I think these discussions about fees and patience are people talking at cross purposes a bit.
We have consensus that quality of the squad is weak or at the very least imbalanced and it's on the hierarchy. I do think the fee is relevant to how fans will judge Okkels and what the club might expect from him and his future fee etc, I don't think it's relevant to how he performs in his time here. We've had expensive flops (Bayliss) and expensive successes (Healy, at least from a playing perspective), cheap flops (Woodburn) and cheap successes (Nugent).
It's worth remembering we live and breathe this club so we know the ins and outs. If I were a footballer and a club that I don't know much about comes along in probably the most prestigious second tier and pays £1m to £2m for me, I'm not looking at that and thinking 'star player'. At this level it's average/below average. If I'm moving to a foreign country, I'm expecting a little leeway to get used to the culture and if I've only played 5 games or whatever it is all of last season and not had preseason with the squad, I'm expecting a little time to get up to match fitness. That's not to say I wouldn't try to hit the ground running, but I'm not expecting to hit my ceiling instantly (although I will try). I would also expect to be wanted around the squad. I wouldn't expect the manager who was around when I was negotiating with the club to bugger off on the day I'm supposed to be signing.
Heck even if I was total crap and a club overpaid for me, that's not on me. If I'm in Okkels' position, the transfer is a no brainer, moving one step below EPL and away from a club that doesn't play me. If it works out, great! If it doesn't, I still might look attractive to a club back home or elsewhere in Europe. If there's a pay rise too, even better (no idea if there is or not).
All the points people are making are valid, but they're valid against Ridsdale. Why spend so much money (for Preston, not a regular Championship club) on a player it wasn't certain we wanted or needed when we are so strapped for cash? Why spend it on someone who, to me, looked like he needed a bedding in period? If he was so integral why not earlier in the window? Why spend it on someone who's only got a brief window to increase their value?
If he flops, I don't totally absolve Okkels of responsibility because effort does count in how I assess a player. E.g. Jeffrey Monaka wasted his career IMO so I hold that against him. I don't hold Andy Procter being crap against him because he was doing his best despite how obviously limited he was, but I do hold it against Westley because the signs were always there Procter wasn't cut out for us. If Okkels isn't playing by the end of the season, he likely holds some accountability too because at his age and with the lack of competition for his position he ought to be playing.
But right now, I don't know enough to write him off as a player. I don't know how match fit he is, if he's settling in ok, if he's got personal issues etc.
Looking at our context of the signing, I get why people expect some success from him instantly. But looking at the man himself I want to afford him a bit of kindness because those aren't expectations he's created. If he leaves a flop, I'm not going to think "why did he fail?", I am going to think "Why did we sign him?", if that's the question in your mind that's a question for Ridsdale, not Okkels.
How do we move forward from here, if I don't want to afford Okkels some leeway that presumes someone else must play. Who in the current team is definitively hit the ground running instead of him? Because right now, it's no one. We're stuck between trying to let someone grow and find consistency or shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic for want of a better phrase
