Natasha Whittam wrote:y2johnny wrote:I know. I know. But then i didnt know you and sluffy where the same either
He bloody wishes. He'd kill to fill my arse.

Natasha Whittam wrote:y2johnny wrote:I know. I know. But then i didnt know you and sluffy where the same either
He bloody wishes. He'd kill to fill my arse.
I would imagine they are deep in negotiations trying to sort the squad out and hopefully bring in some talent, so I guess there's not much to say until it's sorted out.Growler wrote:We've gone 10 days without a message from Ken, have the words of wisdom come to an end? We got 5 essays to read in the 17 days before that.
boltonbonce wrote:Be loud,be proud,and get spending in Bolton Central,you bastards.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
wanderlust wrote:Now it's looking like Amanda Stanley's bid for Newcastle seems to have fallen through, maybe she/PCP Capital will take an interest in us?
She offered Ashley less money than he paid for Newcastle and there appear to be doubts about her own wealth.She handles £billions of others people's cash but apparantly hasn't proven her own fundsSluffy wrote:wanderlust wrote:Now it's looking like Amanda Stanley's bid for Newcastle seems to have fallen through, maybe she/PCP Capital will take an interest in us?
I read that the bid was dependant on Newcastle remaining in the Premier League - and it hardly look like they will if they haven't strengthen at all in the window so far.
So I very much doubt we are on her shopping list if that is the case.
Sluffy wrote:wanderlust wrote:Now it's looking like Amanda Stanley's bid for Newcastle seems to have fallen through, maybe she/PCP Capital will take an interest in us?
I read that the bid was dependant on Newcastle remaining in the Premier League - and it hardly look like they will if they haven't strengthen at all in the window so far.
So I very much doubt we are on her shopping list if that is the case.
T.R.O.Y wrote:Sluffy wrote:wanderlust wrote:Now it's looking like Amanda Stanley's bid for Newcastle seems to have fallen through, maybe she/PCP Capital will take an interest in us?
I read that the bid was dependant on Newcastle remaining in the Premier League - and it hardly look like they will if they haven't strengthen at all in the window so far.
So I very much doubt we are on her shopping list if that is the case.
Where have you read that Sluffy? From what I’ve read her bid fell short of what Ashley was after.
With 5 new players coming in Ken seems to have changed his mind from 6 weeks ago, when he was talking about reducing the squad size.A bullshitter, albeit an articulate one, who makes it up as he goes along would be one way of describing itSluffy wrote:
Experience has taught me that January is not the best time to bring new faces in, as unlike the summer window when you have the pre-season to settle them in and become familiar with their new team mates, there is not sufficient time in January for this.
Basically, they have to be ready and able to hit the ground running and settle in immediately, which is not always possible if they have not been playing regularly and they need time to get match fit and sharp.
In our current situation this has never been more important, as we already have an eligible squad of 33 players and l have to weigh up the ability of the manager being able to manage a squad of this size, let alone increase it and still keep the players happy when they are not being selected for the matchday squad.
A great deal of managers at all levels have commented on this over the years and generally speaking, the conventional wisdom is that 23/24 is a maximum ideal squad size.
I have set the ground rules running along the lines that any new player coming in has to be match fit and ready to challenge for a berth in the match day squad and to enhance immediately the quality we already have.
We don’t have the luxury of taking our time to acclimatise them or get them match fit.
I have made it absolutely clear to the manager that we need to have a balanced and manageable squad and before l can consider bringing players in he will need to trim the current squad size of those who have had little or no game time of late
Kind regards,
Ken
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Last edited by Growler on Thu Feb 01 2018, 13:56; edited 1 time in total
My guess is he tried to move players on, but failed... hence, the larger squad. Let's hope Parky can motivate these players and help us finish one point or more ahead of the relegation zone.Growler wrote:With 5 new players coming in Ken seems to have changed his mind from 6 weeks ago, when he was talking about reducing the squad size.A bullshitter, albeit an articulate one, who makes it up as he goes along would be one way of describing itSluffy wrote:
Experience has taught me that January is not the best time to bring new faces in, as unlike the summer window when you have the pre-season to settle them in and become familiar with their new team mates, there is not sufficient time in January for this.
Basically, they have to be ready and able to hit the ground running and settle in immediately, which is not always possible if they have not been playing regularly and they need time to get match fit and sharp.
In our current situation this has never been more important, as we already have an eligible squad of 33 players and l have to weigh up the ability of the manager being able to manage a squad of this size, let alone increase it and still keep the players happy when they are not being selected for the matchday squad.
A great deal of managers at all levels have commented on this over the years and generally speaking, the conventional wisdom is that 23/24 is a maximum ideal squad size.
I have set the ground rules running along the lines that any new player coming in has to be match fit and ready to challenge for a berth in the match day squad and to enhance immediately the quality we already have.
We don’t have the luxury of taking our time to acclimatise them or get them match fit.
I have made it absolutely clear to the manager that we need to have a balanced and manageable squad and before l can consider bringing players in he will need to trim the current squad size of those who have had little or no game time of late
Kind regards,
Ken
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Growler wrote:With 5 new players coming in Ken seems to have changed his mind from 6 weeks ago, when he was talking about reducing the squad size.A bullshitter, albeit an articulate one, who makes it up as he goes along would be one way of describing itSluffy wrote:
Experience has taught me that January is not the best time to bring new faces in, as unlike the summer window when you have the pre-season to settle them in and become familiar with their new team mates, there is not sufficient time in January for this.
Basically, they have to be ready and able to hit the ground running and settle in immediately, which is not always possible if they have not been playing regularly and they need time to get match fit and sharp.
In our current situation this has never been more important, as we already have an eligible squad of 33 players and l have to weigh up the ability of the manager being able to manage a squad of this size, let alone increase it and still keep the players happy when they are not being selected for the matchday squad.
A great deal of managers at all levels have commented on this over the years and generally speaking, the conventional wisdom is that 23/24 is a maximum ideal squad size.
I have set the ground rules running along the lines that any new player coming in has to be match fit and ready to challenge for a berth in the match day squad and to enhance immediately the quality we already have.
We don’t have the luxury of taking our time to acclimatise them or get them match fit.
I have made it absolutely clear to the manager that we need to have a balanced and manageable squad and before l can consider bringing players in he will need to trim the current squad size of those who have had little or no game time of late
Kind regards,
Ken
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
If you had said someone would have offered 6 million quid for Madine a few months ago... you would have thought we found an insane buyer, and grabbed the money. Madine scored more than anyone for us in quite some time... but he missed probably twice that number this season alone. If anyone thinks KA should not have taken a number like that, should be committed to an asylum. Madine probably should have had 15-20 already... how many sitters has he missed... or skied? So he had a hot streak... that doesn't forecast what he will do in the second half of the season. ITK says we have a striker lined up. The aim this season is to finish at least one point ahead of the bottom three. Is KA entitled to take the money and try to keep us up and sell on? Of course... he kept us from going under. If we are under embargo or not, it is his club. But as Sluffy accurately says, KA stands to make more by staying up. But please don't criticise KA for cashing in on a player we paid nothing for. Let's instead hope he uses that money to help us stay up with a free agent or two. I'll just be happy if we survive this season.Sluffy wrote:I'm not trying to be condescending but when you ever negotiate anything you don't simply lay all your cards out on the table first.
Anderson, like any competent negotiator will spin, misdirect, evade, mislead and everything else it takes to get himself the upper hand in his dealings.
Also there is a dynamic to the process - the circumstances and positions people had six weeks ago have changed - in some instances massively - up to the present time.
Of course nothing I will ever say will change the mind of the anti-Anderson supporters - but if Anderson had said nothing six weeks ago and sold a striker for £6 million down (or that is what I'm reading into what Ken says above), someone who is admittedly playing well - but has been here for quite a while before when he has not - who had put in a transfer request already and wanted away - then we'd all think KA had done a brilliant job.
At the end of the day Anderson owns the club - it is his asset.
If he fucks it up - then he is simply fucking himself.
Doesn't it make more sense for him to find the best way to maximise his own asset?
Madine wanted to go - these days there's not much clubs can do to stop them.
Yes we have a big hole to fill now he's gone - but wouldn't we just be in the same position if he was made to stay and he through his toys out of the pram and reverted to playing shit again?
At least this way Anderson is £6 million up and able to compensate a little bit by bringing some new legs into the side.
Not ideal I'll grant you but its the best of a bad job - and non of our relegation rivals seem to have had a wonderful transfer window either.
He'll be wise to make sure we avoid relegation before crowing about selling the top scorerKane57 wrote:Stunned that he hasn't patted himself on the back at least once for getting such a huge sum for a shithouse like Madine.
He didn't really have a choice. Madine handed in a transfer request. No point in keeping someone on the books who doesn't want to be there. It's bad for the dressing room, could start all sorts of problems.Growler wrote:He'll be wise to make sure we avoid relegation before crowing about selling the top scorerKane57 wrote:Stunned that he hasn't patted himself on the back at least once for getting such a huge sum for a shithouse like Madine.
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum