Jack Clarke Replacement

Leeds United news here, transfer rumours, club affairs, players, fans, etc.
Specific match discussions should go in the category below.

Jack Clarke Replacement

Postby johnnysmiles » 02 Jan 2020, 12:12

Phil Hay has reported that the club has decided on their target for replacing Jack Clarke, but also pointed out that the priority is for a replacement for Eddie, and Phil says Che Adams seems to be the number 1 target...

Bielsa also implied after WBA that match fitness would be a criteria / factor to consider for both positions...

Can anyone speculate as to who the Jack Clarke replacement might be???
johnnysmiles
Brian McDermott's optician
 
Posts: 240
Joined: 26 Dec 2017, 00:56

Re: Jack Clarke Replacement

Postby Selby White » 02 Jan 2020, 13:06

To be honest I'm not bothered if we replace Jack, he wasn't in the team so no big loss in my opinion. If the need to play a youngster is required would rather see the likes of Stevens, Gotts or Bogustz get a chance. More happy developing our own players than someone else.
Loanies should either be obvious first team like White and Harrison or with a view to buy such as Meslier.
Keep your face always toward the sunshine - and shadows will fall behind you.
User avatar
Selby White
LUFCTALK Moderator
 
Posts: 9489
Joined: 25 Mar 2012, 11:32

Re: Jack Clarke Replacement

Postby isrodger » 02 Jan 2020, 19:36

johnnysmiles wrote:Phil Hay has reported that the club has decided on their target for replacing Jack Clarke, but also pointed out that the priority is for a replacement for Eddie, and Phil says Che Adams seems to be the number 1 target...

Bielsa also implied after WBA that match fitness would be a criteria / factor to consider for both positions...

Can anyone speculate as to who the Jack Clarke replacement might be???



Bowen ?? I thought it was telling bielsa spoke at length about him prior to the Hull game.
isrodger
Howard Wilkinson's military attaché
 
Posts: 4040
Joined: 25 May 2009, 09:57

Re: Jack Clarke Replacement

Postby isrodger » 09 Jan 2020, 10:25

Another one - pure speculation on my part - Tom Lawrence - Derby after Clarke maybe the Morris wants shut
isrodger
Howard Wilkinson's military attaché
 
Posts: 4040
Joined: 25 May 2009, 09:57

Re: Jack Clarke Replacement

Postby Leonickroberts » 09 Jan 2020, 10:44

isrodger wrote:
johnnysmiles wrote:Phil Hay has reported that the club has decided on their target for replacing Jack Clarke, but also pointed out that the priority is for a replacement for Eddie, and Phil says Che Adams seems to be the number 1 target...

Bielsa also implied after WBA that match fitness would be a criteria / factor to consider for both positions...

Can anyone speculate as to who the Jack Clarke replacement might be???



Bowen ?? I thought it was telling bielsa spoke at length about him prior to the Hull game.


Bowen is worth 20m+ and if he leaves (which is likely) it'll be for a decent EPL side.
'When he plays on snow, he doesn't leave any footprints’
User avatar
Leonickroberts
Eddie Gray's leftorium proprietor
 
Posts: 841
Joined: 12 Jul 2011, 08:16

Re: Jack Clarke Replacement

Postby isrodger » 09 Jan 2020, 15:28

We should be only signing players players who can play at that level though a large villa last year
isrodger
Howard Wilkinson's military attaché
 
Posts: 4040
Joined: 25 May 2009, 09:57

Re: Jack Clarke Replacement

Postby Otherworld » 09 Jan 2020, 16:40

I think it’s very unlikely that we’ll be able to recruit anyone better than our currently starting players, when all are fit. Our main priority should be to bring in some cover for key positions in case of injuries and suspensions.

We know that MB has been reluctant to bring in another CB, as he believes that Berardi, Ayling, and others can cover, and we’re well covered for full backs too. Meslier has shown that he’s more than capable of stepping up as first team keeper too.

Phillips’ position is a bit more problematic. Obviously we don’t have a replacement of similar quality, and his stand-in would normally be Forshaw, who’s had an injury plagued season (although it appears that he may be back to training soon). Dallas could step in there, Klich could drop back, or we’ve seen White move into a more advanced role to cover (although I’m not a fan of that).

Central midfield has been a problem, with Hernandez and Roberts both suffering injuries, but it looks like both might be close to a return, with Shackleton also coming back from injury, and Gotts available as an option, along with Bogusz and McAlmont too. Wingers Costa and Harrison can be covered by Alioski, Dallas and Hernandez, so I’m not too worried about them.

Bamford has done well this season, and appears to be reasonably injury-free so far this season, but this is where we need some cover. If Bamford is injured, we only realistically have Edmondson as cover, and MB has shown little inclination to use him so far, so a stand-in is essential, preferably someone with experience at Championship level, who can fit into the team quickly, but will be prepared to wait for his chance from the bench.

In summary, I don’t think we need to panic. If all we get in is an experienced striker to cover for Bamford, I’ll be happy with that. A winger and/or a creative midfielder would be a bonus, but not a priority.
Otherworld
Major Frank Buckley's monkey gland expert
 
Posts: 698
Joined: 25 Jul 2012, 21:59

Re: Jack Clarke Replacement

Postby Leonickroberts » 09 Jan 2020, 17:01

isrodger wrote:We should be only signing players players who can play at that level though a large villa last year


How do we do this within the constraints of FFP though ISR? If the players aren't there to be signed for the money we've got (irrespective of how rich our owner is or could be), then we can't sign them.

Right now we need players to get us up, not players for next season. That means top quality loanees who can hit the ground running. If we go up and have money to burn, we can raid the Championship for players like Bowen, Watkins etc, but there's absolutely zero chance we (or West Brom, or even Wolves in their big season), would ever be able to sign this type of player in Jan.

Agree with you Otherworld - if we can bring in Che Adams and potentially a creative no.10 (I would've liked Freeman but sounds like he's off the cards) I'll be happy enough going into the second half of the season with Shackleton and Pablo coming back (and potentially Forshaw, although I'll believe that when I see it...), and Gotts, McCalmont and Bogusz as backup.

We have the same debate every season. Of course we'd all love the club to be able to drop £15m on the player who's guaranteed to go up, but they're once in a blue moon, and almost impossible to land, as Dan James showed. We have to be pragmatic, and accept that parachute payment clubs aside, the whole Championship is in the same boat when it comes to financing Jan moves.
'When he plays on snow, he doesn't leave any footprints’
User avatar
Leonickroberts
Eddie Gray's leftorium proprietor
 
Posts: 841
Joined: 12 Jul 2011, 08:16

Re: Jack Clarke Replacement

Postby isrodger » 09 Jan 2020, 19:41

Leonickroberts wrote:
isrodger wrote:We should be only signing players players who can play at that level though a large villa last year


How do we do this within the constraints of FFP though ISR? If the players aren't there to be signed for the money we've got (irrespective of how rich our owner is or could be), then we can't sign them.

Right now we need players to get us up, not players for next season. That means top quality loanees who can hit the ground running. If we go up and have money to burn, we can raid the Championship for players like Bowen, Watkins etc, but there's absolutely zero chance we (or West Brom, or even Wolves in their big season), would ever be able to sign this type of player in Jan.

Agree with you Otherworld - if we can bring in Che Adams and potentially a creative no.10 (I would've liked Freeman but sounds like he's off the cards) I'll be happy enough going into the second half of the season with Shackleton and Pablo coming back (and potentially Forshaw, although I'll believe that when I see it...), and Gotts, McCalmont and Bogusz as backup.

We have the same debate every season. Of course we'd all love the club to be able to drop £15m on the player who's guaranteed to go up, but they're once in a blue moon, and almost impossible to land, as Dan James showed. We have to be pragmatic, and accept that parachute payment clubs aside, the whole Championship is in the same boat when it comes to financing Jan moves.


Within the constraints of FFP - quite frankly if we are in danger of breaching - remember permissible losses within 3 seasons is £39m - then the club is being woefully mismanaged given we raked in £30m plus in transfer fees in the summer.

We have in my opinion (which is subjective) needlessly enhanced certain players contracts which will have added to operating costs, however with gate receipts and commercial income where it is, the club should be generating revenue of circa £50m, in simple terms that allows a net spend of £63m per season including owners contribution/ permissible losses.

I don’t wish to go all accountant on you, however if we sign £50m of players on 5 year deals the fees are amortised over the term of the contract - £10m per season leaving £53m for running costs etc - which should be sufficient.

I have two issues with how the club is run 1. Radz appears unwilling or (more likely) unable to fund the £13m per annum losses - (his other companies make lufc losses look minimal). 2. We trade the transfer market badly. Examples I would give of this is Roofe who was sold without replacement, for fear of losing a fee - we probably spend the fee received on loan fees for Nketiah & his replacement. When I believe we could have got him to sign a new deal in September. Secondly, the James Fiasco, a deal that fell through as a result of cash flow. Thirdly, the players recommended but who have got away as we weren’t prepared to take a punt, including Haaland !

As you say we all want the same thing - I just wish we had an owner who would invest to the max in the club, and take the long term view when operating in the transfer market.
isrodger
Howard Wilkinson's military attaché
 
Posts: 4040
Joined: 25 May 2009, 09:57

Re: Jack Clarke Replacement

Postby gilesdriveby » 09 Jan 2020, 21:47

What I cant understand is our policy for young players. After the initial Orta splurge which didn't seem to bear dividends, there seems to be a strategy for buying young 17-20 year old players. Here are some examples we buy Miazek, then we buy Meslier, and now we are in the market for another young keeper. We have bought Bogusz, Mc Carron, Mc Calmont, Halme, Kun,Paudi O Connor all of whom were playing first team football in their own country and did well on the under 23 team, but there seems to be limited opportunities for them to break through to the first team. These obviously have an impact on the wage bill and I am not sure we're getting the benefit of same. I also don't think its great for the players either, e.g. has Mc Carron developed better in the last year palying U23 for Leeds rather than playing first team in L1.
My preference is that we buy someone like James who is better than what is currently at the club. Of course we did that with Costa and that hasnt borne the fruits we hoped it would.
gilesdriveby
George Graham's Crombie cleaner
 
Posts: 390
Joined: 25 Feb 2014, 22:54

Next

Return to LUFC TALK

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 9 guests