| The proposed loan of Fede 19:49 - Jul 23 with 19087 views | oldcob |
to Newcastle. Am I the only one who sees no sense in this? Newcastle gain, they get an experienced Premiership International centre back. Fede gains he's playing the standard of football he wishes. Apart from saving Fede's wages, what are Swansea City getting out of this? I can't see anything. Why would we agree to this?
[Post edited 23 Jul 2018 20:01]
|  | | |  |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 01:42 - Jul 24 with 2304 views | E20Jack |
Laudrups signings were a short term money shot. A money shot which cost the club dearly for short term gain. How many of his signings were able to be moved on at a profit? I can’t think of one. |  |
| |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 01:50 - Jul 24 with 2295 views | Kerouac |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 01:42 - Jul 24 by E20Jack |
Laudrups signings were a short term money shot. A money shot which cost the club dearly for short term gain. How many of his signings were able to be moved on at a profit? I can’t think of one. |
Depends on who is doing the selling.
Michu could have gone for £20m+ - we chose not to sell
Chico could have gone for a lot more than he did.
Bony went for 100% profit
Ben Davies (who we owe Laudrup for developing) should have gone for a lot, LOT, more than he did etc.
Under Laudrup though there was not 1 expensive cock up.
We got our money's worth from all of them. |  |
| |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 02:15 - Jul 24 with 2275 views | E20Jack |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 01:50 - Jul 24 by Kerouac |
Depends on who is doing the selling.
Michu could have gone for £20m+ - we chose not to sell
Chico could have gone for a lot more than he did.
Bony went for 100% profit
Ben Davies (who we owe Laudrup for developing) should have gone for a lot, LOT, more than he did etc.
Under Laudrup though there was not 1 expensive cock up.
We got our money's worth from all of them. |
Michu didn’t go for £20m+ and many blame Laudrup for hideously mismanaging his injury which led to an early retirement.
Bony was Jenkins’ signing according to many at the time. We can’t pick and choose who gets the credit for who. Itay Schechter was signed as well.
There is absolutely no way we can give the credit for Davies to Laudrup. A Rolls Royce of a defender that you would have to be brain dead not to play. It’s like giving Dave Jones credit for Aaron Ramsey.
Canas was an expensive free transfer being the captain in a La Liga side Real Betis who he laughably saw as a replacement for Leon and was absolutely a flop. Hernandez left for free as did Ki who was shipped off on loan to Sunderland wasting a year of his contract.
THe continued loan fee for JDG with absolutely no hope of ever getting a financial return.
So in short a club like ours can’t sign people with the intent on “getting our moneys worth” with no financial return as the hole those players leave absolutely provides the catalyst for later problems.
The above was one of a long line of poor forward thinking decisions that led to our demise, a host of enjoyable poor forward thinking decisions none the less. A bit like blowing your lottery win on luxury rentals and items with little to no resale value - fun, and rewarding in the short term but the platform for future long term issues, which will (and did) develop.
That is without even touching upon the money syphoned off from all sales and ensuring we were only purchasing players under the “care” of Tutumlu during that tenure so he got a slice of every pie. We were financially over a barrel. [Post edited 24 Jul 2018 4:05]
| |
| |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 08:31 - Jul 24 with 2159 views | costalotta |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 01:50 - Jul 24 by Kerouac |
Depends on who is doing the selling.
Michu could have gone for £20m+ - we chose not to sell
Chico could have gone for a lot more than he did.
Bony went for 100% profit
Ben Davies (who we owe Laudrup for developing) should have gone for a lot, LOT, more than he did etc.
Under Laudrup though there was not 1 expensive cock up.
We got our money's worth from all of them. |
Agree but would add scouting too.
I don’t recall Laudrup tenure acquiring players that were huge waste of money such as Baston, or Bony MkII, or a Tabanou, or a Mesa. There are others.
Someone could site Pozuello or a Canas. Poz cost about the same as Grimes. Canas had been watched for about a year. Canas was a bosman. Not knowing the maths on these two but it wouldn’t surprise me if the costs associated with these players was less than the loss on Tabanou, or even perhaps a paloschi
What I do recal is players brought in for relatively small amounts who made an impact that allowed us play the best football we’d probably played in the last 50 years. To win our first major honours. Players like Michu, Chico, Pablo and JDG. These players cost less overall than 1 Baston.
In fact, I’d add that it’s entirely possible that if HJ had trusted the football man that is Laudrup other low priced gems could well have been recruited, improved the club and maybe achieve more success (relatively speaking ) and sold for profit further down the line, in keeping with a philosophy that had served well. Sadly he was fired and player judgement capability drastically reduced. The rest is history.
Does anyone really think that Laudrup caused our downfall? Really? |  | | |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 10:21 - Jul 24 with 2086 views | Tom1912 |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 01:42 - Jul 24 by E20Jack |
Laudrups signings were a short term money shot. A money shot which cost the club dearly for short term gain. How many of his signings were able to be moved on at a profit? I can’t think of one. |
I can see the argument they were short term but I don't think it's fair to say it cost the club dearly.
Michu was £2m and was easily worth it for that season.
Chico was £2m and Hernandez £5m, and we got £3-4m back for both from memory.
JDG would have had a loan fee but again, worth it for the seasons he had for us.
Canas, Pozuelo and Amat would all have been relatively cheap acquisitions in PL terms.
There really wasn't a huge outlay on Laudrup's signings. Transfer fees and wages were being managed at a sustainable level at that point. And the big signing we made-Bony, we sold at a profit. [Post edited 24 Jul 2018 10:22]
| | | |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 10:25 - Jul 24 with 2077 views | 34dfgdf54 |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 10:21 - Jul 24 by Tom1912 |
I can see the argument they were short term but I don't think it's fair to say it cost the club dearly.
Michu was £2m and was easily worth it for that season.
Chico was £2m and Hernandez £5m, and we got £3-4m back for both from memory.
JDG would have had a loan fee but again, worth it for the seasons he had for us.
Canas, Pozuelo and Amat would all have been relatively cheap acquisitions in PL terms.
There really wasn't a huge outlay on Laudrup's signings. Transfer fees and wages were being managed at a sustainable level at that point. And the big signing we made-Bony, we sold at a profit. [Post edited 24 Jul 2018 10:22]
|
Is correct.
Since his departure the transfer policy here has been a joke and has cost us millions upon millions. |  | | |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 13:01 - Jul 24 with 2003 views | E20Jack |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 10:21 - Jul 24 by Tom1912 |
I can see the argument they were short term but I don't think it's fair to say it cost the club dearly.
Michu was £2m and was easily worth it for that season.
Chico was £2m and Hernandez £5m, and we got £3-4m back for both from memory.
JDG would have had a loan fee but again, worth it for the seasons he had for us.
Canas, Pozuelo and Amat would all have been relatively cheap acquisitions in PL terms.
There really wasn't a huge outlay on Laudrup's signings. Transfer fees and wages were being managed at a sustainable level at that point. And the big signing we made-Bony, we sold at a profit. [Post edited 24 Jul 2018 10:22]
|
I didn’t say it cost the club dearly, I said it was one of a long line of things that did. It set the platform. We had almost a whole squad to replace with very little return to do it with. Great for the short term it lasted but it did nothing for the long term future of the club.
What we did receive in that time had to be divided out to Laudrups agent, same goes for what we brought in. [Post edited 24 Jul 2018 13:05]
| |
| |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 13:29 - Jul 24 with 1952 views | 34dfgdf54 |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 13:01 - Jul 24 by E20Jack |
I didn’t say it cost the club dearly, I said it was one of a long line of things that did. It set the platform. We had almost a whole squad to replace with very little return to do it with. Great for the short term it lasted but it did nothing for the long term future of the club.
What we did receive in that time had to be divided out to Laudrups agent, same goes for what we brought in. [Post edited 24 Jul 2018 13:05]
|
I'm no expert in finances, granted.
But wasn't Laudrup getting players in for cheap, on relatively cheap wages as most were exports from La Liga, it's well known the salaries received over here compared to La Liga apart from the top 4 clubs is massive. Surely the money we were getting from staying in the league was more than covering our outlay.
Since Huw took the reigns, we have spunked away massive amounts. You only need to look how hard it is to shift the players we spent £10m plus on. By the time the season starts we'll have Ayew and Borja out on loan with no return. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The proposed loan of Fede on 13:31 - Jul 24 with 1944 views | scruffyjack |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 13:01 - Jul 24 by E20Jack |
I didn’t say it cost the club dearly, I said it was one of a long line of things that did. It set the platform. We had almost a whole squad to replace with very little return to do it with. Great for the short term it lasted but it did nothing for the long term future of the club.
What we did receive in that time had to be divided out to Laudrups agent, same goes for what we brought in. [Post edited 24 Jul 2018 13:05]
|
Do you think that our transfer policy since Laudrup has been handled better then? | | | |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 13:35 - Jul 24 with 1931 views | Tom1912 |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 13:01 - Jul 24 by E20Jack |
I didn’t say it cost the club dearly, I said it was one of a long line of things that did. It set the platform. We had almost a whole squad to replace with very little return to do it with. Great for the short term it lasted but it did nothing for the long term future of the club.
What we did receive in that time had to be divided out to Laudrups agent, same goes for what we brought in. [Post edited 24 Jul 2018 13:05]
|
You said: "A money shot which cost the club dearly for short term gain", I was responding to that. | | | |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 13:52 - Jul 24 with 1906 views | E20Jack |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 13:35 - Jul 24 by Tom1912 |
You said: "A money shot which cost the club dearly for short term gain", I was responding to that. |
But clarified in the same post with
“The above was one of a long line of poor forward thinking decisions that led to our demise, a host of enjoyable poor forward thinking decisions none the less”. | |
| |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 13:54 - Jul 24 with 1903 views | E20Jack |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 13:31 - Jul 24 by scruffyjack |
Do you think that our transfer policy since Laudrup has been handled better then? |
Policy? Yes.
The policy under Laudrup was to sign anyone and everyone that Tutumlu could get his greedy hands on a slice, the majority of which have little to no resale value meaning we were double and sometimes triple paying to fill a position.
I am absolutely against short term signings so any policy that strays from that is a better one long term. | |
| |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 14:02 - Jul 24 with 1885 views | E20Jack |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 13:29 - Jul 24 by 34dfgdf54 |
I'm no expert in finances, granted.
But wasn't Laudrup getting players in for cheap, on relatively cheap wages as most were exports from La Liga, it's well known the salaries received over here compared to La Liga apart from the top 4 clubs is massive. Surely the money we were getting from staying in the league was more than covering our outlay.
Since Huw took the reigns, we have spunked away massive amounts. You only need to look how hard it is to shift the players we spent £10m plus on. By the time the season starts we'll have Ayew and Borja out on loan with no return. |
Everything is incremental. At the time it was the most we spent in one season in our entire history.
The longer you stay at the level we were at, the more you need to spend to maintain it. Whether that is transfer fees or wages.
The key is buying players that you can then sell before their contract runs out to recoup the cash to re-invest. With mismanagement of players, syphoning off of financial deals and signing key players on continuous loans - it really was set up for the short term.
As it proved. | |
| |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 14:15 - Jul 24 with 1857 views | jasper_T |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 13:54 - Jul 24 by E20Jack |
Policy? Yes.
The policy under Laudrup was to sign anyone and everyone that Tutumlu could get his greedy hands on a slice, the majority of which have little to no resale value meaning we were double and sometimes triple paying to fill a position.
I am absolutely against short term signings so any policy that strays from that is a better one long term. |
That policy was partially justified by the fact that we'd qualified for Europe and quickly needed a much larger squad to deal with the extra fixtures. The duds Tutumlu brought in (Canas, Pozuelo, Lamah...) still played a decent number of games for us, unlike the wastes of money we've bought since. | | | |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 14:23 - Jul 24 with 1831 views | Drizzy |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 14:15 - Jul 24 by jasper_T |
That policy was partially justified by the fact that we'd qualified for Europe and quickly needed a much larger squad to deal with the extra fixtures. The duds Tutumlu brought in (Canas, Pozuelo, Lamah...) still played a decent number of games for us, unlike the wastes of money we've bought since. |
Exactly.
Filling gaps in the squad with cheap short-term signings is sensible policy for a club our size so we're not hampered by long expensive contracts tied to mediocrity. All of the "waste" from the Laudrup era amounted to less than the cost of twelve games of Bony this season. |  |
| |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 14:30 - Jul 24 with 1811 views | E20Jack |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 14:15 - Jul 24 by jasper_T |
That policy was partially justified by the fact that we'd qualified for Europe and quickly needed a much larger squad to deal with the extra fixtures. The duds Tutumlu brought in (Canas, Pozuelo, Lamah...) still played a decent number of games for us, unlike the wastes of money we've bought since. |
It will never be justified as it is not, and never was, sustainable. If it was, then everyone would do it. It was a fun period of time, but not a smart one in the long term, which is what really counts. I wouldn’t take it back if course, but also won’t ignore the part it played in our demise. Doing deals with devil, short term signings for short term gain - that was the start of a change of mentality at the club, one that forgot its roots and what it stood for. It got carried away.
Laudrup shot his bolt, he knew that too. Gathered a group of Tutumlus cheap players and ran with it for the short term. To think that is a plan that should be followed is just unrealistic and wholly impossible I would suggest.
Do you think he could replicate that feat? Incredibly doubtful. Which is probably why he decided to follow the cash in the Middle East. | |
| |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 16:51 - Jul 24 with 1749 views | 34dfgdf54 |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 14:30 - Jul 24 by E20Jack |
It will never be justified as it is not, and never was, sustainable. If it was, then everyone would do it. It was a fun period of time, but not a smart one in the long term, which is what really counts. I wouldn’t take it back if course, but also won’t ignore the part it played in our demise. Doing deals with devil, short term signings for short term gain - that was the start of a change of mentality at the club, one that forgot its roots and what it stood for. It got carried away.
Laudrup shot his bolt, he knew that too. Gathered a group of Tutumlus cheap players and ran with it for the short term. To think that is a plan that should be followed is just unrealistic and wholly impossible I would suggest.
Do you think he could replicate that feat? Incredibly doubtful. Which is probably why he decided to follow the cash in the Middle East. |
Who were the short term players? Monk bombed them all out, they more or likely would have wanted to stay if Laudrup was still here. [Post edited 24 Jul 2018 16:51]
| | | |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 22:17 - Jul 24 with 1660 views | icecoldjack |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 13:54 - Jul 24 by E20Jack |
Policy? Yes.
The policy under Laudrup was to sign anyone and everyone that Tutumlu could get his greedy hands on a slice, the majority of which have little to no resale value meaning we were double and sometimes triple paying to fill a position.
I am absolutely against short term signings so any policy that strays from that is a better one long term. |
That'll teach us, signing short term players and winning trophies while playing like Real Madrid .
The price of doing business in the premier league is costly, doing business and getting it wrong, ie, post Laudrup is horrificly more expensive !
No doubt we've taken a scatter gun approach to transfers since then, the overall effect of that has been a dilution of good technical players and an influx of steady eddy nobody types who we've paid well over the odds for.
It's an utter joke and has been for years, it's finally cost us when in all honesty it was almost impossible to fook up what was built by Martinez,Sousa, Rodgers and Laudrup .
It was difficult to fook up a brand ,identity and style of play but Huw with a sprinkling of Monk managed to do just that, thanks guys, enjoy the multi millions made on the back of the Swans.
As for Flaky Fernandez, decent player but it says everything that nobody is really stumping up hard cash for him, early days perhaps, but nobody seems to be beating down the door so I guess that means he's mediocre like most of our squad these days.
Let's hope the championship helps some of our players grow a set of balls though, they were lacking when it mattered last season, though in fairness Carlos also lost his bottle at the crucial time of season.
Looking forward to what potter puts on show, it will be a work In progress for the next few seasons while the club slash costs, it's going to be very interesting that's for sure !! |  | | |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 22:46 - Jul 24 with 1614 views | E20Jack |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 22:17 - Jul 24 by icecoldjack |
That'll teach us, signing short term players and winning trophies while playing like Real Madrid .
The price of doing business in the premier league is costly, doing business and getting it wrong, ie, post Laudrup is horrificly more expensive !
No doubt we've taken a scatter gun approach to transfers since then, the overall effect of that has been a dilution of good technical players and an influx of steady eddy nobody types who we've paid well over the odds for.
It's an utter joke and has been for years, it's finally cost us when in all honesty it was almost impossible to fook up what was built by Martinez,Sousa, Rodgers and Laudrup .
It was difficult to fook up a brand ,identity and style of play but Huw with a sprinkling of Monk managed to do just that, thanks guys, enjoy the multi millions made on the back of the Swans.
As for Flaky Fernandez, decent player but it says everything that nobody is really stumping up hard cash for him, early days perhaps, but nobody seems to be beating down the door so I guess that means he's mediocre like most of our squad these days.
Let's hope the championship helps some of our players grow a set of balls though, they were lacking when it mattered last season, though in fairness Carlos also lost his bottle at the crucial time of season.
Looking forward to what potter puts on show, it will be a work In progress for the next few seasons while the club slash costs, it's going to be very interesting that's for sure !! |
Read my posts posts again.
- It was an enjoyable time
- I would not take it back
- an enjoyable short term period in our history that was designed to be just that.
- It was not a feasible or long term solution. Impossible to continue.
Which part can be argued exactly? It was toxic off the field as a result, and as you would have to expect from such arrangements. [Post edited 24 Jul 2018 22:48]
| |
| |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 23:09 - Jul 24 with 1567 views | TNT |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 00:39 - Jul 24 by E20Jack |
People that keep hamming up “international” center back.
He hasn’t been selected for them in essentially the whole time he has been with us. 4 years ago his last wasn’t it?
Most of what I have read in those last 4 years is how rubbish he is and how we wasted £8m. Now people are crying that he is being taken off the payroll.
Is there a more fickle group of fans out there? Hard pushed to find them if you ask me. Next there will be uproar that Routledge is going elsewhere and how much of an asset he could be. |
Yeah, Alan Knill had the label 'International Centre Back, too'. | |
| |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 23:25 - Jul 24 with 1547 views | builthjack |
Did we make a financial profit during the Laudrup era? |  |
| Swansea Indepenent Poster Of The Year 2021. Dr P / Mart66 / Roathie / Parlay / E20/ Duffle was 2nd, but he is deluded and thinks in his little twisted brain that he won. Poor sod. We let him win this year, as he has cried for a whole year. His 14 usernames, bless his cotton socks.
|
| |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 01:11 - Jul 25 with 1507 views | E20Jack |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 23:25 - Jul 24 by builthjack |
Did we make a financial profit during the Laudrup era? |
-14m euros on transfer fees after a quick look. Not including what we paid in loan fees or what we paid Tutumlu for all outgoings and incomings, which was a significant amount. It will be far far higher.
this includes the sales of Allen and Sinclair. [Post edited 25 Jul 2018 1:24]
| |
| |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 06:37 - Jul 25 with 1439 views | 34dfgdf54 |
Who were the players signed for the short term? | | | |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 07:20 - Jul 25 with 1417 views | E20Jack |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 06:37 - Jul 25 by 34dfgdf54 |
Who were the players signed for the short term? |
MIchu, Hernandez and De Guzman the immediate three with a host of other signings designed to line the pockets of those signing them as opposed to a long term vision of the future. It was about the “here and now”.
If there was any sort of long term plan then Michus injury wouldn’t have been as horrendously mismanaged as it was. De Guzman would not have been signed on a continuous loan and we would not have been signing players only represented by the manager and agent taking a slice.
The whole ethos of Laudrups reign was the definition of short termism. | |
| |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 07:45 - Jul 25 with 1388 views | KingBony |
| The proposed loan of Fede on 13:01 - Jul 24 by E20Jack |
I didn’t say it cost the club dearly, I said it was one of a long line of things that did. It set the platform. We had almost a whole squad to replace with very little return to do it with. Great for the short term it lasted but it did nothing for the long term future of the club.
What we did receive in that time had to be divided out to Laudrups agent, same goes for what we brought in. [Post edited 24 Jul 2018 13:05]
|
You just go against the grain for attention- you are talking absolute nonsense......again. |  |
| Daddy Daddy cool, Daddy Daddy cool |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
