Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] Do YOU expect a player to feature more because he cost a lot?
- Thread starter Bozza
- Start date
studio150
Well-known member
Price is irrelevant (or should be)
Selection must be earned based on performance on the pitch and if out of the team, attitude and performance in training (and for U23s if included).
If continued selection is based purely on value then the non attractive side of playing (defensive covering, marking, etc) don't get done and only result in relegation.
Selection must be earned based on performance on the pitch and if out of the team, attitude and performance in training (and for U23s if included).
If continued selection is based purely on value then the non attractive side of playing (defensive covering, marking, etc) don't get done and only result in relegation.
D
Deleted member 18477
Guest
I would like to see the new big money signings play... but our big money signings are a gamble as we simply cannot afford Chelsea/Barca/PSG type signings who more often than not are proven...
We also get fleeced because we’re part of the prem and because of our TV money, pay a premium compared to the rest of Europe.
We also get fleeced because we’re part of the prem and because of our TV money, pay a premium compared to the rest of Europe.
Perkino
Well-known member
- Dec 11, 2009
- 6,051
A club record signing is being bought in as an improvement for the existing squad so I would expect them to feature more, not initially but after a few weeks certainly.
However, sometimes a player who I adore gets replaced and I find it difficult to adjust
However, sometimes a player who I adore gets replaced and I find it difficult to adjust
BN41Albion
Well-known member
- Oct 1, 2017
- 6,826
I voted yes. They/we shouldn't EXPECT them to start, and they of course should get into the team on merit. But ultimately, once they have settled into the club/Premier League, they should be 'more likely to start' than others if the club have done their homework properly and have paid a premium for the player. Otherwise, why pay so much more for them?
Cheshire Cat
The most curious thing..
Yes, yes they should. Otherwise we should have bought somebody else who is better.
Dolph Ins
Well-known member
Interesting. How much would each of last seasons first 11 cost us now. I am thinking that we were lucky last season with injuries and suspensions and that we would have been stretched with last years squad. This year it looks like we can manage injuries and suspensions with what looks like a pretty damn good 23. Do I think they should go straight in to the first 11? Absolutely not. Are any of them better than last seasons first 11? I have no idea but I would be very surprised to see more than 1 new face at Watford. Wow this really is not the sort of football I ever expected to support. Thank you Tony.
Two different questions. They're certainly not entitled to start because of the fee, but if we spent a lot on a player then it shows that Chris think's they are worth a lot, so we're more likely to think that Chris will play that player.
Obviously we need to take into account that our existing team are worth a lot - far more than we paid for them - so if a new player costs a lot, that doesn't mean they've cost more than our manager values our current players at.
And then we know it's down to how they do in training, and whether Chris thinks they'll do better than what we have.
But yes, the price we pay will influence how we think about the likelihood of a player being on the starting 11.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 36,014
yes, because i expect the expensive player to be a good player. if they arent doing the business in training or on the pitch i expect the manager to manage that.
maffew
Well-known member
Too many other variables. Fitness, prospect, current market, position, time left in transfer window, supply, demand... Wages is a better measure imo
maffew
Well-known member
Actually the question is worded ambiguously possibly on purpose rereading it. A player which costs more should be more likely to start but that's just by logic. The 2 questions are not the same
Amazing how nuanced the replies to this simple question have become.
No is the answer.
No is the answer.
maffew
Well-known member
Which of the 2 different questions are you talking about hwt? Needs a poll
maffew
Well-known member
Which of the 2 different questions are you talking about hwt? Needs a poll!
Nuance implies there’s some subtle difference in interpretation, but the OP contains two completely different questions that elicit completely different answers.
Would I expect an expensive player to play more than a cheaper player? Yes.
Should that player be entitled to play? No.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Read the poll again. It is quite clear. Are you calling [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] a ****?
- Aug 8, 2005
- 27,221
Nope. The transfer market inflation means a player bought for even £20million now is possibility no better than one we bought for £5million two years ago.
It’s all crazy meaning transfer feees mean very little really in terms of assessing ability unless bought at the same time.
It’s all crazy meaning transfer feees mean very little really in terms of assessing ability unless bought at the same time.
- Jun 27, 2012
- 14,612
He signed on August 20 last year, played v Watford 6 days later, and then featured in every single Albion squad for the rest of the season (bar game 38) and played in 31 of them.