that aren't going to make it being given to a club that owes us a favour or two.
Click to expand...
Wasn't suggesting it was, merely that without the change in rules in all likelihood they would have been loans instead and that on the off chance they come good - more Shabani, then we'll have an advantageous buy back option
 
It's the obvious and sensible thought, but tbh I don't think it's a presumption that they've earned. I admit I'm probably a bit too far the other way, but my default assumption based on recent history is that they'll more often than not fail to choose (or negotiate) what most would think is the most obvious and sensible solution to any problem, through a pretty catastrophic mix of ineptitude and nativity in our leadership
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top