Summer Transfer Window Discussion

[Free Agent]

Lindstrom’s the Danjuma replacement. he’ll get as much game time as Arnualt did last year

[Kerryblueboy]

Lamptey is in the final year of his contract available for transfer would be a great signing wouldn’t be overpriced either

[PoD1878]

Have we not spent 46 million this summer there was some money there to be spent they went for spending it on more production up front which I agree with just think we should have signed a right back or left back cover on loan instead of maybe Lindstrom who I don’t think will play much

We have brought in £72m at the same time, so I don't think there was any money to be spent.

[777Kidnappings]

Have we not spent 46 million this summer there was some money there to be spent they went for spending it on more production up front which I agree with just think we should have signed a right back or left back cover on loan instead of maybe Lindstrom who I don’t think will play much

Minus 4m isn't it? But yes I agree we should have got a fullback instead if 1 of the signings

[Granite]

I think the summer spending plans went out the window as soon as the Freidkin deal collapsed.

[superpull]

Let's not get into the Liverpool Net spend argument.

There is £46m worth of players in the squad that were not there last year and Onana and Godfrey are the only ones to leave that we would expect to see minutes this season

[777Kidnappings]

Let's not get into the Liverpool Net spend argument.

There is £46m worth of players in the squad that were not there last year and Onana and Godfrey are the only ones to leave that we would expect to see minutes this season

And 60m out of the squad (I forgot about godfrey) you can't pretend there's investment when we are in profit. It's not like we are Chelsea and selling some of our 40 first team players. We've barely been able to fill the bench for years

[superpull]

And 60m out of the squad (I forgot about godfrey) you can't pretend there's investment when we are in profit. It's not like we are Chelsea and selling some of our 40 first team players. We've barely been able to fill the bench for years

Nobody is talking about investment or any nonsense.

But Dyche has brought in £46m worth of players that he agreed to and signed off on with the DoF.


It may have been funded by Onana, but that's not fully the point. Even if that was the point - i can't remember, are you somebody who was championing Onana and saying he was instrumental to the team and we are much worse off without him? Or do you think it is no big loss? Because which camp you are in determines whether your argument here is bollocks and defending Dyche for defendings sake or if you have a point.

It can be the case that you can say Dyche has had money to spend (he has and also gets credit for the "wheeling and dealing" we need to stay afloat) and still be willing to justify why he is reluctant to throw them to the sharks straight away.

[Kerryblueboy]

Oh I can tell you he was no fan of Onana

[TheRam]

The reason he haven’t signed a right back is we have three on the books.

When we started pre season we had one winger and three centre mids on the books.

We desperately needed attacking players and midfielders. That needed to take priority.

In our situation we’re always going to have gaps in the squad.

We can’t have four right backs on the books unfortunately.

[blueforyou]

Goalscorer, please: utmost priority - with or without DCL

[Raptor]

The reason he haven’t signed a right back is we have three on the books.

When we started pre season we had one winger and three centre mids on the books.

We desperately needed attacking players and midfielders. That needed to take priority.

In our situation we’re always going to have gaps in the squad.

We can’t have four right backs on the books unfortunately.

We re-signed 2 of those 3 right backs mind you in the summer, on a combined, what, 150k a week? I'm sure there were better free options out there than either of those

[Shogun]

The reason he haven’t signed a right back is we have three on the books.

When we started pre season we had one winger and three centre mids on the books.

We desperately needed attacking players and midfielders. That needed to take priority.

In our situation we’re always going to have gaps in the squad.

We can’t have four right backs on the books unfortunately.

At the same time, we could have just not offered 2 of the 3 RBs new contracts over the summer to stay

[Kerryblueboy]

Can’t be depending on Seamus to stay fit at this stage and young is a complete liability so we actually only have one right back who is recovering from surgery so I’d say thelwell and dyche got this area all wrong this summer

[777Kidnappings]

Nobody is talking about investment or any nonsense.

But Dyche has brought in £46m worth of players that he agreed to and signed off on with the DoF.


It may have been funded by Onana, but that's not fully the point. Even if that was the point - i can't remember, are you somebody who was championing Onana and saying he was instrumental to the team and we are much worse off without him? Or do you think it is no big loss? Because which camp you are in determines whether your argument here is bollocks and defending Dyche for defendings sake or if you have a point.

It can be the case that you can say Dyche has had money to spend (he has and also gets credit for the "wheeling and dealing" we need to stay afloat) and still be willing to justify why he is reluctant to throw them to the sharks straight away.

No I thought onana was disappointing for us.

I'm actually not really sure what we are debating. All I'm suggesting is if you repeatedly make a profit on transfers and repeatedly reduce the wage bill its difficult to improve the overall quality of the squad.

Are you disagreeing?