Think we also need to plan for what may happen if we go up.
Is what we sign going to be a burden after this season..... Why loans may be preferable!?
(And vice versa)
I honestly think, that unless we can convince a proven PL player to drop down a level for a few months, we should ONLY use the loan market this window for that exact reason.
Even if we sign a winger like George on loan, he's still not likely to impress so much to get in to the Chelsea team next season, so we could maybe have a season and a half long loan from such players. And if he doesnt make the immediate step up, we've not pissed £6m up the wall on a transfer fee.
Which is why I still stand by Bamford. Yes, he's not been prolific in the PL, but he was free. Yes his wages were steeper than we'd like. But it was a risk free signing. And he's more PL experience alone than our entire squad combined. I said at the time, ill say again now. What will cost Doug more?
£40k wages a week on a free signing? Or a £6m fee, plus £25k a week wage?
Spoiler, £40k a week for 6 months is £910,000.
A new £6m signing on £25k a week is £6.5m. Plus no doubt a signing on fee of usually what? 10%
People, Doug included, maybe looked at his high wages and though short term gain rather than long term benefit. Hopefully it doesnt bite us on the arse.
Just imagine we lose in the play-off final to a resurgence from the blunts and they win 1-0 with a Paddy Bamford goal.
Sent from my SM-S711B using Tapatalk