[LOANED OUT] Craig Dawson

Yes shame we couldn't offload any of those as successfully as we've exited Dawson

 

If they sign Troy they will be OK then

 

Jonah Dawson lines up the next victim

 

Don't really get why people are moaning. We got a player we all wanted off the wage bill. There were literally no other takers for him and as far as I know he was even West Ham's 5th or 6th choice target, so we had almost no negotiating position.

 

We should all be very pleased, it will be hilarious when he relegates wet spam

 

Dyche is a fan!

 

Nobody wanted to buy him, who can blame them? Got the second best option of his wages off the books and hopefully a nice loan fee. Sure it has kicked the decision of what we do with him down the line but at least we arent paying his wages for a while.

 

There are still 4 days left to sell players so all theses excuses saying we had no other offers are bull.
We panicked and didn't allow this to play out to our advantage.
There will be desperate PL teams until Friday and at least some of them will overpay this week.
The one wage we need to get off the books asap is Duxbury.

 

It could be a good deal for us but we might never know.

 

What other offers did we have then?

 

Tarkowski is staying, Fulham got a centre back in, Rodon ain't going anywhere unless someone pays a lot of money, at this stage I don't think there was much other interest in Dawson, and I don't think West Ham were interested in anyone else (of course Dawson's agent has close ties to West Ham too). This window won't be particularly busy, let's hope we don't lose any more players, because we all know which one would be the first one to be picked up!

 

This forum 2 pages ago: Haha what mugs, he’s awful and we’re desperate to get rid. I’d give him away for free.

This forum tonight: Why on earth hasn’t a big club spent lots of money on him. We’re the worst negotiators ever.

 

Duxbury has very little to do with transfers. He focuses far more on the corporate side of the club.

 

But it’s not the same people saying those 2 contrasting things?

 

Clearly if we had held out, someone would have bought him, so the club are useless.

Of course, if the club had turned down this offer and then no one had come in for Dawson after all, the club would also be useless. You have to love how it means people can moan no matter what result comes out of it.

I have no idea why people keep insisting on putting the club into no-win situations, but to each their own. Getting a player most of us consider to have no future off the books until the end of the season is a good result. It'll probably save us close to a million in wages we're not paying, and we got a loan fee out of it to boot. It's likely at least a 1.5 to 2 million positive transaction for us, which given we just got relegated in the middle of a once-in-a-hundred-years pandemic is nothing to sneeze at.

 

Whilst I don’t think this deal is something to get wildly annoyed about, I can see why people question it. It’s hardly a financial success, however much people want to paint it as such. We get his wages off the books sure - but there seems to be a bit of an obsession on these pages for overstating ‘loan fees’ and using them as some sort of successful financial bargaining tool. Of course any income is good but I really doubt many of the loan fee’s we get are significant at all in the scheme of things.

Dawson was linked with quite a few clubs this window - I just think some fans are a bit taken aback that we have only managed to source a loan deal with an option to buy from that. Nobody is sad to see the player go...but the details are a bit of a letdown.

 

How is something that positively impacts the club's financial situation for a player we clearly have zero intention of using anything but a financial success?

Frankly, I'm amazed we managed to shift him at all. He's been awful for WBA, then awful for us, and now this year's window has seen approximately 25-30% of the total spend versus last year based on the last figures I saw.

Those numbers I gave assumed his wages were in the 25,000 wage. I would not be surprised if that's an undervaluation of his wage. Regardless, even at 25k and no fee (which seems highly unlikely when loaning him to a higher division club) you're looking at something in the range of a 2 million delta. It's not peanuts, and it's far better than paying him to do sod all here.

If people want to be disappointed because we didn't manage to fully offload a poor player we don't want for millions in the middle of an enormous market slowdown, perhaps they need to readjust their expectations. He's not a hot property. It's astounding we even managed to loan him, never mind that we loaned him to a higher division club.

Besides, if he's so good that we should have sold him to someone, now we get to do so by holding on to him until the market recovers and we can get even more money for him (another stick that's been used to beat the club with as of late).

 

I see you’ve edited out the vast majority of my post in your reply?!

I’m not necessarily arguing against you - but I see backhanded criticism being aimed at some folks on here for being critical of the deal and the excuse of it being the only deal in town being used - that may well be true...but it’s no more easier to prove than the statement being made that if we had waited until deadline day, a better more attractive offer may have come along. Maybe it wouldn’t. But I don’t think one statement can be used without considering the other could also be true.

We found the player to be expendable - or we may have a replacement lined up. But I think if he hadn’t shown a willingness to move on and there were no takers, I really doubt he’d have been sat doing ‘sod all’ as you put it. He’d have got minutes at times and could potentially still have acquired a regular spot in the side. We don’t know. You assume we would have had no intention of using him if he remained with us, I disagree.

And look at the comments from WBA fans when he left them for us - they acknowledged that it was time for him to move on but I can’t remember barely any that said he had a sustained period of being crap for them.

I’m not sad to see him go. It was a poor signing, poorly scouted and we are undoubtedly making a loss on him. But I don’t see us loaning him out, recouping some money and likely having back as a ‘financial success’ - I see it as is mitigating the mistake we made in signing him and offsetting the financial disaster of that deal.

I’m not going to criticise the club for making this deal now. But I think it’s fair to say it’s not what we expected to happen and that’s disappointing.

Anyway, not worth debating long into the night over as most fans are broadly in agreement over his departure and that’s the main thing. I still believe he needs replacing though.

 

Don't forget we will be trousering a cool 1m loan fee.

 

Exactly, not in demand.

So we've accepted a less than ideal offer for him, because it's the only offer for him.

Makes sense to me.

 

The same people who claim a one year loan is great business because “nobody wants them” in the same sentence are always confident that we receive chunky loan fees for the likes of Dawson.

It’s like a comfort blanket. Something difficult to prove either way which therefore allows people to convince themselves that Pozzo has done great business once again.

As you say this loan in itself isn’t the worst news this window by a long chalk, but as I mentioned earlier in a year’s time we’ll be looking at the same 4/5 players still contracted, still on big wages who are a year slower/fatter/unplayed depending on which character you are speaking of.

All comes down to the long contract obsession which brings us back to the transfer fees we are going to get rather than lose them on frees. Oh hold on, nobody wants them. Ah yes but good loan fees remember. And around we go.

 

I always assumed that was us/ his agent leaking fake interest to the press, in order to encourage interest in a player we were desperate to get rid of/ had no future at our club.

I'm therefore surprised/ delighted anyone in the top league actually wanted him enough to take him off our wage books.

 

I understand your point of view and I'm not disagreeing with you but the transfer windows are like a poker game and it is best not to continually fold when you have a playable hand.
Anyway let's hope this deal works out well for us and that WHam willingly give us £2M next summer.

 

Very good pianist in his tv show.
Less accomplished defender.

 

Fair enough!

Still not sure what's in our hand if there's no other interest? West Ham could have signed someone else and we had no other interest from the Prem, his wages too high for the Champ clubs, and foreign window closed. Not much leverage there.

 

Off the wage bill and I believe a loan fee too, and let's not forget if the Spammers want to keep him they have an option to buy him, but if they don't then we can still probably sell him to someone else, what is wrong with that?

 

Everybody throwing a loan fee around - if there is one, which we don’t know there is, it will be for a largely negligible amount. When top players are loaned out, the loan fee’s are around £2m-£3m...so you can imagine what we are getting for Dawson really. And if WHU decide not to buy him in a year, it’ll be because he hasn’t played/impressed or he’s been injured. Either way, we get a depreciating asset back. If we were loaning him out, I’m just surprised it wasn’t with the condition of a mandatory purchase.

Getting him out of the club is a positive thing - but I think some fans are just tempering that with the realistic outlook that it’s not an entirely positive deal to have struck.

Lots of fans suggesting this was the only deal out there - WHU would have known that in that case and could easily have said ‘we’ll pay you 60% of his wages, no loan fee and just an option to buy’...seems like every deal the club do is defended with this belief that only one club was ever interested.

We don’t know we have his full wages off the books and we don’t know if they are paying a loan fee.

 

The deal is better than nothing. West Ham will be paying part of his wages and there might be a loan fee? There have been other rumours but nothing concrete and you also have remember the players choice of where he wants to go. It might be that West Ham is his preferred destination so we have to do what we can. Bloody stupid signing in the first place though

 

That would have been ideal. Not sure if West Ham would have been up for it considering he's coming in as a back-up, and he wasn't exactly their first choice. Imagine he's there as a stop-gap for them before they aim for someone like Rudiger for example next summer.

 

I woke up this morning and remembered we have swapped Craig Dawson for Jeremy Ngakia and gained financially from the deal. And I laughed.

 

Have we? We don't know what WHU are giving us to loan Dawson - and a tribunal could tell us to pay millions for Ngakia yet. Jumping the gun a bit!

 

Some are the same.

 

Not sure why Dawson is getting such a rough deal from "fans" on this forum....then I remember who posts on this forum......so not too unexpected.

He's a limited defender, but is decent enough for a low end Prem club or one chasing promotion from the Championship. He's a threat at set pieces and we don't have an abundance of players who attack the ball like he does, so that will be a loss to the team.

But he was always a struggling fit in a defence with Cathcart. No pace is something ruthlessly exposed in the Premier League. He was good after shutdown though, apart from his last game at Arsenal, where he and Kabs were a disaster.

Overall, he was a disappointing signing, but doesn't really deserve the abuse and mocking he's getting. No better or worse than many other players that play for us and leave. The overhead kick against Leicester is something I cheered.......although I'm sure many on here did not of course.

 

Yes I think he’d have been an asset in the Championship. If there is no obligation to buy l’d have rather kept him and made use of him. No idea where this “attitude” problem comes from - just based off a random rumour originated by LouOrns.

 

You're totally correct to lambast GP for the contract lengths given to declining assets; they have been roundly criticised for that many times on here. Having established that fact, what do people expect them to do with Dawson that is materially better than this deal? I know it's difficult to separate the continuing frustration and anger at the total ****-up that was last season from the current decisions & deals that are the direct result of that, but that is the only way to be able to assess the merits, or otherwise, of them. In their current, real context, not within the context of what SHOULD have been.