The summer transfer activity seems to be attracting media scrutiny at the moment, and not in a positive way.

So far no benefit has been realised from any of our signings apart from Lerma who I think has done ok.

I question what kind of budget will be available in January. I don’t think Palace envisaged needing to go into the market. However, a combination of injuries, current form and upcoming fixtures indicate that the Board will have to shrug off their complacent approach to the season and take some decisive action.

I like to think of myself as a realist as opposed to an optimist or pessimist, but the way things are going at the moment, I’m heading towards the latter.

Old, Ungifted and White

Suffice to say that my reservoir of cautious optimism has run dry in recent weeks but of course our fortunes could change!

Edited by Willo (30 Nov 2023 10.04am)

I’m trying not to be pessimistic despite our recent results and upcoming fixtures but certainly any early optimism when we had a solid back 4 , 2 quality defensive midfielders and the attacking talents of Eze and Olise ( in my opinion better than our prior “give it to Wilf” approach) has evaporated. From thinking we need a right back and a goal scorer in January to secure top half I’m now thinking we need a replacement for Doucoure. I like Hughes but he has no pace and seeing him failing to make any attempt to chase back when beaten in recent games leading to goals has convinced me he’s not good enough as a holding midfielder in the current system. Buying or taking Elneny on loan from Arsenal would be our most important January signing with a right back who still has legs a close second.

Edited by Palacesince64 (30 Nov 2023 2.35pm)

To return to the original point of the thread, I should think the only reasons we might not spend in any given January are that either the right players are at a premium at that time, or we are skint.

The idea that we wouldn't spend because we expect to have a new manager in the summer is based partly on memories of the old model in which the manager dealt with transfer business, and partly on the idea that we should mainly sign players to suit a particular managers tactical style.

On the first point, and in common with many clubs, no modern Palace manager holds the purse strings. Pulis and Allardyce may have been able to apply more pressure than most, but both experiences seemed only to solidify the commitment to a Director of Football model.

On the second point, following the De Boer experience I very much doubt that we would ever again employ a manager with such rigid tactics that highly-specific recruitment must take place just to make his methods work. You just can't change the squad fully enough and quickly enough to do that.

Look at Roy. He, like Pulis and Allardyce before him, has safety-first tactical methods but, like his predecessors, would bite your hand off for better players of any type, size and style, and will fit them in if he gets them. I doubt many people looked at Olise and Eze and thought 'Thats a Hodgson type of player, for sure' yet both have not only been accommodated, they have had the team built increasingly around them, and have thrived.

Finally, most players are capable of playing different styles to some extent. I imagine Olise and Eze will be asked to press more and come back less when they eventually play for top six clubs, but it's not like learning a different sport or anything. Anyone we buy at any time should be able to make a decent fist of whatever tactics any future manager employs, within reason (again, presuming we do not appoint another De Boer).

All in all, the invention of the transfer window makes it almost imperative to do good business whenever you are able, and not miss that chance.

If someone out there is a good player at a good price, we should try for them as hard in January as in the summer. The rest is just details.

Edited by TheBigToePunt (30 Nov 2023 1.20pm)

You've not mentioned my main consideration TBTP which is that the attraction of a new manager would surely have some link to the promise of recruitment/funds?

The best we can hope for is mid-table mediocrity currently. Now whilst you'd think many managers would relish the opportunity to take charge of a stable PL club in London, that pool may be far smaller and desirable than imagined as the offer may not be as attractive a proposition as we'd assume.

My main thought therefore is that in order to attract a certain manager, some commitment to players would be needed. If we spend much or big in January, with Roy still in charge, that may limit the release of funds for any end of season incomer.

I could easily be wrong of course but that has always played into my thoughts.

Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

I would look at it differently: The chances of attracting a good 'manager' (i.e basically a head coach) are linked to how good the squad is, regardless of exactly when each player was signed.

Money in the bank is meaningless to a prospective new manager if (firstly) there is no guarantee we will be successful in buying good players with it in the summer, and (secondly) the manager isn't tasked with recruitment anyway.

If I was Cooper, Potter, McCarthy or whoever it ends up being, I'd base my decision far more on the players we actually have rather than the money we have to hypothetically recruit, especially when that sum is unlikely to be more than our competitors will be looking to spend.

If someone good enough to strengthen the squad is available in January, if we can afford them, and if they will come, then get that deal done ASAP, firstly for the benefit of the team and manager right now, secondly for the benefit of whoever manages us next, and thirdly to help attract the best possible managerial applicants in due course.