GolfingGull
Active member
If thats the case ( and it may well be ), better to gamble/take a risk on a freebie midfielder that may be surplus to requirements and keep what cash we have for striker.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Danny Holla Signs
- Thread starter clippedgull
- Start date
If thats the case ( and it may well be ), better to gamble/take a risk on a freebie midfielder that may be surplus to requirements and keep what cash we have for striker.
Gordon Smith's Paperboy
Member
- May 18, 2013
- 57
So, the club is so badly run that it has to rely on selling its best players in order to balance the books re FFP. How do you know that? And, if you are right, and you might be for all I know, then the problem at the club isn't Burke but Barber who is clearly failing to raise revenues from other sources and keep costs at the club under control.
symyjym
Banned
I think it is probably the case or near to it, but agree nothing wrong with free transfers, Swansea fielded a couple yesterday.
symyjym
Banned
Just playing the detective, it is quite probable that last year’s cash from selling Bridcutt and Barnes balanced our FFP target, and with a maximum £3m loss target this season it would make sense that some of the sale funds from Buckley and Ulloa will go towards that as well.
By the way I didn’t say the club was badly run because of it, just hinting to how it may be spent, because with these sales it looks like we have about £14m in the bank which I don’t think is entirely true. At best we may have £4m-£6m available for purchase and wages.
Last edited:
GingerBeerMan
3-0
- Dec 29, 2011
- 8,202
You're beyond retarded, I can only think you're on a wind up now. Firstly, Kuszczak wasn't on far more than £20k, he was on LESS than £20k basic. You admit Poyet spent a hell of a lot of money (£12-£14m in the CHAMPIONSHIP) and he still didn't get us promoted! And now you're using it as a justification to criticise the current transfer negotiations? Surely it should be the other way round: Poyet spent loads of money and didn't get promoted, so spending less will achieve the same target at a lower cost.
Finally, it seems you have an obsession with transfer value. If this guy cost £2m you wouldn't say, "I haven't heard of him, he must be shit". You'd say, "I haven't heard of him, but he cost £2m so he must be ****ing quality". In no other walk of life is it a disappointment to get something at a lower value. You wouldn't buy a house for £200,000 but then be pissed off you weren't able to pay £400,000. Your whole approach stinks of a 13 year old child who hasn't the first clue about finance or football dealings.
If this guy is rubbish, why does it matter? He was free, and we still have the £10,000,000 left to buy a decent striker (the position which costs the most amount of money to replace).
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
Agreed
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
England have won the test match 
Birdie Boy
Well-known member
- Jun 17, 2011
- 4,379
Where did I say £2m for Holla? £2m for Clayton would have been good. Also, winners count as midfielders I believe!
Birdie Boy
Well-known member
- Jun 17, 2011
- 4,379
Wingers not winners lol, although I would like wingers that are winners!
shaunslats
Member
also one thing to remember from this transfer is that he sat there watching the Birmingham game and andy Naylor knew **** all about it...
TSB
Captain Hindsight
How do you know that? What he knows and what he can report are two different things. Bozza knew about this too but said nothing.
shaunslats
Member
Medwayseagull
JCB
A lot of what we have on this thread is a lot of whingers.
TSB
Captain Hindsight
You're probably right but I do know sometimes his hands are tied. Best the club keep complete radio silence about deals, since two have now gone up the swannie with last-ditch gazumping bids.
Birdie Boy
Well-known member
- Jun 17, 2011
- 4,379
How shop you thumbs up on tapatalk? [emoji6]
brighton bluenose
Well-known member
NSC at its very best ~ a post based on assumption on a matter the poster hasn't got a clue about!!
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,624
You may as well give up. So far in this thread, we've heard criticism of the Holla signing because:
-he's "a Dutch second division player" (firstly, he's not, and secondly, the poster who said that would have been sat here with a semi if we'd signed Adam Clayton who was and still is a second division player)
-the Dutch league must be crap because only a few teams win it (wait- exactly like La Liga and the Premier League, you mean?)
-he's available in late August on a free transfer (like...oh hey...Tomasz Kuszczak? Yep, he's really shit).
-the piece de resistance from Kev comes with his assertion that decent players available on frees can afford to wait it out and be choosy about their preferred option, yet, as far as Holla is concerned, it MUST be because he's shit.
Overall, a quite amazingly poor series of arguments here that really are making the posters in question look pretty dim.
For my money: I know nothing of Holla. But he's not going to cost much, so he's hardly a gamble for the club, and it leaves us plenty of cash- we'd like to think- for some bigger signings in the next week or so. Clearly somebody thinks he can do a job, and for no fee, it's a no-lose deal for us. If he works hard, can pass the ball, win the ball, and chip in with a goal or two, then that already puts him ahead of one or two others (I wouldn't say Ince or JFC have started the season at all well).
Give the guy a break: I don't know why but I've got a good feeling for this one. Surely a bargain signing who goes on to surprise a few people is a positive thing?
Hyperion
New member
- Nov 1, 2010
- 5,314
It's the same sad foot in mouth brigade that got a semi moaning about Teixera. Turns out he's a great prospect.
As for Holla, why the **** are you moaning about him.
Please please **** off. I hope I am I'm earshot of any of this drivel at the Amex. I can't wait.
As for Holla, why the **** are you moaning about him.
Please please **** off. I hope I am I'm earshot of any of this drivel at the Amex. I can't wait.