Gone Elsewhere Conor Coady

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

As far as I can see no we havent and I cant wait to see the two or three loan signings come in

Without Maguire leaving, could Higdon have joined?

On the Coady point - who would we have dropped to fit Coady in? Wallace and Basham are very similar players. Coady may well have been first choice back in May but Liverpool's demands meant that we moved on and signed those two instead. I would imagine that we could have afforded him but central midfield, quite rightly, isn't Clough's priority any more.

Can I recommend that you spend 15 minutes trying to sign players on Championship Manager without spending a penny? Doesn't happen. "Free transfer" is one of the biggest misnomers in football - the player (and their agent) knows full well that a club saving money on transfer fees will pay signing on fees instead. If any of our 8 "free" signings this summer got less than £50k to sign on then I'd be amazed.
 

You all know full fucking well I didnt mean no money as in zero pounds and pence but its easier to argue with me about rather than admit that under the new regime nothing has changed
 
You all know full fucking well I didnt mean no money as in zero pounds and pence but its easier to argue with me about rather than admit that under the new regime nothing has changed

Meet the new boss,
Same as the old boss,

- The Who, 1971
 
Without Maguire leaving, could Higdon have joined?

On the Coady point - who would we have dropped to fit Coady in? Wallace and Basham are very similar players. Coady may well have been first choice back in May but Liverpool's demands meant that we moved on and signed those two instead. I would imagine that we could have afforded him but central midfield, quite rightly, isn't Clough's priority any more.

Can I recommend that you spend 15 minutes trying to sign players on Championship Manager without spending a penny? Doesn't happen. "Free transfer" is one of the biggest misnomers in football - the player (and their agent) knows full well that a club saving money on transfer fees will pay signing on fees instead. If any of our 8 "free" signings this summer got less than £50k to sign on then I'd be amazed.

It is, of course, entirely possible as well that Coady, having had a good season in the third tier, thought it was now time to step up to at least second tier level and would not counetance a permanent move to the third tier.
 
You all know full fucking well I didnt mean no money as in zero pounds and pence but its easier to argue with me about rather than admit that under the new regime nothing has changed
Ok, so your major gripe is that money has been spent and players signed. Or have I misunderstood?
 
You all know full fucking well I didnt mean no money as in zero pounds and pence but its easier to argue with me about rather than admit that under the new regime nothing has changed

So you'd rather we paid clubs for players we don't want than not pay clubs for players we do? Even though we have paid clubs for players we wanted (McNulty, McGahey and Higdon)?

I'm confused.

It is, of course, entirely possible as well that Coady, having had a good season in the third tier, thought it was now time to step up to at least second tier level and would not countenance a permanent move to the third tier.

That might have had an influence but I'd hope that players view us as one step back to take two forward; compared to Huddersfield's standing still.

Coady will probably do well at Huddersfield but I can't see them doing anything other than struggle next season.
 
I am a bit disappointed TBH 375k ?? and we couldn't afford to sign him? can't work this out unless there are a number of extras involved.
 
I am a bit disappointed TBH 375k ?? and we couldn't afford to sign him? can't work this out unless there are a number of extras involved.
Or we could afford him but the manager didn't want him .
 
You all know full fucking well I didnt mean no money as in zero pounds and pence but its easier to argue with me about rather than admit that under the new regime nothing has changed
What does piss me off however is that it seems we were never ever in the running for him when the paltry fee of 400k was enough to discuss personal terms at the very least.

If Clough/Brannigan/Phipps etc. come out and say that we offered that fee and for whatever reason we lost out, i'll simmer from pissed off to suspicious. But this coupled with the breakdown of the Keiron Freeman transfer suggests to me that something isn't right with how we're approaching transfer negotiations ourselves. .

Re Coady- if NC didn't want to sign him, we wouldn't be in the running anyway . No club would come out and say 'we didn't put a bid for him as we didn't want to sign him' As I didn't think Coady was this great player(at L1 level) that some on here are claiming, I'm not fussed at all that we haven't signed him.

Re: Freeman. If you listen to NC's interview , he seemed to be questioning Freeman's desire to play for us rather than money.
 
If everybody in the ground thought coady was transformed under nigel clough, and we had the maguire money, then why not sign him?

.

You mean transformed from a player completely out of his depth at L1 level to an average L1 player I assume because that is all he showed ? Scougall performed better than Coady.

Maybe NC thinks that Basham,Wallace and Reed all individually offer more to the team than Coady does.
 
I'd have through either he didn't want to play in L1 when he knew he had a Championship offer, or NC didn't want him at this stage.

If NC wanted him and he wanted to come here we'd have paid the money.

I have no idea if that is accurate but as far as I know it is no more inaccurate than saying we weren't prepared to pay 400k.
 
I do get your drift but I'm willing to bet you that the sum of their salaries is dwarfed by that of the new boys

And do you know what - I'm glad that we're not throwing money about in some Man City of the lower leagues strategy because it'll only lead to mercinaries and leeches milking what they can and the short term gains would cause longer term damages.

All power to the Prince and his team for doing things the right way - they've backed their manager with the money he wanted and the manager is free to use it how he sees fit. Can't ask for more than that from a board of directors.
The salaries all together will be lower than the new signings,im not doubting that.My point was,when ever someone questions the club,some people are quite happy to put what we have spent,but at the same time, automatically forget about what we have sold or got rid of.

As for us spending will nilly,i'm glad were not doing it that way myself for the reasons you have given,as long as we don't regret getting that bit more quality in at the end of the season,when we knew full well we had the money to get them in at the start of the season,because some people think we are going to get promoted and then spend the money in the Championship.Well i'm sorry but it doesn't work like that.
 
willy-nilly - got me wondering where the hell that came from

According to t'internet this term has two, slightly differing, but related meanings: 'whether it is with or against your will' and 'in an unplanned, haphazard fashion'. We tend to use the latter of these meanings today; the former was the accepted meaning when the term was first coined.

Origin
There are many spellings in early citations, which relate to the 'with or against your will' meaning of the phrase - 'wille we, nelle we', 'will he, nill he', 'will I, nill I', etc. The expression also appears later as 'nilly willy' or 'willing, nilling', or even, in a later humourous version 'william nilliam'. The early meaning of the word nill is key to this. In early English nill was the opposite of will a contraction of 'ne will'. That is, will meant to want to do something, nill meant to want to avoid it. So, combining the willy - 'I am willing' and nilly - 'I am unwilling' expresses the idea that it doesn't matter to me one way or the other.

The Latin phrase 'nolens, volens' means the same thing, although it isn't clear whether the English version is a simple translation of that.

The second, 'in an undecided, haphazard manner', meaning of willy-nilly arrives from the first. The changeable 'this way, then that way' imagery of willy-nilly behaviour fits with our current 'haphazard' meaning of the term.

There's also a, now archaic, phrase 'hitty missy' that had a similar derivation. That comes from 'hit he, miss he'.

The phrase dates back at least a millennium, with the earliest known version being the Old English text, Aelfric'sLives of Saints, circa 1000:

"Forean the we synd synfulle and sceolan beon eadmode, wille we, nelle we."

Shakespeare was familiar with, and apparently quite fond of, the expression in various forms. He used it in The Taming of the Shrew, 1596:

Petruchio: [To Katharina]

Thus in plain terms: your father hath consented
That you shall be my wife; your dowry 'greed on;
And, Will you, nill you, I will marry you.
[that is, I will marry you, whether you like it or not.]

and again, in Hamlet:

First Clown: Give me leave. Here lies the water; good: here stands the man; good; if the man go to this water, and drown himself, it is, will he, nill he, he goes.
[that is, If a man chooses to drown he enters the water, if he chooses not, he leaves.]

So now you know too

 
Tweet from Jim Phipps indicates we'd have most likely been in for him had Liverpool not tried to have our pants down with the valuation early on. As a result moved onto other targets.

 
Last edited:

Just saw this on one of the dedicated football transfer sites. He's only been at Huddersfield a year and suddenly his value has shot up to over 300% of what it cost the Terriers to buy him.
 
Huddersfield paid £375'000 for him, why couldnt we afford that?

We could but Clough is his own man and wanted his own man - Wallace .

If the Wallace purchase had worked (and not being continually injured ) , we wouldn't be talking about Coady , with if , buts , and maybes .

Just another nail in the coffin of Clough , on something that as yet to work out IMO.

UTB
 
Because when we initially asked someone mooted over £1m if memory serves me right. Also, perhaps the player didn't want to come back? Always worth a thought.

Now then BW, don't let anything as ridiculous as facts get in the way of a good old fashioned witch hunt.

Coming here with your logic and common sense, begone foul wizard!
 
Now then BW, don't let anything as ridiculous as facts get in the way of a good old fashioned witch hunt.

Coming here with your logic and common sense, begone foul wizard!

You forgot my wild and inaccurate rumours as well.
 
I realise there are countless number of players we have failed to effectively replace, however in terms of recent times this lad is top of my list.

Our midfield is stagnant at the moment, not one midfielder at the club can be classed as a 'box-to-box' type. No energy, no drive, no movement.

Coady is the type of player we're missing in midfield - jack of all trades really, and if compared against the current lot he'd be master of them all.

I know we've been in contact with Liverpool in regards to a loan player, I just hope its for a midfielder of the same class.
 

We have midfielders, we just don't play enough of them, do that and you don't need a box to box midfielder as you can distribute work in such a way that nobody needs to do everything
 

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