Signings

[BL3]

Sturridge already had 40-odd prem appearances and 6 prem goals when he joined us, which is why Chelsea snapped him up from City, where he'd been since being 13. Wilshere has been marked out at Arsenal since he was about 2. They already had the attention of two much larger Clubs than ours, so I think it's safe to say they'd already been spotted. All Coyle did was recognise that they weren't getting a game and ask if he could borrow them.

...and yet they chose to join us rather than the likes of Newcastle or West Ham. Funny that.

[BL3]

What are you on about at all? In one post you're sarcastically suggesting I read the thread and in this one you're saying we're talking about a part of a post - maybe it'd be easier if you made your mind up.

Let me explain how it works. When someone quotes part of a post, that's the bit they're referring to. Read the fecking thread properly if you want to discuss it.

[Bruce Rioja]

Sturridge already had 40-odd prem appearances and 6 prem goals when he joined us, which is why Chelsea snapped him up from City, where he'd been since being 13. Wilshere has been marked out at Arsenal since he was about 2. They already had the attention of two much larger Clubs than ours, so I think it's safe to say they'd already been spotted. All Coyle did was recognise that they weren't getting a game and ask if he could borrow them.

...and yet they chose to join us rather than the likes of Newcastle or West Ham. Funny that.

I have the feeling that I should include 'Without Prejudice' when addressing you - but here goes;

Would the decision regarding their destination not ultimately lie with Wenger and whoever was Chelsea manager at the time, rather than with the player? I seem to recall Wenger threatening to pull the Wilshire loan unless Coyle apologised for calling one of their lot (Gallas??) a dirty, cheating c*nt (well, not in those exact words, obviously) for the foul on Mark Davies?

[Worthy4England]

What are you on about at all? In one post you're sarcastically suggesting I read the thread and in this one you're saying we're talking about a part of a post - maybe it'd be easier if you made your mind up.

Let me explain how it works. When someone quotes part of a post, that's the bit they're referring to. Read the fecking thread properly if you want to discuss it.

Maybe when you can make your fckuing mind up.

I quoted back at you the bit I was discussing, you suggested I read the thread properly and not just a part of it.

Perhaps you struggle to understand your own posts.

[Lord Kangana]

I read the thread properly. I'd explain it to you, but fear it would be wasted effort.

Allardyce went and signed class players - they were ours, no one elses .

Actually, this isn't quite true. Most of his signings started off as loans, and then when we'd stayed up were persuaded to sign more permanent contracts. Its what had Martin Samuels in such a lather. That and he's a cock.

Sorry for interrupting another tedious Coyle bash, carry on.

[Worthy4England]

I read the thread properly. I'd explain it to you, but fear it would be wasted effort.

Allardyce went and signed class players - they were ours, no one elses .

Actually, this isn't quite true. Most of his signings started off as loans, and then when we'd stayed up were persuaded to sign more permanent contracts. Its what had Martin Samuels in such a lather. That and he's a cock.

Sorry for interrupting another tedious Coyle bash, carry on.

Wouldn't disagree that he loaned players before signing them - not sure it was most - but I don't think I suggested he didn't anywhere.

What is true is that he signed some class players, which were ours and no one elses. Unlike Wilshere and Sturridge who are someone else's players.

[Tals-biggest-fan]

For me it would of been crappy signings if we had paid money for players like Andrews and NRC but we didn't so its either it works out and it becomes a fantastic bit of work or it doesn't and we don't really lose anything from the transfer as we didn't pay anything for him

[BL3]

What are you on about at all? In one post you're sarcastically suggesting I read the thread and in this one you're saying we're talking about a part of a post - maybe it'd be easier if you made your mind up.

Let me explain how it works. When someone quotes part of a post, that's the bit they're referring to. Read the fecking thread properly if you want to discuss it.

Maybe when you can make your fckuing mind up.

I quoted back at you the bit I was discussing, you suggested I read the thread properly and not just a part of it.

Perhaps you struggle to understand your own posts.

When you quote part of a post, it's assumed that that's the part you actually want to discuss. You quoted the part about signing Wilshere and Sturridge when we were in the Prem, NOT the part about the Championship squad. It's right there on page one. Read the fecking thread properly.

[plymouth wanderer]

What are you on about at all? In one post you're sarcastically suggesting I read the thread and in this one you're saying we're talking about a part of a post - maybe it'd be easier if you made your mind up.

Let me explain how it works. When someone quotes part of a post, that's the bit they're referring to. Read the fecking thread properly if you want to discuss it.

Maybe when you can make your fckuing mind up.

I quoted back at you the bit I was discussing, you suggested I read the thread properly and not just a part of it.

Perhaps you struggle to understand your own posts.

When you quote part of a post, it's assumed that that's the part you actually want to discuss. You quoted the part about signing Wilshere and Sturridge when we were in the Prem, NOT the part about the Championship squad. It's right there on page one. Read the fecking thread properly.

You two get a room

[Worthy4England]

What are you on about at all? In one post you're sarcastically suggesting I read the thread and in this one you're saying we're talking about a part of a post - maybe it'd be easier if you made your mind up.

Let me explain how it works. When someone quotes part of a post, that's the bit they're referring to. Read the fecking thread properly if you want to discuss it.

Maybe when you can make your fckuing mind up.

I quoted back at you the bit I was discussing, you suggested I read the thread properly and not just a part of it.

Perhaps you struggle to understand your own posts.

When you quote part of a post, it's assumed that that's the part you actually want to discuss. You quoted the part about signing Wilshere and Sturridge when we were in the Prem, NOT the part about the Championship squad. It's right there on page one. Read the fecking thread properly.

I quoted in response to you saying "who signed Wilshere and Sturridge?" that would be Arsenal and Chelsea - we only borrowed them. That was my first post on the topic. You mentioned the Prem first, not I.

Should I try posting in braille for you?

Like I say, if you can't read what you put, there's no chance of you reading what I put.

[Wandering Willy]

Sturridge already had 40-odd prem appearances and 6 prem goals when he joined us, which is why Chelsea snapped him up from City, where he'd been since being 13. Wilshere has been marked out at Arsenal since he was about 2. They already had the attention of two much larger Clubs than ours, so I think it's safe to say they'd already been spotted. All Coyle did was recognise that they weren't getting a game and ask if he could borrow them.

Not getting involved in this, but without question your best yet.

[Worthy4England]

Sturridge already had 40-odd prem appearances and 6 prem goals when he joined us, which is why Chelsea snapped him up from City, where he'd been since being 13. Wilshere has been marked out at Arsenal since he was about 2. They already had the attention of two much larger Clubs than ours, so I think it's safe to say they'd already been spotted. All Coyle did was recognise that they weren't getting a game and ask if he could borrow them.

Not getting involved in this, but without question your best yet.

Glad you like it!

[BL3]

I quoted in response to you saying "who signed Wilshere and Sturridge?" that would be Arsenal and Chelsea - we only borrowed them. That was my first post on the topic. You mentioned the Prem first, not I.

Guess what? That's because i was discussing the PREM. You see, that's how it works. Someone makes a point and someone else responds to that point. On the other hand, if you don't read the thread properly, then you respond to what you think has been said, rather than what has actually been said.

The OP seemed to be referring to the class we have within our squad as a result of Coyle signings.

The OP was specifically referring to the class we needed in the PREM. That's why he said, 'Sam always knew you needed class in the PREM but Coyle seems ignorant of this'. In addition, the players he named were all signed when we were in the PREM. They were not part of the squad which was assembled by Allardyce in the Championship.

[Worthy4England]

My post saying he seemed to be referring to the class we have in our squad, related to his enitre post, not three words of it, because I'm capable of reading an entire post.

When he said what happened to the scouting set up that bought Djorkaeff etc. The question is about the scouting set up not the players nor when they were signed.

If you manage to concentrate for a full four lines of the OP's post, you'll probably spot that the general thrust of all four lines taken together (and you might need a couple of days to get this bit), is that the OP thinks the squad is a bit mediocre and this in part might be down to the scouting set-up.

One iddy-biddy part of it suggests that our mediocre squad may also have something to do with Coyle not buying enough class - which is something Sam did...

It doesn't specify anywhere whether Sam signed them in the Prem or anything else you might want to imagine. It just says "Sam knew you needed class in the Prem"

Go on - try the full four lines of the OP all at once.

[BL3]

If you manage to concentrate for a full four lines of the OP's post, you'll probably spot that the general thrust of all four lines taken together (and you might need a couple of days to get this bit), is that the OP thinks the squad is a bit mediocre and this in part might be down to the scouting set-up.

...and the players he names in relation to that scouting set-up were all signed... when we were in the Premier League. He then goes on to make the point about 'class' and the Premier League, so i think it's safe to assume that he's talking about players we signed in the Premier League.

You then decided to turn this into a debate about whether we actually own the players or whether they were on loan, although what this has to do with whether the players are 'class' or not, is anyone's guess. I expect it's just part of your ongoing anti-Coyle agenda.

Even when someone else pointed out that initially, 'most of his [Allardyce's] signings started off as loans', which contradicts your assertion that 'they were ours, no one elses', you then say 'I don't think I suggested he didn't' [loan players]

You also ignore the fact that Coyle couldn't make the deals for either Wilshere and Sturridge permanent because they're not for sale and even if they were, we don't have the funds for wages, which is something that we did have when Allardyce was signing the likes of Okocha and Djorkaeff. So in other words, you're not even comparing like for like, because the transfer market has changed beyond all recognition since Allardyce was in charge.

[Worthy4England]

If you manage to concentrate for a full four lines of the OP's post, you'll probably spot that the general thrust of all four lines taken together (and you might need a couple of days to get this bit), is that the OP thinks the squad is a bit mediocre and this in part might be down to the scouting set-up.

...and the players he names in relation to that scouting set-up were all signed... when we were in the Premier League. He then goes on to make the point about 'class' and the Premier League, so i think it's safe to assume that he's talking about players we signed in the Premier League.

His question was about what happened to the scouting set-up that bought us players X, Y and Z. He then says that Sam understood you need class in the Prem and that Coyle does not. He doesn't mention anywhere that he's talking about players we signed in the Premier League - you've made that part up based on your interpretation. Mine's different.

You then decided to turn this into a debate about whether we actually own the players or whether they were on loan, although what this has to do with whether the players are 'class' or not, is anyone's guess. I expect it's just part of your ongoing anti-Coyle agenda.

You can have more than one debate on a single thread. Look through a few of them, you'll see they head off in different directions as people post on them. I'm sure you can cope with this with some practice. I don't have an "Agenda" against Coyle - I don't think our current Manager is good enough based on last season's evidence, who it is isn't important to me.

Even when someone else pointed out that initially, 'most of his [Allardyce's] signings started off as loans', which contradicts your assertion that 'they were ours, no one elses', you then say 'I don't think I suggested he didn't' [loan players]

I said the class Allardyce signed was ours - Djorkaeff, signed permanently, Okocha, signed permanently, Campo, signed permenantly, Diouf, signed permanently yadda, yadda. It was somewhat of a generalisation, so I'll start the next sentence with "Generally" to make it clear. Generally if Allardyce loaned a player, it was with a view to buying them and making our squad better, or it was a fix for a position where we were carrying an injury or it was a bit of a gamble ("I'll give them a go and maybe if they're ok, I'll put in a bid").

You also ignore the fact that Coyle couldn't make the deals for either Wilshere and Sturridge permanent because they're not for sale and even if they were, we don't have the funds for wages, which is something that we did have when Allardyce was signing the likes of Okocha and Djorkaeff. So in other words, you're not even comparing like for like, because the transfer market has changed beyond all recognition since Allardyce was in charge.

I didn't ignore the fact, I just hadn't posted about it that explicitly, so you're making that bit up too. It's part of my point though so happy to discuss it now. Does it make sense to loan people for three months (10-15 games) that will never be our players? In my view it doesn't help us as a strategic direction, it might help us as a tactical fix for injuries. Number of loanees that Coyle has gone on to sign at Bolton is how many? I can think of Klasnic maybe, who Coyle didn't loan, but signed. The point is, as you mention, Wilshere and Sturridge (probably our two most notable loanees under Coyle), neither Arsenal nor Chelsea were likely to sell and if they did we'd be unlikely to be able to afford them. Pointless short termism.

On what are you basing your assertion that we don't have the funds for wages that we had under Allardyce? Our wages under Allardyce were nowhere near as high as a proportion of Revenue as the wages when Coyle took over, albeit I believe (won't know until we see the Accounts) that Coyle has reduced the overall wage bill and therefore it's proportion of our Revenue. The notion that Allardyce spent mahoosive on wages as a proportion of Revenue or in comparison with other Prem teams is incorrect. Megson on the other hand increased our wage bill out of all proportion. I've already posted elsewhere how much we spent on wages in comparison with other Prem Teams - from memory (latest figures from Deloitte's) we were about 14th in the wages league, based on the last set of Club's Accounts (so not last season).

[Jokers in White]

Anyway Zat Knight has signed a 2 year deal

[a1]

Anyway Zat Knight has signed a 2 year deal

could be worse , i were expecting him to sign one off burnley and give him a 6 year contract, just coz. #coyleneopotism

[BL3]

He doesn't mention anywhere that he's talking about players we signed in the Premier League.

...even though he mentions a list of players all of whom were signed when we were in the Premier League...

You can have more than one debate on a single thread.

There's a big difference between having 'more than one debate' and just assuming that people know what you're talking about when you quote one part of a response whilst talking about another.

Generally if Allardyce loaned a player, it was with a view to buying them and making our squad better

Allardyce loaned players you mentioned because we didn't know whether we would be in the Premier League the following season and therefore didn't know whether we would be able to take on their wages long term. It was as much, 'fingers crossed and let's hope for the best', as any sort of long term strategy.

Does it make sense to loan people for three months (10-15 games) that will never be our players? Pointless short termism.

We don't have the budget to sign them, either in terms of transfer fees or wages. The best we can do is take them on season-long loans. It's no more 'pointless short termism' than Allardyce signing the players you mentioned and hoping that we retained our place in the Premier League. If we hadn't, we'd have been starting all over again without those players.

On what are you basing your assertion that we don't have the funds for wages that we had under Allardyce?

Phil Gartside's stated objective to reduce the wage bill.

Our wages under Allardyce were nowhere near as high as a proportion of Revenue as the wages when Coyle took over. Megson on the other hand increased our wage bill out of all proportion.

The OP was comparing Allardyce's signings to Coyle's, not Megson's. Unless of course, you've now decided to go off on another tangent.

The notion that Allardyce spent mahoosive on wages as a proportion of Revenue or in comparison with other Prem teams is incorrect.

I never made either of those comparisons. You've 'made that part up based on your interpretation'. I said he spent big money on wages on 'class' players with no real resale value, like Okocha and Djorkaeff, in contrast to the way Coyle has generally had to work in the transfer market.

[Worthy4England]

He doesn't mention anywhere that he's talking about players we signed in the Premier League.

...even though he mentions a list of players all of whom were signed when we were in the Premier League...

He does that in the context of a single sentence that asks about what happened to the scouting system that signed....The question is about the scouting system not the players.

You can have more than one debate on a single thread.

There's a big difference between having 'more than one debate' and just assuming that people know what you're talking about when you quote one part of a response whilst talking about another.

My statement stood for what it was. It didn't assume anything it just pointed out that Wilshere and Sturridge were just borrowed for a very short while - maybe you assumed something that wasn't there.

Generally if Allardyce loaned a player, it was with a view to buying them and making our squad better

Allardyce loaned players you mentioned because we didn't know whether we would be in the Premier League the following season and therefore didn't know whether we would be able to take on their wages long term. It was as much, 'fingers crossed and let's hope for the best', as any sort of long term strategy.

In your opinion. Which is allowed, I just don't happen to agree with it. We never know whether were going to be in the Prem with any certainty, there's no guarantee we'll still be in the Championship next season. Maybe we should just loan an entire squad. For you logic to pan out, we wouldn't have signed any of them on more than one year Contracts as we're never certain.

Does it make sense to loan people for three months (10-15 games) that will never be our players? Pointless short termism.

We don't have the budget to sign them, either in terms of transfer fees or wages. The best we can do is take them on season-long loans. It's no more 'pointless short termism' than Allardyce signing the players you mentioned and hoping that we retained our place in the Premier League. If we hadn't, we'd have been starting all over again without those players.

We took neither Wilshere nor Sturridge on season long loans. You didn't say we did, I'm just pointing out we didn't. It's a lot more pointless that Allardyce's strategy. Even should we have retained our place in the Prem, we still couldn't afford them, they weren't for sale and they didn't come back. Cluless feckwit signings.

On what are you basing your assertion that we don't have the funds for wages that we had under Allardyce?

Phil Gartside's stated objective to reduce the wage bill.

Which bit of Garstside's stated objective mentioned "less funds than under Allardyce" - I don't recall it and think you've made that bit up, but you seem to do that all the time so I shouldn't be too surprised.

Our wages under Allardyce were nowhere near as high as a proportion of Revenue as the wages when Coyle took over

The OP was comparing Allardyce's signings to Coyle's, not Megson's. Unless of course, you've now decided to go off on another tangent.

I believe you introduced how much Allardyce had to spend

Allardyce had the money to bring in the likes of Okocha, Djorkaeff and Anelka. Coyle has had to borrow players like Wilshere and Sturridge.

I pointed out that the massive hike in our salaries was under Megson not Allardyce. I know that introduces another person into the mix, but it's relevant.

The notion that Allardyce spent mahoosive on wages as a proportion of Revenue or in comparison with other Prem teams is incorrect.

I never made either of those comparisons. You've 'made that part up based on your interpretation'. I said he spent big money on wages on 'class' players with no real resale value, like Okocha and Djorkaeff, in contrast to the way Coyle has generally had to work in the transfer market.

I know you didn't make those comparisons, I did. That why when you quote them, they're in a little box with "Worthy4England wrote" at the front of them. Had you made them, the little box would have said "BL3 wrote"

You said

we don't have the funds for wages, which is something that we did have when Allardyce was signing the likes of Okocha and Djorkaeff

This is incorrect based on information from the Accounts that are in the public domain.