• 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

I dont think it was a gamble.

I think Shi and Sellars were a couple of starry eyed fuckwits dealing with Barcelona and Barca saw them for what they are and capitalised to their own advantage.

'You don't need that obligation lads, we'll definitely buy him, promise'

'Sound, they're SO nice!'
 
The gamble may still come off, Traore wanted a shot at Barca. We gave him that shot and they didn't want him, maybe he will sign an extension from the good faith we demonstrated, maybe he will play his heart out for the remainder of the contrqct and get his dream move (and give us value for him that way)

I'm not sure the spurs deal collapsed due to us, maybe it was traore not wanting to play wing back.

Of course it may just be we are shit at business and traore sulks for the next 12 months and leaves on a free.
 
Mes que un League One executive team.

So much of what they do and say is in bad faith, I find it profoundly depressing.
 
Newbridge Wolf said:
I'm not sure the spurs deal collapsed due to us, maybe it was traore not wanting to play wing back.
Click to expand...
No collapsing of anything really, we just set our price and wouldn't move, Spurs never offered it.
 
If (and its a big if) we'd let him talk to them, I would imagine there to have been at least a semblance of a deal in place if this was true
 
It's *technically* not allowed but it's fairly standard now for personal terms to be agreed before the clubs have everything signed off. You can bet your bottom dollar that Haaland knows right now how much City are going to pay him if they can make a deal with Dortmund.

There wasn't any negotiation to be had, no haggling. Spurs knew what we wanted, they wouldn't pay it, we wouldn't budge. As it is they probably won, we just gave someone away for no reason for half a season and crashed his value, they ended up not playing him at RWB which would almost certainly have been a disaster, we've seen him do it for us and it's not good.
 
Deutsch Wolf said:
Can I borrow your car this weekend? I can't afford to give you anything now but I promise next Monday I'll buy it off you for way above market value. Or I'll hand it back to you with a few extra dents and 2,000 extra miles on the clock, with an empty fuel tank and knackered brake pads.
Click to expand...
You forgot to add that instead you had to drive your other car that keeps breaking down so instead you had to walk every where in the pouring rain so we’re wet and late for all your plans.

Edit - Actually scratch that. You never got there (Europe)
 
Last edited:
Aside from all the other nonsense. I’m confused by this ‘leverage for Trincao’.

Ignoring his ability or lack of, what leverage were we getting? They weren’t going to give us a discount, we were still getting the exact same deal we’d agreed 6 months previously to this one.
 
Last edited:
For the "gamble" to have paid off in any way, Adama would have had to have been so good at Barcelona that it forced bids that had topped out at £20m with 18 months left, to then somehow be worth £30m with 12 months left. Everybody that had ever seen Adama play football outside of YouTube clips knew that that was never, ever, ever going to happen. An absolutely shocking deal, that perfectly sums up our senior leadership team.
 
Deutsch Wolf said:
It's *technically* not allowed but it's fairly standard now for personal terms to be agreed before the clubs have everything signed off. You can bet your bottom dollar that Haaland knows right now how much City are going to pay him if they can make a deal with Dortmund.

There wasn't any negotiation to be had, no haggling. Spurs knew what we wanted, they wouldn't pay it, we wouldn't budge. As it is they probably won, we just gave someone away for no reason for half a season and crashed his value, they ended up not playing him at RWB which would almost certainly have been a disaster, we've seen him do it for us and it's not good.
Click to expand...
ay I get that, IF he did talk to them then I would expect that there was a belief from both parties, at least at one stage, that a deal could be struck between us and Spurs. This may, of course, not been have been the case and we were always too far apart in our valuations.

Equally we may have had our head swayed with a deal that meant we paid nothing for Trincao and that we believed that was worth while pursuing so we changed or stood by our valuation and for Spurs this wasn't enough as they wanted to negotiate more. Who knows, its all conjecture transfer deals breakdown all the time and we are where we are. The truth is there isn't much interest in Adama from clubs who are willing to pay more than we offered him

There is a chance it could be positive for us (and I hope it does) but I suspect we will snap anyones hand off who offers anywhere near10m for him on the last day of transfer window (with no replacement and the transfer fee broken down into instalments paid over the next 25 years)
 
AndyWolves said:
The result of the gamble has failed, that I agree with.

I can see why they tried it though.
Click to expand...
There’s gambling, then there’s just plain stupidity. If the loan included a fee, not a huge one but a minimal one, it would’ve made more sense.

I think what people are saying is the fact we effectively gave him away for 6 months for free is the issue.
 
AndyWolves said:
How is what Newcastle did relevant to us & barca?

It's a trade off between keeping him here and Adama doing Adama things and not extending his contract, or letting him to Barca and potentially a) using him as leverage for Trincao or b) him doing the business in a more attacking team.

Keeping him, to me anyway, seems like it ends with Adama walking for free. Adama going to Barca, whilst not ideal, at least kept some options open.
Click to expand...


I think you're missing the fundamental point. We keep him we very likely have the 4 points that would give us a good chance of European qualification instead of the millions we *didn't* get from Barca.
 
Carsy said:
There’s gambling, then there’s just plain stupidity. If the loan included a fee, not a huge one but a minimal one, it would’ve made more sense.

I think what people are saying is the fact we effectively gave him away for 6 months for free is the issue.
Click to expand...
With hindsight yes, however, I was under the impression that the general opinion of Adama was that he's not worth having anyway 😉
 
All this over a player who has 1 goal and 0 assists for us this season.
 
Johnny75 said:
All this over a player who has 1 goal and 0 assists for us this season.
Click to expand...
While I generally agree with your opinion of Traore, if he'd have been in a our team instead of Hwang or Trincao for the last few months, I think we'd have more points. Not his finishing or assists but there's no doubt when we're under pressure he gets us up the field and pushes opposition back and puts them under pressure
All of this is of course is meaningless as he wanted to go to Barcelona, pity we got scammed by it though.
 
He also occupied opposition players, gave them something to think about, often there would be 2 or 3 players concentrating on him and trying to keep him out of the game. I don't think the opposition worry too much about Hwang or Trincao, why would they?
 
Barcelona have no intention of paying the 30m euros (£25.3m) option to convert 26-year-old Spain winger Adama Traore's loan move from Wolves into a permanent deal and would only be interested in a player swap. (Fabrizio Romano)

I'm open to that as long as the swap doesn't include Trincao.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top