Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Wellens interview in the Grauniad  (Read 3968 times)
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia


+158/-557
Offline Offline

Posts: 33994





Ignore
« Reply #15 on: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 13:34:05 »

Is that your prediction?

No, my prediction is if Wellens gets us up he may well be hunted by bigger fish, it could happen before he manages it like Flitcroft.... I'll get back to you on that if you disagree.
Logged
Paolo69


+3/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 2785





Ignore
« Reply #16 on: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 13:44:56 »

Hahaha. I knew Reg wouldn't be able to handle the recent positivity.
Logged
The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey


+80/-104
Offline Offline

Posts: 5234




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 13:48:27 »

It was in another article.... mixed up the 2, but doesn't alter the substantive point.

Thatís what I donít understand about Wellens sometimes. According to him we were in for Maynard, Mayor, Devitt etc. Obviously they would have been perm signings - with associated wages. Iíd imagine Yates would not have been on their sort of money and seeing as Bradford were desperate to get shot of Doyle and Rovrum seem disinterested in Yates I canít see why they both canít sign in January - especially with their promotion bonus looming!

Theyíre not out of our price range at all.
Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia


+158/-557
Offline Offline

Posts: 33994





Ignore
« Reply #18 on: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 13:55:43 »

Hahaha. I knew Reg wouldn't be able to handle the recent positivity.

I'm all foir it, as long as it is grounded in some sort of reality, you can find posters who more or less exactly a year ago were getting excited about Brown's side, who were 2 points different to the present outfit..... when pointing out it might be a bit early to tell, and that the recruitment of young loans wasn't particularly a good indicator, in comes the usual abuse about negativity.

I still don't think taking Embers' side to the cleaners given what we know about his skills should be used as too much of an indicator, we'll have a better idea after the next 2 home games, where 6 points are necessary.
« Last Edit: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 13:59:18 by Reg Smeeton » Logged
Exiled Bob


+18/-15
Offline Offline

Posts: 1085





Ignore
« Reply #19 on: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 14:09:07 »

Thatís what I donít understand about Wellens sometimes. According to him we were in for Maynard, Mayor, Devitt etc. Obviously they would have been perm signings - with associated wages. Iíd imagine Yates would not have been on their sort of money and seeing as Bradford were desperate to get shot of Doyle and Rovrum seem disinterested in Yates I canít see why they both canít sign in January - especially with their promotion bonus looming!

Theyíre not out of our price range at all.
As usual, Reg has taken something that was said "ďSometimes, you canít compete with strikersí money, so you have to move to the loan market. You get better quality players for a cheaper price" and twisted it to fit his narrative. Wellens never said we couldn't afford these players at all. 
Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia


+158/-557
Offline Offline

Posts: 33994





Ignore
« Reply #20 on: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 14:35:23 »

As usual, Reg has taken something that was said "ďSometimes, you canít compete with strikersí money, so you have to move to the loan market. You get better quality players for a cheaper price" and twisted it to fit his narrative. Wellens never said we couldn't afford these players at all. 

Can we put to bed the idea I have some sort of narrative... I don't.  It's really pretty simple I observe and then interepret, presuambly you do the same.

My observation is that over the last 2 seasons, is that we haven't signed a striker on a permanent 5 in on loan, now my interpretation of that is the gaffers have been trying to sweat te budget, to get value.... a perfectly fair strategy but it does raise issues.

However as you never really say what you think I can only hazard a guess that you think both Brown and Wellens had the funds to buy strikers but just chose not to, for whatever reason. If you'd explained why there might be some logic in this view, then great I'm all for debate.
Logged
pauld


+145/-132
Offline Offline

Posts: 20508





Ignore
« Reply #21 on: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 14:38:27 »

As usual, Reg has taken something that was said "ďSometimes, you canít compete with strikersí money, so you have to move to the loan market. You get better quality players for a cheaper price" and twisted it to fit his narrative. Wellens never said we couldn't afford these players at all.  
tbf, I don't think it's an unreasonable interpretation, either of what was said or the context in which Doyle and Yates came in to the club. Equally, Wellens isn't shy about being a bit cute about what we can/cannot afford or about our targets, so still wouldn't rule out Doyle becoming a perm deal in Jan. Yates might be less likely purely because Rotherham apparently rate him
Logged
Exiled Bob


+18/-15
Offline Offline

Posts: 1085





Ignore
« Reply #22 on: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 14:43:15 »

I don't agree. If he had managed to shift Toums he would have had a larger budget and would have been able to pay for a permanent striker. I think it's common knowledge that he wanted to do that. It has nothing to do with "not being able to afford" a permanent signing.....it's just how he chose to spend the budget that he had.
Logged
Exiled Bob


+18/-15
Offline Offline

Posts: 1085





Ignore
« Reply #23 on: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 14:47:50 »

However as you never really say what you think I can only hazard a guess that you think both Brown and Wellens had the funds to buy strikers but just chose not to, for whatever reason. If you'd explained why there might be some logic in this view, then great I'm all for debate.
Taking Wellens statement, I interpret it as that he got the 2 strikers in on loan because they were better quality than what he could have got on permanent signings. Both are out of contract at the end of the season and, I guess, his intention would be to try to sign them permanently then. By which time we should, hopefully, be in a higher division and have a higher budget.
Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia


+158/-557
Offline Offline

Posts: 33994





Ignore
« Reply #24 on: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 14:55:26 »

Taking Wellens statement, I interpret it as that he got the 2 strikers in on loan because they were better quality than what he could have got on permanent signings. Both are out of contract at the end of the season and, I guess, his intention would be to try to sign them permanently then. By which time we should, hopefully, be in a higher division and have a higher budget.

It's a possible interpretation, but an awful lot of ifs.  For me, te short term view of we've these lads for perhaps a season with Doyle and perhaps not with Yates, lets see if we can get up with them and then think again, is more likely.
Logged
The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey


+80/-104
Offline Offline

Posts: 5234




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 14:56:36 »

tbf, I don't think it's an unreasonable interpretation, either of what was said or the context in which Doyle and Yates came in to the club. Equally, Wellens isn't shy about being a bit cute about what we can/cannot afford or about our targets, so still wouldn't rule out Doyle becoming a perm deal in Jan. Yates might be less likely purely because Rotherham apparently rate him
See, I donít think Rovrum rate him at all. Loaned out to Carlisle last season and us this. And heís OOC at the end of this season and would go for nowt. Itís a strange scenario why they would loan a player for a season when theyíll get nothing for him. I suspect there may be a Ďbuyí clause in January.
Logged
pauld


+145/-132
Offline Offline

Posts: 20508





Ignore
« Reply #26 on: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 14:57:56 »

See, I donít think Rovrum rate him at all. Loaned out to Carlisle last season and us this. And heís OOC at the end of this season and would go for nowt. Itís a strange scenario why they would loan a player for a season when theyíll get nothing for him. I suspect there may be a Ďbuyí clause in January.
Ah, fair do's hadn't realised all that. In which case I concur, so may well get both in Jan/end of season.
Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia


+158/-557
Offline Offline

Posts: 33994





Ignore
« Reply #27 on: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 14:59:27 »

See, I donít think Rovrum rate him at all. Loaned out to Carlisle last season and us this. And heís OOC at the end of this season and would go for nowt. Itís a strange scenario why they would loan a player for a season when theyíll get nothing for him. I suspect there may be a Ďbuyí clause in January.

He wouldn't go for nowt as he'll be under 24, so some sort of compensation must be agreed.
Logged
pauld


+145/-132
Offline Offline

Posts: 20508





Ignore
« Reply #28 on: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 14:59:52 »

I don't agree. If he had managed to shift Toums he would have had a larger budget and would have been able to pay for a permanent striker. I think it's common knowledge that he wanted to do that. It has nothing to do with "not being able to afford" a permanent signing.....it's just how he chose to spend the budget that he had.
Sorry, but I'm struggling to see the difference - if we'd shifted DT he'd have had a larger budget but we couldn't so he didn't? So he stretched the budget a bit further with loans. Also probably an element of "Try before you buy" I suspect
Logged
The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey


+80/-104
Offline Offline

Posts: 5234




Ignore
« Reply #29 on: Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 15:01:19 »

That may be a reasonable explanation. Although Iíd imagine any compo would be less than his worth if he wasnít OOC.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Up
Print
Jump to: