Couldn’t think.... part three
This discussion has been closed.
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
- 1.5K All Categories
- 1 Site Stuff
- 31 Admin (FAQs, rules, queries etc.)
- The Boleyn Arms
- 34 General Chatter
- 7 Member info & Family Album
- 3 Radio Llama (music videos)
- 404 Fun & Games
- 107 BA Predictor Threads
- 33 Word Games
- 4 Quizzes
- 2 Pun Threads
- 293 Magic Minutes
- 3 Other Fun & Games
- 113 Current West Ham
- 199 Men's First Team
- 3 Women's Team
- 11 PL2 & Academy
- 31 Management & Board
- 15 Stadium & Training Ground
- 26 West Ham Miscellaneous
- West Ham Matches
- 395 Match Threads
- 66 MOTM
- 8 West Ham Nostalgia
- 34 Former Players and Staff
- 4 Past Games & Glories
- 37 Transfers
- 46 Transfer Speculation
- 87 Completed Transfers
- 55 Internationals
- 48 Men's Internationals
- 5 Women's Internationals
- 2 Youth Internationals
- 118 Football Chatter
- 43 Football Chatter
- 268 Other Teams & Matches
- 25 Other Players & Staff
Comments
Original...
Big Gob Rob:
Apparently Jack Wilshere is in the shape of his life and will be like a new signing, so they have hope.
Matt Davis reply:
The shape of his life is the outline of a man lying prone on a treatment table.... So yeah, he probably is!
Yeah, I think so. Me and a few friends actually bought it together and share the cost but they do plenty of deals.
They have a dedicated reporter for every PL club, so there's loads of content and it's better than most. With the Diangana deal, you had them clubbing together several reporters who all had good sources at both clubs to get the details. Around the time of Pellegrini's exit, they did some really good stuff on what had happened at the club after the Burnely exit and the state of how the club is run.
From a professional point of view, The Athletic's reporting is the closest to the standard I would expect in my work, which really isn't the case on a lot of football journalism.
The guy who covers West Ham is not the strongest tbh but still gets some interesting stuff and I think he's improving. It's also nice to constantly have different angles (like a recent Diamanti interview).
https://theathletic.co.uk/checkout2/intro1/introperiod6?source=fbpcretads&ad_id=23845492043070092&fbclid=PAAaaFj6V1KlDKBzcnXewSiAH9fc38RZmzfnNyIOfoE9htXPSGfGyoPOIHZik
Bubbles - maybe I need to buy two subscriptions then... 🤔
What’s that? Yes lockdown has been ok, thank you. Why do you ask?
Of those, 46 made less than 10 appearances for us, and 16 made 0.
In total, these players have cost us £56.4 MILLION in transfer fees, and have brought in just £23.265 MILLION when they left. This is a loss of £33.14 MILLION on players that didn't even play 20 games for us.
Yes, this is over a long period of time, but I find it pretty revealing about some of our terrible moves in the transfer market.
The top five losses were:
1. Carlos Sanchez. We paid £4m in August 2018, and he played 18 times before leaving on a free this June.
2. Albian Ajeti. Cost us £8m in August 2019. Scored no goals in his 11 appearances, and left last month for £4.5m.
3. Janaai Gordon. Apparently (according to Soccerbase) cost us £3.5m when we signed him in January 2014. Made no appearances before leaving on a free transfer in August 2017.
4. Calum Davenport. We paid £3m in January 2007 to bring him back to the club (he had an earlier loan spell). He played 14 times in more than three years before getting released in March 2010.
5. Benni McCarthy. Cost us £2.5m in February 2010. Got released in April 2011 after making 13 appearances for the club (and scoring no goals).
To be fair to us, we managed to make a profit on ten of those
Of all transfers (not just the weird ones where they barely played) we made profit on 41 players that we sold - £108.54m, which is pretty good I think. On the flip side, 85 players have left the club at a loss - £194.4m.
Basically, what I'm seeing is that we've pretty much always been mad and erratic in the transfer market. I will take questions now.