ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
You going to Aberdeen?
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
I'm sure people were saying similar last summer.Cleveleys_claret wrote:The truth is is that tomorrow we will have a side out that will be weaker than how we ended the season (in my opinion).
-
- Posts: 3047
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:58 am
- Been Liked: 956 times
- Has Liked: 583 times
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Maybe but I wasnt....I thought last year when we started the season we looked in a stronger position than at the end of the previous season. More experience with a sprinkling of potential...Taylor, WellsTall Paul wrote:I'm sure people were saying similar last summer.
-
- Posts: 3047
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:58 am
- Been Liked: 956 times
- Has Liked: 583 times
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
On Shift and unable to swap due to other staff being on holidays. Gutted but not taking it serious as the club dont seem to beLancasterclaret wrote:You going to Aberdeen?
-
- Posts: 3047
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:58 am
- Been Liked: 956 times
- Has Liked: 583 times
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Wife and kids are though
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
We hadn't signed Wells when the season kicked off.Cleveleys_claret wrote:Maybe but I wasnt....I thought last year when we started the season we looked in a stronger position than at the end of the previous season. More experience with a sprinkling of potential...Taylor, Wells
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Aside from Defour we are just as strong for Thursday's game, and let's be fair we didn't miss Defour that much last season.Cleveleys_claret wrote:Maybe but I wasnt....I thought last year when we started the season we looked in a stronger position than at the end of the previous season. More experience with a sprinkling of potential...Taylor, Wells
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Did people really expect anything else? I'm shocked people are so surprised, we move at snails pace in the market then go on a mad rush in the final few days. It's been the same for quite a while, we'll get players in, i'm sure of that and I'd rather we got 2 quality players in on deadline day than waste millions on players like Clucas and Dawson now.
-
- Posts: 3047
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:58 am
- Been Liked: 956 times
- Has Liked: 583 times
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Heaton - unsure if back to his best after a serious injury for a GK
Mee - Contract situation ongoing
Wood and barnes both not had a proper preseason
JBG not had a proper break
Arfield, Marney, GNK gone
Mee - Contract situation ongoing
Wood and barnes both not had a proper preseason
JBG not had a proper break
Arfield, Marney, GNK gone
-
- Posts: 3047
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:58 am
- Been Liked: 956 times
- Has Liked: 583 times
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Agree but find it shocking a Premier League club with the money involved cant scout foreign leaguesKRBFC wrote:Did people really expect anything else? I'm shocked people are so surprised, we move at snails pace in the market then go on a mad rush in the final few days. It's been the same for quite a while, we'll get players in, i'm sure of that and I'd rather we got 2 quality players in on deadline day than waste millions on players like Clucas and Dawson now.
-
- Posts: 14571
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3437 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Spurs are in the same boat if it helps calm your nerves.Cleveleys_claret wrote:When did I say never? The truth is is that tomorrow we will have a side out that will be weaker than how we ended the season (in my opinion). Our season starts tomorrow...not in 3 weeks like other clubs
As for season starts, we play Thursday don't we, or has the date moved?
-
- Posts: 14571
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3437 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
We do scout them.Cleveleys_claret wrote:Agree but find it shocking a Premier League club with the money involved cant scout foreign leagues
We got Defour and nearly had Grosicki.
We don't own part of an agency like Wolves.
Our scouting network was also pretty iffy for long time so it will take some time for any scouts we have abroad to set up contacts etc.
Then the window in the PL closes before anyone elses so the is less pressure on foreign clubs to sell, because they've still got time to buy.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Quite right.GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Spurs are in the same boat if it helps calm your nerves.
As for season starts, we play Thursday don't we, or has the date moved?
Some of you lot should go and support a crap side. You don't deserve Burnley.
-
- Posts: 3047
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:58 am
- Been Liked: 956 times
- Has Liked: 583 times
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Days mixed up...joys of shift work. Spurs also are able to leave world class defenders on the bench for a season because of contract disputes.GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Spurs are in the same boat if it helps calm your nerves.
As for season starts, we play Thursday don't we, or has the date moved?
All fans will never agree on everything but little things get me like this bull about character being important. Doing research on players before they come to make sure they fit in. If wd had done that with Barton we would have had mixed reviews and that is being nice to JB. Yet we are told we cant abroad because of not knowing enough. We knew enough about Joey and still signed him
This user liked this post: Steddyman
-
- Posts: 3047
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:58 am
- Been Liked: 956 times
- Has Liked: 583 times
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Scouted Defour give me a break. Thats like saying Juventus scouted Ronaldo before signing himGodIsADeeJay81 wrote:We do scout them.
We got Defour and nearly had Grosicki.
We don't own part of an agency like Wolves.
Our scouting network was also pretty iffy for long time so it will take some time for any scouts we have abroad to set up contacts etc.
Then the window in the PL closes before anyone elses so the is less pressure on foreign clubs to sell, because they've still got time to buy.
This user liked this post: lrac
-
- Posts: 14571
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3437 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
So you're now saying we just signed Defour on a whim?
Alright then.
As for JB, he was a good player most people knew that, just had a screw loose but with the right manager he's usually ok.
If, in your opinion, it's bull about character why have we NEVER heard any rumours or stories of dressing room unrest since Dyche got here?
Not a single hint has ever been mentioned by anyone, on here or in the media.
Maybe, just maybe, the character is important and does work.
Defour was already a proven leader of men and a winner.
Barton had the drive to be a better player and dragged up those around him when he was here.
I think you're just looking around for anything to bitch about now.
Alright then.
As for JB, he was a good player most people knew that, just had a screw loose but with the right manager he's usually ok.
If, in your opinion, it's bull about character why have we NEVER heard any rumours or stories of dressing room unrest since Dyche got here?
Not a single hint has ever been mentioned by anyone, on here or in the media.
Maybe, just maybe, the character is important and does work.
Defour was already a proven leader of men and a winner.
Barton had the drive to be a better player and dragged up those around him when he was here.
I think you're just looking around for anything to bitch about now.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
How come Sidney's posting so frequently again?
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
We’ve seen enough in recent transfer windows to know that it’s the end of the window that we should be judging.Cleveleys_claret wrote:Sorry ... so how many games? Tired of people that dont even go to the games saying chill out...you dont pay anything to the club hence you expect nothing
It’s surely better to get players in earlier, from a squad perspective, but for whatever reasons, that’s not really our approch these days.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
No signings, then....whoosh!
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
One way of looking at it i suppose.Cleveleys_claret wrote:Heaton - unsure if back to his best after a serious injury for a GK
Mee - Contract situation ongoing
Wood and barnes both not had a proper preseason
JBG not had a proper break
Arfield, Marney, GNK gone
A more common sense way would be :
Heaton - great point. If only we had another quality keeper at the club...maybe an England international or something !
Ben Mee - bought for half a million, on verge of England squad and never shown anything other than 100% commitment on the pitch to Burnley.
Wood and Barnes - both were back in pre-season training from the outset. Barnes played in Cork friendly. Both have small issues and as manager says have a chance of making Aberdeen game.
JBG - not had a proper break. He had at least 2 weeks off and as Dyche says is looking super sharp. But you do not seem happy if they are fit or not had a pre-season so not sure exactly what you want.
Arfield, Marney & GNK gone - its a good job we had already filled these positions they all play in with full internationals at an estimated cost of going on for £40m.
Just saying like !!
This user liked this post: Greenmile
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
I don't understand, am I missing something?TVC15 wrote: Arfield, Marney & GNK gone - its a good job we had already filled these positions they all play in with full internationals at an estimated cost of going on for £40m.
Just saying like !!
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Poiht being we replaced Marney and Arfield a couple of years ago with better / younger players.KRBFC wrote:I don't understand, am I missing something?
GKN would be a 5th choice wide man in our current squad.
He seems to be criticising the point that these players have left as if the club need to do something about it - when clearly they left because we already had.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
So we replaced GKN years ago despite getting him on loan in January? sounds logical. I think it's pretty obvious to anyone what he means by replacing them but i'll play along, he means replacing them in the squad, not in the team, they're not even at the club anymore to replace in the starting 11.TVC15 wrote:Poiht being we replaced Marney and Arfield a couple of years ago with better / younger players.
GKN would be a 5th choice wide man in our current squad.
He seems to be criticising the point that these players have left as if the club need to do something about it - when clearly they left because we already had.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
I know what he is sayingKRBFC wrote:So we replaced GKN years ago despite getting him on loan in January? sounds logical. I think it's pretty obvious to anyone what he means by replacing them but i'll play along, he means replacing them in the squad, not in the team, they're not even at the club anymore to replace in the starting 11.
He’s criticising the club for the fact they have left - and not been replaced
And I am saying why replace players when you don’t need to ?
We already have 4 central midfielders and 4 wingers - all of whom are ahead of those 3 players. When they are all fit that means 4 of these are already on the bench. Why would these 3 players need replacing now when the club has already done the work needed to cover their departures ?
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Dyche disagrees anywayTVC15 wrote:I know what he is saying
He’s criticising the club for the fact they have left - and not been replaced
And I am saying why replace players when you don’t need to ?
We already have 4 central midfielders and 4 wingers - all of whom are ahead of those 3 players. When they are all fit that means 4 of these are already on the bench. Why would these 3 players need replacing now when the club has already done the work needed to cover their departures ?
-
- Posts: 2105
- Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2016 9:28 pm
- Been Liked: 492 times
- Has Liked: 411 times
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Regardless of the departures we are short in a couple of areas. It’s certainly a little disconcerning that we are farting about with no new signings not even anything on the horizon whilst the window closes in 2 weeks. We are most definitely not proactive in recruitment.
-
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1282 times
- Has Liked: 682 times
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Perhaps we need to stay patient for another week or so before the real business begins.
When Martial, Hazard, Willian, Courtois, Schmeichel and Lloris all depart from their respective clubs only then will the transfer business start to get interesting for us and many other clubs.
The only slight concern is that with potentially three keepers leaving their clubs that all of Leicester, Chelsea and Tottenham will be looking for a top class replacement.
When Martial, Hazard, Willian, Courtois, Schmeichel and Lloris all depart from their respective clubs only then will the transfer business start to get interesting for us and many other clubs.
The only slight concern is that with potentially three keepers leaving their clubs that all of Leicester, Chelsea and Tottenham will be looking for a top class replacement.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
I don't see Real buying Courtois and LLorisRoyboyclaret wrote:Perhaps we need to stay patient for another week or so before the real business begins.
When Martial, Hazard, Willian, Courtois, Schmeichel and Lloris all depart from their respective clubs only then will the transfer business start to get interesting for us and many other clubs.
The only slight concern is that with potentially three keepers leaving their clubs that all of Leicester, Chelsea and Tottenham will be looking for a top class replacement.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Nixon says our issue is we want better players than we have but better players want better wages. Dead end for us then.
-
- Posts: 30707
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11052 times
- Has Liked: 5659 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
There are teams in the Championship paying higher wages than we do, if you want to be in the PL it's just part and parcel of a clubs development that wages would need to be increased to competeSteddyman wrote:Nixon says our issue is we want better players than we have but better players want better wages. Dead end for us then.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Completely agree Vegas.
-
- Posts: 5726
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
- Been Liked: 2833 times
- Has Liked: 141 times
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Well yes but there's limit to any club's development and its limited by its ability to afford wages in the event of relegation.Vegas Claret wrote:There are teams in the Championship paying higher wages than we do, if you want to be in the PL it's just part and parcel of a clubs development that wages would need to be increased to compete
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
The past few years have been spent budgeting for relegation, building up a healthy cash surplus in case of going down. At some point you would expect the club to decide we have sufficient cash reserves (although there is the possibility that this is a movable feast given the way wages are increasing).
At that point then, assuming the directors aren't looking to take a dividend out of the club which seems unlikely, there is little point in recording profits as opposed to re-investing in the team and the infrastructure.
At that point then, assuming the directors aren't looking to take a dividend out of the club which seems unlikely, there is little point in recording profits as opposed to re-investing in the team and the infrastructure.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Unless potential players are put off by relegation clauses, or lower wages supplemented by a significant bonus paid upon survival, I don’t see why we can’t offer pretty decent packages (and assume that we are already be doing so).claretspice wrote:Well yes but there's limit to any club's development and its limited by its ability to afford wages in the event of relegation.
OK we’re not going to be offering 100k a week deals but neither are plenty others. If the demands of certain targets are outside of our valuation of them, we should be moving on pretty quickly.
This user liked this post: Vegas Claret
-
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1282 times
- Has Liked: 682 times
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
No director dividends or indeed remuneration, but interestingly there was an item of £1.9 million in our last set of accounts for exceptional promotion costs that was additional to the £11.2 million for players, management, coaches and other staff.aggi wrote:The past few years have been spent budgeting for relegation, building up a healthy cash surplus in case of going down. At some point you would expect the club to decide we have sufficient cash reserves (although there is the possibility that this is a movable feast given the way wages are increasing).
At that point then, assuming the directors aren't looking to take a dividend out of the club which seems unlikely, there is little point in recording profits as opposed to re-investing in the team and the infrastructure.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Only 1 word sums up our transfer activity, and that's embarrassing.
-
- Posts: 4405
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:43 am
- Been Liked: 1467 times
- Has Liked: 997 times
- Location: Burnley
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
If you are that easily embarrassed then you must find life a hard slog.Murger wrote:Only 1 word sums up our transfer activity, and that's embarrassing.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Haha. I said our business was embarrassing, not that I'm embarrassed.Goobs wrote:If you are that easily embarrassed then you must find life a hard slog.
-
- Posts: 4405
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:43 am
- Been Liked: 1467 times
- Has Liked: 997 times
- Location: Burnley
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Personally I find it frustrating but prudent rather than embarrassing. We have to work with what we have and the future of the club is ultimately paramount.Murger wrote:Haha. I said our business was embarrassing, not that I'm embarrassed.
I would love for us to be able to go gung ho in the market and make a multitude of big signings to get excited about, but that isn't and shouldn't be an option for us.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
I don't think anyone is saying we should go gung ho, but we are moving slower than snails pace. We seem to put all our eggs in 1 basket and then play chicken with the other team.Goobs wrote:Personally I find it frustrating but prudent rather than embarrassing. We have to work with what we have and the future of the club is ultimately paramount.
I would love for us to be able to go gung ho in the market and make a multitude of big signings to get excited about, but that isn't and shouldn't be an option for us.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
I'd assume it was transfer fee add-ons or similar (or anything else that could be bundled in there to make sure we were FFP compliant).Royboyclaret wrote:No director dividends or indeed remuneration, but interestingly there was an item of £1.9 million in our last set of accounts for exceptional promotion costs that was additional to the £11.2 million for players, management, coaches and other staff.
I can't see it being anything to do with the directors as there was no disclosure re: Related Party transactions.
-
- Posts: 4405
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:43 am
- Been Liked: 1467 times
- Has Liked: 997 times
- Location: Burnley
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Like I said frustrating but has served us pretty well in recent years. I have no issue with the club spending time on chasing their number 1 targets to try and get them at a price we like and am sure there will be back up options if we have to change direction. There is still long enough in the market for us to do the business we need / want.Murger wrote:I don't think anyone is saying we should go gung ho, but we are moving slower than snails pace. We seem to put all our eggs in 1 basket and then play chicken with the other team.
Gotta know when to hold / fold as they say and IMO the club have proven themselves pretty good at this in the last 4-5 years.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
The figure that proves you wrong in my view is this: 2017/18 Appearance figure for Scott Arfield: 18 League Games.TVC15 wrote:I know what he is saying
He’s criticising the club for the fact they have left - and not been replaced
And I am saying why replace players when you don’t need to ?
We already have 4 central midfielders and 4 wingers - all of whom are ahead of those 3 players. When they are all fit that means 4 of these are already on the bench. Why would these 3 players need replacing now when the club has already done the work needed to cover their departures ?
He played in almost half of our games last year, scored and assisted and you're saying he's been replaced? By who? Dwight McNeil?
Marney probably has been replaced.
Nkoudou was signed in January as direct competition for our wingers, admittedly he didn't play much but surely that shows Dyche wants other options there?
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
I guess it is if you ignore the £200 million war chest accrued over the last few seasons of building for the future.claretspice wrote:Well yes but there's limit to any club's development and its limited by its ability to afford wages in the event of relegation.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Yeah, GK was ahead of Walters but if GK was here still, Walters would apparently be ahead of him in the pecking order, easy to make up BS to support an agenda and that's what TVC did.boyyanno wrote:The figure that proves you wrong in my view is this: 2017/18 Appearance figure for Scott Arfield: 18 League Games.
He played in almost half of our games last year, scored and assisted and you're saying he's been replaced? By who? Dwight McNeil?
Marney probably has been replaced.
Nkoudou was signed in January as direct competition for our wingers, admittedly he didn't play much but surely that shows Dyche wants other options there?
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
We made a profit in the last 2 windows combined (I believe) if not it was a minimal swing either way, we're acting like we haven't got a pot to **** in. Last seasons transfer budget untouched, should be available unless last years budget was basically ''we need to sell Gray and Keane to fund incomings''.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Where do you get £200m war chest from?Steddyman wrote:I guess it is if you ignore the £200 million war chest accrued over the last few seasons of building for the future.
-
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1282 times
- Has Liked: 682 times
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
As per usual, he's speculating and the figure is a wild exaggeration.taio wrote:Where do you get £200m war chest from?
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
Exactly. Unless the club doesn't have any operating costs to net off turnover!Royboyclaret wrote:As per usual, he's speculating and the figure is a wild exaggeration.
Re: ARTICLE: No imminent move for Clucas
WTF are you talking about now ?KRBFC wrote:Yeah, GK was ahead of Walters but if GK was here still, Walters would apparently be ahead of him in the pecking order, easy to make up BS to support an agenda and that's what TVC did.
Walters was injured - GKN was not good enough but we had injuries and the Lennon transfer was not assured. We could have been down to 2 wide players or even just JBG as Arfield was also injured.
Marney has been injured for a long time and was never going to come back.
Arfield did not play much at all after Christmas and Dyche will have known he was leaving.
I know we need a few players in certain positions and we are clearly looking. However it’s a long way from being the crisis that drama queens like you and the OP are making out. Marney and GKN hardly played more than a few mins last year and we brought Lennon in as Arfield stopped playing. So not sure how we can be criticised for not replacing them when we can only have a squad of 25 and we have 2 players in each position across the whole of the midfield.
Think most fans agree we need another CB, and another striker if we can get rid of Wells or Walters (or preferably both).