If we pay 20m with a 25m buy back clause after two years, and his first year is outstanding. Barcelona wander in and offer 50m, would we be able to sell after one year and keep the money. If they buy back is after 2 years city cant do anything , or does that mean they can take him back within 2 years and we cant stop them.
I can see the flaw in the deal the davids dont like. If after a year big offers are being bounced around , there nothing stopping city saying we want hime back for 25 and go sell him straight away for 50
Why should anyone avoid a thread because they discount certain sources?
Seems to me it's perfectly possible to discuss potential targets without assuming that everything written is true.
Personally, I hate the way some users choose to give the owners stick based on rumours which most often turn out to be nonsense, but I still comment on the threads.
Is it just me, or is the entry for West Ham (a) less comprehensive than the other entries, (b) less factual and (c) an opportunity for Jacob Steinberg to give his own opinion? ;hmm
Whilst it seems frustrating, comparisons with Everton are difficult to make as their situation is very different from ours
- they know they will be pocketing £60 to £80m for Lukaku (maybe a deal in principal has already been done), and likely another slug of money for Barkley - we are in a position where we need to decide what to do with the likes of Enner, Sakho, Snodgrass, Feghouli etc. On top of that AC and Ayew have not hit the straps either. In terms of the players we may want to shift, there won't a be queue of clubs waiting to sign them
In short Everton have two of their big ticket players to cash in - why should they not go big in recruiting new players? Also they don't seem to have the same degree of deadwood players that we do.
We need to carefully balance who is coming in and going out, and I'm sure the Daves are doing just that.
We need to carefully balance who is coming in and going out, and I'm sure the Daves are doing just that.
Whilst I agree with this in general, the striker situation has got nothing to do with balancing who stays and who leaves. We need a striker; arguably two. Zaza and Calleri have already left and there is a huge void to fill.
I think the comparisons with Everton are because they seem to have identified their targets early and then got them, whereas we have multiple targets but have to wait for their parent clubs to make their moves first. What they have to spend is largely irrelevant, as far as I'm concerned.
I guess we all fear a repeat of last summer where we wasted time chasing Bacca before having to settle on a loan move for Zaza, and don't want history to repeat itself.
Thing is OCS we have no concrete idea who our targets actually are. Everton also could also go in big with say the Pickford bid because they can call on the Lukaku monies. If you go over the top you increase your chances of landing a player early. We have no such luxury. Whilst we have handed back Zaza, don't forget we are at the same time welcoming Enner back onto our payroll.
I would be willing to bet by the end of the window our net spend (in terms of fees) will be more than Everton's. So the owners do need to be cut a bit of slack. They have consistently shelled out more than what's been received - the fact that we have often bought poorly is a separate matter though.
I wouldn't worry about Everton. They have massively overpaid for Pickford, bought a £5m striker from Malaga who most on here will say who? and Klaassan who has had a decent season at Ajax. Their needs are different to ours.
;ok I wasn't offering him as a suggested transfer, just answering baz's question.
I wouldn't want him now, as we have other priorities but tbh I'd have taken him last summer (miles better than Nordviet imo, and can also play LB + CB).
Comments
If we pay 20m with a 25m buy back clause after two years, and his first year is outstanding.
Barcelona wander in and offer 50m, would we be able to sell after one year and keep the money. If they buy back is after 2 years city cant do anything , or does that mean they can take him back within 2 years and we cant stop them.
I can see the flaw in the deal the davids dont like. If after a year big offers are being bounced around , there nothing stopping city saying we want hime back for 25 and go sell him straight away for 50
Why should anyone avoid a thread because they discount certain sources?
Seems to me it's perfectly possible to discuss potential targets without assuming that everything written is true.
Personally, I hate the way some users choose to give the owners stick based on rumours which most often turn out to be nonsense, but I still comment on the threads.
An overview of how the scouting set-up works at the PL clubs.
Is it just me, or is the entry for West Ham (a) less comprehensive than the other entries, (b) less factual and (c) an opportunity for Jacob Steinberg to give his own opinion? ;hmm
- they know they will be pocketing £60 to £80m for Lukaku (maybe a deal in principal has already been done), and likely another slug of money for Barkley
- we are in a position where we need to decide what to do with the likes of Enner, Sakho, Snodgrass, Feghouli etc. On top of that AC and Ayew have not hit the straps either. In terms of the players we may want to shift, there won't a be queue of clubs waiting to sign them
In short Everton have two of their big ticket players to cash in - why should they not go big in recruiting new players?
Also they don't seem to have the same degree of deadwood players that we do.
We need to carefully balance who is coming in and going out, and I'm sure the Daves are doing just that.
I think the comparisons with Everton are because they seem to have identified their targets early and then got them, whereas we have multiple targets but have to wait for their parent clubs to make their moves first. What they have to spend is largely irrelevant, as far as I'm concerned.
I guess we all fear a repeat of last summer where we wasted time chasing Bacca before having to settle on a loan move for Zaza, and don't want history to repeat itself.
I would be willing to bet by the end of the window our net spend (in terms of fees) will be more than Everton's. So the owners do need to be cut a bit of slack. They have consistently shelled out more than what's been received - the fact that we have often bought poorly is a separate matter though.
Who was the last Dutch player to come from the Dutch league who was considered a success in the Prem?
You don't think they would generally be considered a success?
They are both getting picked regularly for teams consistently finishing top half of the table.
I think that's 'success', but it depends on your definition I suppose.
(Oh, just checked, Van Dijk wasn't actually playing in the Dutch league prior to his transfer to Southampton.)
I wouldn't want him now, as we have other priorities but tbh I'd have taken him last summer (miles better than Nordviet imo, and can also play LB + CB).
Still, it's all about the onions...
He is supposed to give creativity but thought he created nothing against United
Lukaku got 25 goals and 6 assists and Barkley got 5 goals and 8 assists
That's a lot of goals to make up for especially with 2 younger guys (Sandro is only 21) who've never played in the league before
Pickford is a good player but imo not worth £30mil
Is there a prize for the best answer? ;biggrin
#just pay shipping and handling
;wahoo