• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Djed Spence

Lilbaz said:
We are well over our non hg limit, not sure we have a choice of keeping them.
Click to expand...
The HG thing is a bit of a misnomer, though. If we didn't have a single HG player we'd be limited to 17 players and as many U21s as we want. Now 17 is not quite enough for 4 comps, but we do have a few HGs. So we have enough to have a 22-23 man squad for both EPL and CL. And between EPL and CL we'll only be using a 17-18 player rotation anyway, with the rest featuring mainly in the domestic cups. We may not have a full 25 man squad for CL, but do we really need it? 2 players per position is 22 and that's assuming they're all specialists and can't cover any other position, which is not the case. And we easily have 22, so we're fine, even if we have a "normal" amount of injuries.
 
Gutter Boy said:
But 5 subs and 2 games a week. That’s potentially an hour a week each. If the starters know they will always only play an hour, they can go full pelt all the time.

There’s also that Perisic will likely double up as our 6th forward. Maybe Royal will be our 6th CB if Tanganga goes as well as Rodon. Plus Spence’s time to settle and Sessegnon and Doherty’s injury histories. I think it’s possible we’ll keep all 6 anyway
Click to expand...
This is really important. Everyone is saying that with 5 subs you need a bigger squad. I'd argue with 5 subs you probably can do with a smaller squad, because you won't running players into the ground.
 
alekaras said:
The HG thing is a bit of a misnomer, though. If we didn't have a single HG player we'd be limited to 17 players and as many U21s as we want. Now 17 is not quite enough for 4 comps, but we do have a few HGs. So we have enough to have a 22-23 man squad for both EPL and CL. And between EPL and CL we'll only be using a 17-18 player rotation anyway, with the rest featuring mainly in the domestic cups. We may not have a full 25 man squad for CL, but do we really need it? 2 players per position is 22 and that's assuming they're all specialists and can't cover any other position, which is not the case. And we easily have 22, so we're fine, even if we have a "normal" amount of injuries.
Click to expand...

You misread what i was saying. We are already over our non home grown limit of 17. Think we have 22 non hg. So already need to get rid of 5 as they can't be a part of the squad. That's without adding anyone else.
 
alekaras said:
This is really important. Everyone is saying that with 5 subs you need a bigger squad. I'd argue with 5 subs you probably can do with a smaller squad, because you won't running players into the ground.
Click to expand...

Yes, in isolation I think that's true.

But being back in the CL, and having a season that will be extra busy because of the world cup I think makes us need a bigger squad.

Although 5 subs may mean less wear and tear on some players the benefits of having quality on the bench increases. So more about the players in the squad than the number of players. Not saying you disagree, just adding to your point.
 
Think Spence was agreed 3 times yesterday.

On paper the easiest transfer is taking the longest, wonder if we will move on soon
 
Legohamster said:
Think Spence was agreed 3 times yesterday.

On paper the easiest transfer is taking the longest, wonder if we will move on soon
Click to expand...

relax levy moved in to negotiate … I know bite me. Certain that we will get this across the line tomorrow.
 
Forest have signed right back Neco Williams from Liverpool for almost 17 million. Incredible how Liverpool continue to mug off other clubs when getting rid of youth players they don't see a long term future for. While it means they're no longer interested in Spence, that fee sort of justifies what Boro are asking.
 
Jordinho said:
Forest have signed right back Neco Williams from Liverpool for almost 17 million. Incredible how Liverpool continue to mug off other clubs when getting rid of youth players they don't see a long term future for. While it means they're no longer interested in Spence, that fee sort of justifies what Boro are asking.
Click to expand...
A fee one club pays doesn’t justify another though does it
I’d argue then that Perisic on a free justifies why Spence should be free
This is very similar to when we signed Sessegnon IMO
 
Bedfordspurs said:
A fee one club pays doesn’t justify another though does it
I’d argue then that Perisic on a free justifies why Spence should be free
This is very similar to when we signed Sessegnon IMO
Click to expand...

There's literally no logic there though as Perisic was a free agent. The Liverpool lad and Spence at least have a few on paper similarities to them (age/position)
 
billyiddo said:
There's literally no logic there though as Perisic was a free agent. The Liverpool lad and Spence at least have a few on paper similarities to them (age/position)
Click to expand...
There is no logic to any fees
That is the point
You can’t compare one transfer with another as every one has different circumstances and needs (player, selling club and buying club)
Only thing the pool lad and Spence have in common is their age and position
That’s the same with a lot of players but some are valued higher than others
 
Bedfordspurs said:
There is no logic to any fees
That is the point
You can’t compare one transfer with another as every one has different circumstances and needs (player, selling club and buying club)
Only thing the pool lad and Spence have in common is their age and position
That’s the same with a lot of players but some are valued higher than others
Click to expand...

Of course you can compare transfer fees, what a strange thing to argue - people do it all the time and clubs will certainly use fees that other, similar players go for in negotiations
 
Bedfordspurs said:
There is no logic to any fees
That is the point
You can’t compare one transfer with another as every one has different circumstances and needs (player, selling club and buying club)
Only thing the pool lad and Spence have in common is their age and position
That’s the same with a lot of players but some are valued higher than others
Click to expand...

They're similar age, played in the same league in the same position, wanted by some of the same clubs. It seems very natural to compare their fees. Their value to the buying or selling club will of course be affected by other things as well, but Forest wanted Spence and have now bought Williams instead. Gibson at Boro will look at the fee there and think he's right to try and get more.
 
billyiddo said:
Of course you can compare transfer fees, what a strange thing to argue - people do it all the time and clubs will certainly use fees that other, similar players go for in negotiations
Click to expand...

Thing is if borough were going to sell him to forest for less than what they are asking of us. Then we shouldn't pay it. Otherwise it will encourage other clubs to bump the price in the future which could cost us millions on transfers.

Borough fans are saying that they offered a lower price to forest as they paid a loan fee. But they got that money anyway.
 
billyiddo said:
Of course you can compare transfer fees, what a strange thing to argue - people do it all the time and clubs will certainly use fees that other, similar players go for in negotiations
Click to expand...
Fans do
Clubs don’t
Clubs have a value they put on a player based in affordability and willingness to sell
You can’t use comparable figures as because there are too many variables
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Fans do
Clubs don’t
Clubs have a value they put on a player based in affordability and willingness to sell
You can’t use comparable figures as because there are too many variables
Click to expand...

Of course they do - "we're not willing to go higher than this amount because we believe it is market value based on deal X, Y & Z" or "we won't sell below this amount because (the same reasoning" it's just a part of negotiations. Might go in one ear and out the other but it will certainly be used at times by one party or the other.
 
billyiddo said:
Of course they do - "we're not willing to go higher than this amount because we believe it is market value based on deal X, Y & Z" or "we won't sell below this amount because (the same reasoning" it's just a part of negotiations.
Click to expand...
I think you would be laughed at, at a senior level if you did that. It’s probably why levy takes longer because he uses a smart man’s tactics
That’s commodity buying basically
Buying a player is buying a service through a tri party relationship
Player has to want the move and the clubs have to be happy with the price… all motivation driven for different reasons
Any given market is driven by buyer and seller plus rarity value… hence the premium for certain things
It’s why we paid more like for like for Richarlison than sterling or Jesus are going for… other variables in play. Contract length, so by default players motivation… means the selling clubs hand is slightly weaker
I doubt we negotiated with Everton and said Jesus is available for £45m so you must reduce your price…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back