Confirmed Signing Josh King

[Lanolin]

My opinions seem mad, because I don't rate King, care to elaborate oh wise one. Also you improve the squad by buying first team ready players, if you buy back ups your first team never improves.

No, because you think Bolasie is better/as good as King. I mean they're both available, Bolasie for significantly cheaper, and yet King is clearly much more in demand. It would appear not many people share your opinion, but as I said, you're welcome to it.

King is 'first team ready'. If you mean good enough to walk into the team then you're just saying exactly what I said you were, and you said you definitely weren't, which is quite an impressive turnaround in the space of one post. If you think we're signing anyone anytime soon who is better than DCL and Richarlison then you are going to be sorely disappointed. I would be content with bringing in somebody who can come in and give them a rest sometimes, and who can come on as a sub to potentially change games. As I said, all teams buy players to be back ups, the idea that everyone you sign must automatically be better than what you've got is painfully outdated. Look at Liverpool over the last couple of years, none of Jota, Shaqiri, Minamino, that left back who i can't remember the name of etc have been bought to go into the strongest XI, they've been bought to add depth. I'd say they've improved in recent years though.

 

[catcherintherye]

Id leave it in all honesty, we have enough and this is just reaching, i dont see us doing this deal in a full market, so i dont think we should. Brooks though id be all over.

The issue for Brooks is of course the price. I do wonder if we are hedging, hoping Brooks and Sarr come down in price if they don't get promoted.

To some degree, it's also why I can see some retience of PL teams giving championship teams money. I mean they are asking for £40m for players and pleading poverty, which does feel a bit odd.

 

[dutchblue54]

No, because you think Bolasie is better/as good as King. I mean they're both available, Bolasie for significantly cheaper, and yet King is clearly much more in demand. It would appear not many people share your opinion, but as I said, you're welcome to it.

King is 'first team ready'. If you mean good enough to walk into the team then you're just saying exactly what I said you were, and you said you definitely weren't, which is quite an impressive turnaround in the space of one post. If you think we're signing anyone anytime soon who is better than DCL and Richarlison then you are going to be sorely disappointed. I would be content with bringing in somebody who can come in and give them a rest sometimes, and who can come on as a sub to potentially change games. As I said, all teams buy players to be back ups, the idea that everyone you sign must automatically be better than what you've got is painfully outdated. Look at Liverpool over the last couple of years, none of Jota, Shaqiri, Minamino, that left back who i can't remember the name of etc have been bought to go into the strongest XI, they've been bought to add depth. I'd say they've improved in recent years though.

look at the stats of both that will tell you you are way off.
If Richarlison or DCL get injured, we need some one who can score a goal.
If that would be Bolasie we can start preparing for the Championship lol.

 

[AmericasToffee]

Got kind of hopeful, then saw "football insider".

 

[catcherintherye]

No, because you think Bolasie is better/as good as King. I mean they're both available, Bolasie for significantly cheaper, and yet King is clearly much more in demand. It would appear not many people share your opinion, but as I said, you're welcome to it.

King is 'first team ready'. If you mean good enough to walk into the team then you're just saying exactly what I said you were, and you said you definitely weren't, which is quite an impressive turnaround in the space of one post. If you think we're signing anyone anytime soon who is better than DCL and Richarlison then you are going to be sorely disappointed. I would be content with bringing in somebody who can come in and give them a rest sometimes, and who can come on as a sub to potentially change games. As I said, all teams buy players to be back ups, the idea that everyone you sign must automatically be better than what you've got is painfully outdated. Look at Liverpool over the last couple of years, none of Jota, Shaqiri, Minamino, that left back who i can't remember the name of etc have been bought to go into the strongest XI, they've been bought to add depth. I'd say they've improved in recent years though.

I personally quite like Yannick, seems a good bloke. I'm also quite forgiving of the signing, I thought he was excellent pre injury. 5 Assists in 11 games or something, with a goal. Post injury though he hasnt been the same. Whenever he has gone anywhere, he hasn't been the same.

Even if you take Kings open play returns, he's a lot better than Bolasie. There's probably a debate about pre injury Bolasie to King, which would be an interesting one, but not now.

I am against signing "squad players" for the most part, but increasingly we may find that is where we get too. We have resolved an awful lot of the first 11 problems now. Really Right back and GK are our only 2 areas (and thats not an immediate issue with Colemans form). You start to change what you look for a bit. Versatility becomes more important.

One thing Liverpool did well, was they got a good core of back up players. United under Ferguson were probably the best example, though the best Wenger team's had it too. Players on the bench who could come in and do a job. Games that allow you to rest your Richarlinsons or James/DCl's without droppoing the quality too much.

 

[MarkHollis]

The issue for Brooks is of course the price. I do wonder if we are hedging, hoping Brooks and Sarr come down in price if they don't get promoted.

To some degree, it's also why I can see some retience of PL teams giving championship teams money. I mean they are asking for £40m for players and pleading poverty, which does feel a bit odd.

Don't think Bournemouth and Watford are representative when it comes to Championship clubs' financial situation, especially with parachute money involved.

 

[catcherintherye]

Don't think Bournemouth and Watford are representative when it comes to Championship clubs' financial situation, especially with parachute money involved.

No of course. But Brentford are asking for 30m for their players. You can see why some PL are a bit perplexed that on the hand they get their money cut, and on the other they have to doubly reduce their money to give championship teams money.

 

[Brisan123]

Just described the past two months as the worst time he's ever had in his life, due to all the complications with his transfer. Also considers himself to be in crap shape, national team manager concurs. Also lots of blag on how West Ham are in for him.

in norwegian though.

Joshua King om klubbproblemene: – De verste to månedene i livet mitt

ULLEVAAL STADION (VG) Joshua King (28) vet ikke hva hans fremtid på klubblaget bringer – og forteller åpenhjertig om en mentalt svært tøff periode.

www.vg.no

Now you can choose to read this as a great oppurtunity for Carlo to turn things around for him, or be the pessimist and readit as if he's past it and not gonna make it here. I'll stick to the latter, like.

Any RS lurkers here to translate

 

[Lanolin]

I personally quite like Yannick, seems a good bloke. I'm also quite forgiving of the signing, I thought he was excellent pre injury. 5 Assists in 11 games or something, with a goal. Post injury though he hasnt been the same. Whenever he has gone anywhere, he hasn't been the same.

Even if you take Kings open play returns, he's a lot better than Bolasie. There's probably a debate about pre injury Bolasie to King, which would be an interesting one, but not now.

I am against signing "squad players" for the most part, but increasingly we may find that is where we get too. We have resolved an awful lot of the first 11 problems now. Really Right back and GK are our only 2 areas (and thats not an immediate issue with Colemans form). You start to change what you look for a bit. Versatility becomes more important.

One thing Liverpool did well, was they got a good core of back up players. United under Ferguson were probably the best example, though the best Wenger team's had it too. Players on the bench who could come in and do a job. Games that allow you to rest your Richarlinsons or James/DCl's without droppoing the quality too much.

That's it in a nutshell. Is King the type of player I really want us to sign? No, of course not. Realistically, is he a good option for where we are at the moment? Yes, I'd say so. He's the type of player who could come in and do a decent job from the start, and freshen things up during a game, without there being a huge drop off in the level of play. He's obviously not as good as Richarlison or DCL, but he's not so far behind them that the whole thing falls apart. I think with Kean last year, and more than likely with Simms, that's the issue you have, their all round game just isn't good enough for the team to keep playing the same way so you risk the whole thing falling apart. With most top teams, if they put out an entire second team then the drop off in quality will be huge and obvious, but they can make 2/3 changes at a time without it having any impact at all.

 

[Brisan123]

Can he be had for around 10m? If so you're not going to get better in the UK for that. Great age, low fee, modest wages, I'd be all for him signing as an option off the bench.

He will find it hard to get a seat on the bench with all the deadwood there already.
Although he would be well suited to join the rest of them

 

[Brisan123]

I agree mate. You have to face the possibility that we may not have the finances at the moment though. If we could get a loan to buy, at a price that would interest Watford, hat would be our best chance. But the lack of rumours suggest that isnlt happening. Window closes this time tomorrow.

King, at the right price in fee and wages, would add a back up goal threat that we currently don't have.

Never has and never will be an issue

 

[Shibbywiggles]

We need to have a massive season this year. We need to pushing for top 4 end of season (and maybe win a damn trophy for once) to keep Richarlison, Digne etc. happy and staying here past the end of this season. Whilst King wouldn’t be a sexy signing, he’s far better back up for DCL than we have and can definitely do a job rotation wise to keep us going over the tough winter period.
For the right price, I’m in.

 

[catcherintherye]

That's it in a nutshell. Is King the type of player I really want us to sign? No, of course not. Realistically, is he a good option for where we are at the moment? Yes, I'd say so. He's the type of player who could come in and do a decent job from the start, and freshen things up during a game, without there being a huge drop off in the level of play. He's obviously not as good as Richarlison or DCL, but he's not so far behind them that the whole thing falls apart. I think with Kean last year, and more than likely with Simms, that's the issue you have, their all round game just isn't good enough for the team to keep playing the same way so you risk the whole thing falling apart. With most top teams, if they put out an entire second team then the drop off in quality will be huge and obvious, but they can make 2/3 changes at a time without it having any impact at all.

Yes a fair analysis. I would add, if we don't sign King I don't think it's disaster. We are a bit light before January and will rely on a bit of luck, but honestly I can't really criticise the broad strategy in the use of funds this summer, and if there aren't much left it's one of those.

As for King, I think we are seeing the club is beginning to head in a direction that is taking the fans a little time to catch up too. We are used to hoping for miracles to come in to propel us forwards. Ancelotti will feel he has the makings of a team, but probably needs players who won't let him down, and he knows what he gets from them. It's not so much how high is their potential ceiling, but how low is their floor.

He organises teams very well. He wants players to help him win games regularly, and a 28 year old, who will grasp instructions quite quickly is what he's likely after.

Simms has done very well for the 23's, and maye he keeps doing so, but at present he's a risk, and for Ancelotti why would you risk it, or take on another project? We already have Gordon, Brainthwaite, Nkonkou and slightly above that a group who are early 20's. There's no imperative for us to take on more young players.

I know some want us to emulate RB Leipzig, who while they have done very well, haven't actually won anything either.

King to me is the type of player sides who do wins things have in their squad as a back up option.

 

[brieverton]

Has there been anything further to suggest we have done more than express interest?

I think a large part of the issue with the way players like King are perceived relate to the fact that its been aeons since we had options in reserve that might actually be decent. Not great, but decent.

Not only that, but a player at Kings level will also do comparatively better with better players around him. What a surprise that is. That's what the RS second string have always managed, particularly in attack. Origi will bag enough goals a year to justify his fee/wages, I wouldn't fancy his chances if he was playing week in, week out for Fulham, for example. Good enough for a bit-part role, clearly not good enough to be a regular starter.

Quality is important and King is by no means that. Depth is as important though. The better teams have both, but they are not the same thing.

 

[catcherintherye]

Has there been anything further to suggest we have done more than express interest?

I think a large part of the issue with the way players like King are perceived relate to the fact that its been aeons since we had options in reserve that might actually be decent. Not great, but decent.

Not only that, but a player at Kings level will also do comparatively better with better players around him. What a surprise that is. That's what the RS second string have always managed, particularly in attack. Origi will bag enough goals a year to justify his fee/wages, I wouldn't fancy his chances if he was playing week in, week out for Fulham, for example. Good enough for a bit-part role, clearly not good enough to be a regular starter.

Quality is important and King is by no means that. Depth is as important though. The better teams have both, but they are not the same thing.

Yes all true. Some very dubious surce has said we have bid. A few murmerings really.

You are right on depth too. It's the advantage of better players as well, suddenly lads you thought you;d get nothing out of are ok. Delph and Davies both looked more comfortable with Doucoure in front of them. Sigurdsson has been better with Allan behind him and James in front. You can suddenly slot people in, and they look better too.