1894
Well-Known Member
Gary Cook's business-speak now appearing as football-speak. We better get used to it ...
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The transfer strategy
- Thread starter mammutly
- Start date
Cheltblue
Well-Known Member
mammutly said:A strategy is an overall plan, so the idea of a 'transfer strategy' has to be rubbish. There are just too many unknowns.
It cannot be a plan to go after players, not get them, so then go after other players and get them instead, if we can.
The club might have a list of targets but that's all it is. Bigging it up as a 'strategy' is stupid.
I believe it works in the same way as the 'project'!!!
mammutly
Well-Known Member
1894 said:Gary Cook's business-speak now appearing as football-speak. We better get used to it ...
I think that's exactly what it is. Dressing things up as something that they are not.
The club is after a big name signing.
That's it.
The only other 'strategy' involves looking at who might be available and whether we want them or not. The only difference between us and other clubs, all of whom do the same thing, is that the money is less of a factor.
bizzbo
Well-Known Member
i disagree so much it hurts. ask any CEO if he has a strategy or just a list of business that needs to be done. the trick is not to get hung up on the unknowns.
Ducado
Well-Known Member
mammutly said:1894 said:Gary Cook's business-speak now appearing as football-speak. We better get used to it ...
I think that's exactly what it is. Dressing things up as something that they are not.
The club is after a big name signing.
That's it.
The only other 'strategy' involves looking at who might be available and whether we want them or not. The only difference between us and other clubs, all of whom do the same thing, is that the money is less of a factor.
Well it's your opinion and who knows you could be right, or you could be wrong, does anyone actually care? I very much doubt it, it's such a pity that all the best people in the world of football management are far to busy posting on internet forums and flipping burgers
bizzbo
Well-Known Member
Ducado said:mammutly said:1894 said:Gary Cook's business-speak now appearing as football-speak. We better get used to it ...
I think that's exactly what it is. Dressing things up as something that they are not.
The club is after a big name signing.
That's it.
The only other 'strategy' involves looking at who might be available and whether we want them or not. The only difference between us and other clubs, all of whom do the same thing, is that the money is less of a factor.
Well it's your opinion and who knows you could be right, or you could be wrong, does anyone actually care? I very much doubt it, it's such a pity that all the best people in the world of football management are far to busy posting on internet forums and flipping burgers
guess it's just another way to run down city, or build them up. however, regardless of the coherence or depth of any strategy that may or may not be in place, mammutly appears to have made a crap argument. The unknowns in the transfer market are pretty easy to identify. club X will or won't bid for X. Player X will or will not agree to sign. come up with reasonable probabilities for these things, and you can create a perfectly workable strategy. ask donald rumsfield, although he was talking about the unknowns that you don't even know exist. not many of them in a the transfer business.
almost forgot...do you want onions with that?
OB1
Well-Known Member
I actually think there is a fairly clear transfer strategy that City have. One part of the strategy is to sign one or two big name players for both commercial reasons and footballing reasons, and in order to help City encourage other players to join the club. However a core part of the strategy is to buy proven players with Premier League experience with a clear goal of getting City into the top four pdq. As opposed, for example, to a strategy of buying young players who have great potential and taking time to develop a successful team. That's my take on the strategy.
I'd hope and expect that the transfer strategy will change once City have established themselves as a force.
I'd hope and expect that the transfer strategy will change once City have established themselves as a force.
OB1 said:I actually think there is a fairly clear transfer strategy that City have. One part of the strategy is to sign one or two big name players for both commercial reasons and footballing reasons, and in order to help City encourage other players to join the club. However a core part of the strategy is to buy proven players with Premier League experience with a clear goal of getting City into the top four pdq. As opposed, for example, to a strategy of buying young players who have great potential and taking time to develop a successful team. That's my take on the strategy.
I think you're right, although I would hope that there is still a place for that "younger players with potential" category in the squad. We're in an ideal situation to take a punt on a few of these players each season.
allblues09
Well-Known Member
I agree....bizzbo said:i disagree so much it hurts. ask any CEO if he has a strategy or just a list of business that needs to be done. the trick is not to get hung up on the unknowns.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RpSv3HjpEw
JWP1926
Well-Known Member
im sure Garry Cook told us our transfer strategy, actually i think it was our chairman, anyway it goes like this: mark hughes identifies a position that needs a player adding to it, he writes down 3 players in the order in which he would prefer them and hands Garry and the board the list, they try and buy the player who is 1st on the list for a particular position (hence why we are trying to buy such players as Eto'o and John Terry) and if that fails then Garry and the board look at option 2.