Snog, Marry, Avoid: Summer 2023 Transfer Window

[nicholaldo]

Charlie Hayes-Green joins the B Team from Liverpool.

This is where those academy ties may really pay off for us. Loans are great, but having people at big clubs advising their cast offs to come and try life with us is the real "pay dirt" area.

I note our near neighbours have had some success doing just that - Devine, Hughes, etc.

Hopefully we do similar.

Do you know anything about Hayes-Green?

[GhostoftheBok]

Do you know anything about Hayes-Green?

Not a lot to be honest, but I've asked someone who should know more.

He was injured for a quite a while and it meant he didn't play a huge amount at some youth levels, so I've not seen/heard much of him. Almost everything I know is from a brief chat today and reading the available online stuff. So a pinch of salt is advised.

I know I've seen him play both left and centre back. I'm told he has also played as a wingback and in central midfield at younger levels, but I've never seen him do it. Versatility is usually a good sign.

From what I've been told he's been let go for a couple of reasons. One is he's not as technically gifted as Liverpool want their youngsters to be, but he's improved enough to still be seen as a capable "modern centre half" for his age. A couple of the coaches made sure he stayed to 18 as they felt his development was artificially stunted by the injuries, but he's obviously not made up ground quickly enough. The other big issue was a concern he wasn't going to be able to stay fit once the really intense stuff started in the 18-21 bracket.

The fact we've given him a 1+1 deal, rather than the 2+1 we gave the Leeds lad probably says he's one we're cautious of. Perhaps due to those injury concerns.

[The_Gun]

Thanks for that, Ghost.

Do you know anything about his physical attributes? Is he fast/slow, tall/short etc?

[GhostoftheBok]

Thanks for that, Ghost.

Do you know anything about his physical attributes? Is he fast/slow, tall/short etc?

Well, baring in mind he's still young and these things change fairly rapidly at that age I'd say "about average" for all those. The online stuff says 6'1" and I can't speak against it. Didn't seem awfully slow when I saw him, but I don't recall thinking "that guy is quick" either.

I'd say he's perhaps in the George Johnston mould of being fairly non-descript in those areas. Taller than George, though.

[Mar]

Therein lies the problem with self inflicted selection headaches and I suspect this may have been an issue around February / March with MJ Williams.

MJ seemed to be completely out of contention during gameweek 29-37 and it very much looked like he was out the door. Injuries hit and he became a starter towards the end of the season. Instead I suspect he would've made the bench more often than he did, had we not had the appearance count being in place that could trigger an extension. I don't think its particularly helpful if we're not playing Bodvarsson simply because of the risk of triggering an extension.

With respect, Mar, I question the above.

MJ was out with a knee injury from the game on Feb 4th (Cheltenham) until he made his comeback with an entirely unnecessary 8-minute cameo at Wembley. In the month before his injury he'd drifted out of the XI but was brought on for the last 15 minutes of the 3-0 win v Pompey and the last 17 v FGR. He also came on for the last 17 at Exeter. And before that, in January, he'd played the last 12 v Man U kids, last 19 v Exeter, last 23 v Derby; he was also on the bench (unused) at Barnsley, Derby and home to Plymouth. None of that feels like the actions of a manager nervously watching the appearance total tick up.

As for Bod – say we only offer him a year, he wants two. Do you walk away?

There are, as you note, times where clubs opt not to pick players because they're close to triggering clauses. But I don't think it happens very often - as we know, things were going downhill fast when Spearing left. And being picked regularly generally means they're doing something useful for the team - without MJ stepping up, we quite possibly wouldn't have made the playoffs last term.

With Bod we've made the right call, there wouldn't be a walking away but more of a consideration around how do we sign a player and not be concerned about offering him play time. It's not good for the club or the player in my opinion. Clearly the Spearing issue was the worst example of it but I'd rather us not end up having the concern in the first place if we cam avoid it

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

With Bod we've made the right call, there wouldn't be a walking away but more of a consideration around how do we sign a player and not be concerned about offering him play time. It's not good for the club or the player in my opinion. Clearly the Spearing issue was the worst example of it but I'd rather us not end up having the concern in the first place if we cam avoid it

Yeah, it's definitely a complication and therefore less than perfect, but it's also a workaround.

When we're looking at players with injury records it's rarely long before someone suggests a "pay as you play" contract - they're rare (although you can tweak any contract's basic/bonus balance) but this is something similar.

In truth it benefits the player less than the club - can he confidenyl buy a house, select a school etc? But as with the conversation in the other thread – that's the life of an itinerant worker, or at least an economic migrant.

So far in his career he's been employed in Iceland, Stavanger (Norway), Kaiserslautern (Germany), Wolverhampton, Reading, SE London and Lancashire. So it goes.

[sleepingindiana79]

Florian flick is linked with us on twitter

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Florian flick is linked with us on twitter

...but indications are that his club would want a seven-figure sum to release him.

[GhostoftheBok]

Florian flick is linked with us on twitter

Yup. Direct contact between the two clubs.

They're not going to get a million euros for him from any of the clubs interested as things stand. Not without a lot of conditions, anyway.

Schalke will have briefed Bild in order to get a reaction and try to create an auction. Fairly standard to use Bild that way in Germany.

Schalke's relegation complicates matters, but his deal is expiring and his agent told the club last year he wouldn't sign a new one unless he was guaranteed to start games. It may be they now offer him a new deal, but seems unlikely.

Will be amazed if we could get him to come to League One, but we won't have gone to Schalke without having received encouragement from him reps. Would be a superb signing at this level.

[The_Gun]

Know absolutely nothing about him, but if he’s any good then you’d imagine Championship clubs would have an interest.

[truewhite15]

Want him simply to be able to say "for Flick's sake!" everytime he does anything wrong. Not that he will do anything wrong, of course.

[TANGODANCER]

So far in his career he's been employed in Iceland, Stavanger (Norway), Kaiserslautern (Germany), Wolverhampton, Reading, SE London and Lancashire. So it goes.

He's also stated he's well settled here and loves the club, the fans and community, as do his wife and children. That means a great deal. I'll risk tipping him for Player of the Season for the coming one. Super optimist me.

[Worthy4England]

My question is (and it is but a question), is the 12month set by the club or the player? His injuries would suggest club,but,??

At his age you imagine the club wants a shorter contract, the player a longer one. Made all the likelier when Iles says "It is understood there is an option to extend the contract by another 12 months, based on appearances."

I despise the option to extend the contract tweaks. Allows clubs to pull another Jay Spearing, lets not play him so as to not risk triggering the extension. Perhaps we had the same with MJ earlier last season. Either way I hope it's not going to be an issue as it hampers our decision making during matches.

I hadn't had time to refresh my memory, but I was struggling to recall the exact problem we had with Jay - didn't quite recall it as us not wanting to trigger an extension. It was that it would have triggered an instant payment to Liverpool, and we couldn't afford an all day bus ticket at the time. We were still subject to the HMRC winding up order and I don't think Sports Shield had quite concluded their take over. The decision seems to have been for all the right reasons at the time. We had no money.

[GhostoftheBok]

Iles is suggesting we want to loan Flick. I'm sceptical as to how that would work, but he's better placed to know our intentions.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Iles is suggesting we want to loan Flick. I'm sceptical as to how that would work, but he's better placed to know our intentions.

Surely a loan makes no sense at all for the club with his registration, given his contract is up next summer.

Meanwhile, Bristol press suggesting Kane Wilson likely to be sold this week. https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/foo ... er-8524588

[GhostoftheBok]

Surely a loan makes no sense at all for the club with his registration, given his contract is up next summer.

Meanwhile, Bristol press suggesting Kane Wilson likely to be sold this week. https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/foo ... er-8524588

This is the thing. His agent has been fairly clear they won't extend his contract unless he starts for Schalke. Schalke have said he won't get loaned out unless he signs a new deal. This has been understood in Germany since December, so I'm not sure why we'd enquire if we weren't offering cash. Maybe I'm missing something, but it just seems odd. My expectation is he'll be sold for about £600k, with a few conditions in case he's the next big thing in a couple of years.

Whoever gets Wilson, fitness allowing, will be laughing.

[Mar]

My question is (and it is but a question), is the 12month set by the club or the player? His injuries would suggest club,but,??

At his age you imagine the club wants a shorter contract, the player a longer one. Made all the likelier when Iles says "It is understood there is an option to extend the contract by another 12 months, based on appearances."

I despise the option to extend the contract tweaks. Allows clubs to pull another Jay Spearing, lets not play him so as to not risk triggering the extension. Perhaps we had the same with MJ earlier last season. Either way I hope it's not going to be an issue as it hampers our decision making during matches.

I hadn't had time to refresh my memory, but I was struggling to recall the exact problem we had with Jay - didn't quite recall it as us not wanting to trigger an extension. It was that it would have triggered an instant payment to Liverpool, and we couldn't afford an all day bus ticket at the time. We were still subject to the HMRC winding up order and I don't think Sports Shield had quite concluded their take over. The decision seems to have been for all the right reasons at the time. We had no money.

Certainly an issue contractually with the players situation which neither benefitted Bolton, Liverpool or Spearing.

Maybe I'm misremembering but wasn't a similar thing applicable with Keith 'get off the TV' Andrews?

Either way, should Bod have a bad start to next season it may end up being financially prudent to not play him as opposed to letting him play his way into contention. He's on the books, let's have a platform for which he can thrive.

[Worthy4England]

Don't disagree with the first bit, mate, that no one benefited. It read like we'd have had to cough a "6 figure sum) and if we didn't have it, we didn't have it. Financially, things were well into unravelling at that point, in relation to a contract that had been signed a couple of years previous. Liverpool could probably have let it go, but then they'd have set a precedent.

Andrews, signed under Coyle, I think, when I suspect we were into double or quits gambling to go straight back to the Prem to cover financial shortfalls. It would not surprise me to learn that his contract was borderline to absolutely not affordable in the event we didn't bounce straight back. Freedman took over and unloaded him twice on loan.

Bod. Wasn't a nailed on start prior to his injury last year and it also feels like he did some personal wrestling, with whether to sign his offered contract. Most folks, I suspect, would sign a contract they thought beneficial pretty quickly. So in that sense, you might think that in the event we needed 1 point to ensure promotion or were rooted 10 points adrift at the foot of the table, at Easter, we might look to ensure the extension wasn't triggered. We also might have doubts about how we'll his injury has healed. Makes sense to me.

[Mar]

It's a sensible decision by the club to go with the one year option. He wasn't as effective as the season prior and the obvious injury concerns. He's got quite a few things in his favour though, the fact no one stepped up to substantially replace his role and the fact that the fans have really taken to him.

Surely the lack of goal output last season probably contextualised the drop off, we weren't as creative but were more defensively solid. Hopefully this coming season is better but we'll see.

Thankfully we've got a decent board making decent decisions. It looks like we'll be able to cover the costs should his contract extension pose any risks. So I can't see it making a difference other than giving Bod a bit more certainty.

[Worthy4England]

Yeah, I think his first half season he bagged 7, do you'd have been looking at maybe 14 over a full season. Last year he was on 3 for half a season. Here I think per 90's and stats don't help much, because if IE isn't going to give him that sort of game time, then it sorta doesn't matter.

For me, the bigger loss (purely in terms of goals) was Baka, who didn't really cut it as a starter, but bagged 14 the season before...