Reconstruction time again: the summer 2018 transfer thread

[Jugs]

That's what's so maddening about it all - Parky never liked him, despite his goals.

Everyone likes Alf, but Parky was never comfortable with him in the side because he had to make sacrifices elsewhere to make it work.

Ultimate players who don't fir the system, even goal scorers, move on. Has happened to better strikes than Alf.

Also, Alf was on good money given the current wage structure and he's probably worth a couple of new players who do fit.

Klasnic

[jonnybwfc]

Interesting move, good luck to him. Wonder how he'll fancy playing in 35C heat.

Sydney FC have had Dwight Yorke and Del Piero as strikers in the past. Not bad company.

[GhostoftheBok]

Parky is saying he had no idea Alf was leaving until he knocked on his door and told him he had a three year contract in Oz. Presumably someone at the club must have known, unless he's saying Sydney illegally approached Alf.

[GhostoftheBok]

So we have 3 loans who are all "match day squad" players. We can have 5 total loans in that squad. We needed 2 more players, according to Phil, before Alf left. So we need to loan in at least 3 players now - in the knowledge they can't all feature. That might make some negotiations with lads who want game time a bit tricky.

[Prufrock]

I think it's still 2. Alf was surplus. Based on 2 per position (but 3 strikers for 1 spot) I think we're after a central midfielder and a forward. Not counting Darby, Pritchard or Hall we've got:

2x GK, 2x RB, 2x LB, 4xCB, 5xCM, 4xwinger and 2xCF.

Aneke and a target man?

[GhostoftheBok]

I think it's still 2. Alf was surplus. Based on 2 per position (but 3 strikers for 1 spot) I think we're after a central midfielder and a forward. Not counting Darby, Pritchard or Hall we've got:

2x GK, 2x RB, 2x LB, 4xCB, 5xCM, 4xwinger and 2xCF.

Aneke and a target man?

Could still be two, if Parky already wanted one because he was never going to give Alf any time. However, the indication is that Donaldson is viewed as an attacking utility who may also feature wide (as we saw tonight), so I'd not be shocked to see two more strikers in.

Aneke and a centre forward seem like a minimum, yes. If Alf going gives us the cash for another passing mid on top of that I'd not argue either - but that's for after anything else gets done.

[TANGODANCER]

I think it's still 2. Alf was surplus. Based on 2 per position (but 3 strikers for 1 spot) I think we're after a central midfielder and a forward. Not counting Darby, Pritchard or Hall we've got:

2x GK, 2x RB, 2x LB, 4xCB, 5xCM, 4xwinger and 2xCF.

Aneke and a target man?

Not looking to be obstructive here,or stating any Sherlocks, but target men need somebody around to play off them. My frustration last night was from a long standing moan going back at least as far as Kev Davies, that our front man is supposed to pull wallop balls out of the sky and do it all on his own with nobody around to help. Striker is a thankless task at best (I played there for a fair while when young) , especially when refs have all Bolton players down as villains and never victims, but until we start advancing via any method other than the wallop route, we'll never progress in this league. People are saying what a good side we played against and we did this and that etc. Did we ever just have a player stride forth and lash a shot in? The harsh truth is that Leeds are a Championship side just like us and played like hungry Prem contenders. They gave our wingers no space to run at and pushed us back constantly. We played like Hare and Hounds Sunday pub league first half.We did better second half simply because we were two goals down in the first round of a cup competition and they could sit us out if they wished. Now we're out. We'll play other good sides in this League and unless we start playing football we'll struggle weekly (or weakly?) . Sammi's absence was the most obvious fact for us. Okay, moan over. Come on you Whites...

[BWFC_Insane]

I think it's still 2. Alf was surplus. Based on 2 per position (but 3 strikers for 1 spot) I think we're after a central midfielder and a forward. Not counting Darby, Pritchard or Hall we've got:

2x GK, 2x RB, 2x LB, 4xCB, 5xCM, 4xwinger and 2xCF.

Aneke and a target man?

Not looking to be obstructive here,or stating any Sherlocks, but target men need somebody around to play off them. My frustration last night was from a long standing moan going back at least as far as Kev Davies, that our front man is supposed to pull wallop balls out of the sky and do it all on his own with nobody around to help. Striker is a thankless task at best (I played there for a fair while when young) , especially when refs have all Bolton players down as villains and never victims, but until we start advancing via any method other than the wallop route, we'll never progress in this league. People are saying what a good side we played against and we did this and that etc. Did we ever just have a player stride forth and lash a shot in? The harsh truth is that Leeds are a Championship side just like us and played like hungry Prem contenders. They gave our wingers no space to run at and pushed us back constantly. We played like Hare and Hounds Sunday pub league first half.We did better second half simply because we were two goals down in the first round of a cup competition and they could sit us out if they wished. Now we're out. We'll play other good sides in this League and unless we start playing football we'll struggle weekly (or weakly?) . Sammi's absence was the most obvious fact for us. Okay, moan over. Come on you Whites...

It how we play. We play a lone striker. We're setup away from home to soak it up and counter. Lets be honest, last night a very good and expensive set of players exposed some of our rustiness. But a fully sharp Hobbs and Wilson - we might have even won the game.

With all due respect I suspect you need to watch this league a bit more, because the gap between the have's and have nots is as large as the premiership. In fact it is larger. And we are trying to setup, as we did at WBA, in a way to counteract that. Given the circumstances last night it was a good performance and Parky reflected that in his comments. Those players apart from sharpness all looked as capable as those that played at WBA and BC, and in some cases they may even be improvements. Our squad is stronger than it has been in a while and that is huge cause for optimism.

[TANGODANCER]

With all due respect I suspect you need to watch this league a bit more, because the gap between the have's and have nots is as large as the premiership.

With all due respect I'm talking about last night's game which I saw every minute of. . Leeds made eight (that's eight) changes to their preferred side, something the media, particularly the Yorkshire lot, are keen to stress ("and were still to good for Bolton!") and ran us ragged. Are you talking about the have-nots (us) who had to score two goals in injury time to avoid relegation from this league? My points (opinions) are just as valid as yours as regards this game. We need to change our methods. Our new keeper might as well have had a Lord Nelson telescope to find somebody to throw the ball to. Wallop it is then. Carry on Mr expert. .

[BWFC_Insane]

With all due respect I suspect you need to watch this league a bit more, because the gap between the have's and have nots is as large as the premiership.

With all due respect I'm talking about last night's game which I saw every minute of. . Leeds made eight (that's eight) changes to their preferred side, something the media, particularly the Yorkshire lot, are keen to stress ("and were still to good for Bolton!") and ran us ragged. Are you talking about the have-nots (us) who had to score two goals in injury time to avoid relegation from this league? My points (opinions) are just as valid as yours as regards this game. We need to change our methods. Our new keeper might as well have had a Lord Nelson telescope to find somebody to throw the ball to. Wallop it is then. Carry on Mr expert. .

How many changes did we make? And were any of those changes introducing a 7M quid striker?

[GhostoftheBok]

We do need to get in and around a striker, nothing wrong with saying that. If anything, that's more and not less necessary with Parky's style of play - just as it was under Allardyce. Second ball is name of the game and we need players who can do the Nolan, Stelios and Diouf roles - picking up the second ball and making things happen. The trouble last night was that we had players who could have been in and around, but we lacked the focal point in attack. Hall worked really hard and didn't hide, but he got no change out of that Leeds back four.

If we'd have had Magennis in from the start it may have been a different story in attack, just as it may have been in defence had any of those players ever played together before.

Last night wasn't really about systems, styles and partnerships. Those matter, always, but we were always going to be up against it and it was mostly about looking at our options in personnel. I'd say that, from what we saw, we are short reliable competition for Magennis and Ozzy and (given budgets) not a huge amount else.

[GhostoftheBok]

Whilst Magennis seems to have started well, I think we'll need another striker with a proven eye for goal. Not sure who, mind.

Probably not likely to get a proven scorer; but Magennis isn't one either and he's started okay. Wouldn't mind Sam Gallagher, if he's available and finances work. Probably not in our budget, though.

[TANGODANCER]

With all due respect I suspect you need to watch this league a bit more, because the gap between the have's and have nots is as large as the premiership.

With all due respect I'm talking about last night's game which I saw every minute of. . Leeds made eight (that's eight) changes to their preferred side, something the media, particularly the Yorkshire lot, are keen to stress ("and were still to good for Bolton!") and ran us ragged. Are you talking about the have-nots (us) who had to score two goals in injury time to avoid relegation from this league? My points (opinions) are just as valid as yours as regards this game. We need to change our methods. Our new keeper might as well have had a Lord Nelson telescope to find somebody to throw the ball to. Wallop it is then. Carry on Mr expert. .

How many changes did we make? And were any of those changes introducing a 7M quid striker?

Okay, which of those changes involved leaving out better options apart from maybe Ben between the sticks? If that's the case, have we wasted our time bringing them in? Our changes, correct me if I'm wrong, were suposedly for the better to give our new stars game time (young Hall apart) yet first half they opened us up at will with a side not supposedly their first choice (hence eight changes) . Are you in some way contesting that we played wallop ball, dithered and gave the ball away on more than one occasion because we were constantly pressed back? That more than one of our attacks ended up going backwards? If you are, maybe it's you who should pay attention. I'm not saying we don't have a potentially good side in the making, but I'm stating we played poorly and without method first half when the damage was done and all too often resorted to sending balls into no mans land . After that it was Leeds game to lose. Pass your opinions by all means, but don't try to make them anything else. I might not go to games anymore (as you never hesitate to remind me) but I do know the difference between good and bad football. Our new front men may well turn out to be great assets, but total Air mail football to a lone striker wouldn't work for Barcelona never mind Bolton. We need to play the midfield, that's what Leeds did and why they won. Our wingers hardly got a clear run forward all game, primarily (in my opionion) because their defence didn't have to worry about the middle. Oh for another Mark Davies!.

[BWFC_Insane]

With all due respect I suspect you need to watch this league a bit more, because the gap between the have's and have nots is as large as the premiership.

With all due respect I'm talking about last night's game which I saw every minute of. . Leeds made eight (that's eight) changes to their preferred side, something the media, particularly the Yorkshire lot, are keen to stress ("and were still to good for Bolton!") and ran us ragged. Are you talking about the have-nots (us) who had to score two goals in injury time to avoid relegation from this league? My points (opinions) are just as valid as yours as regards this game. We need to change our methods. Our new keeper might as well have had a Lord Nelson telescope to find somebody to throw the ball to. Wallop it is then. Carry on Mr expert. .

How many changes did we make? And were any of those changes introducing a 7M quid striker?

Okay, which of those changes involved leaving out better options apart from maybe Ben between the sticks? If that's the case, have we wasted our time bringing them in? Our changes, correct me if I'm wrong, were suposedly for the better to give our new stars game time (young Hall apart) yet first half they opened us up at will with a side not supposedly their first choice (hence eight changes) . Are you in some way contesting that we played wallop ball, dithered and gave the ball away on more than one occasion because we were constantly pressed back? That more than one of our attacks ended up going backwards? If you are, maybe it's you who should pay attention. I'm not saying we don't have a potentially good side in the making, but I'm stating we played poorly and without method first half when the damage was done and all too often resorted to sending balls into no mans land . After that it was Leeds game to lose. Pass your opinions by all means, but don't try to make them anything else. I might not go to games anymore (as you never hesitate to remind me) but I do know the difference between good and bad football. Our new front men may well turn out to be great assets, but total Air mail football to a lone striker wouldn't work for Barcelona never mind Bolton. We need to play the midfield, that's what Leeds did and why they won.

You're expecting a team of assembled frees, many of whom haven't played a competitive game for a long time, to look better than they did last night? I was impressed, I expected a 4/5-0 thumping at best. In fact we made a game of it. And should have equalised. Against a Leeds side who, even though they made 8 changes had a player who cost more than our entire squad of 20 odd players.

There was some defensive rustiness exposed in the first half, understandable for a back four where 3 of the players haven't played any games individually for a long while and were thrown together 24 hours prior to the game. But they got better.

We're a better squad than last season clearly. Even Leeds fans remarked they were surprised we played as well as we did.

The first team will play against Reading but as Parky says, many of the lads last night put a claim in. We have genuine selection dilemmas. Surely that is a huge positive, compared to last season?

[Jugs]

With all due respect I suspect you need to watch this league a bit more, because the gap between the have's and have nots is as large as the premiership.

With all due respect I'm talking about last night's game which I saw every minute of. . Leeds made eight (that's eight) changes to their preferred side, something the media, particularly the Yorkshire lot, are keen to stress ("and were still to good for Bolton!") and ran us ragged. Are you talking about the have-nots (us) who had to score two goals in injury time to avoid relegation from this league? My points (opinions) are just as valid as yours as regards this game. We need to change our methods. Our new keeper might as well have had a Lord Nelson telescope to find somebody to throw the ball to. Wallop it is then. Carry on Mr expert. .

How many changes did we make? And were any of those changes introducing a 7M quid striker?

Okay, which of those changes involved leaving out better options apart from maybe Ben between the sticks? If that's the case, have we wasted our time bringing them in? Our changes, correct me if I'm wrong, were suposedly for the better to give our new stars game time (young Hall apart) yet first half they opened us up at will with a side not supposedly their first choice (hence eight changes) . Are you in some way contesting that we played wallop ball, dithered and gave the ball away on more than one occasion because we were constantly pressed back? That more than one of our attacks ended up going backwards? If you are, maybe it's you who should pay attention. I'm not saying we don't have a potentially good side in the making, but I'm stating we played poorly and without method first half when the damage was done and all too often resorted to sending balls into no mans land . After that it was Leeds game to lose. Pass your opinions by all means, but don't try to make them anything else. I might not go to games anymore (as you never hesitate to remind me) but I do know the difference between good and bad football. Our new front men may well turn out to be great assets, but total Air mail football to a lone striker wouldn't work for Barcelona never mind Bolton. We need to play the midfield, that's what Leeds did and why they won.

You're expecting a team of assembled frees, many of whom haven't played a competitive game for a long time, to look better than they did last night? I was impressed, I expected a 4/5-0 thumping at best. In fact we made a game of it. And should have equalised. Against a Leeds side who, even though they made 8 changes had a player who cost more than our entire squad of 20 odd players.

There was some defensive rustiness exposed in the first half, understandable for a back four where 3 of the players haven't played any games individually for a long while and were thrown together 24 hours prior to the game. But they got better.

We're a better squad than last season clearly. Even Leeds fans remarked they were surprised we played as well as we did.

The first team will play against Reading but as Parky says, many of the lads last night put a claim in. We have genuine selection dilemmas. Surely that is a huge positive, compared to last season?

Nah because this is Parky and Bolton - Otz will be out and Vela, Lowe and Murphy will all be back in.

The only reason Noone - who was top class in pre season - started against Bristol City was because Ameobi was injured.

Anyway, what no one is addressing is that ALF would have gone no matter who came in. The fact that it's Sydney made this easier for PP. He had a great excuse lined up - "couldn't get in the way of his dream move."

Balls. Had Wigan come in for him, PP would have driven him there himself but would have found it harder to explain to the fans.

Fact is, ALF turned the game against Forest and kept us up. Class act, goal scorer and potential game changer - but PP has never fancied him, right from the off.

[BWFC_Insane]

With all due respect I suspect you need to watch this league a bit more, because the gap between the have's and have nots is as large as the premiership.

With all due respect I'm talking about last night's game which I saw every minute of. . Leeds made eight (that's eight) changes to their preferred side, something the media, particularly the Yorkshire lot, are keen to stress ("and were still to good for Bolton!") and ran us ragged. Are you talking about the have-nots (us) who had to score two goals in injury time to avoid relegation from this league? My points (opinions) are just as valid as yours as regards this game. We need to change our methods. Our new keeper might as well have had a Lord Nelson telescope to find somebody to throw the ball to. Wallop it is then. Carry on Mr expert. .

How many changes did we make? And were any of those changes introducing a 7M quid striker?

Okay, which of those changes involved leaving out better options apart from maybe Ben between the sticks? If that's the case, have we wasted our time bringing them in? Our changes, correct me if I'm wrong, were suposedly for the better to give our new stars game time (young Hall apart) yet first half they opened us up at will with a side not supposedly their first choice (hence eight changes) . Are you in some way contesting that we played wallop ball, dithered and gave the ball away on more than one occasion because we were constantly pressed back? That more than one of our attacks ended up going backwards? If you are, maybe it's you who should pay attention. I'm not saying we don't have a potentially good side in the making, but I'm stating we played poorly and without method first half when the damage was done and all too often resorted to sending balls into no mans land . After that it was Leeds game to lose. Pass your opinions by all means, but don't try to make them anything else. I might not go to games anymore (as you never hesitate to remind me) but I do know the difference between good and bad football. Our new front men may well turn out to be great assets, but total Air mail football to a lone striker wouldn't work for Barcelona never mind Bolton. We need to play the midfield, that's what Leeds did and why they won.

You're expecting a team of assembled frees, many of whom haven't played a competitive game for a long time, to look better than they did last night? I was impressed, I expected a 4/5-0 thumping at best. In fact we made a game of it. And should have equalised. Against a Leeds side who, even though they made 8 changes had a player who cost more than our entire squad of 20 odd players.

There was some defensive rustiness exposed in the first half, understandable for a back four where 3 of the players haven't played any games individually for a long while and were thrown together 24 hours prior to the game. But they got better.

We're a better squad than last season clearly. Even Leeds fans remarked they were surprised we played as well as we did.

The first team will play against Reading but as Parky says, many of the lads last night put a claim in. We have genuine selection dilemmas. Surely that is a huge positive, compared to last season?

Nah because this is Parky and Bolton - Otz will be out and Vela, Lowe and Murphy will all be back in.

The only reason Noone - who was top class in pre season - started against Bristol City was because Ameobi was injured.

Anyway, what no one is addressing is that ALF would have gone no matter who came in. The fact that it's Sydney made this easier for PP. He had a great excuse lined up - "couldn't get in the way of his dream move."

Balls. Had Wigan come in for him, PP would have driven him there himself but would have found it harder to explain to the fans.

Fact is, ALF turned the game against Forest and kept us up. Class act, goal scorer and potential game changer - but PP has never fancied him, right from the off.

Again, I wildly disagree. He signed him. And tried to build a wonky 3-5-2 to accomodate him. It didn't work. Its hard to accomodate goal sniffers nowadays if that is all they offer. Most sides play 1 up top now in this league.

As for Noone - he's decent but if Ameobi is fit - get him straight back in. We missed him on Saturday.

There are selection questions all over the pitch. Parky wanted Oztumer so I suspect will use him. But he'll do so when it is right. I'm not convinced Saturday is right, we won at WBA in impressive style so maybe we'll revert to that team. But lets see. Biggest case for inclusion for me is Wilson. Looked a class above our other CBs.

[Jugs]

Noone should be in ahead of Buckley, surely?

Of course, Ameobi is one of the first names on the team sheet.

I think Otz could be the playmaker we need to create more chances, but time will tell if we see enough of him

[Prufrock]

I have a theory that a lot of our scouting revolves around looking at teams where trendy new managers take over and seeing who we can pick up whose face doesn't fit. Bristol City in particular stands out.

[Prufrock]

Noone should be in ahead of Buckley, surely?

Of course, Ameobi is one of the first names on the team sheet.

I think Otz could be the playmaker we need to create more chances, but time will tell if we see enough of him

Noone and Sammy both much more effective off the right tough.

[Jugs]

True.

And another thing about ALF - who's gonna replace him? Another Tyler Walker? We've lost a fantastic impact sub - one of the best in this league - and I have no faith that we'll end up with anything better than Keshi Anderson.

We're bollocked if Magennis stops scoring.