2024/25 Kevin Thelwell

[pfim]

It was a decent interview, and I always give credit when a DOF does an interview because they don't have to.

My couple of takeaways from it would be

I'm not really sure what conservatively strategic means. We need a lot of players, so not sure how a conservative strategy plays into that.

If the summer window turns out to be a success then I will ultimately accept the reasoning given for such a quiet January.

I was a little disappointed that the large number of out of contract players and loan signings was not discussed. I don't expect individual contracts or players to be discussed but I would have liked to hear a wider discussion on what our strategy is to deal with having so few players currently under contract next season.

I think it means we need a lot of players so I wouldn't expect large fees for an individual player, but moderate fees for many to spread the risk. I think it also means in a way that they have a profile of a player they want, and will stick to it by and large.

 

[Tony’s Carp]

I think it means we need a lot of players so I wouldn't expect large fees for an individual player, but moderate fees for many to spread the risk. I think it also means in a way that they have a profile of a player they want, and will stick to it by and large.

It’s an interesting summer from that point of view, say for example you need 8 players (not necessarily 8 starters) and have a budget of 120m- do you buy 8 15m players (a very low price point for PL players these days, but sometimes you get an Ndiaye) or aim for 4 30m players to up the quality then pad the squad with 4 loans / frees?

Can see the argument either way- the former strategy like you say spreads the risk and if you are buying fairly young could yield a good amount of profit in the future, but would it substantially strengthen the first team short term?

I guess it comes down to a balance between strengthening the floor v raising the ceiling.

 

[pfim]

It’s an interesting summer from that point of view, say for example you need 8 players (not necessarily 8 starters) and have a budget of 120m- do you buy 8 15m players (a very low price point for PL players these days, but sometimes you get an Ndiaye) or aim for 4 30m players to up the quality then pad the squad with 4 loans / frees?

Can see the argument either way- the former strategy like you say spreads the risk and if you are buying fairly young could yield a good amount of profit in the future, but would it substantially strengthen the first team short term?

I guess it comes down to a balance between strengthening the floor v raising the ceiling.

It's probably the former, with loan signings and "frees" possibly adding some experience to the squad. We're losing all of these players at the end of the season, not only do they need to be replaced but the squad is already threadbare, we need additions in numbers on top of that.

I'm hoping the days of buying mediocre 27 year olds for large fees are over.

 

[Tony’s Carp]

It's probably the former, with loan signings and "frees" possibly adding some experience to the squad. We're losing all of these players at the end of the season, not only do they need to be replaced but the squad is already threadbare, we need additions in numbers on top of that.

I'm hoping the days of buying mediocre 27 year olds for large fees are over.

I certainly don’t mind the conservative “spread the risk” approach but would say there needs to be an exception for a starting striker. That’s going to need some proper spend to get anywhere near the quality we need.

 

[Makis]

With the amount of changes required changing DoF now would be a huge risk. New guy wouldn't have time to put his feet under the table before starting to shape the squad. He would be unfamiliar with the players who stay, who's contracts are running out and all the staff. He would need to come up with a long-term strategy of his own as so far it has been about survival.

And Thelwell hasn't done a bad job under the circumstances.

 

[ToffeeScot]

Still think he probably deserves to have one bash at a transfer window with some actual money behind him and not having to sell to buy. The only thing that worries me about him is his love for Broja.

 

[AirMo]

Still think he probably deserves to have one bash at a transfer window with some actual money behind him and not having to sell to buy. The only thing that worries me about him is his love for Broja.

And without Sean Dyche refusing to play anyone he buys and making them all look incredibly [Poor language removed].

 

[bluestevon]

Personally i think it means what we were talking about with Broja above.

Instead of buying him for £30 mill, go back to Chelsea and get him on loan again for the year if he's fit and negotiate a better option.

That's one of likely 3 striker spots that likely need replacing sorted.

Conservative isn't bringing in again a player who has been injured with seierate injuries and entire season whilst we pay several million for the privilege of treating him.

Strategic isn't repeating the same mistake again it's called massive stupidity

 

[bluestevon]

It’s an interesting summer from that point of view, say for example you need 8 players (not necessarily 8 starters) and have a budget of 120m- do you buy 8 15m players (a very low price point for PL players these days, but sometimes you get an Ndiaye) or aim for 4 30m players to up the quality then pad the squad with 4 loans / frees?

Can see the argument either way- the former strategy like you say spreads the risk and if you are buying fairly young could yield a good amount of profit in the future, but would it substantially strengthen the first team short term?

I guess it comes down to a balance between strengthening the floor v raising the ceiling.

It's not much of an argument, you spend on bigger transfers and fill the remaining roles with loans and such.

The way both Newcastle and villa have done business.

 

[W84 Dum Freeze]

With the amount of changes required changing DoF now would be a huge risk. New guy wouldn't have time to put his feet under the table before starting to shape the squad. He would be unfamiliar with the players who stay, who's contracts are running out and all the staff. He would need to come up with a long-term strategy of his own as so far it has been about survival.

And Thelwell hasn't done a bad job under the circumstances.

A competent replacement would take all the above in their stride.

Surely we're not going to risk our best opportunity to advance on someone who leaves us strikers short at the start of every season, players chased endlessly leaving us always short of pace, renewed contracts to players with a long list of injuries, points deductions for exceeding PSR when knowing
the circumstances it's hardly been professional or competent.

Adequate at best.
We can find better now.

 

[bluestevon]

I certainly don’t mind the conservative “spread the risk” approach but would say there needs to be an exception for a starting striker. That’s going to need some proper spend to get anywhere near the quality we need.

Spreading the risk is more like to get you a Beto, Maupay and Broja, focusing on one could get you a Delap... I know which I'd rather go for.

We've spread the risk buying fullbacks for years, we've sorted it over a load of crap players which sees us now relying on two game a season Seamus a lad who can't cross a ball and a 40yo ex winger and a fat lad from Glasgow

 

[jamieni]

I certainly don’t mind the conservative “spread the risk” approach but would say there needs to be an exception for a starting striker. That’s going to need some proper spend to get anywhere near the quality we need.

Hopefully the new stadium and so on is a bit of a draw for some exciting talent up front albeit i just can’t see us splashing a huge sum on one player this summer. Unless of course Kev is just playing things down to avoid us getting rinsed in the market.

 

[Wat Tyler]

Spends 50m on crap strikers, never once in all the windows here has he brought in any pacy wingers or addressed the glaring full back issue.

He does one interview and people want to give him a new deal.

 

[Neiler]

Conservative isn't bringing in again a player who has been injured with seierate injuries and entire season whilst we pay several million for the privilege of treating him.

Strategic isn't repeating the same mistake again it's called massive stupidity

There is often a very fine line between stupidity and genius mate.

Id 100% bring him back for another year with leveraged favourable terms - even if that is a bit rouge against the prevailing opinion on here.

The conservative strategy is, clearly a player we think has ability and who if fit we would ok to make permanent, we have likely three positions in his area of the pitch to fill, why invest in say no 1 & 2, then make no 3 Broja on a leveraged loan with an option - instead of also investing in no 3. Preserves funds and we have all the safeguard if it goes well.

I think its a player the DOF and manager rate and we will have all his medical data before we decide to it.

I see a lot of logic to it if im being honest.

 

[Tony’s Carp]

It's not much of an argument, you spend on bigger transfers and fill the remaining roles with loans and such.

The way both Newcastle and villa have done business.

Yeah I can see both sides of the argument but think I broadly agree with this. Ultimately for all the talk of a massive rebuild we are not building a team from scratch- 8 of the 11 that destroyed Leicester are under contract, Gana and Doucs would likely sign contracts if offered, Lindstrøm we have the option (a different debate!).

So really like you say I’d look for 3-4 genuine level raising signings for the bulk of the budget, to take a half decent core group to another level, rather than just add bodies at broadly the level we already have. Then bulk things up with lower cost / free / loan signings.

Judicious use of loans also avoids too much bloat when you want to upgrade those squad players in coming years rather than being stuck with them on PL wages.