Rate our transfer window

[S.F.Sorrow]

I'm not impressed. As always with TK: Too little, too late and too many short term loans that will require yet another rebuild next season. Bascially making the same mistakes, no lessons learned.

As for bargains/value for money... I don't consider this a good thing unless the players are actually good enough. Saving money on bargain Championship-level players when trying to survive in the Premier League may not turn out to be such great value in the long run.

I'm very disappointed. It will take a miracle to avoid relegation with this squad. No cover for Mitro and we're looking very weak at DM (no, Anguissa can't play that DM role). I'm sure the CBs we have signed are decent but I'm not convinced they are the solution to our problems at the back. We didn't get the experienced leader we so desperately need.

If we had gotten the reinforcements earlier then maybe, just MAYBE this squad could have had a fighting chance. But leaving everything too late and starting the season unprepared AGAIN will almost certainly see us relegated. I hope I'm wrong of course.

[RaySmith]

Very good, under the circumstances of such a short time, and  who we are - feel we have definitely strengthened    the team in key areas, and thus have a  much better chance of survival.

[winterline]

still too early to really tell, however I'm not as optimistic, 4

[fcfulham55]

I rated low, to balance the over optimistic views.

Can we stay with these players? Probably not, but its not impossible now.

[Twig]

I think it's too early to assess this transfer window in terms of player quality. We often jump too quickly to conclusions; Hector is a recent example, earlier last season we were singing his praises after lockdown he went rapidly downhill.

We have already had some bad luck with injuries to Tete and Anderson which is not directly a reflection on our transfer business but it certainly diminishes the effectiveness of the window.  I was disappointed how late (as per usual) we did a lot of our business and we certainly needed to strengthen our striking options but on the other hand some of our new signings have shown early promise.  All in all I'd give it about a 6.

[mrmicawbers]

I had assumed reading the board not that I agreed that TK transfer window would get much lower ratings.I thought we generally had a really good transfer window and rated it an 8.My belief now is that some people here wouldn't change their minds over TK as they've been so vociferous in castigating his past transfer dealings.So it's quite pleasant to read for a change that the majority on here currently don't share that view.

[Statto]

I had assumed reading the board not that I agreed that TK transfer window would get much lower ratings.I thought we generally had a really good transfer window and rated it an 8.My belief now is that some people here wouldn't change their minds over TK as they've been so vociferous in castigating his past transfer dealings.So it's quite pleasant to read for a change that the majority on here currently don't share that view.

Average rating seems to be about 6.7 so hardly a ringing endorsement. I thought it was a poor window overall but still scored it a 5. If we don't get a win in the next week and a half it will go down dramatically.

[Arthur]

The big question mark when it comes to rating this window is that I don't know under what financial constraints Tony Khan had to operate. Evidently we could have spent something more than we did because we agreed a fee in the region of £15 -20M for Todibo and then subsequently spent only £5.5M on Adarabioyo and Kongolo. Even so, it doesn't appear we were able spend anything like the £100M we laid out two years ago.

Even if Tony Khan's spending back then was a self-inflicted problem now... in this transfer window, I think he's done well.

In particular, his upgrading of our defence in every position for an outlay of £10.5M is truly incredible. Plus, in Andersen, we have, on loan, an even better defender still. If this scenario had been put to supporters in the aftermath of our Wembley victory, who would have thought it possible? Nigh on impossible, more like.

With our second-half showing at Sheffield suggesting Parker is keen for us to have a counter-attacking threat, the pace of Josh King would be better than the aerial power of Mitrovic, so this may be a shortcoming.

And clearly there are those who regard the timing of our incoming players as a reason to mark him down. We are, however, a mere point behind the 17th-placed team with 33 games still to play. Better to bring in better players later in the window and forfeit 3-or-4 points, in my opinion, than play four-fifths of the season with not-quite-so-good players who were signed early on. (My guess is we couldn't have loaned Lookman, Andersen and Loftus-Cheek before we did - nor do I think, as a promoted club, could we have expected to attract, less still this season afford to buy, players of this calibre on a permanent basis.)

[AnOldBrownie]

If it were simply based on value I'd have given it an 8...and considered a 9.

BUT...I thought we needed one more attacking option and I would have also liked for business to have been done sooner.

As such I gave it a 7.

But we have no idea why it took so long for some players to come in.    Hell...Robinson was done fast has all heck.   And baring injury he's our starting LB for the foreseeable future.     


If RLC gets back to form, I'm going to raise it to an 8.   Right now, he's still recovering and imo it shows.

[Statto]

And clearly there are those who regard the timing of our incoming players as a reason to mark him down. We are, however, a mere point behind the 17th-placed team with 33 games still to play. Better to bring in better players later in the window and forfeit 3-or-4 points, in my opinion, than play four-fifths of the season with not-quite-so-good players who were signed early on.

I suspect those marking him down for timing disagree with your reasoning that signing quality players and signing them early are mutually exclusive alternatives, but admittedly there's no way of proving whether that's correct or incorrect. The "mere point" argument, however, is a bit less nebulous. Firstly because if Burnley win their game in hand, the gap will be 3 points. Secondly because we know from experience that one way or another, the team finishing 17th will get something like 38 pts over the course of the season, and if our target is to match them, then when the window closed we were already 4pts behind where we needed to be. We now need to play like the team in 15th for the rest of the season just to finish 17th. So where we have those threads saying it's ok, we're better than West Brom, Burnley and Sheffield United, really we need to be looking for two other teams that we can outperform from hereon in.

[fulhamben]

Surely the proof is in the pudding and we won't really know untill we are mathematically safe or relegated.  But that being said, Anderson aside as I haven't seen him kick a ball, I'm really happy with the players that we have signed. They have all slotted in well and all look like an upgrade on what we had.

[General]

There are a lot of ifs and buts and unknowns and it's been a weird transfer window as we left it so late in many regards and also had a short turnaround - there's also the fact there are now still areas that are visibly weak - particularly now up front and on wings.

If I was being fussy, I'd have wanted at least one more winger and another striker.

We have signed Tosin and Kongolo permanently - that's a bonus, although I do wonder how many games Kongolo will play, simply for the fact he got injured after two games last loan... Andersen and Tete are also out injured. I really like what Areola brings to the club, seems like a nice guy and Tosin is showing quality. Lemina looks exciting - but where did he dissapear the last couple of games?

It's too early - I went for a generous 7, which on reflection could easily have been a 6.5.

The quality of the squad is much stronger in general, but I can't help but think we're still hand tied by the ego of Tony Khan and how he negotiates potential transfers... for instance Marlon seemed like a done deal, so did Baumgartl... we signed 4 players on deadline day. RLC was coming back from injury, Lookman has always started brightly at the clubs he's played at but then faded, Tosin is a championship proven academy player (although don't get me wrong looks the business on his first showing), but the jury has to still be out even if I really like what he brings to the team and what he's shown.

In order of players that have played who we've signed this summer i'd go

1) Robinson
2) Areola
3) Tosin
4) Lemina
5) Lookman
6) Aina
7) RLC
8) Tete
9) Reed
10) Knockaert

Havent yet seen

Kongolo
Andersen

Bonus is that we have options on Areola, Lemina, Aina and have signed Kongolo, Tosin, Reed, Knockaert and Robinson on permanent deals.

So 66% of our signings we have a say on what happens at the end of the season should we stay up.

[charlesoz]

In my honest opinion, there is something VERY wrong with the way we conduct transfer business
Consider this:  Last night Toney -cost 5 million -scored another 2 goals for Brentford
Having sold Ollie Watkins for circa 30 million and loaned Benrahma for 4 million, Brentford show a net profit of 29 million and STILL have the asset of Benrahma estimated at 20 million
That represents a fantastic profit for a club that has always had a policy of giving lower league players an opportunity then capitalising on their success

Contrast that with how Fulham operate in the transfer market.  Kostas Mitroglou -remember that particular disaster?  11 million that had to be written off
Add to that Jean Michael Seri, Anthony Knockaert, Ivan Cavaleiro, Alfie Mawson, Decordova Reid-some will argue that Decordova Reid and Cavalaeiro are not bad signings but I beg to differ.  Include the ones that have actually proven to be decent signings -Bryan, Mitrovic, Anguissa (eventually) and you can clearly see that a huge amount has been spent on new players and a massive chunk of that has been mis-spent

It's okay for T.Khan to cite logistical statistics as the way forward but I think he needs to take a long hard look at the financial statistics.  Time to get his scouts scouring the lower divisions and unearthing some hidden gems
If Brentford can do it over and over again, why can't we?

[fulhamben]

In my honest opinion, there is something VERY wrong with the way we conduct transfer business
Consider this:  Last night Toney -cost 5 million -scored another 2 goals for Brentford
Having sold Ollie Watkins for circa 30 million and loaned Benrahma for 4 million, Brentford show a net profit of 29 million and STILL have the asset of Benrahma estimated at 20 million
That represents a fantastic profit for a club that has always had a policy of giving lower league players an opportunity then capitalising on their success

Contrast that with how Fulham operate in the transfer market.  Kostas Mitroglou -remember that particular disaster?  11 million that had to be written off
Add to that Jean Michael Seri, Anthony Knockaert, Ivan Cavaleiro, Alfie Mawson, Decordova Reid-some will argue that Decordova Reid and Cavalaeiro are not bad signings but I beg to differ.  Include the ones that have actually proven to be decent signings -Bryan, Mitrovic, Anguissa (eventually) and you can clearly see that a huge amount has been spent on new players and a massive chunk of that has been mis-spent

It's okay for T.Khan to cite logistical statistics as the way forward but I think he needs to take a long hard look at the financial statistics.  Time to get his scouts scouring the lower divisions and unearthing some hidden gems
If Brentford can do it over and over again, why can't we?

yes but you miss out Massive points, yes Brentford made 60 million on two players, but they sold their two best players, and still play in the championship, where as we kept all our good players, play in the prem, and made a hell of a lot more money than Brentford did by selling their best players just for winning the play off finals. I wonder if you ask a brentford who they think has the better transfer policy, what their answer would be.

[Arthur]

And clearly there are those who regard the timing of our incoming players as a reason to mark him down. We are, however, a mere point behind the 17th-placed team with 33 games still to play. Better to bring in better players later in the window and forfeit 3-or-4 points, in my opinion, than play four-fifths of the season with not-quite-so-good players who were signed early on.

I suspect those marking him down for timing disagree with your reasoning that signing quality players and signing them early are mutually exclusive alternatives, but admittedly there's no way of proving whether that's correct or incorrect.

If someone else thinks it ought to have been possible to sign quality players early in the window, I, too, have no way of proving otherwise. I do, however, in the parentheses that follows the extract you quote, endeavour to underpin my statement so that the reader can see my opinion has been formed on more than just 'the toss of a coin'.

The "mere point" argument, however, is a bit less nebulous. Firstly because if Burnley win their game in hand, the gap will be 3 points. Secondly because we know from experience that one way or another, the team finishing 17th will get something like 38 pts over the course of the season, and if our target is to match them, then when the window closed we were already 4pts behind where we needed to be. We now need to play like the team in 15th for the rest of the season just to finish 17th. So where we have those threads saying it's ok, we're better than West Brom, Burnley and Sheffield United, really we need to be looking for two other teams that we can outperform from hereon in.

In hindsight, I see my specifying how many points we are adrift might be misleading; my point is that I would rather we have just 1 point but better players than 4-or-5 points but not such a strong squad. I look to two seasons ago: To what extent our having every player in before the opening game helped us to a better start, I cannot say, but after the first five matches, we were on 4 points. And yet, despite that we are 3 points shy of the class of 2018-19, I rate our chances of survival more highly because I think I see better players in our ranks now than then.

In terms of how we must fare between now and the end of the season, I look at it like this: There can never be more than three clubs we must out-perform in order to survive. They won't necessarily be the same three throughout the season. But the maximum number can't ever be greater than three.

[I Ronic]

In my honest opinion, there is something VERY wrong with the way we conduct transfer business
Consider this:  Last night Toney -cost 5 million -scored another 2 goals for Brentford
Having sold Ollie Watkins for circa 30 million and loaned Benrahma for 4 million, Brentford show a net profit of 29 million and STILL have the asset of Benrahma estimated at 20 million
That represents a fantastic profit for a club that has always had a policy of giving lower league players an opportunity then capitalising on their success

Contrast that with how Fulham operate in the transfer market.  Kostas Mitroglou -remember that particular disaster?  11 million that had to be written off
Add to that Jean Michael Seri, Anthony Knockaert, Ivan Cavaleiro, Alfie Mawson, Decordova Reid-some will argue that Decordova Reid and Cavalaeiro are not bad signings but I beg to differ.  Include the ones that have actually proven to be decent signings -Bryan, Mitrovic, Anguissa (eventually) and you can clearly see that a huge amount has been spent on new players and a massive chunk of that has been mis-spent

It's okay for T.Khan to cite logistical statistics as the way forward but I think he needs to take a long hard look at the financial statistics.  Time to get his scouts scouring the lower divisions and unearthing some hidden gems
If Brentford can do it over and over again, why can't we?

yes but you miss out Massive points, yes Brentford made 60 million on two players, but they sold their two best players, and still play in the championship, where as we kept all our good players, play in the prem, and made a hell of a lot more money than Brentford did by selling their best players just for winning the play off finals. I wonder if you ask a brentford who they think has the better transfer policy, what their answer would be.

Also, had Brentford been promoted they wouldn't have wanted to sell or loan those two particular players and would of needed to strengthen their squad. So wouldn't be sitting on a profit.

[toshes mate]

In my honest opinion, there is something VERY wrong with the way we conduct transfer business ...
It's okay for T.Khan to cite logistical statistics as the way forward but I think he needs to take a long hard look at the financial statistics.  Time to get his scouts scouring the lower divisions and unearthing some hidden gems ...
If Brentford can do it over and over again, why can't we?

Your post makes a very good comparison between two London clubs although the twist to 'very wrong' may be better interpreted as 'different'.  I have also been impressed by Brentford's recruitment over the past couple of years and their capacity to do business without dramatics.  Your critics look to the outcome of the playoffs to weaken your argument which is a little pathetic given we know they are a lottery, and have little or nothing to do with recruitment in any which way, but I believe you make a worthy comparison upon which TK cannot claim any credit.  Brentford were impressive, as a team, all last season, and that appears to have been carried over to this season.  How they manage it should be worth studying and in some depth.  Of course the season is young and Brentford may fall away but there is just a possibility that on their way up they pass one who is dear to our hearts on the way down.   And so I would most certainly say loundly 'If Brentford can do these kind of deals then why can't we?'  What is missing in our recruitment process?

[FulhamStu]

People constantly moan about getting players in late.  The fact is, the players are very often not available until late on.  Take Andersen as an example, he has said, that until a week or so before the window closed he was not considering a transfer out, but after talking to his head coach he requested a transfer and then it all happened very late.  Those of you who think we could have bought top quality centre backs early in the window have no idea how difficult or even impossible that could have been to achieve.   What we know is that we have recruited 3 potentially excellent centre backs, 2 or 3 potentially excellent full backs all in the positions we most needed to upgrade and significant upgrades in midfield and attack.  Yes, Lookman is a forward.   Was it perfect, of course not, a perfect transfer window is impossible because getting Messi for free before a ball is kicked is never going to happen.

Some fans will never agree we have had a good window because it would suggest Tony Khan may have done his job quite well.

At this stage I will repeat that it looks like it was a very good window, however as many have said, until we have seen the players deliver after say 10 more games we can't yet be sure.

[FulhamStu]

As for comparing us with Brentford, they have little money so have devised a brilliant way to recruit relatively unknown players from relatively unknown or small clubs and sell on at a profit.  They do it better than any other club in the country.  Would this suit Fulham, no it would not because we have more money and higher expectations.  Would Chelsea use Brentford's system to get into the champions league, of course they would not.  If the Khans ever left us and we sank down the leagues, yes using Brenfords system would be a very good idea.

[Twig]

People constantly moan about getting players in late.  The fact is, the players are very often not available until late on.  Take Andersen as an example, he has said, that until a week or so before the window closed he was not considering a transfer out, but after talking to his head coach he requested a transfer and then it all happened very late.  Those of you who think we could have bought top quality centre backs early in the window have no idea how difficult or even impossible that could have been to achieve.   What we know is that we have recruited 3 potentially excellent centre backs, 2 or 3 potentially excellent full backs all in the positions we most needed to upgrade and significant upgrades in midfield and attack.  Yes, Lookman is a forward.   Was it perfect, of course not, a perfect transfer window is impossible because getting Messi for free before a ball is kicked is never going to happen.

Some fans will never agree we have had a good window because it would suggest Tony Khan may have done his job quite well.

At this stage I will repeat that it looks like it was a very good window, however as many have said, until we have seen the players deliver after say 10 more games we can't yet be sure.

"Those of you who think we could have bought top quality centre backs early in the window have no idea how difficult or even impossible that could have been to achieve." But I guess you do? Stu, unless you happen to be an agent, player or DoF don't you think that sounds rather arrogant or condescending?