Teasy

How does taking a player on loan mean we have to change our entire way of playing to suit him? There's no reason why he would have to be anything than another option in games where we feel we need that kind of player, and more options are a good thing. Also how can getting a player we sold for £35m on loan for a year be considered going back to stupid board decisions, if it worked it'd be a fucking master stroke.

Probably wants him back ASAP, after all Ben Arfa had his leg put back on backwards and can't run finished as a Footballer don't you know

£17.5m would be funnier Don't believe them for a minute, and this is why: Absolutely no fucking chance But thats just a Mirror story, we have no idea yet what the figures will be, i'll bet your left bollock thats a guess, just like most of the shit they print. That's what I mean, I don't believe the Mirror story, I believe we've made an offer though.

£17.5m would be funnier Don't believe them for a minute, and this is why: Absolutely no fucking chance

We're talking about a 1 year loan with the option of a permanent deal though, not a straight out permanent transfer. That's fucking hilarious and just screams "rubbing your noses in it"

Piss off man. come on think about it, loan deal back with agreed low price performs great we buy him back for less than half we paid for him, the utter trolling of liverpool can't be resisted Or we bring back somebody that could quite easily upset squad harmony, who is also not as good as what we've got and I highly doubt he would be happy to be third choice either. As that is what he would be. Can't believe the amount of people that are dripping like a fridge at the prospect of this twat coming back. So fuck if he's not happy, he'd be on loan and if he starts acting up send the fucker back, what have we lost then? I wouldn't want Carroll back for pretty much any fee right now, but on loan for a fraction of his wages is well work it.

How's that then?

He can hardly be consistent if he's not starting. In the run up to the end of the season when he started every game he scored 3 and set up 4 in 11 starts, which is a great record.

If we only paid £5m for him though being on the bench a lot shouldn't make him that much of a flop

I'd take him as backup, as another option if we need him, but not for £10m and not on big wages.

Hopefully we offer at least 9m Euro's (£7.2m), they'll probably accept that.

At the same time Formula One, although quite the money spinner in itself, is still a sport where the megarich haven't changed the game in the same way as they did in football. If you really believe some of the richest people in the world can't put significant pressure on UEFA to forego its FFP plans you are quite naive in my humble opinion.. Stepping away from the breakaway league argument itself, do you really believe that FFP is going to prevent these billionaires from buying the success and recognition they apparently crave? So yeah I believe mega rich owners will still manage to bring their wealth to bear and gain their sides an edge. I just don't believe the financial fair play thing will cave entirely and if it did it wouldn't be down to an empty threat like a European break away league. My only expectation from the whole financial fair play regulations is that it'll mean we never see owner subsidisation on the scale of Chelsea or Man City again.

Formula One is already staged all over the world and is a single league of 12 teams. The threat of 8 of those 12 leaving to form a new league that would then work exactly the same as the previous one is a far more realistic proposition than the whole break away super league in Football.

Yeah I agree that's the only way it could have a chance of working, but that would require UEFA/FIFA and local FA's being part of the whole plan. As a break away, unofficial tournament it'd be doomed to fail IMO.

Replace Porto with NUFC in your argument: can you see our fans stop supporting the club because we are at the bottom of the table yet get to regularly see the likes of Messi and Ibrahimovic ply their trade at SJP? We were here when we were playing Plymouth not so long ago for crying out loud. And anyway, the real money is in TV deals nowadays, and there would be plenty of it in this imaginary deal as that's where most of the non-European viewers would go, as well as a significant part of the domestic market, at the expense of the traditional national competitions as well as continental cup formats. UEFA would be bricking it at the thought alone, and rightfully so.. Our fans aren't used to winning the title every other year, if the likes of Porto were suddenly relegated to perennial also rans near the bottom of the league they'd lose a hell of a lot of their fan base and slowly they're once illustrious name in world Football would turn to shit, same goes for any of them. Being able to watch Messi isn't going to make up for any of that. I'm sure that if they arranged this competition then initially they'd get a massive TV deal and it would damage domestic leagues and European competitions to a degree. But long term it'd damage most of the clubs taking part just as much or even more. I just don't agree that UEFA would be bricking it over an idea they can see nobody seriously wants. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree and wait to find out if UEFA cave in on financial fair play, personally I don't see it.

Lets say for instance that Porto are bottom of the league, they would still fill their stadium playing against a team they have no history against in what amounts to a plastic competition?, I don't see it. Also my point is the reasons it won't happen are clear enough for the likes of UEFA to figure out that its an empty threat. So I see no reason for them to be worried about it to the point where they let these clubs do whatever they want. The richer clubs will always get away with more, but I can't see this threat carrying much weight. Clubs with mega rich owners will still have an advantage over most of the rest, but not to the degree they've had recently, I don't believe we'll ever see anything on the scale of Chelsea or Man City again.

It's also the future of the game, sadly.. IYO Not sure if it's a matter of opinion after seeing what Chelsea and Man City have achieved in the last 8 or so seasons through outside investment. does that mean it's the future of the game ? Let's put it this way: if this trend of megarich individuals buying English football clubs and investing huge sums of money in them continues there is a significant chance that clubs who don't have a megarich owner will be unable to compete and in a few years time the Premiership will consist of these kinds of clubs. It's not a vision of the future I particularly look forward to, but sadly it does look like that's exactly what the future holds, yes. i hope not. i foresee a legal challange to do with FFP after blatter has gone that will blow that whole scene away. Clubs like Chelsea are clearly laughing their bollocks off about FFP. I can see them and the likes of Barcelona, Madrid, Munich, Inter etc. threaten to form a breakaway European competition and UEFA will soon fold as it knows it's f***ed without these clubs in its primary money making competition.. This has been threatened for years, its never happened because the interest really wouldn't be there. People would watch it like people watch pre-season tournaments, but that's not going to produce to kind of money that makes it worth losing league, cup, European revenue. Plus the clubs involved would be seen as outcasts, I can't see UEFA being that s*** scared of such a threat to be honest. I'm sorry, but I find it hard to believe that a league format that includes the likes of Man City, Man U, Chelsea, Juventus, AC Milan, Inter Milan, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Valencia, PSG, FC Porto, Borussia Dortmund, Bayern Munich, etc. wouldn't be able to compete with a league that would see us vs Stoke and Sunderland vs Everton as its "super sunday" features. UEFA is at the leash of the big clubs whether we like it or not, and FFP will do more to protect and serve their interests than put a dent in it in reality. These clubs have become "the big clubs" by winning genuine competitions with world wide recognition like the Premier League, La Liga, Bundesliga ect. Man City weren't even considered one of these kind of clubs until they started challenging for the Premier League title, the competition makes the club not the other way around.. Going off to play in a glorified pre season tournament where stadiums will be half empty due to fans not being able to travel across Europe every week in a league were most of these clubs will have to accept being mid/bottom of the table will do nothing but hurt most of them.

Have there been any recent links to us and Hoilett BTW? Haven't noticed any myself.

Don't see anything there that would be too rich for us. The wages are maybe on the upper scale of what we're prepared to pay these days, but the fee's if true shouldn't be any problem at all.

It's also the future of the game, sadly.. IYO Not sure if it's a matter of opinion after seeing what Chelsea and Man City have achieved in the last 8 or so seasons through outside investment. does that mean it's the future of the game ? Let's put it this way: if this trend of megarich individuals buying English football clubs and investing huge sums of money in them continues there is a significant chance that clubs who don't have a megarich owner will be unable to compete and in a few years time the Premiership will consist of these kinds of clubs. It's not a vision of the future I particularly look forward to, but sadly it does look like that's exactly what the future holds, yes. i hope not. i foresee a legal challange to do with FFP after blatter has gone that will blow that whole scene away. Clubs like Chelsea are clearly laughing their bollocks off about FFP. I can see them and the likes of Barcelona, Madrid, Munich, Inter etc. threaten to form a breakaway European competition and UEFA will soon fold as it knows it's fucked without these clubs in its primary money making competition.. This has been threatened for years, its never happened because the interest really wouldn't be there. People would watch it like people watch pre-season tournaments, but that's not going to produce to kind of money that makes it worth losing league, cup, European revenue. Plus the clubs involved would be seen as outcasts, I can't see UEFA being that shit scared of such a threat to be honest.

Poor article, they're using the rumours of the price Ashley wanted while we were in the Championship. As if that won't have changed now that we're not only back in the Premier League but just finished 5th.. Also just as important is the news of the increased TV money. That'll increase revenue significantly which in turn will increase the clubs value even further. I'd be surprised if he'd take much under £200m now.

There was definitely a quote going around a while ago about €15m being his asking price. But then I suppose I haven't seen a quote for the comment sicko claimed he's made. So that could, and maybe is quite likely bullshit now that I think about it

Seems like a lot of talk and posturing from Twente, if nobody makes a bigger bid then we'll see if they stick to their words. thing is they don't need to sell so can take the risk of his playing well for another season, helping them do well, increasing his reputation and clubs offering even more next year. They don't have to sell, I'm just not convinced that they don't want to. Maybe I'm wrong, but it just seems odd to me the number of times their president talks about specific fees in the media.

I must be the only person who doesn't give a shit about the olympics.. I might not even watch the Football part and I watch charity Football matches like Soccer Aid

Seems like a lot of talk and posturing from Twente, if nobody makes a bigger bid then we'll see if they stick to their words.