The transfer strategy

[zeusbheld]

it's a case of 'two birds with one stone'. dunno why you are on one about this!

I agree. Nice if it happens but not intended.


The reason I'm 'on one' about this ( apart from the fact that I'm always on one about something) is that too many people are praising Hughes and Cook for being great and visionary leaders when all they have done is drawn up a list of targets and gone after them. Great! Credit where credits due.

But to argue there is some far reaching meta level strategy involved is stupid.

you seem to have a notion that 'strategy' is something exotic and inherently brilliant.

if my strategy to get a job is to sit on the sofa, pick my nose, watch dvds and read blue moon, it may suck ass candy as strategies go but it's still a strategy.

also, some very good strategies are fairly straightforward. like signing the best players you can from your direct competition. ac milan did that in the late 80s early 90s. on purpose. it worked, at least i thought so and their silverware cabinet agrees.

there are a lot of reasons for going after the players we're going after, and they may tend to vary from player to player, but it's not randomly chasing after every good player. but they all do tend to fit into an overall pattern... almost as if... someone... planned it that way. (cue thunder and spooky music).

 

[bizzbo]

it's a case of 'two birds with one stone'. dunno why you are on one about this!

I agree. Nice if it happens but not intended.


The reason I'm 'on one' about this ( apart from the fact that I'm always on one about something) is that too many people are praising Hughes and Cook for being great and visionary leaders when all they have done is drawn up a list of targets and gone after them. Great! Credit where credits due.

But to argue there is some far reaching meta level strategy involved is stupid.

well, I guess I'm on the side of giving them the benefit of the doubt... look at the barry transfer. I think it's a good bet from what we've seen that benitez' plan this summer was to get barry for 12m, sell alonso or mascher for 30, and plough the rest back into the squad. now he has a bit of a problem. whilst there is no concrete evidence of forethought here, it does seem that this would have at least crossed a few minds in our boardroom... the terry bid as well, also seems to have a purpose beyond recruiting a top centre back. it has brought the latent politicking at chelsea out in the open. who is really calling the shots there? terry? abramovich? kenyon? ancelotti? they have to sort it our now, as opposed to being able to get on with their work quietly, hoping everyone falls into line. add to that, the fact that the bid was delivered by cook at a (spurious) meeting that city called re: sturridge, and it seems to be designed to send a message to a club who have pinched one of our best young players, and sniffed around robinho.

really, who knows. but sometimes 'myths' can serve a very positive effect ;)

 

[Anonymous]

it's a case of 'two birds with one stone'. dunno why you are on one about this!

I agree. Nice if it happens but not intended.


The reason I'm 'on one' about this ( apart from the fact that I'm always on one about something) is that too many people are praising Hughes and Cook for being great and visionary leaders when all they have done is drawn up a list of targets and gone after them. Great! Credit where credits due.

But to argue there is some far reaching meta level strategy involved is stupid.

you seem to have a notion that 'strategy' is something exotic and inherently brilliant.

if my strategy to get a job is to sit on the sofa, pick my nose, watch dvds and read blue moon, it may suck ass candy as strategies go but it's still a strategy.

also, some very good strategies are fairly straightforward. like signing the best players you can from your direct competition. ac milan did that in the late 80s early 90s. on purpose. it worked, at least i thought so and their silverware cabinet agrees.

there are a lot of reasons for going after the players we're going after, and they may tend to vary from player to player, but it's not randomly chasing after every good player. but they all do tend to fit into an overall pattern... almost as if... someone... planned it that way. (cue thunder and spooky music).

United have done much the same under Ferguson.

 

[Giosballbag]

it's a case of 'two birds with one stone'. dunno why you are on one about this!

I agree. Nice if it happens but not intended.


The reason I'm 'on one' about this ( apart from the fact that I'm always on one about something) is that too many people are praising Hughes and Cook for being great and visionary leaders when all they have done is drawn up a list of targets and gone after them. Great! Credit where credits due.

But to argue there is some far reaching meta level strategy involved is stupid.

you seem to have a notion that 'strategy' is something exotic and inherently brilliant.

if my strategy to get a job is to sit on the sofa, pick my nose, watch dvds and read blue moon, it may suck ass candy as strategies go but it's still a strategy.

Sounds like a good strategy to me.

 

[mammutly]

it's a case of 'two birds with one stone'. dunno why you are on one about this!

I agree. Nice if it happens but not intended.


The reason I'm 'on one' about this ( apart from the fact that I'm always on one about something) is that too many people are praising Hughes and Cook for being great and visionary leaders when all they have done is drawn up a list of targets and gone after them. Great! Credit where credits due.

But to argue there is some far reaching meta level strategy involved is stupid.

you seem to have a notion that 'strategy' is something exotic and inherently brilliant.

if my strategy to get a job is to sit on the sofa, pick my nose, watch dvds and read blue moon, it may suck ass candy as strategies go but it's still a strategy.

also, some very good strategies are fairly straightforward. like signing the best players you can from your direct competition. ac milan did that in the late 80s early 90s. on purpose. it worked, at least i thought so and their silverware cabinet agrees.

there are a lot of reasons for going after the players we're going after, and they may tend to vary from player to player, but it's not randomly chasing after every good player. but they all do tend to fit into an overall pattern... almost as if... someone... planned it that way. (cue thunder and spooky music).

TBH was signed, why?

Our main target this year seems to have been Santa Cruz. Are Blackburn our rivals?

Thereason we go after players is to strengthen our squad. Anything else is a bonus.

 

[Anonymous]

TBH was signed, why?

Our main target this year seems to have been Santa Cruz. Are Blackburn our rivals?

Thereason we go after players is to strengthen our squad. Anything else is a bonus.

Not really a very good argument at all...

People are going to think you're just sniping for the sake of it...

 

[leewill31]

it's a case of 'two birds with one stone'. dunno why you are on one about this!

I agree. Nice if it happens but not intended.


The reason I'm 'on one' about this ( apart from the fact that I'm always on one about something) is that too many people are praising Hughes and Cook for being great and visionary leaders when all they have done is drawn up a list of targets and gone after them. Great! Credit where credits due.

But to argue there is some far reaching meta level strategy involved is stupid.

you seem to have a notion that 'strategy' is something exotic and inherently brilliant.

if my strategy to get a job is to sit on the sofa, pick my nose, watch dvds and read blue moon, it may suck ass candy as strategies go but it's still a strategy.

also, some very good strategies are fairly straightforward. like signing the best players you can from your direct competition. ac milan did that in the late 80s early 90s. on purpose. it worked, at least i thought so and their silverware cabinet agrees.

there are a lot of reasons for going after the players we're going after, and they may tend to vary from player to player, but it's not randomly chasing after every good player. but they all do tend to fit into an overall pattern... almost as if... someone... planned it that way. (cue thunder and spooky music).

TBH was signed, why?

Our main target this year seems to have been Santa Cruz. Are Blackburn our rivals?

Thereason we go after players is to strengthen our squad. Anything else is a bonus.

that gave me a chuckle,thanks mammutly!

 

[mammutly]

TBH was signed, why?

Our main target this year seems to have been Santa Cruz. Are Blackburn our rivals?

Thereason we go after players is to strengthen our squad. Anything else is a bonus.

Not really a very good argument at all...

People are going to think you're just sniping for the sake of it...

Sorry Billy. By 'this year' I meant 2009. We made a big effort to sign RSC in January and went back for him this window.

We have also targeted big name players - kaka, eto and probably enquired about a lot more.

When you look at the players we have signed, it is obvious that Mark Hughes is trying to build a solid premiership side.

The attempted and the actual signings considered together suggest only that the 'strategy' is to strengthen the squad. This is no different to any other club with money to spend.

My point is that we are simply not targeting players with a view to undermining our rivals. We are simply getting the best
( in the opinion of Hughes et al) that we can from the current market. Talk of a secondary sub strategy or whatever is bullshit.

 

[Neville Kneville]

TBH was signed, why?

Our main target this year seems to have been Santa Cruz. Are Blackburn our rivals?

Thereason we go after players is to strengthen our squad. Anything else is a bonus.

Not really a very good argument at all...

People are going to think you're just sniping for the sake of it...

Sorry Billy. By 'this year' I meant 2009. We made a big effort to sign RSC in January and went back for him this window.

We have also targeted big name players - kaka, eto and probably enquired about a lot more.

When you look at the players we have signed, it is obvious that Mark Hughes is trying to build a solid premiership side.

The attempted and the actual signings considered together suggest only that the 'strategy' is to strengthen the squad. This is no different to any other club with money to spend.

My point is that we are simply not targeting players with a view to undermining our rivals. We are simply getting the best
( in the opinion of Hughes et al) that we can from the current market. Talk of a secondary sub strategy or whatever is bullshit.

So every single player we sign has to be from one of our rivals in order for it to be true? Daft argument.

If there's a choice between a top player with PL experience, an equal player from abroad with similar experience or a top player with PL experience that suits us down to the ground & also fucks over our rivals, we'll go for him. Naieve to think it doesn't come into the equation. It was said that Abramovic would do that before he even started with Chelsk & our people have openly said they're following Chelsea's strategy.

Chelsea do it, rags do it & now we're doing it. Sorry if that means Hughes & Cook are doing something right but they're getting a lot of things right these days.

 

[mammutly]

The thing that I find really worrying is that people actually believe that there are a pool of players scattered around different clubs who are equally suitable for a particular role in our squad on all levels, and that all we have to do is pick the one that will piss our rivals off the most. Unbelieveable!