[Albion] Enock Mwepu (Retired 10/10/2022)

[Blue Valkyrie]

Propper was in the 25 man EPL squad last season, was he not? Number 14 as I recall.

We will have a 25 man EPL squad next season, will we not? Which Mwepu will be in. So he's replacing someone......

Don't forget players like Moder and Zeqiri stop 'being under 21' and have to be squeezed into the squad as well.

 

[Baldseagull]

Thanks for posting this. Really in depth.

I was watching Citeh’s £63m man Rodri last night for Spain and I thought f*** that, Bissouma is actually a level up on that fella. I’m convinced that Tony has already accepted a deal for Biss (from Citeh, Utd or Liverpool) with an agreed announcement date of mid-July giving us time to find his replacement without being blackmailed by the selling club because they know we are desperate to fill Yves’ hole.

This signing will go a long way to healing the pain of Biss’ departure (along with the £50m+ of course).

I love him as a player, but have no desire to fill his hole at all.

 

[Machiavelli]

Propper was in the 25 man EPL squad last season, was he not? Number 14 as I recall.

We will have a 25 man EPL squad next season, will we not? Which Mwepu will be in. So he's replacing someone......

The pedant in me indicates that his shirt number was 24, as it has been throughout his time for us.
But on to the substance, I don't think that B&HA "always" sign direct replacements. We go through different phases, according to circumstances. Currently, the policy seems to be based around two factors. First and foremost, forward planning (hence Moder, Karbownik, Caicedo, Jeremy whatsisname, etc). Second, and as AZ says, reducing the squad, which largely entails trying to offload players who have been around for a while and will get limited game time and of these some (Propper, Ryan and, hopefully, many more) are easier to get rid than others (Locadia's stench will linger the longest), while also certain others that have been developed internally but don't look as though they're quite going to make it with us (Walton and, I suspect, Molumby, ...).

 

[Guinness Boy]

The pedant in me indicates that his shirt number was 24, as it has been throughout his time for us.
But on to the substance, I don't think that B&HA "always" sign direct replacements. We go through different phases, according to circumstances. Currently, the policy seems to be based around two factors. First and foremost, forward planning (hence Moder, Karbownik, Caicedo, Jeremy whatsisname, etc). Second, and as AZ says, reducing the squad, which largely entails trying to offload players who have been around for a while and will get limited game time and of these some (Propper, Ryan and, hopefully, many more) are easier to get rid than others (Locadia's stench will linger the longest), while also certain others that have been developed internally but don't look as though they're quite going to make it with us (Walton and, I suspect, Molumby, ...).

You're right it was a typo. Lallana was 14 right?

The rest of the point stands. IIRC we may have only named 23 seniors in January (that's what one site I checked said) so we certainly won't be reducing the men's first team Premier League squad as far as I can see.

 

[schmunk]

IIRC we may have only named 23 seniors in January (that's what one site I checked said) so we certainly won't be reducing the men's first team Premier League squad as far as I can see.

Yep.

https://www.premierleague.com/news/2015249

N.B. naming fewer than 25 'over age' players is not unusual - looking at the list:

Arsenal - 21
Villa - 23
Albion - 23
Burnley - 22
Chelsea - 20
Palace - 25 (of course!)
Everton - 23

etc.

 

[Machiavelli]

You're right it was a typo. Lallana was 14 right?

The rest of the point stands. IIRC we may have only named 23 seniors in January (that's what one site I checked said) so we certainly won't be reducing the men's first team Premier League squad as far as I can see.

You have got agreement with your point there and it's certainly not one that I disagree with, as I didn't raise the prospect of the number of named seniors in the squad. Where I differed, alongside [MENTION=1276]AZ Gull[/MENTION], is with your claim that B&HA always directly replace one player with another.

 

[Guinness Boy]

You have got agreement with your point there and it's certainly not one that I disagree with, as I didn't raise the prospect of the number of named seniors in the squad. Where I differed, alongside [MENTION=1276]AZ Gull[/MENTION], is with your claim that B&HA always directly replace one player with another.

The pendant in me says I stated "ALMOST always" and used the past tense

 

[dazzer6666]

I don't know why the club do this with virtually every signing but they do and have done for years now, it's not sudden. It's boring. Perhaps to ease pressure on the rplayer/manager in case they flop? If it's not Naylor it's the Argus.

I agree it seems unlikely the fee is more than £20m...but as cheap as £11m? That also seems very unlikely.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

I think it’s brilliant…….keeping what should be commercially sensitive information to themselves. A long term strategy of not flashing your knickers to the market every time you buy and sell a player makes perfect sense - why let every other club and agent see what you’re doing ?

I do wonder how they pretty much always ensure that nothing comes out from the other side of the transaction though……all very well including a confidentiality clause in the transfer agreement but surprised it’s not leaked more often

 

[Wellesley]

The pendant in me says I stated "ALMOST always" and used the past tense

Swinger are ya? Nod's as good as a wink to a blind bat.....

 

[Audax]

It's pretty much the same as Pritchard though. If you take out the drama surrounding the M25 nonsense, both Brighton and Norwich had bids accepted and Pritchard chose them over us.

I'd still argue there's a core difference. In the Pritchard case, he'd already agreed to join us and then reneged while on his way to sign the contract - arguably, we may have been able to go to court and claim, as verbal agreements *are* contract enforceable in the UK. In the other two cases, it never got that far (that we're aware of). For those more recent two cases, we were merely 1 of 2 (or more) clubs that had bids accepted and could negotiate with the player directly, but the player ultimately chose to go elsewhere.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Swinger are ya? Nod's as good as a wink to a blind bat.....

View attachment 138328

I'm not having a great day with typos. Time to call Specsavers!

 

[Terry Butcher Tribute Act]

I think it’s brilliant…….keeping what should be commercially sensitive information to themselves. A long term strategy of not flashing your knickers to the market every time you buy and sell a player makes perfect sense - why let every other club and agent see what you’re doing ?

I do wonder how they pretty much always ensure that nothing comes out from the other side of the transaction though……all very well including a confidentiality clause in the transfer agreement but surprised it’s not leaked more often

Something always comes out from the other side through. Which is we always see Naylor or Owen "understand the fee to be much less than the amount being reported." Stock line, every time. Seems a bit convenient to so consistently have to say the same thing. It's probably true sometimes but always?

To be honest I don't particularly care that much about the fee, it just grates me the way Barber controls the local journalists and how so many people lap the PR up as gospel (I may have whinged about this before).

Of course BHA would never dream of overpaying for a player, because we are such a well run club...


Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[dazzer6666]

Something always comes out from the other side through. Which is we always see Naylor or Owen "understand the fee to be much less than the amount being reported." Stock line, every time. Seems a bit convenient to so consistently have to say the same thing. It's probably true sometimes but always?

To be honest I don't particularly care that much about the fee, it just grates me the way Barber controls the local journalists and how so many people lap the PR up as gospel (I may have whinged about this before).

Of course BHA would never dream of overpaying for a player, because we are such a well run club...


Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Several examples suggest otherwise………..without even knowing the true amount (whatever Locadia cost was too much) and noone recruiting in any industry gets it right all the time or anywhere close. As many lap up bollocks on Twitter as gospel as do anything supposedly coming out of the club via local journos - the club PR is rarely more than ‘undisclosed’.

 

[chaileyjem]

it just grates me the way Barber controls the local journalists

Club are happy to say when they've broken the transfer record. They did with Adam Webster, and Izquierdo and Davy Propper before that. So presumably they didn't in this case because they didn't. And its not just local journalists who have reported a figure in the £13m-14m range.

 

[Terry Butcher Tribute Act]

Club are happy to say when they've broken the transfer record. They did with Adam Webster, and Izquierdo and Davy Propper before that. So presumably they didn't in this case because they didn't. And its not just local journalists who have reported a figure in the £13m-14m range.

Tbf i just saw £11m on a post above. Where is £14 quoted?

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Barham's tash]

I think it’s brilliant…….keeping what should be commercially sensitive information to themselves. A long term strategy of not flashing your knickers to the market every time you buy and sell a player makes perfect sense - why let every other club and agent see what you’re doing ?

I do wonder how they pretty much always ensure that nothing comes out from the other side of the transaction though……all very well including a confidentiality clause in the transfer agreement but surprised it’s not leaked more often

Whilst it’s frustrating as fans I agree it’s an impressive way of working as long as both sides keep their end of the bargain.

I bet the info fed to Naylor is slightly wide of the mark but is on the right side of wrong if that makes sense for the reasons you describe. The other Twitter bod who broke the news claims it’s £22m with clauses which it might well be - £Xm per 50 appearances, league position etc but I bet the initial fee is close to £13m as Naylor stated.

Expect the selling club forfeit a significant sum in future revenue if they reveal the cost.

 

[Machiavelli]

Whilst it’s frustrating as fans I agree it’s an impressive way of working as long as both sides keep their end of the bargain.

I bet the info fed to Naylor is slightly wide of the mark but is on the right side of wrong if that makes sense for the reasons you describe. The other Twitter bod who broke the news claims it’s £22m with clauses which it might well be - £Xm per 50 appearances, league position etc but I bet the initial fee is close to £13m as Naylor stated.

Expect the selling club forfeit a significant sum in future revenue if they reveal the cost.

Agree and, as to your last point, it's also probably the case that the agent (and player?) have a similar clause.

 

[Questions]

Another Arsenal piece from a few months back, being linked with him. Does give you a breakdown from an Austrian footy journo about what we can maybe expect.

Would love to see him with Biss but is he a replacement?
Start 1:36

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxIkWxBtth4

Couldn’t even get that far… annoying twats

 

[chaileyjem]

Tbf i just saw £11m on a post above. Where is £14 quoted?

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Talk Sport reporter quoted "less than £15m"
https://twitter.com/alex_crook/status/1412462526332342278

Mail quoted "in the region of £18m" in their headline - perhaps they're adding in add ons to make the total figure
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...k-Mwepu-four-year-deal-Red-Bull-Salzburg.html

WeAreBrighton are very bullish about it - convinced that the twitter source that was early in announcing this is correct - but just as some critics argue that some journalists always go with the smallest number. They are local journalists/fans who always go with the largest number. They are often highly critical of other journalists reporting transfer fees - normally the ones that check and have good sources - and insist that they are doing the clubs bidding.
http://www.wearebrighton.com/newsop...sfer-record-to-sign-the-computer-enock-mwepu/

 

[Terry Butcher Tribute Act]

Talk Sport reporter quoted "less than £15m"
https://twitter.com/alex_crook/status/1412462526332342278

£15m ish seems a bit more realistic.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk