In a career that lasts 25 years at the very most, and could end any minute, you would take x4 the amount of your weekly wage if you could
25 years?
I doubt if the average Football League player's career with a good wage lasts much more than eight years. Most start earning decent money around 22 and are finished at 30. Of course, many go on well into their thirties, but just as many lose form or fitness and are finished at Football League level by their mid- or late-twenties.
I wonder how many of those who are criticising Grant for taking his chance are youngsters living off their parents, grants or the dole. Most people who have had to work hard for their money, maybe with the constant threat of redundancy or of an inhibiting illness or injury, would know exactly why he would be a fool not to grab the chance.
In a career that lasts 25 years at the very most, and could end any minute, you would take x4 the amount of your weekly wage if you could
25 years?
I doubt if the average Football League player's career with a good wage lasts much more than eight years. Most start earning decent money around 22 and are finished at 30. Of course, many go on well into their thirties, but just as many lose form or fitness and are finished at Football League level by their mid- or late-twenties.
I wonder how many of those who are criticising Grant for taking his chance are youngsters living off their parents, grants or the dole. Most people who have had to work hard for their money, maybe with the constant threat of redundancy or of an inhibiting illness or injury, would know exactly why he would be a fool not to grab the chance.
Interesting they haven’t said anything about Fosu and Reeves. Perhaps LB feels they haven’t done enough. I would like young Albie Morgan to get a long term deal.
I think we'd be crazy not to re-sign Fosu. He definitely has sell-on value, even if he has been hit and miss this season. You saw some of it in his cameo on Saturday. He's a very gifted player. To lose him on a free would be silly.
I would personally also offer Reeves an extension. I think he's a player of quality, who I think is smarter and does more than he gets credit for at times. But I appreciate this is probably a tougher choice.
Lastly, I would definitely offer Sarr a new deal. He's shown the quality he has. Wouldn't match the terms he's on now (even if I suspect they're often overstated on here). But he's a player you could build a defense around.
Sarr’s already contracted until 2020. Even if extending that was a priority it would complicated to do with a wage cut, I imagine.
In a career that lasts 25 years at the very most, and could end any minute, you would take x4 the amount of your weekly wage if you could
25 years?
I doubt if the average Football League player's career with a good wage lasts much more than eight years. Most start earning decent money around 22 and are finished at 30. Of course, many go on well into their thirties, but just as many lose form or fitness and are finished at Football League level by their mid- or late-twenties.
I wonder how many of those who are criticising Grant for taking his chance are youngsters living off their parents, grants or the dole. Most people who have had to work hard for their money, maybe with the constant threat of redundancy or of an inhibiting illness or injury, would know exactly why he would be a fool not to grab the chance.
Finished at 30? Most are finished at maybe 32 would be more accurate.
A career isn't just your peak it's the build up and the winding down.
In a career that lasts 25 years at the very most, and could end any minute, you would take x4 the amount of your weekly wage if you could
I wonder how many of those who are criticising Grant for taking his chance are youngsters living off their parents, grants or the dole.
Weird comment. It costs about 45k to get a degree now, so you can leave students out of it. Also, I suspect the unemployed appreciate the value of money more than you seem to think.
It's short termism, but I would rather we get someone with higher quality on loan than less reliable quality permanently. We need to get out of this division, so yes we will have an even more depleted squad in the summer and will have to rebuild, but I'd rather increase the chances of rebuilding from the Championship than having one less spot to fill in League One.
Also, I don't really know what type of forward we would be able to actually buy at this stage of the window anyway. Prices will be massively inflated because the other team most likely won't have time to replace him--and that's assuming a player is even for sale. So you might end up spending all of the Karlan money just to get a decent League One level striker in, which to me is bad business. Better we loan someone from the Championship who is of high end League One/Championship quality.
Lastly, for all of his faults, I don't think Roland can be blamed too much for selling a player for a seven figure sum when we're in League One. Ditto, to *some* extent, if we don't buy a new striker. But moreso to the first point, the mistake was made in the summer not tying Karlan down to a new deal. Same went through the fall. If he'd signed a new deal, he might still leave, but we would have a much better bargaining position.
This is always the problem with selling players and expecting to replace them in January.
Sure we are probably getting a better fee selling Karlan now than we'd get in the summer, but to replace him we are shopping in an inflated market and will have to pay over the odds, at the very least reducing any financial benefit to the club or owner. Or we will have to sign a loan and, with the best will in the world, getting a player in on, loan at this stage of the season who will come in, hit the ground running, link up as well as Karlan does with Taylor, and get into double figures goals wise by the end of the season... well it strikes me as a long shot. Or we just don't sign anyone, and don't rule that one out yet by the way.
The deals that are done in January, especially towards the end of the window, tend to be clubs desperate to strengthen picking up players who are on the scrap heap at another club - and signings like that always carry significant risk in one form or another, or are big clubs making smaller clubs offers they can't refuse.
Signing good players to replace good players in January is very hard to do. Its doubly hard with strikers, because good ones just don't come on the market often. We've got ourselves caught in this catch 22 situation so many times now, but it seems to just keep on coming around every year.
Bowyer talks a lot about only signing the right players in terms of quality and personality and within budget. He's dead right to do so, and he shouldn't lower his standards, but I wonder if it those standards that will stop us bringing in more than one player on loan - I just doubt that a quality striker, whose, a great lad, and is cheap will be available to sign permanently in January.
But it's not just down to what the selling club wants
If a player insists on leaving by refusing to play or being disruptive, then the club is in a really hard position. If you keep the player, you may end up with a moody disinterested player for the rest of the season, who's a shadow of the player before the bid arrived.
Van Dijk for example was forced to stay at Soton despite handing in a transfer request in the summer of 2017, but was a a shadow of his normal self until he left in January, whereupon he suddenly became world class again.
But is that the kind of player Bowyer will want to sign and are we remotely a big enough draw to get player to do that? Bowyer has spoken a lot about getting the right characters in because the group as it is has "something special" and he doesn't want to disrupt that.
I was thinking more about the issues we have with keeping players when bids come in (e.g. Karlan). If we told Karlan he couldn't leave, would he be the same player for the rest of the season?
At this stage, it will be difficult to buy anyone from a "smaller" club (e.g. an Eaves) unless the player helps force the move as nobody will want to sell their best player now. Obviously it's a lot different with unwanted players from bigger clubs.
I'm sure Karlan wants this move, but the way he played on Saturday did not suggest to me he has been agitating for it or has made himself difficult to manage - Bowyer said he had been excellent in training the previous week and said he felt Karlan gave him everything during the game. I think this is more we've been made an offer the club or owner feels they can't turn down.
I think there's more than just money in this for Karlan too - Terriers fans seem to be expecting him to play. Most if us are skeptical he'll be able to step up to the Premier League immediately, but he gets 3 months to see if he can. If Hudds go down but he scores goals he could be back in The Premier League by August with another new club, or he worst case he's in The Championship at a well run club, with parachute payments and likely ambitions to get promoted again. All while earning a much better wedge. He's being portrayed as just greedy by some, but there is sense for his career in this move too.
Saturday was easy for him, as he could play the match (in his mind) as a farewell match, in the expectation that the move would go ahead a few days later. If we stopped the move this week, I doubt he'd be a happy bunny then though
Those Terriers fans expecting him to play, I doubt they've even seen him! Go back 15 years to when we were in the PL, can you imagine Curbs buying a 3rd division striker?
It's short termism, but I would rather we get someone with higher quality on loan than less reliable quality permanently. We need to get out of this division, so yes we will have an even more depleted squad in the summer and will have to rebuild, but I'd rather increase the chances of rebuilding from the Championship than having one less spot to fill in League One.
Also, I don't really know what type of forward we would be able to actually buy at this stage of the window anyway. Prices will be massively inflated because the other team most likely won't have time to replace him--and that's assuming a player is even for sale. So you might end up spending all of the Karlan money just to get a decent League One level striker in, which to me is bad business. Better we loan someone from the Championship who is of high end League One/Championship quality.
Lastly, for all of his faults, I don't think Roland can be blamed too much for selling a player for a seven figure sum when we're in League One. Ditto, to *some* extent, if we don't buy a new striker. But moreso to the first point, the mistake was made in the summer not tying Karlan down to a new deal. Same went through the fall. If he'd signed a new deal, he might still leave, but we would have a much better bargaining position.
This is always the problem with selling players and expecting to replace them in January.
Sure we are probably getting a better fee selling Karlan now than we'd get in the summer, but to replace him we are shopping in an inflated market and will have to pay over the odds, at the very least reducing any financial benefit to the club or owner. Or we will have to sign a loan and, with the best will in the world, getting a player in on, loan at this stage of the season who will come in, hit the ground running, link up as well as Karlan does with Taylor, and get into double figures goals wise by the end of the season... well it strikes me as a long shot. Or we just don't sign anyone, and don't rule that one out yet by the way.
The deals that are done in January, especially towards the end of the window, tend to be clubs desperate to strengthen picking up players who are on the scrap heap at another club - and signings like that always carry significant risk in one form or another, or are big clubs making smaller clubs offers they can't refuse.
Signing good players to replace good players in January is very hard to do. Its doubly hard with strikers, because good ones just don't come on the market often. We've got ourselves caught in this catch 22 situation so many times now, but it seems to just keep on coming around every year.
Bowyer talks a lot about only signing the right players in terms of quality and personality and within budget. He's dead right to do so, and he shouldn't lower his standards, but I wonder if it those standards that will stop us bringing in more than one player on loan - I just doubt that a quality striker, whose, a great lad, and is cheap will be available to sign permanently in January.
But it's not just down to what the selling club wants
If a player insists on leaving by refusing to play or being disruptive, then the club is in a really hard position. If you keep the player, you may end up with a moody disinterested player for the rest of the season, who's a shadow of the player before the bid arrived.
Van Dijk for example was forced to stay at Soton despite handing in a transfer request in the summer of 2017, but was a a shadow of his normal self until he left in January, whereupon he suddenly became world class again.
But is that the kind of player Bowyer will want to sign and are we remotely a big enough draw to get player to do that? Bowyer has spoken a lot about getting the right characters in because the group as it is has "something special" and he doesn't want to disrupt that.
I was thinking more about the issues we have with keeping players when bids come in (e.g. Karlan). If we told Karlan he couldn't leave, would he be the same player for the rest of the season?
At this stage, it will be difficult to buy anyone from a "smaller" club (e.g. an Eaves) unless the player helps force the move as nobody will want to sell their best player now. Obviously it's a lot different with unwanted players from bigger clubs.
I'm sure Karlan wants this move, but the way he played on Saturday did not suggest to me he has been agitating for it or has made himself difficult to manage - Bowyer said he had been excellent in training the previous week and said he felt Karlan gave him everything during the game. I think this is more we've been made an offer the club or owner feels they can't turn down.
I think there's more than just money in this for Karlan too - Terriers fans seem to be expecting him to play. Most if us are skeptical he'll be able to step up to the Premier League immediately, but he gets 3 months to see if he can. If Hudds go down but he scores goals he could be back in The Premier League by August with another new club, or he worst case he's in The Championship at a well run club, with parachute payments and likely ambitions to get promoted again. All while earning a much better wedge. He's being portrayed as just greedy by some, but there is sense for his career in this move too.
Saturday was easy for him, as he could play the match (in his mind) as a farewell match, in the expectation that the move would go ahead a few days later. If we stopped the move this week, I doubt he'd be a happy bunny then though
Those Terriers fans expecting him to play, I doubt they've even seen him! Go back 15 years to when we were in the PL, can you imagine Curbs buying a 3rd division striker?
We signed Mark McCammon from Cambridge United who were a League Two club in 1998/99 Blackburn signed Jon Stead from Huddersfield who were in League Two at the time in 2003/04
They're the only two that I can remember / find moving from this low to the Premier League
It's short termism, but I would rather we get someone with higher quality on loan than less reliable quality permanently. We need to get out of this division, so yes we will have an even more depleted squad in the summer and will have to rebuild, but I'd rather increase the chances of rebuilding from the Championship than having one less spot to fill in League One.
Also, I don't really know what type of forward we would be able to actually buy at this stage of the window anyway. Prices will be massively inflated because the other team most likely won't have time to replace him--and that's assuming a player is even for sale. So you might end up spending all of the Karlan money just to get a decent League One level striker in, which to me is bad business. Better we loan someone from the Championship who is of high end League One/Championship quality.
Lastly, for all of his faults, I don't think Roland can be blamed too much for selling a player for a seven figure sum when we're in League One. Ditto, to *some* extent, if we don't buy a new striker. But moreso to the first point, the mistake was made in the summer not tying Karlan down to a new deal. Same went through the fall. If he'd signed a new deal, he might still leave, but we would have a much better bargaining position.
This is always the problem with selling players and expecting to replace them in January.
Sure we are probably getting a better fee selling Karlan now than we'd get in the summer, but to replace him we are shopping in an inflated market and will have to pay over the odds, at the very least reducing any financial benefit to the club or owner. Or we will have to sign a loan and, with the best will in the world, getting a player in on, loan at this stage of the season who will come in, hit the ground running, link up as well as Karlan does with Taylor, and get into double figures goals wise by the end of the season... well it strikes me as a long shot. Or we just don't sign anyone, and don't rule that one out yet by the way.
The deals that are done in January, especially towards the end of the window, tend to be clubs desperate to strengthen picking up players who are on the scrap heap at another club - and signings like that always carry significant risk in one form or another, or are big clubs making smaller clubs offers they can't refuse.
Signing good players to replace good players in January is very hard to do. Its doubly hard with strikers, because good ones just don't come on the market often. We've got ourselves caught in this catch 22 situation so many times now, but it seems to just keep on coming around every year.
Bowyer talks a lot about only signing the right players in terms of quality and personality and within budget. He's dead right to do so, and he shouldn't lower his standards, but I wonder if it those standards that will stop us bringing in more than one player on loan - I just doubt that a quality striker, whose, a great lad, and is cheap will be available to sign permanently in January.
But it's not just down to what the selling club wants
If a player insists on leaving by refusing to play or being disruptive, then the club is in a really hard position. If you keep the player, you may end up with a moody disinterested player for the rest of the season, who's a shadow of the player before the bid arrived.
Van Dijk for example was forced to stay at Soton despite handing in a transfer request in the summer of 2017, but was a a shadow of his normal self until he left in January, whereupon he suddenly became world class again.
But is that the kind of player Bowyer will want to sign and are we remotely a big enough draw to get player to do that? Bowyer has spoken a lot about getting the right characters in because the group as it is has "something special" and he doesn't want to disrupt that.
I was thinking more about the issues we have with keeping players when bids come in (e.g. Karlan). If we told Karlan he couldn't leave, would he be the same player for the rest of the season?
At this stage, it will be difficult to buy anyone from a "smaller" club (e.g. an Eaves) unless the player helps force the move as nobody will want to sell their best player now. Obviously it's a lot different with unwanted players from bigger clubs.
I'm sure Karlan wants this move, but the way he played on Saturday did not suggest to me he has been agitating for it or has made himself difficult to manage - Bowyer said he had been excellent in training the previous week and said he felt Karlan gave him everything during the game. I think this is more we've been made an offer the club or owner feels they can't turn down.
I think there's more than just money in this for Karlan too - Terriers fans seem to be expecting him to play. Most if us are skeptical he'll be able to step up to the Premier League immediately, but he gets 3 months to see if he can. If Hudds go down but he scores goals he could be back in The Premier League by August with another new club, or he worst case he's in The Championship at a well run club, with parachute payments and likely ambitions to get promoted again. All while earning a much better wedge. He's being portrayed as just greedy by some, but there is sense for his career in this move too.
Saturday was easy for him, as he could play the match (in his mind) as a farewell match, in the expectation that the move would go ahead a few days later. If we stopped the move this week, I doubt he'd be a happy bunny then though
Those Terriers fans expecting him to play, I doubt they've even seen him! Go back 15 years to when we were in the PL, can you imagine Curbs buying a 3rd division striker?
We signed Mark McCammon from Cambridge United who were a League Two club in 1998/99 Blackburn signed Jon Stead from Huddersfield who were in League Two at the time in 2003/04
They're the only two that I can remember / find moving from this low to the Premier League
Further to this; Looking at the end of season top scorer charts for League One going back to 2004/05 the only player who moved directly from this level to the Premier League was Dele Alli - All others have either progressed to the Premier League with their clubs (Lambert | Holt) or have gone on to a Championship club first (Rhodes)
In a career that lasts 25 years at the very most, and could end any minute, you would take x4 the amount of your weekly wage if you could
I wonder how many of those who are criticising Grant for taking his chance are youngsters living off their parents, grants or the dole.
Weird comment. It costs about 45k to get a degree now, so you can leave students out of it. Also, I suspect the unemployed appreciate the value of money more than you seem to think.
No, a footballer who's been on 3k a week since the age of 19 would appreciate the value of money much more than someone on the breadline. Odd. (sarcasm face)
It's short termism, but I would rather we get someone with higher quality on loan than less reliable quality permanently. We need to get out of this division, so yes we will have an even more depleted squad in the summer and will have to rebuild, but I'd rather increase the chances of rebuilding from the Championship than having one less spot to fill in League One.
Also, I don't really know what type of forward we would be able to actually buy at this stage of the window anyway. Prices will be massively inflated because the other team most likely won't have time to replace him--and that's assuming a player is even for sale. So you might end up spending all of the Karlan money just to get a decent League One level striker in, which to me is bad business. Better we loan someone from the Championship who is of high end League One/Championship quality.
Lastly, for all of his faults, I don't think Roland can be blamed too much for selling a player for a seven figure sum when we're in League One. Ditto, to *some* extent, if we don't buy a new striker. But moreso to the first point, the mistake was made in the summer not tying Karlan down to a new deal. Same went through the fall. If he'd signed a new deal, he might still leave, but we would have a much better bargaining position.
This is always the problem with selling players and expecting to replace them in January.
Sure we are probably getting a better fee selling Karlan now than we'd get in the summer, but to replace him we are shopping in an inflated market and will have to pay over the odds, at the very least reducing any financial benefit to the club or owner. Or we will have to sign a loan and, with the best will in the world, getting a player in on, loan at this stage of the season who will come in, hit the ground running, link up as well as Karlan does with Taylor, and get into double figures goals wise by the end of the season... well it strikes me as a long shot. Or we just don't sign anyone, and don't rule that one out yet by the way.
The deals that are done in January, especially towards the end of the window, tend to be clubs desperate to strengthen picking up players who are on the scrap heap at another club - and signings like that always carry significant risk in one form or another, or are big clubs making smaller clubs offers they can't refuse.
Signing good players to replace good players in January is very hard to do. Its doubly hard with strikers, because good ones just don't come on the market often. We've got ourselves caught in this catch 22 situation so many times now, but it seems to just keep on coming around every year.
Bowyer talks a lot about only signing the right players in terms of quality and personality and within budget. He's dead right to do so, and he shouldn't lower his standards, but I wonder if it those standards that will stop us bringing in more than one player on loan - I just doubt that a quality striker, whose, a great lad, and is cheap will be available to sign permanently in January.
But it's not just down to what the selling club wants
If a player insists on leaving by refusing to play or being disruptive, then the club is in a really hard position. If you keep the player, you may end up with a moody disinterested player for the rest of the season, who's a shadow of the player before the bid arrived.
Van Dijk for example was forced to stay at Soton despite handing in a transfer request in the summer of 2017, but was a a shadow of his normal self until he left in January, whereupon he suddenly became world class again.
But is that the kind of player Bowyer will want to sign and are we remotely a big enough draw to get player to do that? Bowyer has spoken a lot about getting the right characters in because the group as it is has "something special" and he doesn't want to disrupt that.
I was thinking more about the issues we have with keeping players when bids come in (e.g. Karlan). If we told Karlan he couldn't leave, would he be the same player for the rest of the season?
At this stage, it will be difficult to buy anyone from a "smaller" club (e.g. an Eaves) unless the player helps force the move as nobody will want to sell their best player now. Obviously it's a lot different with unwanted players from bigger clubs.
I'm sure Karlan wants this move, but the way he played on Saturday did not suggest to me he has been agitating for it or has made himself difficult to manage - Bowyer said he had been excellent in training the previous week and said he felt Karlan gave him everything during the game. I think this is more we've been made an offer the club or owner feels they can't turn down.
I think there's more than just money in this for Karlan too - Terriers fans seem to be expecting him to play. Most if us are skeptical he'll be able to step up to the Premier League immediately, but he gets 3 months to see if he can. If Hudds go down but he scores goals he could be back in The Premier League by August with another new club, or he worst case he's in The Championship at a well run club, with parachute payments and likely ambitions to get promoted again. All while earning a much better wedge. He's being portrayed as just greedy by some, but there is sense for his career in this move too.
Saturday was easy for him, as he could play the match (in his mind) as a farewell match, in the expectation that the move would go ahead a few days later. If we stopped the move this week, I doubt he'd be a happy bunny then though
Those Terriers fans expecting him to play, I doubt they've even seen him! Go back 15 years to when we were in the PL, can you imagine Curbs buying a 3rd division striker?
We signed Mark McCammon from Cambridge United who were a League Two club in 1998/99 Blackburn signed Jon Stead from Huddersfield who were in League Two at the time in 2003/04
They're the only two that I can remember / find moving from this low to the Premier League
Further to this; Looking at the end of season top scorer charts for League One going back to 2004/05 the only player who moved directly from this level to the Premier League was Dele Alli - All others have either progressed to the Premier League with their clubs (Lambert | Holt) or have gone on to a Championship club first (Rhodes)
And Dele Alli was then loaned back straight away, where he helped MKD get promoted...
Not really a lot wrong with what Grant has done, if anything at all. But anyone that leaves us and isnt guaranteed to go onto bigger and better things (Lookman, Gomez) automatically becomes a snake.
The releasing of the Aribo/Phillips news (although nothing certain there yet) is interesting and I expect we are about to be severely underwhelmed with business over the next few days. Grant to be sold and a less than like-for-like loan replacement to arrive.
The releasing of the Aribo/Phillips news (although nothing certain there yet) is interesting and I expect we are about to be severely underwhelmed with business over the next few days. Grant to be sold and a less than like-for-like loan replacement to arrive.
We go from having the best striking partnership in League 1 to ?
Steve Gallen have been superb in getting Williams, Cullen etc to cafc, but as expected Grant makes the quantum leap then Charlton face the possibility of playing a 4--6-0 line up at Fleetwood ! Well it's a problem for their CB's who to mark.
The two strikers we now need as Taylor has at least 2 games if not 4 games he is going to miss ( hope he doesn't get injured) the head of recruitment faces his finest hour.
This week is crucial in Cafc finishing in a top 6 place. Top 2 is a long shot because of never playing the same team twice because of injuries or suspensions.
The releasing of the Aribo/Phillips news (although nothing certain there yet) is interesting and I expect we are about to be severely underwhelmed with business over the next few days. Grant to be sold and a less than like-for-like loan replacement to arrive.
The releasing of the Aribo/Phillips news (although nothing certain there yet) is interesting and I expect we are about to be severely underwhelmed with business over the next few days. Grant to be sold and a less than like-for-like loan replacement to arrive.
what pisses me off, is if the Grant deal was as clear cut as Cawley tweeted on Saturday, if should have been done by now why 2 days later and 2 days from the window closing are we still waiting.
what pisses me off, is if the Grant deal was as clear cut as Cawley tweeted on Saturday, if should have been done by now why 2 days later and 2 days from the window closing are we still waiting.
Its so that little bit of hope inside can start building as we begin to think Grant is potentially staying and then BAM!!... deal confirmed
In a career that lasts 25 years at the very most, and could end any minute, you would take x4 the amount of your weekly wage if you could
25 years?
I doubt if the average Football League player's career with a good wage lasts much more than eight years. Most start earning decent money around 22 and are finished at 30. Of course, many go on well into their thirties, but just as many lose form or fitness and are finished at Football League level by their mid- or late-twenties.
I wonder how many of those who are criticising Grant for taking his chance are youngsters living off their parents, grants or the dole. Most people who have had to work hard for their money, maybe with the constant threat of redundancy or of an inhibiting illness or injury, would know exactly why he would be a fool not to grab the chance.
That’s why I said at most. Goalkeepers for example
It's short termism, but I would rather we get someone with higher quality on loan than less reliable quality permanently. We need to get out of this division, so yes we will have an even more depleted squad in the summer and will have to rebuild, but I'd rather increase the chances of rebuilding from the Championship than having one less spot to fill in League One.
Also, I don't really know what type of forward we would be able to actually buy at this stage of the window anyway. Prices will be massively inflated because the other team most likely won't have time to replace him--and that's assuming a player is even for sale. So you might end up spending all of the Karlan money just to get a decent League One level striker in, which to me is bad business. Better we loan someone from the Championship who is of high end League One/Championship quality.
Lastly, for all of his faults, I don't think Roland can be blamed too much for selling a player for a seven figure sum when we're in League One. Ditto, to *some* extent, if we don't buy a new striker. But moreso to the first point, the mistake was made in the summer not tying Karlan down to a new deal. Same went through the fall. If he'd signed a new deal, he might still leave, but we would have a much better bargaining position.
This is always the problem with selling players and expecting to replace them in January.
Sure we are probably getting a better fee selling Karlan now than we'd get in the summer, but to replace him we are shopping in an inflated market and will have to pay over the odds, at the very least reducing any financial benefit to the club or owner. Or we will have to sign a loan and, with the best will in the world, getting a player in on, loan at this stage of the season who will come in, hit the ground running, link up as well as Karlan does with Taylor, and get into double figures goals wise by the end of the season... well it strikes me as a long shot. Or we just don't sign anyone, and don't rule that one out yet by the way.
The deals that are done in January, especially towards the end of the window, tend to be clubs desperate to strengthen picking up players who are on the scrap heap at another club - and signings like that always carry significant risk in one form or another, or are big clubs making smaller clubs offers they can't refuse.
Signing good players to replace good players in January is very hard to do. Its doubly hard with strikers, because good ones just don't come on the market often. We've got ourselves caught in this catch 22 situation so many times now, but it seems to just keep on coming around every year.
Bowyer talks a lot about only signing the right players in terms of quality and personality and within budget. He's dead right to do so, and he shouldn't lower his standards, but I wonder if it those standards that will stop us bringing in more than one player on loan - I just doubt that a quality striker, whose, a great lad, and is cheap will be available to sign permanently in January.
But it's not just down to what the selling club wants
If a player insists on leaving by refusing to play or being disruptive, then the club is in a really hard position. If you keep the player, you may end up with a moody disinterested player for the rest of the season, who's a shadow of the player before the bid arrived.
Van Dijk for example was forced to stay at Soton despite handing in a transfer request in the summer of 2017, but was a a shadow of his normal self until he left in January, whereupon he suddenly became world class again.
But is that the kind of player Bowyer will want to sign and are we remotely a big enough draw to get player to do that? Bowyer has spoken a lot about getting the right characters in because the group as it is has "something special" and he doesn't want to disrupt that.
I was thinking more about the issues we have with keeping players when bids come in (e.g. Karlan). If we told Karlan he couldn't leave, would he be the same player for the rest of the season?
At this stage, it will be difficult to buy anyone from a "smaller" club (e.g. an Eaves) unless the player helps force the move as nobody will want to sell their best player now. Obviously it's a lot different with unwanted players from bigger clubs.
I'm sure Karlan wants this move, but the way he played on Saturday did not suggest to me he has been agitating for it or has made himself difficult to manage - Bowyer said he had been excellent in training the previous week and said he felt Karlan gave him everything during the game. I think this is more we've been made an offer the club or owner feels they can't turn down.
I think there's more than just money in this for Karlan too - Terriers fans seem to be expecting him to play. Most if us are skeptical he'll be able to step up to the Premier League immediately, but he gets 3 months to see if he can. If Hudds go down but he scores goals he could be back in The Premier League by August with another new club, or he worst case he's in The Championship at a well run club, with parachute payments and likely ambitions to get promoted again. All while earning a much better wedge. He's being portrayed as just greedy by some, but there is sense for his career in this move too.
Saturday was easy for him, as he could play the match (in his mind) as a farewell match, in the expectation that the move would go ahead a few days later. If we stopped the move this week, I doubt he'd be a happy bunny then though
Those Terriers fans expecting him to play, I doubt they've even seen him! Go back 15 years to when we were in the PL, can you imagine Curbs buying a 3rd division striker?
We signed Mark McCammon from Cambridge United who were a League Two club in 1998/99 Blackburn signed Jon Stead from Huddersfield who were in League Two at the time in 2003/04
They're the only two that I can remember / find moving from this low to the Premier League
Didn't vardy go from banging them in non league straight to the prem?
It's short termism, but I would rather we get someone with higher quality on loan than less reliable quality permanently. We need to get out of this division, so yes we will have an even more depleted squad in the summer and will have to rebuild, but I'd rather increase the chances of rebuilding from the Championship than having one less spot to fill in League One.
Also, I don't really know what type of forward we would be able to actually buy at this stage of the window anyway. Prices will be massively inflated because the other team most likely won't have time to replace him--and that's assuming a player is even for sale. So you might end up spending all of the Karlan money just to get a decent League One level striker in, which to me is bad business. Better we loan someone from the Championship who is of high end League One/Championship quality.
Lastly, for all of his faults, I don't think Roland can be blamed too much for selling a player for a seven figure sum when we're in League One. Ditto, to *some* extent, if we don't buy a new striker. But moreso to the first point, the mistake was made in the summer not tying Karlan down to a new deal. Same went through the fall. If he'd signed a new deal, he might still leave, but we would have a much better bargaining position.
This is always the problem with selling players and expecting to replace them in January.
Sure we are probably getting a better fee selling Karlan now than we'd get in the summer, but to replace him we are shopping in an inflated market and will have to pay over the odds, at the very least reducing any financial benefit to the club or owner. Or we will have to sign a loan and, with the best will in the world, getting a player in on, loan at this stage of the season who will come in, hit the ground running, link up as well as Karlan does with Taylor, and get into double figures goals wise by the end of the season... well it strikes me as a long shot. Or we just don't sign anyone, and don't rule that one out yet by the way.
The deals that are done in January, especially towards the end of the window, tend to be clubs desperate to strengthen picking up players who are on the scrap heap at another club - and signings like that always carry significant risk in one form or another, or are big clubs making smaller clubs offers they can't refuse.
Signing good players to replace good players in January is very hard to do. Its doubly hard with strikers, because good ones just don't come on the market often. We've got ourselves caught in this catch 22 situation so many times now, but it seems to just keep on coming around every year.
Bowyer talks a lot about only signing the right players in terms of quality and personality and within budget. He's dead right to do so, and he shouldn't lower his standards, but I wonder if it those standards that will stop us bringing in more than one player on loan - I just doubt that a quality striker, whose, a great lad, and is cheap will be available to sign permanently in January.
But it's not just down to what the selling club wants
If a player insists on leaving by refusing to play or being disruptive, then the club is in a really hard position. If you keep the player, you may end up with a moody disinterested player for the rest of the season, who's a shadow of the player before the bid arrived.
Van Dijk for example was forced to stay at Soton despite handing in a transfer request in the summer of 2017, but was a a shadow of his normal self until he left in January, whereupon he suddenly became world class again.
But is that the kind of player Bowyer will want to sign and are we remotely a big enough draw to get player to do that? Bowyer has spoken a lot about getting the right characters in because the group as it is has "something special" and he doesn't want to disrupt that.
I was thinking more about the issues we have with keeping players when bids come in (e.g. Karlan). If we told Karlan he couldn't leave, would he be the same player for the rest of the season?
At this stage, it will be difficult to buy anyone from a "smaller" club (e.g. an Eaves) unless the player helps force the move as nobody will want to sell their best player now. Obviously it's a lot different with unwanted players from bigger clubs.
I'm sure Karlan wants this move, but the way he played on Saturday did not suggest to me he has been agitating for it or has made himself difficult to manage - Bowyer said he had been excellent in training the previous week and said he felt Karlan gave him everything during the game. I think this is more we've been made an offer the club or owner feels they can't turn down.
I think there's more than just money in this for Karlan too - Terriers fans seem to be expecting him to play. Most if us are skeptical he'll be able to step up to the Premier League immediately, but he gets 3 months to see if he can. If Hudds go down but he scores goals he could be back in The Premier League by August with another new club, or he worst case he's in The Championship at a well run club, with parachute payments and likely ambitions to get promoted again. All while earning a much better wedge. He's being portrayed as just greedy by some, but there is sense for his career in this move too.
Saturday was easy for him, as he could play the match (in his mind) as a farewell match, in the expectation that the move would go ahead a few days later. If we stopped the move this week, I doubt he'd be a happy bunny then though
Those Terriers fans expecting him to play, I doubt they've even seen him! Go back 15 years to when we were in the PL, can you imagine Curbs buying a 3rd division striker?
We signed Mark McCammon from Cambridge United who were a League Two club in 1998/99 Blackburn signed Jon Stead from Huddersfield who were in League Two at the time in 2003/04
They're the only two that I can remember / find moving from this low to the Premier League
Didn't vardy go from banging them in non league straight to the prem?
Nope; Championship first with Leicester...
Was there for two years before they got promoted to the Premier League
what pisses me off, is if the Grant deal was as clear cut as Cawley tweeted on Saturday, if should have been done by now why 2 days later and 2 days from the window closing are we still waiting.
It's a known fact that the deal will be done just before midnight meaning we have no time to get in a replacement. Tis the way of things with Charlton. The only difference this time is that we don't have Gobbo or Meire saying we tried so hard but just couldn't get the deals over the line. Hopefully Gallen and Bow can work some magic
I don't blame Grant for wanting to move up the ladder more money etc , just think he is not a natural scorer , but is still young and lots to learn . He is scoring goals now because he has one of the best midfields in the division a lot harder the higher you go
Comments
I doubt if the average Football League player's career with a good wage lasts much more than eight years. Most start earning decent money around 22 and are finished at 30. Of course, many go on well into their thirties, but just as many lose form or fitness and are finished at Football League level by their mid- or late-twenties.
I wonder how many of those who are criticising Grant for taking his chance are youngsters living off their parents, grants or the dole. Most people who have had to work hard for their money, maybe with the constant threat of redundancy or of an inhibiting illness or injury, would know exactly why he would be a fool not to grab the chance.
A career isn't just your peak it's the build up and the winding down.
Those Terriers fans expecting him to play, I doubt they've even seen him! Go back 15 years to when we were in the PL, can you imagine Curbs buying a 3rd division striker?
Blackburn signed Jon Stead from Huddersfield who were in League Two at the time in 2003/04
They're the only two that I can remember / find moving from this low to the Premier League
Judas
😀
Steve Gallen have been superb in getting Williams, Cullen etc to cafc, but as expected Grant makes the quantum leap then Charlton face the possibility of playing a 4--6-0 line up at Fleetwood ! Well it's a problem for their CB's who to mark.
The two strikers we now need as Taylor has at least 2 games if not 4 games he is going to miss ( hope he doesn't get injured) the head of recruitment faces his finest hour.
This week is crucial in Cafc finishing in a top 6 place. Top 2 is a long shot because of never playing the same team twice because of injuries or suspensions.
Steve Gallen this is your week. Good luck.
I know, we can all dream.
Was there for two years before they got promoted to the Premier League