Schu me the way to Amarillo - Summer 2025 Transfer Thread

[Mar]

Scottish rag the Daily Record report that Celtic have turned down a Bolton bid of £500k for their Irish striker Johnny Kenny.

Sounds like signings for the future. Are we after a load of calculated gambles that may pay off as part of the business model?

Was hoping we'd get someone tried and tested to pretty much guarantee progression. But that being said it didnt work out too well with Collins.

[The_Gun]

Scottish rag the Daily Record report that Celtic have turned down a Bolton bid of £500k for their Irish striker Johnny Kenny.

Sounds like signings for the future. Are we after a load of calculated gambles that may pay off as part of the business model?

Was hoping we'd get someone tried and tested to pretty much guarantee progression. But that being said it didnt work out too well with Collins.

£500k is a lot for us right now, so if this is true, presumably our expectation is that he’d slot straight into the first team. I’d be surprised if we had the cash to go much higher than this for one player, though, so perhaps we’ll need to move to other targets.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Scottish rag the Daily Record report that Celtic have turned down a Bolton bid of £500k for their Irish striker Johnny Kenny.

Sounds like signings for the future. Are we after a load of calculated gambles that may pay off as part of the business model?

Was hoping we'd get someone tried and tested to pretty much guarantee progression. But that being said it didnt work out too well with Collins.

£500k is a lot for us right now, so if this is true, presumably our expectation is that he’d slot straight into the first team. I’d be surprised if we had the cash to go much higher than this for one player, though, so perhaps we’ll need to move to other targets.

Respected Scots-based journo Anthony Joseph says:
"It’s understood [£500,000] offer was well below #CelticFC’s valuation. They’re not too keen to sell, but may be open to a loan later in the window. #BWFC are expected to come back in with another offer."

[The_Gun]

Interesting. 'Way below Celtic's valuation' suggests they want £1m+, which would sound a bit high, unless we've got more sales lined up.

[BWFC_Insane]

Scottish rag the Daily Record report that Celtic have turned down a Bolton bid of £500k for their Irish striker Johnny Kenny.

Sounds like signings for the future. Are we after a load of calculated gambles that may pay off as part of the business model?

Was hoping we'd get someone tried and tested to pretty much guarantee progression. But that being said it didnt work out too well with Collins.

£500k is a lot for us right now, so if this is true, presumably our expectation is that he’d slot straight into the first team. I’d be surprised if we had the cash to go much higher than this for one player, though, so perhaps we’ll need to move to other targets.

Respected Scots-based journo Anthony Joseph says:
"It’s understood [£500,000] offer was well below #CelticFC’s valuation. They’re not too keen to sell, but may be open to a loan later in the window. #BWFC are expected to come back in with another offer."

Iles report omits the part about another offer but includes the idea we might try for a loan.

Which to me sounds right - I can’t see us spending ‘way more’ on a player even if he is 22 and highly rated. If it was a hundred K difference then maybe but Celtic don’t strike me as really worrying too much in that regard so I imagine they see his value as significantly higher.

Assuming we are playing 433 this sounds like an alternative or competition for the Dalby role as he is apparently another big lad but one who is more pacy and runs the line. Not unlike Hardie…

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Assuming we are playing 433 this sounds like an alternative or competition for the Dalby role as he is apparently another big lad but one who is more pacy and runs the line. Not unlike Hardie…

I've been operating under that assumption, but I'm beginning to wonder, given a (reported) sizeable splash of money on another forward. Now, I know (and have said) that we need another forward, and there's a case for rotation/flexibility etc, but as a wise mate said to me "Seems a lot to spend on a sub".

Assuming we're not going old-school 4-4-2 (not impossible, but slightly unlikely), could we be looking at some variety of 3-5-2? After all, we're a left-back and two wingers short of a 4-3-3... Back three would suit a few of our existing players – JOT, Conway, perhaps Taylor; would also make Forrester/Johnston more feasible as centre-backs...

[sonicthewhite]

Assuming we are playing 433 this sounds like an alternative or competition for the Dalby role as he is apparently another big lad but one who is more pacy and runs the line. Not unlike Hardie…

I've been operating under that assumption, but I'm beginning to wonder, given a (reported) sizeable splash of money on another forward. Now, I know (and have said) that we need another forward, and there's a case for rotation/flexibility etc, but as a wise mate said to me "Seems a lot to spend on a sub".

Assuming we're not going old-school 4-4-2 (not impossible, but slightly unlikely), could we be looking at some variety of 3-5-2? After all, we're a left-back and two wingers short of a 4-3-3... Back three would suit a few of our existing players – JOT, Conway, perhaps Taylor; would also make Forrester/Johnston more feasible as centre-backs...

Take that step one pace further, could we be recruiting the players who could be flexible to play either 433, 352 or 442 as and when the situation demands? Last season SS wasn't scared to change personnel and formation mid game, sometimes more than once.

[jmjhb]

I was under the impression it was going to be 4231 primarily

[sonicthewhite]

I was under the impression it was going to be 4231 primarily

That as well

[BWFC_Insane]

Assuming we are playing 433 this sounds like an alternative or competition for the Dalby role as he is apparently another big lad but one who is more pacy and runs the line. Not unlike Hardie…

I've been operating under that assumption, but I'm beginning to wonder, given a (reported) sizeable splash of money on another forward. Now, I know (and have said) that we need another forward, and there's a case for rotation/flexibility etc, but as a wise mate said to me "Seems a lot to spend on a sub".

Assuming we're not going old-school 4-4-2 (not impossible, but slightly unlikely), could we be looking at some variety of 3-5-2? After all, we're a left-back and two wingers short of a 4-3-3... Back three would suit a few of our existing players – JOT, Conway, perhaps Taylor; would also make Forrester/Johnston more feasible as centre-backs...

I don’t think so - what I heard is that towards the end of the season Schuey had more or less stated he wanted to move to a back four ‘primarily’ for next season.

And he’s on record as saying he wants wingers.

Now of course - what you can get in the market matters a lot and maybe changes plans. But pretty sure a back four was the plan and they seem to be saying recruitment going to plan.

I mean we need another player who can go up front and who knows maybe Schumacher sees himself playing a striker out wide at times - Big Sam style.

[Bijou Bob]

It's an interesting shift for us, moving back into the Scottish market. As no one over 40 can utter the words 'Show reel' without immediately thinking of Daniel Braaten, the very idea of us dabbling in Scotland still raises the ancient spectre of Steve McAnespie. I'm certain we've moved on from that £900k debacle (I seem to remember Keegan took him to Fulham and used him sparingly?) and if the youngster is the sort of hard running battler we need to play off the Big Lad, then it seems our scouting network is at least widening. Time will tell if it's also improving.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Danny Armstrong, formerly wanted by Evatt and now on a free, set for Romania.
https://x.com/AnthonyRJoseph/status/1938531564486365195

[Spartan2]

In the recent interview with Schumacher the board behind him had a 4132 formation on it. Make of that what you will.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

In the recent interview with Schumacher the board behind him had a 4132 formation on it. Make of that what you will.

And in the teaser they apparently recorded the same day - the one with a teddy in goal - the lineup was 4-2-3-2

[Spartan2]

I could get behind that!

[Prufrock]

Not for me. We haven't got the players to play a 4232.

[BWFC_Insane]

Not for me. We haven't got the players to play a 4232.

More crucially has Sharon got the money to pay off the referees?

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Not for me. We haven't got the players to play a 4232.

More crucially has Sharon got the money to pay off the referees?

Given the quality of refereeing I'd hazard a guess that they wouldn't notice.

[Prufrock]

Reminds me of the best PM I ever received on this site when I gently pointed out an erstwhile poster's suggested line-up contained one more player than the regulation XI....

-----------

"your a dick"
Delete messageReport private messageQuote message
Sent: Sat Sep 21, 2013 12:16 pm
From: [redacted, I have some scruples]
Recipient: Prufrock

Delete your post + stay out of my fecking threads you utter cuint!

understood?

[TonyDomingos]

Reminds me of the best PM I ever received on this site when I gently pointed out an erstwhile poster's suggested line-up contained one more player than the regulation XI....

-----------

"your a dick"
Delete messageReport private messageQuote message
Sent: Sat Sep 21, 2013 12:16 pm
From: [redacted, I have some scruples]
Recipient: Prufrock

Delete your post + stay out of my fecking threads you utter cuint!

understood?

TBF, that could have come from any of us.