What Is The Clubs Transfer Strategy

[Marinakis Red]

A start of a new strategy has been made with Brazil and the manager now doing most of the recruitment for the first team and Modesto finding younger players from abroad for our under 23's and he's doing a good job of that to be fair to him.

The new strategy needs more time though to develop, it's still very new and in it's infancy. We cannot judge on what happens in January, we will see in the summer.

Oh and we already have a Director of Football.

Has the strategy got performance data included? What is the philosophy to identify the styles of players we want? Age range? Long term vision? All I see is short termism .

[Sniffer Dog (Admin)]

You need to ask Brazil, the Manager and Modesto that. I cannot answer.

[wassy04]

Good to know that we have people on the forum that knows exactly what has been done and what needs to be done.

To be honest, I don't see any major problems with the recruitment done this summer. It looked good at the time. I don't believe we needed that many new players but if you look at it isolated then the overall balance looked good (both age and position).

I'd be careful defending our transfer dealings, its not a popular stance. :D

I think the strategy change has been clear personally. I was happy with the summer business at the time. Just disappointing how badly Arter has done and Colback/Freeman have been injured for most of the year.

We've also got a clear strategy of bringing players into the academy which we know has been effective already and will likely continue.

[Marinakis Red]

You need to ask Brazil, the Manager and Modesto that. I cannot answer.

Because it then actually becomes a strategy and a vision. I do not believe we have one. 

No profiling of players seems to be taking place, where is dourekas in all this? He creates the vision as a director of football? That is what that role is all about. 

Nobody seems to have a clue what the strategy is,just we have one.

Wonder if we have a vision and a strategy written down anywhere.

[Sniffer Dog (Admin)]

It's not half as bad as some are making out.

Lets have a bit of honesty here...

If after the loss to Stoke at the end of last season the next day we were offered Colaback, Arter and Freeman we would have all taken them wouldn't we? Be honest.

[wassy04]

It's not half as bad as some are making out.

Lets have a bit of honesty here...

If after the loss to Stoke at the end of last season the next day we were offered Colaback, Arter and Freeman we would have all taken them wouldn't we? Be honest.

I've openly said I would, although I'm also not a football scout, sadly.

[Marinakis Red]

It's not half as bad as some are making out.

Lets have a bit of honesty here...

If after the loss to Stoke at the end of last season the next day we were offered Colaback, Arter and Freeman we would have all taken them wouldn't we? Be honest.

Not colback he had been injured for a while and not played a game for 18 months pretty much, I was really happy with Freeman I thought he would be a good player, but turned up unfit and never found any fitness, arter has been passed around clubs a bit before and nobody took the option of signing him. That tells you a little bit about them. Even when Cardiff got relegated to the champ they did not take him after the season loan in the prem.

[GaribaldiRED]

Good to know that we have people on the forum that knows exactly what has been done and what needs to be done.

To be honest, I don't see any major problems with the recruitment done this summer. It looked good at the time. I don't believe we needed that many new players but if you look at it isolated then the overall balance looked good (both age and position).

I'd be careful defending our transfer dealings, its not a popular stance. :D

I think the strategy change has been clear personally. I was happy with the summer business at the time. Just disappointing how badly Arter has done and Colback/Freeman have been injured for most of the year.

We've also got a clear strategy of bringing players into the academy which we know has been effective already and will likely continue.

I know Wassy, after all we only recruit 30+ players without caring what position they play  :D

I think there must be different ways of defining what Transfer Strategy really is. At least that could be a reason for all the strange posting lately.

[Marinakis Red]

Good to know that we have people on the forum that knows exactly what has been done and what needs to be done.

To be honest, I don't see any major problems with the recruitment done this summer. It looked good at the time. I don't believe we needed that many new players but if you look at it isolated then the overall balance looked good (both age and position).

I'd be careful defending our transfer dealings, its not a popular stance. :D

I think the strategy change has been clear personally. I was happy with the summer business at the time. Just disappointing how badly Arter has done and Colback/Freeman have been injured for most of the year.

We've also got a clear strategy of bringing players into the academy which we know has been effective already and will likely continue.

I know Wassy, after all we only recruit 30+ players without caring what position they play  :D

I think there must be different ways of defining what Transfer Strategy really is. At least that could be a reason for all the strange posting lately.

I've thought that quite a bit Gari, nobody understands the word strategy or vision and what they mean. We have had 3 and a half years of the current plan though. And we have gone backwards. A vision and a strategy moves you forward.

[Salvatore Matrecano]

It's not half as bad as some are making out.

Lets have a bit of honesty here...

If after the loss to Stoke at the end of last season the next day we were offered Colaback, Arter and Freeman we would have all taken them wouldn't we? Be honest.

I would have taken Freeman as he was the choice of our then head coach. He has looked poor and unfit though and I dont believe CH would have backed his loan.
I would not have taken Colback and said so at the time, dont believe he offers enough, always said Watson was a superior player even when it was unfashionable to admit it without derision.
I had thought Arter was a good player purely based on his performances against us but proper scouting should have seen his flaws. He again has been poor but yes at the time I would have taken him.

[GaribaldiRED]

Good to know that we have people on the forum that knows exactly what has been done and what needs to be done.

To be honest, I don't see any major problems with the recruitment done this summer. It looked good at the time. I don't believe we needed that many new players but if you look at it isolated then the overall balance looked good (both age and position).

I'd be careful defending our transfer dealings, its not a popular stance. :D

I think the strategy change has been clear personally. I was happy with the summer business at the time. Just disappointing how badly Arter has done and Colback/Freeman have been injured for most of the year.

We've also got a clear strategy of bringing players into the academy which we know has been effective already and will likely continue.

I know Wassy, after all we only recruit 30+ players without caring what position they play  :D

I think there must be different ways of defining what Transfer Strategy really is. At least that could be a reason for all the strange posting lately.

I've thought that quite a bit Gari, nobody understands the word strategy or vision and what they mean. We have had 3 and a half years of the current plan though. And we have gone backwards. A vision and a strategy moves you forward.

Mind, a strategy or vision don't guarantee you any result. You can have a great vision and strategy but if you are not able to execute on it you will most likely fail.

[Marinakis Red]

Good to know that we have people on the forum that knows exactly what has been done and what needs to be done.

To be honest, I don't see any major problems with the recruitment done this summer. It looked good at the time. I don't believe we needed that many new players but if you look at it isolated then the overall balance looked good (both age and position).

I'd be careful defending our transfer dealings, its not a popular stance. :D

I think the strategy change has been clear personally. I was happy with the summer business at the time. Just disappointing how badly Arter has done and Colback/Freeman have been injured for most of the year.

We've also got a clear strategy of bringing players into the academy which we know has been effective already and will likely continue.

I know Wassy, after all we only recruit 30+ players without caring what position they play  :D

I think there must be different ways of defining what Transfer Strategy really is. At least that could be a reason for all the strange posting lately.

I've thought that quite a bit Gari, nobody understands the word strategy or vision and what they mean. We have had 3 and a half years of the current plan though. And we have gone backwards. A vision and a strategy moves you forward.

Mind, a strategy or vision don't guarantee you any result. You can have a great vision and strategy but if you are not able to execute on it you will most likely fail.

Not it just gives you an understanding of what is trying to be achieved, performance is measurable against it, the vision is clear, what the objectives and goals are year on year, you try and attract certain types to fill the roles required to get the results you want, it allows forward thinking and planning. Are you sure forest have that right now? 

Do you think were thinking of what our team will look like say in 3 years time? Because if you execute your plan you'll know. You'll know what the average age of the team will be, you'll know the type of footballer you want to attract, you'll know they type of manager you'll want at the helm and what style you'll be performing. 3 years in how far are we into that strategy?