Article in today's YP on comments from Paul Conway yesterday, confirms what quite a few on the BBS have been saying. On our return to the Championship, the Club will not deviate from the present recruitment strategy. In short, we are very unlikely to sign any player over the age of 25 and will stay true to the value of signing young, hungry, talented players with development and sell on potential further down the line. The Board believe that the current "core" of the squad has the ability to compete in the Championship and says that it's a bit more appealing for any "targets" to come to a Championship Club. With regards to Daniel Stendel, Mr Conway says they want him to stay at the Club for a long time and they are hoping to talk to him about that, when it's ( contract) ready. He ended by saying that the goal at the start of this season was automatic promotion and that was achieved through a lot of hard work throughout the Organisation and it's now up to the Championship and we will be working our way up the table. So as some supporters have speculated, it looks like more of the same. In a way, I for one expected the statement, but have to admit that I am a tad disappointed that we wouldn't even contemplate bringing a couple of "mature" hands in to mentor and guide our young squad. Not specifically, but players of the pedigree of say Gary Cahill (33) who is leaving Chelsea and if it's right what some in the media are saying that Adam Davies does join Wolves, their No 2 keeper John Ruddy (32) might be surplus to their requirements, although on the subject of Cahill, it looks like he could be tempted to join Burnley who have said they are interested in him. I suppose at the end of the day, as usual, it all comes down to money and the dilemma of if we are to achieve our target of finishing as high as we can in the Championship, without doing anything "crazy", what the maximum budget we need to make available, to ensure that we can sign the quality young players necessary to realise our ambition.? It's going to be very interesting and I hope we manage to achieve our aims and are able to establish our place in the Championship, because at the very least, surely that is our rightful place.?
You are joking about the Cahill and players of the pedigree aren’t you? Even if we did pay their required wages, they’d still have better clubs to go to than ours.
'Very unlikely' is different to 'we wouldn't even contemplate it'. Personally though, I have no interest in watching a player like Cahill prance around as a shadow of his former self taking 50% of our transfer budget in the process. Stick to the plan, enjoy the plan, and enjoy whatever success it brings. Experienced doesn't have to mean old anyway.
Hoping that if we do look like we could achieve something then like in the Wilson era we'd get some in with experience to shore us up How would it benefit the club though to say yes we will spend?
We are experienced anyway - a lot of the squad has already played at Championship level. They didn’t look out of their depth last season, just didn’t have time to gel and missed a goalscorer. If we’d have had Moore and McBurnie from the start last season, we’d have finished mid table comfortably.
I would much rather watch young, hungry players then ageing players in the twilight of their career. Fair enough they could teach the young players with their experience but I fully trust the gaffer to do that.
True DT, that's why I used the words " not specifically", as it appears that Cahill could be Turf Moor bound and Ruddy would probably be up as cover, were he to return to Carrow Road.
Daniel has carefully and very successfully crafted a team spirit and mode of playing that has returned us to the Championship. An 'old hand' would no doubt have their own views on the game and there would, in my view be a danger of that undermining the ethic which Stendel has built. I'd say keep on as we are, but hopefully with the injection of even more promising development prospects lured by our higher league standing and our reputation for bringing players on.
No club better than Barnsley only clubs that spend stupid amounts of money on players then get themselves into financial trouble.l
To be fair, even as a championship Club we are less of an attraction to players looking for a move than quite a few clubs in the division. I reckon there are about 12 teams in the division with more pulling power based on name alone before we start with finances. I realise I'm now going to be banished from this board forever but i'm just telling it as I see it.
Lots of different threads on this post and I agree with much of what is written but on the principle of having a ‘policy’ of not signing anyone over 25 years of age. If that’s the case, it is pure idiocy.
You are perfectly entitled to your opinion HH. Granted we probably are perceived as less glamourous than a lot of Clubs, but I feel deep down we are probably admired as having spirit, determination and a never say die attitude. If we spring a surprise by beating a team when the media thought we had no chance, the headlines in the papers usually contain the words " battling Barnsley" or something similar. My final word on signing mature/ experienced players who might just tease a little more out of our young squad of players, whilst recognising the folly of bringing some players to the Club who's best days are behind them, the signing of Craig Hignett (29), Paul Wilkinson (32) Neil Thompson and John Hendrie both (33), didn't do us much harm. I suppose the question then probably is, are the Board setting their threshold of 25, too low.?
Like in any debate, either side can provide examples to support a relevant case or opinion. For every Hendrie, WIlkinson or Thompson we've had umpteen types in the Lita, Treacy, Richardson mould as well. I personally think that our style of football suits a younger team. What good is an older head in the middle of the pitch, who we want to act as a midfield general, if he doesn't have the legs do be doing the running that McGeehan and Mowatt do for 40+ games a year? Got to be a consideration under Stendel.
