CONFIRMED Hamer joins Coventry

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Nick Jansky said:
It was such a rigid system that it became difficult to fit new players into it.
Click to expand...
But also enabled the players we had to play way, way above their natural level, leading to our richest spell of success in a generation. It was absolutely not square pegs in round holes, it was the opposite. Every player was playing in a position perfectly tailored for them.

Not that there's anything wrong with it, but Selles played Cannon and One as wingers and a CB at RB. It's just streams of "Wilder did all the bad things, Selles does all the good things". Wilder played boring football, Wilder put square pegs in round holes, Wilder doesn't develop players, Wilder makes them robots, Wilder tells players not to run with the ball.

It's a crock of shit. Can we just praise Selles without having to constantly denegrate Wilder in the process?
 



AWetFlannel said:
Did Wilder not develop our 3-4-1-2 around players like Basham, Duffy and Freeman? Will this tiresome bullshit never end? 😭
Click to expand...
Yes, in 2016, but he didn't last season. So can we stop the bringing up Wilder's previous successes from years ago tiresome bullshit while we're at it. Your argument is based on a team from 9 years ago. It's 2025.

1000008412.gif
 
Tony_Kaufman said:
Yes, in 2016, but he didn't last season. So can we stop the bringing up Wilder's previous successes from years ago tiresome bullshit while we're at it. Your argument is based on a team from 9 years ago. It's 2025.

View attachment 216338
Click to expand...
Last season he changed the formation more than once. The season before he changed our formation multiple times. You're talking shit.
 
AWetFlannel said:
But also enabled the players we had to play way, way above their natural level, leading to our richest spell of success in a generation. It was absolutely not square pegs in round holes, it was the opposite. Every player was playing in a position perfectly tailored for them.

Not that there's anything wrong with it, but Selles played Cannon and One as wingers and a CB at RB. It's just streams of "Wilder did all the bad things, Selles does all the good things". Wilder played boring football, Wilder put square pegs in round holes, Wilder doesn't develop players, Wilder makes them robots, Wilder tells players not to run with the ball.

It's a crock of shit. Can we just praise Selles without having to constantly denegrate Wilder in the process?
Click to expand...
You think it’s a crock of shit. That does not, in any way, make it a crock of shit.
 
AWetFlannel said:
Last season he changed the formation more than once. The season before he changed our formation multiple times. You're talking shit.
Click to expand...
Regardless you've completely missed the point I was making, which isn't the first time.

My point in brief is that Wilder's system was based on results and winning, Selles appears to be about maximising each players individual strengths and allowing them to shine by letting them play their natural game within a system.
 
Tony_Kaufman said:
Regardless you've completely missed the point I was making, which isn't the first time.

My point in brief is that Wilder's system was based on results and winning, Selles appears to be about maximising each players individual strengths and allowing them to shine by letting them play their natural game within a system.
Click to expand...
Hasn't Selles referred to it as organised chaos?
 
MojoMuffin said:
I think you do make some good points here and I'd be inclined to agree with some of it if we were not entering our first full season with new owners.

There's a bit of an obsession with shifting players on when they get to a certain age in order to recoup some funds before they end up in Saudi or MLS nowadays. I'd like to think that under new ownership, recouping funds in the region of 15m shouldn't entirely be necessary at this point, especially after the sale of Souza and given there's not many players around like Hamer for that price point. At 28/29 Hamer is pretty much going to be in his prime now and with his flare, passing ability and finishing, I really think he'll shine in this Selles team. 15m will be peanuts if he gets us promoted and if we don't, I'd like to think that the new owners won't be flapping about the idea of his value dropping in his final year.

There's other aspects at play in terms of parachute payments and whether or not the player wants to move, but the owners should and will have had to put together a thorough plan to the EFL in order to buy us in the first place, one of which would be how they manage the funds when parachute payments end. I think these folks do have some decent money behind them, I think they're just being sensible about where and how it's spent. If Hamer isn't pushing for a move, to me, it's not a sensible decision to sell him this window given what he is very much capable of helping us to achieve this coming season.
Click to expand...
I'd be delighted to watch Hamer for another season, and there would be no complaints from me if he stayed. There is always the argument that money invested in a champ team is worth it if you get promoted - but its no guarantee. If I was a decision maker with 15m on the table (who knows if that will happen), I'd be inclined to accept it, but I would also want to know the plan for how those funds would be invested, whether there are achieavable and exciting ways to invest the funds into the team.
This whole argument is premised on that, but that is also a big unknown, and there is no way we are buying younger Hamer who can perform at his level on day 1 - that player is being snapped up at a higher level than us.
 
Dave said:
The owners have money (Tom Cannon) Hamer best player in Championship, good season in prem. No club is getting him for less than 22.5M in my opinion. we will also demand it all up front, so we can replace straight away. Very few clubs are able to provide directly up front cash and is done over stints. This will not help PSV's position. My 2p, he stays as PSV cant afford him up front.

Also, lets not forget, last season we sold players for a good amount, rather than 2 packets of crisps and a new set of balls. The board will not entertain selling Hamer unless the offer up front is too good to turn down and we can get 2 replacements in straight away.
Click to expand...
How do you know the owners have money ?
The 10 million could have been a loan against parachute money
 
10-0 win said:
Burrows and Hamer only first xi not starting at York. A bit worried not starting our obiously most central player.
Click to expand...
Two teams one for each half
You’d be saying the same if they’d played the first half
 



ATL Recs said:
How do you know the owners have money ?
The 10 million could have been a loan against parachute money
Click to expand...
We've already taken all of the money. As per Darren Smith at the start of last season. Check the finances
 
AWetFlannel said:
Last season he changed the formation more than once. The season before he changed our formation multiple times. You're talking shit.
Click to expand...
Have to agree but playing the wrong players in the wrong places constantly
 
brownblade said:
Why buy a football club for £100m if you have no money? There's no need for conspiracy when common sense is available.
Click to expand...

Absolutely but it won’t be the first time it’s happened. My understanding is they’ve made a payment to buy the club (or payments) not paid in full?

I believe the consortium thought we were going up and made the gamble that the Cannon signing would act as insurance to achieve that. If they’ve borrowed the money for Cannon that’s the first red flag for me.

I’m not yet convinced by these owners and you can call it as some would on here, bed wetting or flouncing, it doesn’t matter.

I hope I’m wrong but let’s just say time will tell
 
Blade58 said:
Absolutely but it won’t be the first time it’s happened. My understanding is they’ve made a payment to buy the club (or payments) not paid in full?

I believe the consortium thought we were going up and made the gamble that the Cannon signing would act as insurance to achieve that. If they’ve borrowed the money for Cannon that’s the first red flag for me.

I’m not yet convinced by these owners and you can call it as some would on here, bed wetting or flouncing, it doesn’t matter.

I hope I’m wrong but let’s just say time will tell
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting they have only paid the Prince a first installment?
 
Blade58 said:
I believe the consortium thought we were going up and made the gamble that the Cannon signing would act as insurance to achieve that.
Click to expand...
... which would show an appalling lack of football knowledge. He was the most predictably low impact signing you could possibly get for that money
 
Blade58 said:
Absolutely but it won’t be the first time it’s happened. My understanding is they’ve made a payment to buy the club (or payments) not paid in full?

I believe the consortium thought we were going up and made the gamble that the Cannon signing would act as insurance to achieve that. If they’ve borrowed the money for Cannon that’s the first red flag for me.

I’m not yet convinced by these owners and you can call it as some would on here, bed wetting or flouncing, it doesn’t matter.

I hope I’m wrong but let’s just say time will tell
Click to expand...
You are not flouncing at all. Bedwetting, definitely.
 
Tony_Kaufman said:
Regardless you've completely missed the point I was making, which isn't the first time.

My point in brief is that Wilder's system was based on results and winning, Selles appears to be about maximising each players individual strengths and allowing them to shine by letting them play their natural game within a system.
Click to expand...
Perhaps if all your points weren't smeared with jabs at Wilder they'd be more agreeable.
 
brownblade said:
Are you suggesting they have only paid the Prince a first installment?
Click to expand...

No not really.

I’m suggesting as with a lot of these contractual agreements, it’s based on payments and not necessarily £105m up front. Whether that amounts to a payment or a number of payments after 8 months I’ve no idea.
 
Blade58 said:
No not really.

I’m suggesting as with a lot of these contractual agreements, it’s based on payments and not necessarily £105m up front. Whether that amounts to a payment or a number of payments after 8 months I’ve no idea.
Click to expand...

They went through loads of testing by the EFL. They had to prove they could fund and sustain us.
 
brownblade said:
Are you suggesting they have only paid the Prince a first installment?
Click to expand...
Not sure how much of the debt they have paid but it's unlikely to be all. The prince still has a charge registered on the assets of the club. That charge is only satisfied when he's paid in full. The charge is still outstanding and still registered at Companies House.
 



You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Players with a negative goals total
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
Silent Blade
Silent Blade
VictoryBlade
Hamer
2
Replies
39
Views
5K
CPB
C
Ndiayewillalwaysloveyou
Callum O'Hare!
2
Replies
47
Views
29K
LBA_Blade
LBA_Blade
Coolblade
A few observations from the stats: Hamer, O’Hare & Brooks
Replies
16
Views
2K
andy m
A
D
This is how non first team signings should be announced...
Replies
1
Views
781
joe casey
joe casey

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom