8 minutes ago, SydneyChelsea said:

It was (typically) dumb of BlueCo to go all-in on the unproven Camara and Roma's injury-prone Manu Kone and they deserve criticism for being naive enough to play along with Monaco after the initial rejection. Rather embarassingly they have put out PR pieces to Fabrizio Romano et al yapping about how "classy" we were at the deadline for deigning to let Enzo Fernandez go despite the last-minute issues. It makes the PR about "deadlines" all the worse too.

That said I also don't know why some of our fans think that Man City have played some sort of game here; they clearly had to manage the tensions between reservations about Fernandez's quality relative to the price, and the need to be seen supporting Maresca publicly. The conspiracy that City deliberately delayed this to the last minute to some how inconvenience us is just plain weird. City weren't thinking about whether we were going to sign a replacement, and given we had nearly £200m in bonus transfer revenue after Jackson's sale, we had plenty of money to get a replacement organised if Fernandez's transfer really hinged on a replacement so that's on us.

That said, we should be more appreciative of the business we have done this window. Alonso, Rogers and Lacroix make us a far better team than we were last season, even if our midfield is significant weaker.

Who exactly is the ideal replacement for enzo or someone to fill that midfield spot? I'm not too sure about wharton and scott especially those 2 going to cost another fortune, much like anderson, they are never going to justify over 100mils pricetag.

Selling enzo for profit is too good an opportunity to pass because it's highly unlikely we'll ever get another chance. I'm in the camp of putting priority in selling him for profit even if there is no immediate replacement ready. Part of that thinking is also helped by the fact we're not in europe so lesser games.

Btw, what do you mean with that bolded text? City only submitted 1 bid and why must it came at the last day or last hour of the transfer window? Is it just for haggling purpose? If they're really serious in enzo then they wouldn't be risking it for the deal to fall through. So, I think maybe they're not that serious but wanted to be seen as backing their manager so they did what they did and alas for them the blueco actually accepted (much to their annoyance lol)

This window is the best window under blueco and I can say that because we're not in europe. The makeshift signing like welbeck & henderson should be just for this season. Next season, I would expect major signings.

6 minutes ago, BolaBall said:

Who exactly is the ideal replacement for enzo or someone to fill that midfield spot? I'm not too sure about wharton and scott especially those 2 going to cost another fortune, much like anderson, they are never going to justify over 100mils pricetag.

Selling enzo for profit is too good an opportunity to pass because it's highly unlikely we'll ever get another chance. I'm in the camp of putting priority in selling him for profit even if there is no immediate replacement ready. Part of that thinking is also helped by the fact we're not in europe so lesser games.

Btw, what do you mean with that bolded text? City only submitted 1 bid and why must it came at the last day or last hour of the transfer window? Is it just for haggling purpose? If they're really serious in enzo then they wouldn't be risking it for the deal to fall through. So, I think maybe they're not that serious but wanted to be seen as backing their manager so they did what they did and alas for them the blueco actually accepted (much to their annoyance lol)

This window is the best window under blueco and I can say that because we're not in europe. The makeshift signing like welbeck & henderson should be just for this season. Next season, I would expect major signings.

I fully agree with what you're saying. There is no good 'replacement' for Fernandez right now and like you said, it was a once-in-a-lifetime to extract maximum profit from a problematic player. It's no different to Inter Milan selling Lukaku or PSG ditching Mbappe, sometimes a toxic player is not worth even the most extraordinary of outputs and their numbers mask an overall negative impact on the team.

Maybe a bit of a conspiracy of our own here but that's my take on City too. I think it's telling that, despite knowing Maresca was a fan and that Fernandez was available all summer, City didn't meaningfully move for him until all of their other targets were signed, sealed and delivered. Illiman Ndiaye was more a priority apparently! Fernandez is clearly a vanity signing, a statement to give the impression they are backing Maresca. So the bolded part is just my view that as much as Maresca may have wanted Fernandez I don't think everyone at City fully agreed or that he justified the expected price.

The side effect of not rushing into deals this summer (whether that was intended or not...) is that clubs know we have money to spend. The problem for them is they already know our top targets are Scott and Wharton, both of whom will necessarily have to be cheaper next season as their contracts run down. Anderson's transfer also created a very inflated midfielder market this season, but that effect wears down over the year. I really do think that keeping our powder dry either for January or next summer is the smartest play.

We shouldn't undersell how good this window was on paper. If we don't make the top 4 or win a trophy, that's not on the recruitment.

7 hours ago, forbzy said:

Or not

Enzo left, still a 10/10 window. We go again in January. One game a week until then

We managed to sell a lot of sh*te, brought in some cracking players, solved a potentially poisonous situation with Fernandez and made profit. A few years of f*uck ups wasnt going to be sorted in one window. We have one game a week and im pretty confident we will be fine. Wee Barco, step on up young man. Im still feeling positive for the season ahead.

Some pathetic panty wetting going on here just because we didnt buy one player, after we essentially made every change needed to the squad.

We needed rid of certain players, other than one they all have gone and most for a good profit. We brought in the experienced defenders and keeper we desperately needed, we totally refreshed the attack into possibly the best front line in the league now. We have brought in midfielders, though we perhaps do need one more we now have an opportunity to play youth players in the cups without needing to "give 1st teamers game time".

Some of the over the top posts on here are so laughable at times.

1 hour ago, SydneyChelsea said:

I fully agree with what you're saying. There is no good 'replacement' for Fernandez right now and like you said, it was a once-in-a-lifetime to extract maximum profit from a problematic player. It's no different to Inter Milan selling Lukaku or PSG ditching Mbappe, sometimes a toxic player is not worth even the most extraordinary of outputs and their numbers mask an overall negative impact on the team.

Maybe a bit of a conspiracy of our own here but that's my take on City too. I think it's telling that, despite knowing Maresca was a fan and that Fernandez was available all summer, City didn't meaningfully move for him until all of their other targets were signed, sealed and delivered. Illiman Ndiaye was more a priority apparently! Fernandez is clearly a vanity signing, a statement to give the impression they are backing Maresca. So the bolded part is just my view that as much as Maresca may have wanted Fernandez I don't think everyone at City fully agreed or that he justified the expected price.

The side effect of not rushing into deals this summer (whether that was intended or not...) is that clubs know we have money to spend. The problem for them is they already know our top targets are Scott and Wharton, both of whom will necessarily have to be cheaper next season as their contracts run down. Anderson's transfer also created a very inflated midfielder market this season, but that effect wears down over the year. I really do think that keeping our powder dry either for January or next summer is the smartest play.

We shouldn't undersell how good this window was on paper. If we don't make the top 4 or win a trophy, that's not on the recruitment.

Sorry, I have to report this post for being too sensible, an oasis of reason (to mix a metaphor) in an ocean of typical bloody minded negativity.

Just now, dkw said:

Some pathetic panty wetting going on here just because we didnt buy one player, after we essentially made every change needed to the squad.

We needed rid of certain players, other than one they all have gone and most for a good profit. We brought in the experienced defenders and keeper we desperately needed, we totally refreshed the attack into possibly the best front line in the league now. We have brought in midfielders, though we perhaps do need one more we now have an opportunity to play youth players in the cups without needing to "give 1st teamers game time".

Some of the over the top posts on here are so laughable at times.

When aren't they? My blocked list is growing.

1 minute ago, dermott said:

When aren't they? My blocked list is growing.

This post sums it pretty well, we have a light fixture list ahead of us so the doom and gloom, oh no our season is over nonsense is so f**king grating...

This ignores using a couple of the young midfielders when needed also, which we absolutely should be doing this season.

You can admire his sentiment, but his arithmetic needs work !