Sage in or out

[RedandBlueSash]

That’s fine. You are perfectly entitled to your opinion and ultimately we all have opinions on the game otherwise we wouldn’t be on here. I respect yours but I have a different one. Mingueza has been pony for us so far but may come good. Khalali has been out of his depth so far but may come good. I don’t regard Sarr as a viable midfield option but maybe I am wrong.

Your point about not being able to afford to finished article is kind of the exact point people are making. We had something like the finished article in Lacroix and Munoz. We sold them and replaced them with players who may be as good in time but aren’t right now. Hence the squad is worse and has gaps

Maybe but if we don't sell for profit we defeat the entire model which allows us to advance as a club of small means. If we don't sell at all, we lose £75M and that sort of thing definitely gets us relegated eventually.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Assuming the club has a choice with regards to selling a player or keeping them. It seems that for a club our size, in order to attract players we have to put a reasonable release clause into the contract.

Odd when it's every player's dream to play in the Premier League. Earning an extra £50,000 a week is even more of a dream.

 

[JHB]

Maybe but if we don't sell for profit we defeat the entire model which allows us to advance as a club of small means. If we don't sell at all, we lose £75M and that sort of thing definitely gets us relegated eventually.

I don’t disagree. What gets me about Munoz is we ploughed all the money from the sale into a player who has been poor so far. Now he may come good and I hope so but currently we are net neutral financially and worse off on the pitch

 

[Willo]

I don’t disagree. What gets me about Munoz is we ploughed all the money from the sale into a player who has been poor so far. Now he may come good and I hope so but currently we are net neutral financially and worse off on the pitch

Khalaili has not yet 'Hit his straps' with us but with the greatest of respect the Belgian League is different in quality to the PL and it might take a degree of time for him to adjust to the demands of the league in this country.New League, new team and perhaps tactically Union St Gilloise were different to the tactics deployed by Monsieur Sage.

 

[JHB]

Khalaili has not yet 'Hit his straps' with us but with the greatest of respect the Belgian League is different in quality to the PL and it might take a degree of time for him to adjust to the demands of the league in this country.New League, new team and perhaps tactically Union St Gilloise were different to the tactics deployed by Monsieur Sage.

All mitigating factors. All the more reason getting rid of Munoz made no sense, especially when we needed stability in defensive positions having got rid of Lacroix.

I’d also say Munoz came from the Belgian League and hit the ground running.

It’s not just the defensive side that worries me with Khalali. He constantly gives the ball away and doesn’t have the energy to get up and down the pitch that even Mitchell has, let alone Munoz. He just looks miles out of his depth

 

[Aray]

 

[TheBigToePunt]

I don’t disagree. What gets me about Munoz is we ploughed all the money from the sale into a player who has been poor so far. Now he may come good and I hope so but currently we are net neutral financially and worse off on the pitch

To which you can add spending the profits from Eze and Guehi on Larsen and Johnson.

I don't like the idea of palace only ever buying promising players at lower prices, developing them, selling high, and repeating over and again. I like that we nick decent free transfers here and there, buy the odd good-value journeyman, and spend as big as we can on what we hope are good players. It shows flexibility and pragmatism to use a mixed approach.

Thing is, it all comes under huge strain if the bigger money signings underperform, or the promising hopefuls don't kick on. The free transfers and cheaper journeymen rarely become our best, most valuable individuals. They are more of a support act. It's the young hopefuls that have the greatest significance for the ongoing budget, and the big money signings are supposed to be the fruit of that approach.

Where we have hit choppy waters is that neither category of signing has worked out well for a while now. Larsen and Johnson, obviously, but also Pino haven't given us anything like £100m worth of performances. I'd be very pleasantly surprised if O'Neill (who I include in that category as the swap for Johnson) can change that.

At the other end, Canvot, Khalili, Esse, might all end up in the bin marked 'Franca'. We don't know yet about Gozo or Osario. What we do know is that the promising young hopeful signings are not only recording a lower success rate, they are costing increasingly more. There's another £100m spent on that little bunch.

All of which just underlines that whatever transfer strategy and business model you think you have, there is nothing as risky as changing the players who are actually performing for you.

 

[BromleyMonkey]

To which you can add spending the profits from Eze and Guehi on Larsen and Johnson.

I don't like the idea of palace only ever buying promising players at lower prices, developing them, selling high, and repeating over and again. I like that we nick decent free transfers here and there, buy the odd good-value journeyman, and spend as big as we can on what we hope are good players. It shows flexibility and pragmatism to use a mixed approach.

Thing is, it all comes under huge strain if the bigger money signings underperform, or the promising hopefuls don't kick on. The free transfers and cheaper journeymen rarely become our best, most valuable individuals. They are more of a support act. It's the young hopefuls that have the greatest significance for the ongoing budget, and the big money signings are supposed to be the fruit of that approach.

Where we have hit choppy waters is that neither category of signing has worked out well for a while now. Larsen and Johnson, obviously, but also Pino haven't given us anything like £100m worth of performances. I'd be very pleasantly surprised if O'Neill (who I include in that category as the swap for Johnson) can change that.

At the other end, Canvot, Khalili, Esse, might all end up in the bin marked 'Franca'. We don't know yet about Gozo or Osario. What we do know is that the promising young hopeful signings are not only recording a lower success rate, they are costing increasingly more. There's another £100m spent on that little bunch.

All of which just underlines that whatever transfer strategy and business model you think you have, there is nothing as risky as changing the players who are actually performing for you.

I doubt there’s ever been so much money spent in desperate signings!! Strange thing to do for us, because we’re usually frugal from frugal street

 

[Painter]

And they're errors which have invariably been seized upon by strikers more clinical than ours.

Excluding Delap, whom Glasner continues to start over woods.

 

[TheBigToePunt]

Excluding Delap, whom Glasner continues to start over woods.

And the Middlesbrough forwards, and the Poznan ones. They run Forest pretty close for missing sitters against us.

Hence the lingering feeling that even our wins this season have been lucky.

 

[JHB]

To which you can add spending the profits from Eze and Guehi on Larsen and Johnson.

I don't like the idea of palace only ever buying promising players at lower prices, developing them, selling high, and repeating over and again. I like that we nick decent free transfers here and there, buy the odd good-value journeyman, and spend as big as we can on what we hope are good players. It shows flexibility and pragmatism to use a mixed approach.

Thing is, it all comes under huge strain if the bigger money signings underperform, or the promising hopefuls don't kick on. The free transfers and cheaper journeymen rarely become our best, most valuable individuals. They are more of a support act. It's the young hopefuls that have the greatest significance for the ongoing budget, and the big money signings are supposed to be the fruit of that approach.

Where we have hit choppy waters is that neither category of signing has worked out well for a while now. Larsen and Johnson, obviously, but also Pino haven't given us anything like £100m worth of performances. I'd be very pleasantly surprised if O'Neill (who I include in that category as the swap for Johnson) can change that.

At the other end, Canvot, Khalili, Esse, might all end up in the bin marked 'Franca'. We don't know yet about Gozo or Osario. What we do know is that the promising young hopeful signings are not only recording a lower success rate, they are costing increasingly more. There's another £100m spent on that little bunch.

All of which just underlines that whatever transfer strategy and business model you think you have, there is nothing as risky as changing the players who are actually performing for you.

Agreed. Johnson is arguably our worst ever signing. £35m and did nothing. We’ve swapped him for a player worth half that at best. I know people talk about Pino’s quality etc but the reality is he has largely been ineffectual. His return in goals, assists and influencing games is poor.

JSL I am more sympathetic to. He’s not worth anything like £45m but we thought JPM was leaving for £30m and a net outlay of £15m would have been ok. As it turns out that didn’t happen and we have a problem. The other really bad one is Nketiah. Poor player at this level. A track record of mediocrity at very best. Doesn’t fit the system we had then or now and we shelled out £30m. Bonkers.

I also think Osario and Gozo were daft signings. A combined £40m+ for two players who aren’t going to play in a position we already had depth in. Why? Just a total waste of money and resources.

 

[JHB]

And the Middlesbrough forwards, and the Poznan ones. They run Forest pretty close for missing sitters against us.

Hence the lingering feeling that even our wins this season have been lucky.

The worry is even in the games we’ve won we’ve been extremely open and had no control over the game. Wins are wins though so we take them.

I strongly suspect by the international break we will be in the bottom three. Maybe even bottom of the table and looking for a new manager. Hope I am wrong but other teams starting to pick up points

 

[pssguy]

Agreed. Johnson is arguably our worst ever signing. £35m and did nothing. We’ve swapped him for a player worth half that at best. I know people talk about Pino’s quality etc but the reality is he has largely been ineffectual. His return in goals, assists and influencing games is poor.

JSL I am more sympathetic to. He’s not worth anything like £45m but we thought JPM was leaving for £30m and a net outlay of £15m would have been ok. As it turns out that didn’t happen and we have a problem. The other really bad one is Nketiah. Poor player at this level. A track record of mediocrity at very best. Doesn’t fit the system we had then or now and we shelled out £30m. Bonkers.

I also think Osario and Gozo were daft signings. A combined £40m+ for two players who aren’t going to play in a position we already had depth in. Why? Just a total waste of money and resources.

He has looked a lot more influential this season and has 4 goals in the last 6 games. He may always be better in European games but has only just turned 24 and is probably worth more than we paid for him

 

[Willo]

The worry is even in the games we’ve won we’ve been extremely open and had no control over the game. Wins are wins though so we take them.

I strongly suspect by the international break we will be in the bottom three. Maybe even bottom of the table and looking for a new manager. Hope I am wrong but other teams starting to pick up points

Fulham have recorded back-to-back wins and kept 'Clean sheets' in both games.

 

[TheBigToePunt]

Agreed. Johnson is arguably our worst ever signing. £35m and did nothing. We’ve swapped him for a player worth half that at best. I know people talk about Pino’s quality etc but the reality is he has largely been ineffectual. His return in goals, assists and influencing games is poor.

JSL I am more sympathetic to. He’s not worth anything like £45m but we thought JPM was leaving for £30m and a net outlay of £15m would have been ok. As it turns out that didn’t happen and we have a problem. The other really bad one is Nketiah. Poor player at this level. A track record of mediocrity at very best. Doesn’t fit the system we had then or now and we shelled out £30m. Bonkers.

I also think Osario and Gozo were daft signings. A combined £40m+ for two players who aren’t going to play in a position we already had depth in. Why? Just a total waste of money and resources.

Yes, I should have included Nketiah on my list of big money underperformers. Forgot about him. That probably says a lot in itself.

I kind of get the idea that Larsen is supposed to be Mateta plus £15m but even on those terms he's been a terrible downgrade at a large cost. In real terms it gets even worse.

For me, Gozo and Osario are classic director of football/moneyball signings, made in the hope they are a highly profitable longer term investment. Fine if they don't cost much and you're first team is good and strong. A poor use of money that needed to go elsewhere if not.

That said, even when we obviously needed to focus on established senior players for here and now, the underlining issue remains. The best solution to palace not generating enough money to have a good enough side is to buy cheap, develop, and sell high. The club are sort of bound to make such signings even more once they've wasted previous profits on duff players, even though that is when the team most needs immediate reinforcement! That is our only route to being able to provide that reinforcement.

Not that buying promise is going well. That end of things seems to be struggling. At one point we had four or five massive financial assets in the team, all of whom represented significant potential profit for modest outlays. We literally could have paid for the new stand by selling three or four of them.

Now, the only player we could sell for significant profit is Wharton. Once he goes, our remaining ability to create a better transfer budget goes with him.

If we had four or five youngsters that other clubs wanted then we could gradually recover from the failure of our big money signings, replenishing the budget through sales. As it stands, we've are not only stuck with poor quality big money signings that we will never make our money back on, but also lack the means to restart the process that provided the money for us to waste in the first place!

 

[JHB]

Yes, I should have included Nketiah on my list of big money underperformers. Forgot about him. That probably says a lot in itself.

I kind of get the idea that Larsen is supposed to be Mateta plus £15m but even on those terms he's been a terrible downgrade at a large cost. In real terms it gets even worse.

For me, Gozo and Osario are classic director of football/moneyball signings, made in the hope they are a highly profitable longer term investment. Fine if they don't cost much and you're first team is good and strong. A poor use of money that needed to go elsewhere if not.

That said, even when we obviously needed to focus on established senior players for here and now, the underlining issue remains. The best solution to palace not generating enough money to have a good enough side is to buy cheap, develop, and sell high. The club are sort of bound to make such signings even more once they've wasted previous profits on duff players, even though that is when the team most needs immediate reinforcement! That is our only route out of it.

Not that buying promise is going well. That end of things seems to be struggling. At one point we had four or five massive financial assets in the team, all of whom represented significant potential profit for modest outlays. We literally could have paid for the new stand by selling three or four of them.

Now, the only player we could sell for significant profit is Wharton. Once he goes, our remaining ability to create a better transfer budget goes with him.

If we had four or five youngsters that other clubs wanted then we could gradually recover from the failure of our big money signings, replenishing the budget through sales. As it stands, we've are not only stuck with poor quality big money signings that we will never make our money back on, but also lack the means to restart the process that provided the money for us to waste in the first place!

Yep. Our only currently scalable asset we would make a guaranteed return in is Wharton. If we got relegated he’d go for about £50m I reckon. If we stay up probably £65m or thereabouts. We would have suitors for Pino but not at a big profit as it stands. Henderson would go but probably be in demand but not at a big profit. Can’t see any of our other players being in demand at all to be honest. Mitchell should be but seems to fly under the radar.

 

[Davepalace707]

If we had four or five youngsters that other clubs wanted then we could gradually recover from the failure of our big money signings, replenishing the budget through sales. As it stands, we've are not only stuck with poor quality big money signings that we will never make our money back on, but also lack the means to restart the process that provided the money for us to waste in the first place!

This perfectly sums up our predicament. And is why Sage has to be able to mould a more solid team pdq or someone else will be brought in to have a go. Cos we ain’t buying any more players.

 

[JHB]

Watching Spurs play Chelsea off the park. All the teams at the bottom end of the table with the exception of Coventry and maybe Sunderland look like they have improved dramatically. They look much better than us. We need to see an immediate improvement tomorrow or it is hard to see the board has any other option but to change things. Make no mistake we are firmly in a battle for survival

 

[TheBigToePunt]

This perfectly sums up our predicament. And is why Sage has to be able to mould a more solid team pdq or someone else will be brought in to have a go. Cos we ain’t buying any more players.

Years ago managers would be brought in with a remit to lower a wage bill, or bring in X amount a year through player sales to keep the club going, even if the fans only found out about it all years later. That manager would do his job accordingly, picking a certain number of youngsters he thought might get sold on, just so their value went up, or setting up his team defensively in the knowledge that there was no money for better players.

In order words, there was a connection between the business needs and every level of the football decision making.

I can't quite see that at Palace at the moment. Or at least, I still can't quite see Sage as the man to see us through this period. Hopefully I'm wrong, but it does all seem to point towards the club being on the ropes a bit and just needing to avoid being knocked out, rather than coming out chin-first every week.

 

[Painter]

Yep. Our only currently scalable asset we would make a guaranteed return in is Wharton. If we got relegated he’d go for about £50m I reckon. If we stay up probably £65m or thereabouts. We would have suitors for Pino but not at a big profit as it stands. Henderson would go but probably be in demand but not at a big profit. Can’t see any of our other players being in demand at all to be honest. Mitchell should be but seems to fly under the radar.

Kamada, Mateta, Sarr in your opinion aren't saleable assets, that we would get a return on!!