Charlie Adam

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

1 minute ago, BackOfTheNet said:

 

True. And in case it comes across I’m not saying he’d be a bad signing, I’m just saying our business could perhaps be better spending money elsewhere.

Very much my thinking also. Tieing up those that can be, hugely important. Haring and Naismith top of my list. Souttar I doubt will sign another contract but worth having a go at putting him on megabucks with a view to a better deal for the club in time.

 

If he signs, no grumbles, if he doesn't then I am not going to be anywhere the level of disappointment I will be if Naismith does not return.

[Alex Kintner]

At least these random emoticons would finally make sense!

 

 

[Beast Boy]

11 minutes ago, To Be Frank said:

At least these random emoticons would finally make sense!

 

 

 

“Charlie Faceman Adam”

 

[rick witter]

42 minutes ago, BackOfTheNet said:

 

Firstly - I think you’re overestimating Adam’s talent, even at his peak. One leg indeed. I understand your Naismith and Lafferty comparisons, however my point still stands, Adam’s fitness levels have always been questioned. Naismith and Lafferty’s fitness was never an issue. So Adam is not going to be fitter now than he was at his peak is he.

 

Secondly - I’m well aware of the wage structure at the club. I never once said we’d break the bank for him. I simply questioned whether it was wise to spend the wage cap on one player, with that one player being Adam. Maybe it would be wiser to tie up players already at the club on better contracts or sign two or three younger players on pre-contracts rather than spend said wages on one player. I was on the forum last year championing Naismith and saying his wages would be justified (particularly with the sale of Walker), but I’m not convinced spending those wages on Adam would be justified. However IF he signs and he proves me wrong on that front I’d be delighted.

 

Lastly - I’ve also been quite vocal on this forum that Lafferty was not the irreplaceable entity many thought and was called everything under the sun for it. The point I made then - and I feel this applies to Adam too potentially - is that one player does not a team make and a team can perform better without individuals doing it for themselves. (The point then was yes Lafferty scored 19 but had no assists, and his team play / ethic lacked - Naismith has scored 12 and assisted at least 3 in half a season with a team ethic around him - yes we got 19 goals but we also got a 6th place finish) Adam of course is a different player who’s job it is to play through balls and take set pieces so should be able to chip in with a couple of goals and assists. What I don’t want is spending the money we do on him to help us finish 3rd or 4th only to engineer a move to a club who (likely) will finish 2nd so as to help them keep us capped at 3rd or 4th. As I say, it’s self-defeating. Is Adam more likely going to be a Naismith who helps along the team on and off the pitch and takes pride in effectively coaching the youngsters, or will he be more like Lafferty promoting himself for another move?

 

All I’m saying is I’d rather we spend the money we would spend on Adam for 5 months to be spent on investing in contract extensions or future development. I never had doubts about Naismith and thought signing him for even 5 months would be justified. I just can’t personally say the same about Adam.

Agree completely with this. 

 

[Governor Tarkin]

7 minutes ago, Glib and Shameless Crier said:

 

“Charlie Faceman Adam”

 

 

Was that not a former poster on here?

[Morgan]

12 hours ago, Smithee said:

Would 86% even you out a bit?

 

 

 

Nup, too random.

 

12 hours ago, rudi must stay said:

 

85% is an interesting percentage, and one to be wildly optimistic about

 

Hope you're right, just seems a strange figure to me.

[Mr Elwood P]

50 minutes ago, BackOfTheNet said:

 

Firstly - I think you’re overestimating Adam’s talent, even at his peak. One leg indeed. I understand your Naismith and Lafferty comparisons, however my point still stands, Adam’s fitness levels have always been questioned. Naismith and Lafferty’s fitness was never an issue. So Adam is not going to be fitter now than he was at his peak is he.

 

Secondly - I’m well aware of the wage structure at the club. I never once said we’d break the bank for him. I simply questioned whether it was wise to spend the wage cap on one player, with that one player being Adam. Maybe it would be wiser to tie up players already at the club on better contracts or sign two or three younger players on pre-contracts rather than spend said wages on one player. I was on the forum last year championing Naismith and saying his wages would be justified (particularly with the sale of Walker), but I’m not convinced spending those wages on Adam would be justified. However IF he signs and he proves me wrong on that front I’d be delighted.

 

Lastly - I’ve also been quite vocal on this forum that Lafferty was not the irreplaceable entity many thought and was called everything under the sun for it. The point I made then - and I feel this applies to Adam too potentially - is that one player does not a team make and a team can perform better without individuals doing it for themselves. (The point then was yes Lafferty scored 19 but had no assists, and his team play / ethic lacked - Naismith has scored 12 and assisted at least 3 in half a season with a team ethic around him - yes we got 19 goals but we also got a 6th place finish) Adam of course is a different player who’s job it is to play through balls and take set pieces so should be able to chip in with a couple of goals and assists. What I don’t want is spending the money we do on him to help us finish 3rd or 4th only to engineer a move to a club who (likely) will finish 2nd so as to help them keep us capped at 3rd or 4th. As I say, it’s self-defeating. Is Adam more likely going to be a Naismith who helps along the team on and off the pitch and takes pride in effectively coaching the youngsters, or will he be more like Lafferty promoting himself for another move?

 

All I’m saying is I’d rather we spend the money we would spend on Adam for 5 months to be spent on investing in contract extensions or future development. I never had doubts about Naismith and thought signing him for even 5 months would be justified. I just can’t personally say the same about Adam.

 

Hell of a lot of assumptions in here. I don't believe Levein signing Adam will have any impact on offering contract extensions to existing players or impact on the recruitment of new youth players. That is the whole point of a wage cap, it prevents one players contract having a detrimental effect upon the rest of the club. It is also conceivable that the mystery benefactor may contribute to wages at some point, we simply do not know. You make a big point of Adam's fitness and then in the next paragraph elude to the fact his main attributes are passing and set pieces. I agree with the second point and believe that somewhat negates the first point. He won't require the fitness levels of a striker or a winger, he won't be deployed in a high press, he will be pinging passes about the pitch and setting up attacks. A perfect player to bring the best out of Uche and Vanacek.

Edited January 4, 2019 by Mr Elwood P

[BackOfTheNet]

29 minutes ago, Sir Gio said:

Very much my thinking also. Tieing up those that can be, hugely important. Haring and Naismith top of my list. Souttar I doubt will sign another contract but worth having a go at putting him on megabucks with a view to a better deal for the club in time.

 

If he signs, no grumbles, if he doesn't then I am not going to be anywhere the level of disappointment I will be if Naismith does not return.

 

Just seen Rangers getting Kamara and Jones on pre-contracts, very good signing and young so time for improvement and profit down the line. Which is why I think that style of transfer(s) market is what we should be prioritising.

[adayinmay]

4 hours ago, BackOfTheNet said:

 

I’m one that’s not so keen on a move. However I’m not denying that the Charlie Adam I’ve seen play for Blackpool, Liverpool and Stoke in the EPL is good enough for Hearts, and if he’s anywhere near that quality he’d be a great signing. I am however questioning whether a player that’s played less than 20 first team games for Stoke in the last year and a half is the same level of player anymore and whether he’s worth a punt. As it won’t be a cheap punt, he could very well come in being the most costly wages expenditure wise.

 

His fitness levels were seriously  questioned at his peak, so it’s only fair to question them even more as he gets to the Autumn of his career and hasn’t played much at all. It’s not whether he has the talent, that never leaves a player, it’s the fitness and ability. And attitude, as others have mentioned, his “outspoken” style could upset a tight dressing room and although I’m not expecting players to grow up supporting only Hearts, since the summer he’s been trying to manoeuvre a move to Rangers so much it reeks of desperation. I’m all fine with players using Hearts as a stepping stone for them to go onto bigger and better things, but that means outside Scotland. Anyone using Hearts to angle a move to Rangers or Celtic is self defeating in my opinion.

 

So do I think he isn't good enough for Hearts? No. However, do I think we desperately need him so much to spend as much as we would to bring him in without knowing his current level of ability and fitness? No. If he comes in I will applaude him as he takes the field and support him and the other ten on the park and hope he does great and wonderful things of the like some here are expecting him to do with the greatest of ease (from his apparent huge step down to us). But if he doesn’t come in I won’t care either. As someone else put it - whelmed.

Perfectly put. This is where I stand also.

[BackOfTheNet]

11 minutes ago, Mr Elwood P said:

 

Hell of a lot of assumptions in here. I don't believe Levein signing Adam will have any impact on offering contract extensions to existing players or impact on the recruitment of new youth players. That is the whole point of a wage cap, it prevents one players contract having a detrimental effect upon the rest of the club. It is also conceivable that the mystery benefactor may contribute to wages at some point, we simply do not know. You make a big point of Adam's fitness and then in the next paragraph elude to the fact his main attributes are passing and set pieces. I agree with the second point and believe that somewhat negates the first point. He won't require the fitness levels of a striker or a winger, he won't be deployed in a high press, he will be pinging passes about the pitch and setting up attacks. A perfect player to bring the best out of Uche and Vanacek.

 

As I say, in case it hasn’t come across this way, I’m not saying he’d be a bad signing. I’m saying I don’t think it would be a season changer. (I think an injury free team we have already would be that) When I’m talking about money being spent elsewhere I’m talking about investment. Let’s say we spend our cap, for arguments say 8k a week on Adam (not suggesting that’s a real figure, just for hypotheticals), we could get a player that contributes well for 5 months, helping us to 3rd or 4th. But what if signed two players on pre-contracts at 3-4k a week, or 3 players on 2.5-3k a week. We could get ourselves another Ikpeazu, Lee and Haring. Now you could say Adam is better than all those three, but what would be better for the team? Adam on his own to leave at the end of the season, or to bring 2-3 players like above mentioned for 1, 2, multiple seasons and maybe even sell on for a hefty profit? If we have a wage structure in place can’t have both, 8k is 8k, it’s how it’s used which is where the debate lies.

[Beast Boy]

21 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Was that not a former poster on here?

 

Yes. I believe so. 

[Governor Tarkin]

8 minutes ago, Glib and Shameless Crier said:

 

Yes. I believe so. 

 

Thought the name rung a bell.

He could be quite amusing iirc.

[ramrod]

1 hour ago, BackOfTheNet said:

 

True. And in case it comes across I’m not saying he’d be a bad signing, I’m just saying our business could perhaps be better spending money elsewhere.

It's not just as easy as saying the money could be spent better elsewhere and it magically happens . 

Adam could turn out to be a tremendous investment like Naismith and Lafferty he has an outstanding pedigree. 

Some of Craig's punts have been costly where as Adam wouldn't be a punt . Imo 

[Beast Boy]

23 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Thought the name rung a bell.

He could be quite amusing iirc.

 

Mixed bag at best. Occasionally witty, but for the most part tedious and banal. As I remember it. ?

[Governor Tarkin]

24 minutes ago, Glib and Shameless Crier said:

 

Mixed bag at best. Occasionally witty, but for the most part tedious and banal. As I remember it. ?

 

Could be describing most of us tbh

 

[Mr Elwood P]

1 hour ago, BackOfTheNet said:

 

As I say, in case it hasn’t come across this way, I’m not saying he’d be a bad signing. I’m saying I don’t think it would be a season changer. (I think an injury free team we have already would be that) When I’m talking about money being spent elsewhere I’m talking about investment. Let’s say we spend our cap, for arguments say 8k a week on Adam (not suggesting that’s a real figure, just for hypotheticals), we could get a player that contributes well for 5 months, helping us to 3rd or 4th. But what if signed two players on pre-contracts at 3-4k a week, or 3 players on 2.5-3k a week. We could get ourselves another Ikpeazu, Lee and Haring. Now you could say Adam is better than all those three, but what would be better for the team? Adam on his own to leave at the end of the season, or to bring 2-3 players like above mentioned for 1, 2, multiple seasons and maybe even sell on for a hefty profit? If we have a wage structure in place can’t have both, 8k is 8k, it’s how it’s used which is where the debate lies.

 

That’s the crux of it, we don’t need three £2.5k p/w signings. We do need one outstanding midfield player at a similar level to Naismith & Berra. 

[Beast Boy]

3 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Could be describing most of us tbh

 

 

Exactly what I was thinking as I typed it. ?

[BackOfTheNet]

14 minutes ago, Mr Elwood P said:

 

That’s the crux of it, we don’t need three £2.5k p/w signings. We do need one outstanding midfield player at a similar level to Naismith & Berra. 

 

As I say, this is where the debate lies and we obviously fall on either side of it. Right now, one big signing could benefit is this season (not title winning but maybe difference between 3rd and 4th). So I see the appeal. But I’m thinking more long term, and I genuinely think investment/pre-contracts would be the better option here. Last January I thought Naismith would be the better option, I just don’t hold Adam in as high regard, and the team we have for this season and beyond can be built upon more long term for proper trophy challenges. That appeals to me more than Adam in short term. But I’d gladly be proven wrong as I say.

[HoGwash]

3 hours ago, jack D and coke said:

Aye the hun chat absolutely sickens me I’ll be honest. 

No thanks. 

Not solely aimed at you as this has been referred to by multiple posters, but what has he said about Rangers when asked that he hasn't said about Hearts when asked?

[HoGwash]

6 minutes ago, BackOfTheNet said:

 

As I say, this is where the debate lies and we obviously fall on either side of it. Right now, one big signing could benefit is this season (not title winning but maybe difference between 3rd and 4th). So I see the appeal. But I’m thinking more long term, and I genuinely think investment/pre-contracts would be the better option here. Last January I thought Naismith would be the better option, I just don’t hold Adam in as high regard, and the team we have for this season and beyond can be built upon more long term for proper trophy challenges. That appeals to me more than Adam in short term. But I’d gladly be proven wrong as I say.

I'm more on the side of @Mr Elwood P in this debate as I think Adam would be a good signing but I wanted to mention that it's a rare pleasure reading a coherent debate between 2 posters with opposing views without it resorting to abuse. 

Very un-kickback like ?

Edited January 4, 2019 by HoGwash
Typo

[Paolo]

4 minutes ago, HoGwash said:

Not solely aimed at you as this has been referred to by multiple posters, but what has he said about Rangers when asked that he hasn't said about Hearts when asked?

When asked about Hearts he said there had been no interest has yet been shown, and left it there. When Rangers were mentioned, he talked about how great they were and that he would love to play for them again, even though he also said no interest has yet been shown. 

Edited January 4, 2019 by Paolo

[HoGwash]

Just now, Paolo said:

When asked about Hearts he said there had been no interest.  When Rangers were mentioned, he talked about how great they were and that he would love to play for them again.  

When asked about Hearts he talked up the club and Craig Levein and said he'd be very interested. Pretty much as he said about Rangers, not just as widely reported.

[BackOfTheNet]

3 minutes ago, HoGwash said:

I'm more on the side of @Mr Elwood P in this debate as I think Adam would be a good signing but I wanted to mention that it's a rare pleasure reading a coherent debate between 2 posters with opposing views without it resorting to abuse. 

Very un-kickback like ?

 

?

[Paolo]

Just now, HoGwash said:

When asked about Hearts he talked up the club and Craig Levein and said he'd be very interested. Pretty much as he said about Rangers, not just as widely reported.

He was nowhere near as enthusiastic.   Just said he liked Levein.   He was hugely enthusiastic when discussing Rangers. 

[HoGwash]

1 minute ago, Paolo said:

He was nowhere near as enthusiastic.   Just said he liked Levein.   He was hugely enthusiastic when discussing Rangers. 

Sounded fine to me when I saw full clips of his interviews. I think he just wants to play football.

[Alex Kintner]

5 minutes ago, Paolo said:

He was nowhere near as enthusiastic.   Just said he liked Levein.   He was hugely enthusiastic when discussing Rangers. 

Is there somewhere I can watch the interview?

[Roman1874]

A swap deal with Djoum to Stoke would be a good bit of business.

[Mikey1874]

4 minutes ago, To Be Frank said:

Is there somewhere I can watch the interview?

 

One of his interviews 

 

 

[4marsbars]

8 minutes ago, Paolo said:

He was nowhere near as enthusiastic.   Just said he liked Levein.   He was hugely enthusiastic when discussing Rangers. 

 

I wouldn't be put off by that. Most players will want the biggest contract with the biggest team they can get. It seems obvious that Adam would rather go to Rangers than Hearts. But Rangers might well not want him. He'd be a good signing, I think.

[Armageddon]

I'm going to guess Naismith is staying and he's spoken to Adam about joining him.

[Ribble]

For those saying that we should prioritise pre-contracts for next season over signing Adam for 5 months, there is nothing to say we can't do both or that (if we are speaking to Adam) that it is just for 5 months, we could well agree a loan deal for 5 months AND sign him on a pre-contract for a further couple of years!

 

Our budget will be higher next season than this due to not having things like a new pitch to pay for, increased revenue and lower maintenance of the pitch and main stand. We will free up wages/loan fee's from Djoum, Amankwaa, Sammon, Mitchell and Dikamona and possibly a couple of other fringe/youth players so we could well have in excess of 20k per week 'cap space' in our wage budget which means that signing Adam doesn't prevent us going for the like of Cadden, Halkett, GMS etc

[Mr Elwood P]

30 minutes ago, BackOfTheNet said:

 

As I say, this is where the debate lies and we obviously fall on either side of it. Right now, one big signing could benefit is this season (not title winning but maybe difference between 3rd and 4th). So I see the appeal. But I’m thinking more long term, and I genuinely think investment/pre-contracts would be the better option here. Last January I thought Naismith would be the better option, I just don’t hold Adam in as high regard, and the team we have for this season and beyond can be built upon more long term for proper trophy challenges. That appeals to me more than Adam in short term. But I’d gladly be proven wrong as I say.

 

In an ideal world we can get Adam signed and add a few development players and a few pre contracts but that could be wildly optimistic on my part. It’s probably better to keep any further discussion on the merits and demerits of the signing until it actually happens. As @HoGwash said, a good civil debate.

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

22 minutes ago, Ribble said:

For those saying that we should prioritise pre-contracts for next season over signing Adam for 5 months, there is nothing to say we can't do both or that (if we are speaking to Adam) that it is just for 5 months, we could well agree a loan deal for 5 months AND sign him on a pre-contract for a further couple of years!

 

Our budget will be higher next season than this due to not having things like a new pitch to pay for, increased revenue and lower maintenance of the pitch and main stand. We will free up wages/loan fee's from Djoum, Amankwaa, Sammon, Mitchell and Dikamona and possibly a couple of other fringe/youth players so we could well have in excess of 20k per week 'cap space' in our wage budget which means that signing Adam doesn't prevent us going for the like of Cadden, Halkett, GMS etc

Dread to think how much is going out the window on Sammon and Amankwaa

[BackOfTheNet]

42 minutes ago, Mr Elwood P said:

 

In an ideal world we can get Adam signed and add a few development players and a few pre contracts but that could be wildly optimistic on my part. It’s probably better to keep any further discussion on the merits and demerits of the signing until it actually happens. As @HoGwash said, a good civil debate.

 

[DH1986]

26 minutes ago, Sir Gio said:

Dread to think how much is going out the window on Sammon and Amankwaa

 

Just about every club has a Sammon and an Amankwaa.....

 

Players who have signed and done nothing of note and have been a complete waste of money. 

[haveyouheard 22]

Just now, DH1986 said:

 

Just about every club has a Sammon and an Amankwaa.....

 

Players who have signed and done nothing of note and have been a complete waste of money. 

Correct

[Heartsofgold]

3 minutes ago, DH1986 said:

 

Just about every club has a Sammon and an Amankwaa.....

 

Players who have signed and done nothing of note and have been a complete waste of money. 

 

True but we seem to have made a bit of a habit in signing players in this bracket. Time for quality over quantity for a while. Help to develop the youth players we have. 

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

5 minutes ago, DH1986 said:

 

Just about every club has a Sammon and an Amankwaa.....

 

Players who have signed and done nothing of note and have been a complete waste of money. 

How much cash though for our 2? They have been disastrous. Malaury Martin can be added to the list too sadly.

[DH1986]

Just now, Sir Gio said:

How much cash though for our 2? They have been disastrous. Malaury Martin can be added to the list too sadly.

 

I have no idea for how much cash.

 

But my point stands....if it hadn’t been Sammon it would have A.N.Other....it’s just the way it goes. If we went back through most the last 20-25 seasons I think you’ll find we always had a player or three within the squad that was a waste of a wage.

 

Sammon was a Neilson signing, Martin was a Cathro signing and Amankwaa was a CL signing......it happens.

[Agentjambo]

We are not even interested in charlie Adam. 

[davemclaren]

6 minutes ago, Agentjambo said:

We are not even interested in charlie Adam. 

??

[Mikey1874]

18 hours ago, dazajmbo said:

85% chance will be done.

 

6 minutes ago, Agentjambo said:

We are not even interested in charlie Adam. 

 

Different news 

[SUTOL]

13 minutes ago, Sir Gio said:

How much cash though for our 2? They have been disastrous. Malaury Martin can be added to the list too sadly.

 

 

I suppose it depends on what loan fee's and percentage of wages the loaning club contribute.

 

 

We had loan fee income of £183,000 last season and £260,000 the year before. 

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

8 minutes ago, DH1986 said:

 

I have no idea for how much cash.

 

But my point stands....if it hadn’t been Sammon it would have A.N.Other....it’s just the way it goes. If we went back through most the last 20-25 seasons I think you’ll find we always had a player or three within the squad that was a waste of a wage.

 

Sammon was a Neilson signing, Martin was a Cathro signing and Amankwaa was a CL signing......it happens.

Yeah it does, but we have done it on an industrial scale these last few years, thankfully the backlog of burden is beginning to ease. And with it, freedom of wages to try and find some better acquisitions offering vfm

[Beast Boy]

6 minutes ago, Agentjambo said:

We are not even interested in charlie Adam. 

 

I read that in Alicia Silverstone’s voice from Clueless.

[DH1986]

Just now, Sir Gio said:

Yeah it does, but we have done it on an industrial scale these last few years, thankfully the backlog of burden is beginning to ease. And with it, freedom of wages to try and find some better acquisitions offering vfm

 

Exactly.

 

Having three managers in three years....all who have their own styles....a high turnover of players was inevitable. A bit stability and an experienced man at the helm will decrease the need for complete squad overhauls every season.

 

But as budgets hopefully increase year on year I still expect a steady flow of coming and going as we look to increase the quality of each position.

[Mikey1874]

Signings in summer have done okay, better than previous years.

 

Djoum and Rossi were the only real stand outs before last year when at least we got Michael Smith and Lafferty. 

 

Just Ryan Edwards this time and quickly put on loan. 

[Bull's-eye]

Mrs Budge posts on JKB. 

 

Shirley not.

[Agentjambo]

Leeds shaughnessy coming in plus trying to get a winger if they can move either Amankwaa or mulraney. 

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

3 minutes ago, Agentjambo said:

Leeds shaughnessy coming in plus trying to get a winger if they can move either Amankwaa or mulraney. 

Do you not feel even a little bit desperate writing this stuff