Liverpool just completed the signing of Divock Origi for a reported ten million pounds... that is less than we paid for McCormack. Well, Origi is only 19 and he is really good, I saw him in the World Cup. At eight years younger, he has much more value than McCormack, and will probably excel in the prem while McCormack seems a Championship-caliber striker.
I obviously get that maybe Origi wouldn't want to come to Fulham, but my larger point is that - and this has been an ongoing theme - that we haven't been getting value for money with our signings. I think we could do a lot better and be a lot smarter about how we spend our money. That might seem obvious, but not only because our signings have been busts, but the entire approach is wrong. 092.gif
Quote from: jags24 on July 29, 2014, 08:48:45 PM
Liverpool just completed the signing of Divock Origi for a reported ten million pounds... that is less than we paid for McCormack. Well, Origi is only 19 and he is really good, I saw him in the World Cup. At eight years younger, he has much more value than McCormack, and will probably excel in the prem while McCormack seems a Championship-caliber striker.
I obviously get that maybe Origi wouldn't want to come to Fulham, but my larger point is that - and this has been an ongoing theme - that we haven't been getting value for money with our signings. I think we could do a lot better and be a lot smarter about how we spend our money. That might seem obvious, but not only because our signings have been busts, but the entire approach is wrong. 092.gif
But we will get value for money if his goals get us promoted.
Just like Leeds did.
Quote from: jags24 on July 29, 2014, 08:55:00 PM
Just like Leeds did.
So Fulham = Leeds? Since when??
It's a bit different comparing the two deals though.
Origi is fairly inexperienced and scored 5-6 goals last season. McCormack is guaranteed goals, and probably hasn't cost us near the touted fee, especially not up front. That and the fact he never would have joined us.
Quote from: jags24 on July 29, 2014, 08:55:00 PM
Just like Leeds did.
Leeds had just been promoted from League 1 when they signed McCormack, and he was going to be their 5th choice striker. Completely different circumstances, and they weren't trying for promotion.
Also because he didn't get promoted with, to be honest, a poor Leeds side that means absolutely nothing about whether we get promoted. Completely different situation.
We have to pay more than Liverpool to attract players now. Liverpool is in Prem and Champions league which is a greater attraction to players than us in the Championship
why are we as fans worried at what the Club negotiate as fees for players? It's not our money after all, they give us a team to support and we do our bit. Personally I couldn't give a toss how much any of them cost, just that they play well and are a credit to the Club
Quote from: you lucky people on July 29, 2014, 09:19:35 PM
why are we as fans worried at what the Club negotiate as fees for players? It's not our money after all, they give us a team to support and we do our bit. Personally I couldn't give a toss how much any of them cost, just that they play well and are a credit to the Club
I'm sure the fans of Portsmouth, Blackpool, Leeds and all the other clubs who have been up against the wall wholeheartedly agree with you. Christ.
how can you say what vfm is until he plays if he bangs in 3 a game it will be money well spent, plus 8 mill and you send him back to the his original club could break his leg and not be the same player afterwards. no matter what you pay there always a risk
You can throw numbers around to have a moan but a player is worth what a club are willing to pay.
Remy could go for £8.5M
Messi was a few thousand quid.
It's not always the best indicator
their problems stem from a lack of funds, Fulham are hardly short of a few bob, why get upset at the amount aplayer costs before he's even kicked a ball for us
Quote from: jags24 on July 29, 2014, 08:48:45 PM
Liverpool just completed the signing of Divock Origi for a reported ten million pounds... that is less than we paid for McCormack. Well, Origi is only 19 and he is really good, I saw him in the World Cup. At eight years younger, he has much more value than McCormack, and will probably excel in the prem while McCormack seems a Championship-caliber striker.
I obviously get that maybe Origi wouldn't want to come to Fulham, but my larger point is that - and this has been an ongoing theme - that we haven't been getting value for money with our signings. I think we could do a lot better and be a lot smarter about how we spend our money. That might seem obvious, but not only because our signings have been busts, but the entire approach is wrong. 092.gif
But he hasn't scored in the championship .............................and has he scored 28 goals in 42 games ???
Non !!!
I just think that Origi is a better value than McCormick. If McCormick gets us promoted, then great, it was justified. But the way I feel is that we have a tendency to spend all our money in one lump sum on a player who is already mature and it doesn't always work out.
It would be smarter to pay 2.6mn for four guys like Dejagah than 10mn for one Ruiz. In a small club, the value is not often there. Sometimes, a large expenditure is useful, but often we are just putting all the money on one guy and then surrounding him with a bunch of free transfers.
Or if you do spend the money, then theoretically spend it on someone with upside whose value could increase, like Origi. If we had better scouts then they should be finding us these types of hidden gems. We could have bought an entire midfield for the price we paid for McCormack.
McCormack's down payment is alledged to be 6mil with the remainder of the fee being add ons plus we keep him whereas Liverpool have sent him back to his club on loan so really this thread is totlly irrelevant :028:
Quote from: jags24 on July 29, 2014, 09:34:02 PM
I just think that Origi is a better value than McCormick. If McCormick gets us promoted, then great, it was justified. But the way I feel is that we have a tendency to spend all our money in one lump sum on a player who is already mature and it doesn't always work out.
It would be smarter to pay 2.6mn for four guys like Dejagah than 10mn for one Ruiz. In a small club, the value is not often there. Sometimes, a large expenditure is useful, but often we are just putting all the money on one guy and then surrounding him with a bunch of free transfers.
Or if you do spend the money, then theoretically spend it on someone with upside whose value could increase, like Origi. If we had better scouts then they should be finding us these types of hidden gems. We could have bought an entire midfield for the price we paid for McCormack.
With better scouts have you seen our youth teams!!!! or you can spend 8 mill on origi and in 3 years time he could pee off on a free transfer
Quote from: jags24 on July 29, 2014, 09:34:02 PM
I just think that Origi is a better value than McCormick. If McCormick gets us promoted, then great, it was justified. But the way I feel is that we have a tendency to spend all our money in one lump sum on a player who is already mature and it doesn't always work out.
It would be smarter to pay 2.6mn for four guys like Dejagah than 10mn for one Ruiz. In a small club, the value is not often there. Sometimes, a large expenditure is useful, but often we are just putting all the money on one guy and then surrounding him with a bunch of free transfers.
Or if you do spend the money, then theoretically spend it on someone with upside whose value could increase, like Origi. If we had better scouts then they should be finding us these types of hidden gems. We could have bought an entire midfield for the price we paid for McCormack.
Robert Lewandowski coat Bayern £0 so he's value than McCormack, and Taggart. You can't then accuse the club of poor transfer business
Why are you angry?
It's not as if its your money.
Liverpool have paid for the potential, Fulham have paid for the experience of been there, done it, got the t shirt.
At this moment in time, I'd rather have the experience than paying that sort of money for potential, especially when we have quite a few players with huge potential
Quote from: JBH on July 29, 2014, 09:38:03 PM
McCormack's down payment is alledged to be 6mil with the remainder of the fee being add ons plus we keep him whereas Liverpool have sent him back to his club on loan so really this thread is totally irrelevant :028:
Couldn't agree more.
Obviously this is a strange comparison (Origi was never going anywhere near a lower level Premiership team, much less a Championship team), but every transfer has its own set of circumstances.
Even if we were still in the premiership, we could offer 10 million for Origi, but it's kind of pointless because he wouldn't come.
Beyond that, I don't know why people always ignore wages.
Wages more than transfer fees are what ruin clubs financially.
We do a great job in the youth end of things, but my feeling is that spending our whole pot of money on one guy and getting everyone else on frees is not a good way to go. It creates inequality on the team which could hurt morale.
I just don't think it's a successful model for purchasing players and that's why we've had little to show for it on the pitch. The future is an open book and McCormack will have a chance to be a guiding light - I am still rooting for him.
Quote from: JBH on July 29, 2014, 09:38:03 PM
McCormack's down payment is alledged to be 6mil with the remainder of the fee being add ons plus we keep him whereas Liverpool have sent him back to his club on loan so really this thread is totlly irrelevant :028:
:plus one:
Quote from: bucksfulham on July 29, 2014, 09:45:29 PM
Quote from: JBH on July 29, 2014, 09:38:03 PM
McCormack's down payment is alledged to be 6mil with the remainder of the fee being add ons plus we keep him whereas Liverpool have sent him back to his club on loan so really this thread is totally irrelevant :028:
Couldn't agree more.
Not really, it's just about where you choose to put your money and what is good value and what isn't. Imo, Fulham pay for things that aren't good value. I would rather own Origi who is class and eight years younger than McCormick who can excel only in a second division.
I understood we paid £6m + add ons......add ons included us being promoted, and staying in the Prem for 2 seasons....also Leeds would get a % for any sell on
QuoteNot really, it's just about where you choose to put your money and what is good value and what isn't. Imo, Fulham pay for things that aren't good value.
We've definitely had some hits and misses, just like everyone else. But for all the bad buys, we've also had a number of very shrewd purchases (Dempsey, Dembele, Hangeland, etc.)
QuoteI would rather own Origi who is class and eight years younger than McCormick who can excel only in a second division.
Well, yeah, of course you would. I'd prefer Messi over either guy to be honest.
It's still early, we don't know if we've spent the large majority of the budget or not. It may depend on availability.
The bit that gets me is the fact that teams buy players then loan them back as is the case of
Divock Origi.........
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/28551650 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/28551650)
Its obviously to stop other clubs buying the player.
With Ross i'm happy at least we've signed a player that was prepared to join us knowing that this season was going to be a difficult one in the respect of rebuilding a squad. Where as according to press reports at the time he had other options of fairly stable teams.
Plus Liverpool aren't in our league so not worried about them this season !!!!
Quote from: jags24 on July 29, 2014, 09:34:02 PM
But the way I feel is that we have a tendency to spend all our money in one lump sum on a player who is already mature and it doesn't always work out.
We don't make many big money signings at all, it's just the ones we have made have been unsuccessful. The vast majority of our signings are the likes of Dejagah.
Quote from: jags24 on July 29, 2014, 10:10:14 PM
Quote from: bucksfulham on July 29, 2014, 09:45:29 PM
Quote from: JBH on July 29, 2014, 09:38:03 PM
McCormack's down payment is alledged to be 6mil with the remainder of the fee being add ons plus we keep him whereas Liverpool have sent him back to his club on loan so really this thread is totally irrelevant :028:
Couldn't agree more.
Not really, it's just about where you choose to put your money and what is good value and what isn't. Imo, Fulham pay for things that aren't good value. I would rather own Origi who is class and eight years younger than McCormick who can excel only in a second division.
Obvious Troll is obvious?
Quote from: God The Mechanic on July 29, 2014, 10:43:21 PM
Quote from: jags24 on July 29, 2014, 09:34:02 PM
But the way I feel is that we have a tendency to spend all our money in one lump sum on a player who is already mature and it doesn't always work out.
We don't make many big money signings at all, it's just the ones we have made have been unsuccessful. The vast majority of our signings are the likes of Dejagah.
Ruiz
Stek
MitroGoalless
That's 33mn pounds down the loo. The vast majority of our signings are NOT like Dejagah. The vast majority of our signings are free transfers, and the rest are big money signings that have not panned out.
My feeling is that we bought high on McCormick. It is the same pattern over and over again - to do the same thing and expect a different result is the definition of insanity. But crazier things have happened.
Quote from: Aaron on July 29, 2014, 10:54:15 PM
Obvious Troll is obvious?
Because I don't like our transfer policies then I'm not really a Fulham supporter, eh? S001.gif
Disagree with OP. McCormack is a sensible buy as is our best chance of getting the goals to be promoted. £11m must have been offset against promotion revenue.
Quote from: Milo on July 29, 2014, 11:16:38 PM
Disagree with OP. McCormack is a sensible buy as is our best chance of getting the goals to be promoted. £11m must have been offset against promotion revenue.
Yeah, but he is going to take playing time that could have been used to develop Woodrow and Dembele. It would have been better to develop those two players and have split the money on a CM and a winger, plus maybe a RCB. The structure of the team would have been stronger and all the forwards would have had better support.
Do we want to stay in the Championship or try and get promotion? I prefer to spend and continue to spend which in the long run will help players like Dembele. Putting them in a poor side will only stop their confidence and encourage them to move on to other clubs.
We need to spend on the right players in the right area. We have started to build a squad, we need to spend big money to build a team.
You're looking at this totally the wrong way dude.. Sure it would be nice to be able to spend 10 mil on a kid that has potential and might be really good in a few years just to send him out on loan and hope he comes back a star. If you want to support a club that does that though, you probably need to be supporting one of the big clubs, or Tottenham. Fulham are not really in a position to do that though are we. What we have done is gone out and bought the golden boot winner or the league we are now in. The Championship is a totally different class to the Premiership and you need to accept that. Maybe McCormack wouldn't set the premiership on fire, but that is irrelevant to us, he is capable of setting the Championship on fire and that is what matters. We need to be the best team in the league that we're in, then once we're back in the big time we can worry about the rest.
We have a squad made up of really exciting young players, the leagues top striker, A really solid keeper, Scott Parker who would probably be the most experienced player in the league and a Manager who knows his s@#t. As well as some decent Premier League talent like Kaca (also a national team player) and Rodallega and one of the most exciting prospects we have had for a while in Chris David. If we manage to sign 2 more decent experienced players, a good CB and a good CM we will be one of the most attractive and balanced teams in the league that we're in. On top of that we still have one of the best youth systems in country, if not the best.
I don't see much wrong with our Transfer policies at all. I would much rather be in the position we're in now then the position QPR were in at the start of last season. Sure they pulled it off in the last minute of the season but if they hadn't they would have become Portsmouth. That won't happen to us.
It's true that the team is exciting, and I love the new kits, hopefully Magath will be good. I do like him but I don't fully trust the revolution. I think we need to keep spending. Of course it would be nice to get back up to the Prem but personally I just want to see the club develop Moussa and Woodrow, with Roberts coming in next year.
Developing young players is more important than just getting promoted again because the young kids are your future. Buy vets who play the same position and you hold the youngsters back. Imagine a side with Roberts on the right, Moussa and Woodrow up top, David as AM and Kaca on the left, that team will score a lot of goals in a couple years. Then if we get promoted we'll be able to stay there instead of shifting around. It is better to build a team.
Fulham doesn't spend nearly enough time thinking about defense and preventing goals. Scotty is class, but he is not young and athletic enough to be a major ball-winning DM at this point. We need quality CB's and who knows how the RB's will pan out. I do like Staf a lot, that could be a great pickup. I just want to see a youth revolution and not buying players who occupy their positions.
And of course, I'm pissed about Dejagah leaving!
Quote from: kiwiwaka on July 29, 2014, 09:06:17 PM
Origi is fairly inexperienced and scored 5-6 goals last season. McCormack is guaranteed goals, and probably hasn't cost us near the touted fee, especially not up front. That and the fact he never would have joined us.
But he's not guaranteed goals; 28 league goals last year, certainly, but just 5 in an injury-plagued season the year before, and 2 in 2010-11. Rhodes is guaranteed goals at this level if anyone is. McCormack somewhat less so.
Not to disagree with your general point that we never would've been able to sign Origi after he stood out at the World Cup, but "guaranteed" is an awfully strong word.
Quote from: jags24 on July 30, 2014, 12:07:51 AM
It's true that the team is exciting, and I love the new kits, hopefully Magath will be good. I do like him but I don't fully trust the revolution. I think we need to keep spending. Of course it would be nice to get back up to the Prem but personally I just want to see the club develop Moussa and Woodrow, with Roberts coming in next year.
Developing young players is more important than just getting promoted again because the young kids are your future. Buy vets who play the same position and you hold the youngsters back. Imagine a side with Roberts on the right, Moussa and Woodrow up top, David as AM and Kaca on the left, that team will score a lot of goals in a couple years. Then if we get promoted we'll be able to stay there instead of shifting around. It is better to build a team.
Fulham doesn't spend nearly enough time thinking about defense and preventing goals. Scotty is class, but he is not young and athletic enough to be a major ball-winning DM at this point. We need quality CB's and who knows how the RB's will pan out. I do like Staf a lot, that could be a great pickup. I just want to see a youth revolution and not buying players who occupy their positions.
And of course, I'm pissed about Dejagah leaving!
I'm disappointed about Dejagah going too but fair play to him. He doesn't pretend to be someone he isn't. He has about 4 years left to set himself up for the rest of his life. His options are
A) Stay at Fulham and slog away in the Championship.
B) go to a lower half premier league team and go through the same s@#t as last year
or
C) Go to the middle east, earn an absolute fortune and be the one of the best players in the league. It might seem like a bit of a waste of talent to us, but it's probably the bets option for him. Good luck to him. He can barely get through 90 mins at 28, I don't see him being Karagounis and still playing at the top mid 30's
"Developing young players is more important than just getting promoted again because the young kids are your future."
that's all very poetic and romantic but at the end of the day its BS, Being in the premier league is where it's at. You can still develop players when you're in the premier league. That's why teams loan their younger players to championship teams. Our best youngsters will still play amongst experienced guys and develop faster and the rest will get loaned out themselves. I'm sure Shahid didn't invest his fortune into the club so he could have an awesome development team that sits mid table in the championship that would just get picked apart by the big clubs when(/if) they reach their potential anyway.
You're post seems a little bit contradictory though.. You want us to keep spending bucket loads of money but not buy anyone who will take game time away form our kids. We have some promising young backs in Burn and Grimmer, why do they get frozen out of this youth development team you're so keen on?
I just think that we've already spent a lot of money on attacking players and there is no balance. I am somewhat ambivalent on Burn. Yes, okay, Grimmer could be good, I don't know much about him. But I think our key prospects are attacking players. As the other poster was saying, McCormick is a mixed bag. 29 goals last year but only 7 combined the two previous years. It has the potential to be a massive overpay.
I just think there's better ways we could have been spending our money like giving the defense some BACKBONE or getting a ball-winning midfielder who can also distribute. I get it that all the new signings sound exciting, but the reason why other teams aren't making so many is that they already have their players.
Maybe by the end of the year, we'll be back in the Prem and Felix will be primed for a new contract, and Woodrow and Dembele will have developed into international superstars, etc. But I just don't see it, man. I think we could have gone a different approach. Fulham board has too often approached transfer season like a 1980's Nintendo game where all you need to buy is Strikers and good GK.
In real life every position is important and interconnected.
The other teams, already have all their players sure that's all well and good, but ours were all duds. Hangeland was a great servant to the club and before his injury was immense for us, unfortunately he never recovered and there was obviously some sort of tension between him and the club anyway. I would have loved to of kept Sidwell but is contract was up and he is good enough to be in the Prem, so good luck to him. Richardon, hot and cold, would have been nice to keep him but he didn't want to be there. Heitinga wasn't ours anyway he was on a 6 month contract. The rest of the players that we probably could have kept were average at best and only dragging us down (literally). If it was between them and a mystery box I would take the mystery box every time. We have spent a bit, but wage wise I would say we are still very much in the green from last season with quite a bit to play with.
I'm not sure why everyone has gone cold on Burn, he was solid for us when he was thrown in the deep end and did a great job all things considered and only looked out of place when he was told to play right back for some stupid reason. He was a fan favourite with Birmingham in the Championship and is 3 steps up from Amorebietta. He wins his challenges, is good with his head and most importantly does not give away penalties every couple of games.
Worrying that McCormack didn't score many goals when he was injured 2 years ago is a bit redundant. The important factor is that he bounced back from the injury to become the Golden Boot rather than becoming a shadow of his former self like a lot of players do.
Chin up buddy.
Quote from: jags24 on July 29, 2014, 08:48:45 PM
Liverpool just completed the signing of Divock Origi for a reported ten million pounds... that is less than we paid for McCormack. Well, Origi is only 19 and he is really good, I saw him in the World Cup. At eight years younger, he has much more value than McCormack, and will probably excel in the prem while McCormack seems a Championship-caliber striker.
I obviously get that maybe Origi wouldn't want to come to Fulham, but my larger point is that - and this has been an ongoing theme - that we haven't been getting value for money with our signings. I think we could do a lot better and be a lot smarter about how we spend our money. That might seem obvious, but not only because our signings have been busts, but the entire approach is wrong. 092.gif
I think you're going to have to get used to the reality that Fulham will always be beaten out of the players you fancy, and that we'll have to make do with what is available, in our price range, and want to play in England's second tier. If you want to be with Fulham for the long term, you have to realize this -- and also this: our great equalizer, the fact that we were a Premier League club in LONDON is gone, at least for the near term.
Since absolutely NONE of our new signings has played a league match in 2014-15, I think you might be a little premature in assessing that we haven't been getting value for money.
Saha
Smalling
Apart from the fact that I very much doubt we spent anywhere near the reported figure on McCormack, one thing that has also been overlooked, unless I've skimmed past it, is that Mccormack is 'homegrown' and Origi isn't. Homegrown players command higher fees these days due to UEFA regulations so that will also have some bearing on the price tag.
IF we were to go up this year and McCormack is any good then we have a homegrown player.
Another hilarious thing I read on this thread is that "Origi is class". Is he? I havent seen enough of him to make a statement like that but even if he does possess 'class', who's to say he can apply that the the pace and physical demands of the premier league? Because if he can't, you could argue that we have spent the better money in buying a striker that could get us promotion compared to a player that can't hack it in a new environment
This discussion just underlines the opportunity missed after we reached the EUFA cup final. Our stock was high across Europe. Here was the point we could have attracted some very good players with little investment as players would have wanted to play for a top half established Premier team who were playing in Europe. Another what if to ponder.....
I am not sure whether to laugh or cry when I read this topic. The lack of common sense in arguing that we should have spent our money on players like Origi is baffling. Trust me I can find a list of players who cost less than McCormack that wouldn't consider Fulham for a second, even when we were in the PL. After the last seasons we should be glad to get a proven Championship goalscorer for whatever he cost (doubt it was £10m up front).
Mixing our youngsters with some aspiring signings wanting to prove themselves in English football is a preferred mix, even if we might lose a couple if they are too good for us. This club finally has some ambition on the pitch and even if I don't think we will get promoted this season, I am excited to see where we can go from this newly established squad.
Quote from: jags24 on July 29, 2014, 08:48:45 PM
Liverpool just completed the signing of Divock Origi for a reported ten million pounds... that is less than we paid for McCormack. Well, Origi is only 19 and he is really good, I saw him in the World Cup. At eight years younger, he has much more value than McCormack, and will probably excel in the prem while McCormack seems a Championship-caliber striker.
I obviously get that maybe Origi wouldn't want to come to Fulham, but my larger point is that - and this has been an ongoing theme - that we haven't been getting value for money with our signings. I think we could do a lot better and be a lot smarter about how we spend our money. That might seem obvious, but not only because our signings have been busts, but the entire approach is wrong. 092.gif
He wont excel in the Premier League because he's being loaned back to Lille and will not be playing for Liverpool this season.
He may turn out to be like one of Chelsea's star buys - do you think Lukaku is ever going to play for them.
The on going theme is that we are not a Champions League team but Championship and a lot of players will not come here if there is a chance to go to a bigger club, which means we have to pay the going rate without a discount.
I think McC's experience in this league is very important -rather than an untried, untested player with no experience of English football.
We did well to get him I think, and shows the club's commitment.
Origi would never come here anyway, and even if he did he may not fit in this league, or take ages to acclimatise.
Like Ruiz, perhaps, who looked lost in his first Prem game, and never seemed to adjust.
All signings are a gamble, but McC seems less of a gamble than many we might have paid top money for, and if he scores regularly -what price would you put on that? Especially if his goals get us up.
Quote from: jags24 on July 29, 2014, 08:48:45 PM
Liverpool just completed the signing of Divock Origi for a reported ten million pounds... that is less than we paid for McCormack. Well, Origi is only 19 and he is really good, I saw him in the World Cup. At eight years younger, he has much more value than McCormack, and will probably excel in the prem while McCormack seems a Championship-caliber striker.
I obviously get that maybe Origi wouldn't want to come to Fulham, but my larger point is that - and this has been an ongoing theme - that we haven't been getting value for money with our signings. I think we could do a lot better and be a lot smarter about how we spend our money. That might seem obvious, but not only because our signings have been busts, but the entire approach is wrong. 092.gif
To be honest this doesn't make sense.
We signed a proven goal scorer who wanted to come to us.
I'm astonished people still bang on we paid too much.
What does that matter if you start comparing to players who would NEVER come to a Championship team.
This "glass half empty" viewpoint regardless of the situation is getting boring.
These sorts of comparisons of signings when the circumstances are totally different really distort the place we are in at the moment.
We have made some great signings.
The owner is putting his money where is mouth is.
The tired old team of journeymen from last year are gone.
The clear out was needed
We have great depth with the youngsters.
Lets look ahead .
Try if you can to have a positive outlook.....It wont hurt you to do so.
It might even feel good!
049:gif
Four excellent posts on this page.
What can be concluded, maybe, is that if there's an opinion - no matter how surprising - to be had, there will be a supporter somewhere who holds to it.
"We haven't been getting value for our money".
"We could be smarter how we spend our money".
Since when was it our money? Its Khans. Why should we care how much he spends on Mccormack? If he plays well for us it's money well spent. Mccormack is a proven goalscorer in our division. Origi is a young striker who played well in a few world cup games. Plus, Origi is a first division player and wouldn't come to Fulham. In my opinion, a player is worth what the club that is selling him values him at. Leeds valued Mccormack highly. Spurs valued Bale very highly. Liverpool valued Suarez highly, etc...
Why is it as soon as we sign a player people on this site find loads of reasons why they are not good enough or overpriced
then the second we release them they become great players who we should never have let go or were sold to cheap
If we picked up Ronaldo on a free there would be some on this site that would find fault in it
lets get the season under way and see how things pan out before we start criticising
Quote from: Matt on July 30, 2014, 08:41:22 AM
I am not sure whether to laugh or cry when I read this topic. The lack of common sense in arguing that we should have spent our money on players like Origi is baffling. Trust me I can find a list of players who cost less than McCormack that wouldn't consider Fulham for a second, even when we were in the PL. After the last seasons we should be glad to get a proven Championship goalscorer for whatever he cost (doubt it was £10m up front).
Mixing our youngsters with some aspiring signings wanting to prove themselves in English football is a preferred mix, even if we might lose a couple if they are too good for us. This club finally has some ambition on the pitch and even if I don't think we will get promoted this season, I am excited to see where we can go from this newly established squad.
this is why i just put ' what a pointless thread ' haha . Seems people don't know how football works when it comes to this sort of thing.
Quote from: jags24 on July 29, 2014, 09:34:02 PM
I just think that Origi is a better value than McCormick. If McCormick gets us promoted, then great, it was justified. But the way I feel is that we have a tendency to spend all our money in one lump sum on a player who is already mature and it doesn't always work out.
It would be smarter to pay 2.6mn for four guys like Dejagah than 10mn for one Ruiz. In a small club, the value is not often there. Sometimes, a large expenditure is useful, but often we are just putting all the money on one guy and then surrounding him with a bunch of free transfers.
Or if you do spend the money, then theoretically spend it on someone with upside whose value could increase, like Origi. If we had better scouts then they should be finding us these types of hidden gems. We could have bought an entire midfield for the price we paid for McCormack.
Thing is, a goal scoring striker is the hardest and most expensive position to fill. Only time will tell if its money well spent. You can't just say I want him and I want him. Many things have to be in place - a player will want to go to Liverpool generally far more than he will want to come to Fulham etc etc etc. Also, say it was 7million we spent,l that is nothing these days, esp for a goal scoring striker.
Quote from: jags24 on July 29, 2014, 11:25:02 PM
Quote from: Milo on July 29, 2014, 11:16:38 PM
Disagree with OP. McCormack is a sensible buy as is our best chance of getting the goals to be promoted. £11m must have been offset against promotion revenue.
Yeah, but he is going to take playing time that could have been used to develop Woodrow and Dembele. It would have been better to develop those two players and have split the money on a CM and a winger, plus maybe a RCB. The structure of the team would have been stronger and all the forwards would have had better support.
Blimey mate - why can't we have McCormack plus a CM and RCB etc ? I think you will find we have reduced the wage bill by a huge amount. We have got mney for some players who have left and our owner is worth billions !!!!!
To rely on 2 totally unproven (all be it great prospect) strikers, now that would have been madness !! I take it from your title you are from the USA ?
Quote from: jags24 on July 30, 2014, 12:07:51 AM
It's true that the team is exciting, and I love the new kits, hopefully Magath will be good. I do like him but I don't fully trust the revolution. I think we need to keep spending. Of course it would be nice to get back up to the Prem but personally I just want to see the club develop Moussa and Woodrow, with Roberts coming in next year.
Developing young players is more important than just getting promoted again because the young kids are your future. Buy vets who play the same position and you hold the youngsters back. Imagine a side with Roberts on the right, Moussa and Woodrow up top, David as AM and Kaca on the left, that team will score a lot of goals in a couple years. Then if we get promoted we'll be able to stay there instead of shifting around. It is better to build a team.
Fulham doesn't spend nearly enough time thinking about defense and preventing goals. Scotty is class, but he is not young and athletic enough to be a major ball-winning DM at this point. We need quality CB's and who knows how the RB's will pan out. I do like Staf a lot, that could be a great pickup. I just want to see a youth revolution and not buying players who occupy their positions.
And of course, I'm pissed about Dejagah leaving!
OK here we go again, just because we have bought MacCormack will not stop youngsters getting a game. Its a squad game and a long season. We have a lot of games this season, far more than last. We will need to play at least 20 players minimum. Also, I agree I want to young players to be given a real chance, but they will do better with some experience around them. They will be up against some tough ol defenders and if used correctly can scare the life out of them. A good team is well balanced. Yes focus on youth, but not without some strong characteurs around them. McCormack was capt at Leeds so I expect him to lead our younsters both on and off the pitch. Parker as well and Hoogland/Amorebieta at the back.
Check the original post. I already said then in the OP that maybe Origi wouldn't want to come to Fulham. But we could invest in young defensive prospects who demand less $ and would come. There are young prospects out there whom you can pay 2.5mn for instead of 10mn like Origi. Like Liverpool bought Assaidi.
I hate Liverpool, I just think they are doing better business than us these days. They buy young players with upside and who hold their value, for the most part. Look, we used to be one place below them in the standings, now we have gone in opposite directions. Yes, they had a rabid chipmunk to help them along. And obviously I get that they are a bigger club.
But Fulham would be smarter to spend their money on young prospects - the types who are willing to come here and have the upside to contribute in the Prem. Call it "Moneyfootball" if you will - I just think that Fulham has the tendency to buy overvalued crap.
Anyone who disagrees with me can check the league table - hell, we're not even there!
Quote from: jags24 on July 30, 2014, 11:23:12 AM
Check the original post. I already said then in the OP that maybe Origi wouldn't want to come to Fulham. But we could invest in young defensive prospects who demand less $ and would come. There are young prospects out there whom you can pay 2.5mn for instead of 10mn like Origi. Like Liverpool bought Assaidi.
I hate Liverpool, I just think they are doing better business than us these days. They buy young players with upside and who hold their value, for the most part. Look, we used to be one place below them in the standings, now we have gone in opposite directions. Yes, they had a rabid chipmunk to help them along. And obviously I get that they are a bigger club.
But Fulham would be smarter to spend their money on young prospects - the types who are willing to come here and have the upside to contribute in the Prem. Call it "Moneyfootball" if you will - I just think that Fulham has the tendency to buy overvalued crap.
Anyone who disagrees with me can check the league table - hell, we're not even there!
That is just what Fulham have been doing but picking up players at a slightly younger age. That is now showing fruition with those coming through our youth system: Burn, Burgess, David, Hyndman, Roberts, Williams, Williams, Woodrow and Dembele.
Plus we have just bought Eisfeld, Stafylidis and Taggart, all 21 or less.
McCormack is about the only one in this transfer window that doesn't fit that pattern in costing real money and being over 21.
Quote from: jags24 on July 30, 2014, 11:23:12 AM
Check the original post. I already said then in the OP that maybe Origi wouldn't want to come to Fulham. But we could invest in young defensive prospects who demand less $ and would come. There are young prospects out there whom you can pay 2.5mn for instead of 10mn like Origi. Like Liverpool bought Assaidi.
I hate Liverpool, I just think they are doing better business than us these days. They buy young players with upside and who hold their value, for the most part. Look, we used to be one place below them in the standings, now we have gone in opposite directions. Yes, they had a rabid chipmunk to help them along. And obviously I get that they are a bigger club.
But Fulham would be smarter to spend their money on young prospects - the types who are willing to come here and have the upside to contribute in the Prem. Call it "Moneyfootball" if you will - I just think that Fulham has the tendency to buy overvalued crap.
Anyone who disagrees with me can check the league table - hell, we're not even there!
Quote from: Apprentice to the Maestro on July 30, 2014, 11:38:14 AM
Quote from: jags24 on July 30, 2014, 11:23:12 AM
Check the original post. I already said then in the OP that maybe Origi wouldn't want to come to Fulham. But we could invest in young defensive prospects who demand less $ and would come. There are young prospects out there whom you can pay 2.5mn for instead of 10mn like Origi. Like Liverpool bought Assaidi.
I hate Liverpool, I just think they are doing better business than us these days. They buy young players with upside and who hold their value, for the most part. Look, we used to be one place below them in the standings, now we have gone in opposite directions. Yes, they had a rabid chipmunk to help them along. And obviously I get that they are a bigger club.
But Fulham would be smarter to spend their money on young prospects - the types who are willing to come here and have the upside to contribute in the Prem. Call it "Moneyfootball" if you will - I just think that Fulham has the tendency to buy overvalued crap.
Anyone who disagrees with me can check the league table - hell, we're not even there!
That is just what Fulham have been doing but picking up players at a slightly younger age. That is now showing fruition with those coming through our youth system: Burn, Burgess, David, Hyndman, Roberts, Williams, Williams, Woodrow and Dembele.
Plus we have just bought Eisfeld, Stafylidis and Taggart.
McCormack is about the only one in this transfer that doesn't fit that pattern.
Exactly, we have been acquiring young talent. All the young players coming through now were scouted and in some cases relatively large amounts of money paid.
We need another big name, big money signing SOON. We need another player to argue about and say why the money would have been better spent on a cupboard and a set of drawers.
Quote from: Lighthouse on July 30, 2014, 12:18:30 PM
We need another big name, big money signing SOON. We need another player to argue about and say why the money would have been better spent on a cupboard and a set of drawers.
:005: :005:
Everyone can argue/ debate as much as they like, fact is the window is not shut yet and whose to say we won't bring in another 2 or 3 .
Once again I don't know why the original poster is "angry" it's not his money being spent.
I still don't believe we can't attract decent players being in the Championship.
Especially good young players.
Being in London certainly help, don't under estimate the pulling power of the club, who had thought Chris Coleman would of signed when he did, and the likes of Tigana and Keegan becoming our managers, all of which happened when we wasn't in the Prem
Christ how are people still arguing about this.
1) Its nothing like an 11m up front fee
2) We've bought the closest we can to guarenteed goals in his division - the guy who was top scorer in the division last season
3) We have shed loads of money
We've signed a top player - cheer up!
Quote from: Lighthouse on July 30, 2014, 12:18:30 PM
We need another big name, big money signing SOON. We need another player to argue about and say why the money would have been better spent on a cupboard and a set of drawers.
:005:
Well done Lighthouse.
It is an indication of how far a thread is off target when Lighthouse can see the funny side and make a good joke about it.
Quote from: jags24 on July 30, 2014, 11:23:12 AM
There are young prospects out there whom you can pay 2.5mn for instead of 10mn like Origi. Like Liverpool bought Assaidi.
I hate Liverpool, I just think they are doing better business than us these days. They buy young players with upside and who hold their value, for the most part.
While agreeing with Lighthouse and AttM, I still want to point out the irony of your choice of Assaidi as an example of Liverpool's 'better business'.
We tried to sign him. If some media reports at the time are to be believed, the player even came over from the Netherlands to look at our facilities at Motspur Park.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2188963/Fulham-want-Heerenveens-Oussama-Assaidi.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2188963/Fulham-want-Heerenveens-Oussama-Assaidi.html)
A couple of days later, he signed for Liverpool. Your own example actually serves to reinforce the point that other contributors to this thread have pointed out (and which you are trying to argue against): many a good foreign player will overlook us in favour of a Club with a higher profile; we, therefore, have to do our transfer business within a more limited market; other clubs, moreover, know this and negotiate accordingly.
I´m quite laid back at the moment. We have spent a little but recouped that with players sold. We have shed loads of cash to spend in this window & in January. We have got rid of all the rubbish from last season together with their high wages. We only have 2 players over 30. The rebuild has started but there is no instant cure of our non investment over the last few years. Onwards & upwards.
Jags, many can see the point you're making, we need good players without losing an arm and a leg, but to compare our recent signings with what Liverpool are doing in the market is just the chalk vs cheese argument.
Players are willing to reduce their demands to get into a team like Liverpool, Arsenal, Man City etc simply because they know that, given the chance to play, they could achieve some level of success and exposure meaning they can move on the season after for more money elsewhere.
Compared to Fulham, not so much. We sign players that we need to get back into the top flight, but they don't come cheap, and they have a lot less chance to shine in the fizzy league for a quick pay-day. If we have to spend 10 Mill on a player that knocks the goals in for us, rather than on two that might or might not be good enough, then I would go for the former. Even when we were in the Prem, we were not on the same level as the top teams when it comes to transfers, either financially or otherwise.
Quote from: SouthfieldWhite on July 29, 2014, 09:42:06 PM
Why are you angry?
It's not as if its your money.
Liverpool have paid for the potential, Fulham have paid for the experience of been there, done it, got the t shirt.
At this moment in time, I'd rather have the experience than paying that sort of money for potential, especially when we have quite a few players with huge potential
my take on it is that i highly doubt we are going to recoup the cost of buying him, outside of the money he brings in by scoring(e.g. promotion) oriogi is very young and looks to have a lot of potential. theres a much better chance of him becoming a much better player and which time liverpool can sell him off for a fee much higher than they paid and re invest in the team. Fulham probably wont be able to do that with mccormack, as he's 28 and most strikers peak between 26-29, save for the large aerial duelist. It's not my money but i would like to see the team not throw away money so readily.
Quote from: Mokes on July 29, 2014, 11:47:45 PM
You're looking at this totally the wrong way dude.. Sure it would be nice to be able to spend 10 mil on a kid that has potential and might be really good in a few years just to send him out on loan and hope he comes back a star. If you want to support a club that does that though, you probably need to be supporting one of the big clubs, or Tottenham. Fulham are not really in a position to do that though are we. What we have done is gone out and bought the golden boot winner or the league we are now in. The Championship is a totally different class to the Premiership and you need to accept that. Maybe McCormack wouldn't set the premiership on fire, but that is irrelevant to us, he is capable of setting the Championship on fire and that is what matters. We need to be the best team in the league that we're in, then once we're back in the big time we can worry about the rest.
We have a squad made up of really exciting young players, the leagues top striker, A really solid keeper, Scott Parker who would probably be the most experienced player in the league and a Manager who knows his s@#t. As well as some decent Premier League talent like Kaca (also a national team player) and Rodallega and one of the most exciting prospects we have had for a while in Chris David. If we manage to sign 2 more decent experienced players, a good CB and a good CM we will be one of the most attractive and balanced teams in the league that we're in. On top of that we still have one of the best youth systems in country, if not the best.
I don't see much wrong with our Transfer policies at all. I would much rather be in the position we're in now then the position QPR were in at the start of last season. Sure they pulled it off in the last minute of the season but if they hadn't they would have become Portsmouth. That won't happen to us.
i agree that mccormack has the ability to set the champ on fire, but i worry if he's starting his decline. he's got a lot less potential upside than a younger striker, but the same amount of risk. i will be happy as a clam if mccormack scores bags of goals, but i worry about the future sale of him to another team, and what that realistically is costing us.
Quote from: eloc on July 30, 2014, 07:24:44 PM
Quote from: SouthfieldWhite on July 29, 2014, 09:42:06 PM
Why are you angry?
It's not as if its your money.
Liverpool have paid for the potential, Fulham have paid for the experience of been there, done it, got the t shirt.
At this moment in time, I'd rather have the experience than paying that sort of money for potential, especially when we have quite a few players with huge potential
my take on it is that i highly doubt we are going to recoup the cost of buying him, outside of the money he brings in by scoring(e.g. promotion) oriogi is very young and looks to have a lot of potential. theres a much better chance of him becoming a much better player and which time liverpool can sell him off for a fee much higher than they paid and re invest in the team. Fulham probably wont be able to do that with mccormack, as he's 28 and most strikers peak between 26-29, save for the large aerial duelist. It's not my money but i would like to see the team not throw away money so readily.
i can't believe what i have just read. Mccormack in decline already. have a word
Jags24 ...........are you still angry
or just mildly annoyed ???
Different market. The promise of massive bonuses upon promotion essentially changes the value of a player. In PL terms, McCormack isn't a £7 million striker because of his inexperience in the division. However, if you're a Championship side in need of a goal scorer, players like him are worth as much as you have to pay for them.
McCormack wasn't brought in to be later sold on for a profit.
1 - I don't understand most tramsfer prices
2 - it didn't come out my pocket. As long as it doesn't financially crumble the club then so be it! Even better if he bags another 20+ goals.
I am loving the new squad personally. A few more additions and I will be over the moon.
Quote from: Sammyffc on July 30, 2014, 08:23:11 PM
Quote from: eloc on July 30, 2014, 07:24:44 PM
Quote from: SouthfieldWhite on July 29, 2014, 09:42:06 PM
Why are you angry?
It's not as if its your money.
Liverpool have paid for the potential, Fulham have paid for the experience of been there, done it, got the t shirt.
At this moment in time, I'd rather have the experience than paying that sort of money for potential, especially when we have quite a few players with huge potential
my take on it is that i highly doubt we are going to recoup the cost of buying him, outside of the money he brings in by scoring(e.g. promotion) oriogi is very young and looks to have a lot of potential. theres a much better chance of him becoming a much better player and which time liverpool can sell him off for a fee much higher than they paid and re invest in the team. Fulham probably wont be able to do that with mccormack, as he's 28 and most strikers peak between 26-29, save for the large aerial duelist. It's not my money but i would like to see the team not throw away money so readily.
i can't believe what i have just read. Mccormack in decline already. have a word
its not as if its not true... i dont think we will ever recoup the money spent to bring him here if we sell him off.
Quote from: EJL on July 30, 2014, 11:02:26 PM
McCormack wasn't brought in to be later sold on for a profit.
that's the problem i have with it in general. We buy players who arent likely to grow in the future, and arent likely to raise their value enough to counter the loss incurred by their advancing age.
There's also no guarantee Origi would even sign with us.
Quote from: eloc on July 31, 2014, 03:02:45 AM
Quote from: Sammyffc on July 30, 2014, 08:23:11 PM
Quote from: eloc on July 30, 2014, 07:24:44 PM
Quote from: SouthfieldWhite on July 29, 2014, 09:42:06 PM
Why are you angry?
It's not as if its your money.
Liverpool have paid for the potential, Fulham have paid for the experience of been there, done it, got the t shirt.
At this moment in time, I'd rather have the experience than paying that sort of money for potential, especially when we have quite a few players with huge potential
my take on it is that i highly doubt we are going to recoup the cost of buying him, outside of the money he brings in by scoring(e.g. promotion) oriogi is very young and looks to have a lot of potential. theres a much better chance of him becoming a much better player and which time liverpool can sell him off for a fee much higher than they paid and re invest in the team. Fulham probably wont be able to do that with mccormack, as he's 28 and most strikers peak between 26-29, save for the large aerial duelist. It's not my money but i would like to see the team not throw away money so readily.
i can't believe what i have just read. Mccormack in decline already. have a word
its not as if its not true... i dont think we will ever recoup the money spent to bring him here if we sell him off.
Quote from: EJL on July 30, 2014, 11:02:26 PM
McCormack wasn't brought in to be later sold on for a profit.
that's the problem i have with it in general. We buy players who arent likely to grow in the future, and arent likely to raise their value enough to counter the loss incurred by their advancing age.
What, like Hutchinson or Burn or Eisfeld or Tunnicliffe or Woodrow or Williams or Taggard - I could go on. Blimey, there are some fans with one eyed glass half empty minds around. Most people are saying we lack experience. So we buy the leagues top goalscorer and captain of Leeds with perfect Championship experience and people say we paid too much. Can I suggest you worry about something a bit more worrying, like will it rain all day today or not.
Quote from: btings on July 31, 2014, 03:06:14 AM
There's also no guarantee Origi would even sign with us.
Since he's been loaned back to Lille - there is no guarantee that he will ever play for Liverpool
He's been brought to add to their inventory not to play for them
Quote from: Putney on July 29, 2014, 09:21:23 PM
Quote from: you lucky people on July 29, 2014, 09:19:35 PM
why are we as fans worried at what the Club negotiate as fees for players? It's not our money after all, they give us a team to support and we do our bit. Personally I couldn't give a toss how much any of them cost, just that they play well and are a credit to the Club
I'm sure the fans of Portsmouth, Blackpool, Leeds and all the other clubs who have been up against the wall wholeheartedly agree with you. Christ.
0001.jpeg
An interesting read and some excellent points made by everyone.
All just a touch pointless though isn't it? The author's views clearly wont be swayed - fair play to him.
Stunning that people still say things like "it's not our money, who cares what we pay". It's almost like FFP never existed, and that QPR don't face a £50m fine and wouldn't have had points deducted had they not been promoted (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/queens-park-rangers/10855407/QPR-chairman-Tony-Fernandes-vows-to-fight-potential-50m-FFP-fine-after-learning-from-past-mistakes.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/queens-park-rangers/10855407/QPR-chairman-Tony-Fernandes-vows-to-fight-potential-50m-FFP-fine-after-learning-from-past-mistakes.html)).
Quote from: SKSW6 on August 01, 2014, 10:42:50 AM
Stunning that people still say things like "it's not our money, who cares what we pay". It's almost like FFP never existed, and that QPR don't face a £50m fine and wouldn't have had points deducted had they not been promoted (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/queens-park-rangers/10855407/QPR-chairman-Tony-Fernandes-vows-to-fight-potential-50m-FFP-fine-after-learning-from-past-mistakes.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/queens-park-rangers/10855407/QPR-chairman-Tony-Fernandes-vows-to-fight-potential-50m-FFP-fine-after-learning-from-past-mistakes.html)).
Yes that is all well and good. But it is the sustainability and the lack of investment that now sees a once established for thirteen seasons team, relegated. Now having to rebuild a new squad. So there has to be half way point where we don't want to go mad with over payments. But not be too hung up on them. Well run and not worrying about fines has brought is to the Championship.
The club needs to invest in good players but that need not involve large amounts of money.
Rather, if you look back over recent history, the players who have disappointed most and have not made their mark have been the expensive signings (Marlet, Johnson, Ruiz, Mitroglou) or are supposedly on high wages (Parker) whereas more modest signings have formed to core of our team (Schwarzer, Hangeland, Murphy).
We may have paid a lot for McCormack but by the end of this window we will probably be in profit in terms of transfer dealings and will have reduced the wage bill significantly (unless we spash a significant sum on a CM).
Sorry to have bailed on the thread - I didn't mean to - I had a business trip. Anyways, I guess I made a controversial post here, but to summarize I would say that I am within my rights to criticize how Fulham does its business.
I understand that we sign a lot of 17 year-olds on the cheap, but it takes time to develop those players, and I think we'd be better off spending our transfer money on players in the 21-22 age range as opposed to 27 year-olds because they represent better value on the pitch.
Yes, I am American, for the person who asked. It doesn't mean anything - there's lots of clubs who have chosen to do business in a different manner than Fulham - not just Liverpool. What about Swansea, for instance? Maybe a better analogy...
As for those saying that McCormick won't take playing time from the youngsters... no way... of course he will, no doubt he will. Playing time is an asset and you've got to use it wisely. Giving time to the youngters adds value to the club. They will have a lot of competition from Hugo, Mitro and McCormick.
