Patrick Bamford on Tony Pulis

[ThatFragranceGuy]

It's always interesting that depending on how the discussion is going, managers are either responsible for or not responsible for signing players, negotiating their value, agreeing to pay X amount..surely a manager just says who they want the club do the negotiating?

Otherwise what do we have a recruitment team for and they have been consistently bizarre and terrible across multiple managers?

 

[Caesium137]

Whilst BalancetheBooks is getting paid a cut on transfers adding up to a package of £80k per week for 18 months of disaster...

Is this public domain anywhere Indeedido? I haven't heard his salary mentioned anywhere before, nor his cut of sales. I don't see what would be in it for the club to allow a manager a cut of sales? Surely his priority would shift to maximize revenue from player sales rather than league position then?

 

[Otto42]

Actually the facts are that Monk spent £50.1m on 8 players in under 6 months and also borrowed at high cost Lewis Baker, Jack Harrison.
The Club did raise £48.4m moving 12 players on permanently that season and loaned out a number more.

pulis sold only Forshaw and Christie of those for £7.5m, the others had already left under monk.
pulis also loaned in besic and crainie from pl clubs in Jan.

Boro really just terribly re-cycled their relegated squad for an awful one, spending under £2m on fees overall but costing a fortune in wages and agents and a major commitment by Gibson.
They just bought utter shīte.
Braithwaite, Randolph already sold for losses. Christie breaks even.
Howson Shotton and Johnson have no value now, Assombolonga and Fletcher are so bad as to be little more than a bag of balls.
It was stunningly bad round of recruitment.

Then Mr BalancetheBooks gets loads of credit for selling Aitor's Forshaw, Traore, Bamford,Fabio and Barragan at a combined major profit, while selling home grown Gibson.
Then he spunks £19.4m himself on 3 utter nob-jockeys in Flint, Savile and McNair; one of which we have already sold at a major loss and the two others who would only raise a laugh if offered for sale.
Whilst loaning in Mikel, Hugill, besic (again), McQueen, Batth, van la parra and bringing in Lonerghan on a free but not free.
Whilst BalancetheBooks is getting paid a cut on transfers adding up to a package of £80k per week for 18 months of disaster where we are left with a terrible squad and huge problems.

Karanka deserves a 15 on that 1-20 scale. He would have taken us back up and we may not even have gone down had he been backed that January. I'd still far rather have him here now than anything since or any other realistic alternative.
Mowbray deserves the 11 awarded earlier, but we were heading only one way.
Monk deserves 3. At least we got money back on Christie and Randolph saved us the season before last.
BalancetheBooks deserves **** all given he sold the wrong players, bought and loaned in utter rubbish, bored us to tears driving fans away and burgled £6m from the Club in wages and cuts, whilst rimming Mr Gibson.
He is where he should always be and that is unemployed.

Jack Harrison was one of Uncle Tony's strange loan signings I believe? (The other being that bloke from Huddersfield). We do make some odd loan arrangements dont we!

 

[Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret]

It's always interesting that depending on how the discussion is going, managers are either responsible for or not responsible for signing players, negotiating their value, agreeing to pay X amount..surely a manager just says who they want the club do the negotiating?

Otherwise what do we have a recruitment team for and they have been consistently bizarre and terrible across multiple managers?

Whilst we'll never know the real ins and outs of who is primarily behind the transfer deals you can make educated guesses. I mean bamford for hughil has Pulis all over it, with a dash of Gibson's home boy made good added to the mix. We signed a raft of Spanish and Scottish players you can attribute to their respective managers, while Rhodes and downing were presented as gifts. I certainly feel Southgate at the very least bought into the clubs attempts to buy young and cheap and nurture talent, which proved to be disastrous. I thought the leaking of info to the mail re Monks buys also provided an interesting glimpse into how we buy players.

 

[indeedido]

Whilst we'll never know the real ins and outs of who is primarily behind the transfer deals you can make educated guesses. I mean bamford for hughil has Pulis all over it, with a dash of Gibson's home boy made good added to the mix. We signed a raft of Spanish and Scottish players you can attribute to their respective managers, while Rhodes and downing were presented as gifts. I certainly feel Southgate at the very least bought into the clubs attempts to buy young and cheap and nurture talent, which proved to be disastrous. I thought the leaking of info to the mail re Monks buys also provided an interesting glimpse into how we buy players.

I'm not sure that buying young and nurturing talent is wrong or bad at all. But whoever you buy, the key is that they are any good. We've simply paid too much for people who are no good.
Managers, Recruitment and Chairman collectively.

 

[coluka]

Yeah £12m is probably way off.

I'd say £8m as an absolute minimum. I'd be disappointed with less.

I would be amazed if any championship player went for £8M in the current climate. Britt will be on big wages, the club will be desperate to sell, but nobody is going to pay Britt the money he is on here. I think we could be stuck with him till the end of next June (2021). I reckon to move him on we would have to take a small fee to enable someone else to pay him more money. I think we will be lucky to get more than £4M given this pandemic. Why would any club sign any player and pay a fee and him wages when the future is far from clear still.

I think this will shake up football and see some deals being a pay as you play basis and that wages offered outside of thee PL will be far far lower as will transfer fees (imho)

 

[atypical_boro]

I would be amazed if any championship player went for £8M in the current climate. Britt will be on big wages, the club will be desperate to sell, but nobody is going to pay Britt the money he is on here. I think we could be stuck with him till the end of next June (2021). I reckon to move him on we would have to take a small fee to enable someone else to pay him more money. I think we will be lucky to get more than £4M given this pandemic. Why would any club sign any player and pay a fee and him wages when the future is far from clear still.

I think this will shake up football and see some deals being a pay as you play basis and that wages offered outside of thee PL will be far far lower as will transfer fees (imho)

Yeah I totally agree. I said above the caveat that my estimations were in a non-Covid19 world. After all this, I wouldn’t be surprised to see transfer fees almost phased out completely, at least for a year or two.

 

[Redwurzel]

It is hard to talk about current transfer fees while we have football on hold or played behind closed doors.

Apologies for the Monk figure I under estimated it -I know now I forgot Ryan Shotton and Johnny Howson - 8 players on transfer fees some going. Hence my comment about taking several years to recover. Birmingham are still struggling financially from Arry's short spell there.

Nice to see some posters appreciate Karanka's stay. In March 2017 it was hard to find anyone on here that supported him.

Steve Gibson has been chairman for 27 years and a director at MFC for 35 years - He's been around longer than most in the game (running clubs), he signed Tony Pulis's contract and all its terms or did TP write part of it with invisible ink?

Ref: Bamford sale (how this thread started!) I agree TP fancied Hugill as an option more than Bamford. Result in 2018/19 we got 3 points less than in 2017/18 despite having a transfer surplus of £20m and a lower wage bill. Man for Man I would take Bamford over Hugill, but to me it was about spreading limited resources. The Bamford sale paid for another player plus Hugill to come in.

 

[parmoboy]

It is hard to talk about current transfer fees while we have football on hold or played behind closed doors.

Apologies for the Monk figure I under estimated it -I know now I forgot Ryan Shotton and Johnny Howson - 8 players on transfer fees some going. Hence my comment about taking several years to recover. Birmingham are still struggling financially from Arry's short spell there.

Nice to see some posters appreciate Karanka's stay. In March 2017 it was hard to find anyone on here that supported him.

Steve Gibson has been chairman for 27 years and a director at MFC for 35 years - He's been around longer than most in the game (running clubs), he signed Tony Pulis's contract and all its terms or did TP write part of it with invisible ink?

Ref: Bamford sale (how this thread started!) I agree TP fancied Hugill as an option more than Bamford. Result in 2018/19 we got 3 points less than in 2017/18 despite having a transfer surplus of £20m and a lower wage bill. Man for Man I would take Bamford over Hugill, but to me it was about spreading limited resources. The Bamford sale paid for another player plus Hugill to come in.

I still would have preferred for us to just keep Bamford, even if his sale put us in a position where we could bring in two players.

I can understand the argument that we were top heavy in strikers, and needed to sell at least one striker, but I don't think that argument holds up when you consider we sold Bamford, and brought in Hugill. We still ended up with 5 strikers, which was crazy. Pulis ironically mocked Monk for the fact we had 5 strikers on our books when he first took over, yet Pulis did nothing about this and just added to the problem.

I wouldn't have minded quite as much if we'd have sold Bamford and used the money to sign a couple of decent wingers, which was clearly what was needed at the time, although in fairness I do remember a certain amount of effort was made to do that.

Re your point about us getting 3 points less in 18/19 compared to the previous season, you have to remember Bamford only managed a run in the side as our no 9 towards the end of the season, and it coincided with our best run of form that season. I genuinely believe if we'd have had Bamford as our no 9 the following season we'd have finished the season with more points.

 

[Redwurzel]

Parmo

We had 4 strikers not five, because Braithwaite was loaned out at the end of August for the rest of the season when Hugill came in. Gestede was also injured nearly the whole season? so in reality it was 3 strikers.

Ref wingers: Van la Parra was brought in at the beginning of January as a out and out winger, but his injuries were much worse than predicted. TP did play Downing for most of the season as a winger.

 

[BoroMart]

Never understood why we paid 15m for britt when we had bamford, insane.

It's worse than that, we still had Stuani, who was effectively one of those sacrificed to allow us to afford Britt.

We should have given Stuani the number 9, and spent some of that 15 mill that we wasted on Britt on Snodgrass, Luke Freeman and other creative players that wouldn't have wasted silly money and given us a better chance of promotion.

 

[TeaCider]

Parmo

We had 4 strikers not five, because Braithwaite was loaned out at the end of August for the rest of the season when Hugill came in. Gestede was also injured nearly the whole season? so in reality it was 3 strikers.

Braithwaite was loaned out in January, both times.
He just spat his dummy out at the end of August when they wouldn't let him leave.