Oh Tamwolf you mentioned two Prem players, and you can debate how good or bad a signing they are compared to Neto.

But if we add Fernandes, that is just 3 teams in the whole of the Prem you deem did any better in the transfer market. A market that Cinci claims we failed miserably in.

comment by Amigawolf no longer MIA (U18508)
posted 29 minutes ago
Oh Tamwolf you mentioned two Prem players, and you can debate how good or bad a signing they are compared to Neto.

But if we add Fernandes, that is just 3 teams in the whole of the Prem you deem did any better in the transfer market. A market that Cinci claims we failed miserably in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Did anyone do worse. We basically added a solid substitute option Nuno has only recently started to trust. Have others added so little?

Well adding more does not necessarily mean better Cinci. Aston Villa spent over 100 million, and it could be argued are now worse than they were before.

We signed Neto, who I think every Wolves fan can appreciate, Podence, and Campana I think could be great signings, and Jordao some on here seem to rate.

I would argue that is some decent business.

But at the level we are now at you need solid signings to go with good prospective buys, if we had done better business last summer we wouldn't be looking over our shoulder now and would be in a very strong position to secure a CL spot. That is what will propel us toward the top. If we have a similar window this coming summer then we won't be closing the gap at all.

Cinci, I'm not having a go at you. But what does better business even mean?

Signing more players, spending more money, paying higher wages, what is it you think Wolves are doing wrong?

comment by Amigawolf no longer MIA (U18508)
posted 4 minutes ago
Cinci, I'm not having a go at you. But what does better business even mean?

Signing more players, spending more money, paying higher wages, what is it you think Wolves are doing wrong?
----------------------------------------------------------------------


We were trying to spend more money so why is it you are so opposed to that? It isn't your money, the club know what they have, don't worry about that side of it. What we did wrong is not identifying better options, it isn't in any clubs plan for new signings to be gone within months, THAT is bad business.

And better business is obvious, better business than what we did, prospective buys are great but you need immediate impact players as well, the best clubs don't sit still waiting for prospects to come good.

comment by Amigawolf no longer MIA (U18508)
posted about an hour ago
Oh Tamwolf you mentioned two Prem players, and you can debate how good or bad a signing they are compared to Neto.

But if we add Fernandes, that is just 3 teams in the whole of the Prem you deem did any better in the transfer market. A market that Cinci claims we failed miserably in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Neto was signed in the summer. I just did January as you were talking about Fernandes and the January window. Do you want me to go back to the summer and start adding more players?

Pulisic to Chelsea, Kovacic to Chelsea, Tielemans to Leicester, Ayoze Perez to Leicester, Danny Ings to Southampton etc.

Why do we need to limit it to the Premier League too. Can we only sign players other Prem sides do? I think you need to stop looking at things in isolation.

Yes Cinci agreed we were trying to spend, that I have no problem with. But obviously the club for whatever reason chose not to. and I could list numerous reasons why that would be. Spending is easy, spending wisely is key.

Better business sounds great, but that is an aspiration not a given, I'm sure Villa wish they had done better business with their 140 million spend

Tam you can sign players from where you like, you have mentioned some good players, but are they that much better than our signings?

My point is we have done pretty well in our transfer dealings, all things considered.