KaKa

6 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

Maddison is the first time time we've shown our hand since Ekitike really.  I'm sure we'd go higher than £40 million for a player if we deemed it value.

I think we have bid more than £40 million, but the upfront money won't surpass that amount. The rest will be in add ons.

15 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

@KaKa would build our squad from a core of cheaper foreign imports. Unless we go for A1 talent, that is overly risky imo.

Cheaper doesn't mean less talented when it comes to foreign imports.

For example the two players I mentioned when Maddison was being discussed were Aouar and Brandt. All you have to do is look at the kinds of clubs that have been linked to both. Liverpool came very close to signing Brandt at one point, and Arsenal the same for Aouar. These are talents on a similar level to Maddison. Now adjusting to a new league will have to be taken into account, obviously. 

Signing from the Prem is incredibly expensive business, and you have to accept getting ripped off to some extent. Unless you get the timing right. That's why I mentioned Tielemans previously, unfortunately he doesn't seem to be interested.

13 minutes ago, Foxedup said:

He got injured and then just vanished. Rodgers has a habit of vanishing people, did the same with Praet who also played ok before an injury. 
 

He was hit and miss but definitely had talent, can take a while for players to settle in a new league sometimes.

Ah, he got injured. That's a shame for you lot. Think you could have had a really good one there.

6 minutes ago, NE27 said:

 

But surely a player in the PL right now, who is performing consistently has to be considered a safer purchase?

 

They can find the right attitudes and attributes but they will always be an unknown until they've done it in this league. That's ignoring players possibly struggling to settle into new countries etc.

Yes, I agree completely, and that is why we've gone for that first and foremost.

However, at a certain price point, I think they will then walk away because of what they can get as an alternative abroad, even if it does come with some risk.

30 minutes ago, Foxedup said:

Iverson is very highly regarded and was player of the season on loan at Preston and has won it elsewhere whilst on loan. More likely we give him a shot. We have more pressing concerns at right wing.

 

Kasper was on the slide and we conceded an obscene amount of set pieces off the back of it. 

You mention your right wing ... can I just check what your thoughts are on Cengiz Under who you had on loan for a bit? He ended up at Marseille last season and has looked really good and has now since signed permanently for them I believe. What happened with him at Leicester, as he looks a decent talent?

50 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said:

 

I don’t entirely disagree but my argument is that we do need someone fully adapted to the PL if we want to be as ambitious as possible.

 

Maddison, imo, would lift us from fighting for top half to European contention.

 

I suppose it depends on whether that is a priority for the owners or if they’re happy with a consolidation season. Being a supporter, obviously I want to strive for the best.

This bit I don't agree with. It all depends on how good a job the recruitment team do of finding someone outside of the Premier League that can adapt to the league. We've just recently seen that with Bruno. And so I don't think it is anywhere near as clear cut as you've stated.

8 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

To quote Edwards "I don’t think they’ve got it right so far and time is ticking. Still lots of time left but as things stand, if Wilson and ASM are injured at same time, they’re screwed! It’s a concern that is growing". This is my perspective. It's not my own timeline - for it to 2/8 and not have anyone in your 2 priority positions is not getting it right thus far by any metric.

 

If they sign Maddison and Werner on 31/8 I would say "great business. Left it late but got A* players in. It looked dicey for awhile but they delivered". That's *IF*. At 2/8 - things look dicey.

Okay, I think that's fair. I think come the end of the window we'll all be happy. For whatever reason, they've deemed it worthwhile waiting this long to address those positions, so hopefully we end up with some really good players in those spots.

8 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said:

 

So the post made perfect sense apart from the different conversation you were having with yourself?

 

Strong opinion to suggest Bruno is better than Maddison based on his incredibly small sample size. Mo Diame looked like a £50m player for six months once too. Not saying Bruno will flop but trying to suggest he is better than Maddison is ludicrous.

 

It’s funny how suddenly we can find this great value in the market but the total opposite was the case when people were suggesting Wood at £25m was absolutely essential because there was no value to be had.

 

I’ve said it many times but will repeat it again once just for you, £50m-£60m for Maddison is good value.

 

 

 

Think at the time most of us were disappointed with the deal. However, it was somewhat understandable due to having no striker available, and also recognising that the club was looking to add a Premier league experienced striker because of the fact that we were in a relegation scrap and needed someone to slot in right away and be up to speed with the league.

We could have easily got a far more interesting player from abroad for that amount in January IMO, but the circumstances weren't ideal for that. Things are completely different this summer though, as we don't necessarily need someone that is fully adapted to the Premier League straight away.

2 minutes ago, STM said:

 

I won't be preached to by a Leicester fan on how a big club should act thanks.

 

We were paying big boy prices when you were still in nappies pal.

Relax man

I think his point has some validity to it.

Personally, I think this kind of move is a bit early for us. Purely because nowadays when buying top players (English players especially), from clubs in that 5th to 10th range, you typically have to pay through the nose. I'll be very surprised and incredibly impressed if we manage a deal for Maddison or Barnes.

The realistic guy to currently poach of them is Tielemans really, but he's holding out for Arsenal I think, now if that move doesn't materialise, perhaps there's a chance we convince him to join us.

1 minute ago, Ikon said:

 

Aye maybe. But then again I personally don’t think Diaby would have been worth the money quoted, and the club thought the same. Let’s see this time. I think Maddison is worth it. Even if we have to get one or two players on loan to fill out.

That's fair. I think if we do actually end up with Maddison and CHO on loan out wide, that would be really good business.

1 minute ago, gdm said:

That’s fair. I was just meaning he’s clearly worth more than we paid for him 

Ah, right. Yes, absolutely. We knocked that one clear out of the park. At the very least, he's already doubled his value.

4 minutes ago, Ikon said:

I know for sure as hell that I’d rather get Maddison and then CHO on loan than go big for Diaby and have the midfield we have now, or a much lesser midfield player on loan. 
 

Can’t underestimate the effect a signing like Maddison would have. Both on the rest of the team as well as the whole vibe around the place. Other players would grow massively in belief. Mental aspect is important too, not just the player we sign, but others. 

I think if things had gone perfectly this summer, it would have been Diaby in that right wing position and Eriksen in that midfield slot.

3 minutes ago, gdm said:

Bruno came from an inferior league. We got lucky getting Bruno at that price. You answered it yourself, half a season in the premier league and his value has went up massively. 
 

also Lyon can replace him cheaper than Leicester can replace Maddison 

I don't like labelling it as luck.

I think it was a prime example of good scouting and negotiating, which is what a really good recruitment team does. And this is why a number of folks are pretty confident that we'll end the summer in really good shape.

4 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Again, disclaimer that I like Maddison, but I just find it pretty hard to fathom how we can all be universal in thinking £35m-ish for Jack Harrison is ridiculous (which it is) in a position we desperately need, but £60m is the going rate for a player in a position we don't. 

 

Both 25, both English, and both with very similar minutes per goal (344 vs 304)

 

Maddison is obviously the better player, but to that extreme an extent?

 

 

 

People are just looking at the price purely from the calibre of player.

Personally, I think the offer we've put in for Maddison is a realistic value, but it just doesn't work that way for English players, who you only really tend to get for realistic prices when they are in their last year, contract wise.

8 minutes ago, nufc123 said:

But also a bigger risk.

This is true. But I think a lot of people would take that risk.

8 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

The going rate argument is fair enough, but I'll expect him to be truly exceptional if he comes in for £60m like. 

£60 million is even more than what Lyon are asking for Paqueta right? But it seems he's looking for a Champions League club, which is such a shame, as we probably get him with what we've already just bid for Maddison.

1 hour ago, Beth said:

£50m plus Dubravka would be a decent deal for us imo. Grealish is pretty much on par with Madison and the same age when he joined City for £100m. Now is not the time to be tight arses.

That £100 million fee for Grealish is looking crazier and more tragic by the day.

We probably shouldn't be basing any of our bids off of that deal in any way, shape or form whatsoever.

28 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

I personally think we'd get more from Maddison & Almiron/Fraser, than we would from Diaby & Willock/Longstaff/Shelvey.

I think this is exactly the sort of thing that is being discussed and determined behind the scenes.

35 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Maddison's really good like, but putting that amount of money down on him alone, in a position that isn't an immediate priority? Not for me Jeff, I'd be keeping Bruno in his influential role, going for a dedicated DM, and putting that money to use on Diaby or similar. 

I think they are determined to add guaranteed goals to the team, but don't feel as confident in the options available in that right wing spot, due to the high fees for Diaby and Harrison.

And so are looking at possibly adding goals via the right central midfield position as an alternative, and are now exploring the best goals/assists players for that position.

5 minutes ago, Coffee_Johnny said:

Yep, I get the difference. Just wonder whether we know we need another body in there, but who we go for and the brief then given to the other midfielders may vary according to who we get. We are lucky in that Bruno can play any role in the middle. 
 

Also conscious that the whole ‘double pivot’ preference has been discussed regarding how best to use Bruno. Here‘s some blurb re Onana’s playing style:

 

‘Onana is a central midfield player. The Belgian can play in a number of positions in the centre of the park but has mainly been used on either the left of a double-pivot or else as a single pivot… The right-footer is also quite solid as an ‘8’, playing in a more advanced role in a midfield three or potentially even a diamond depending on the team’s choice of formation.“

 

https://totalfootballanalysis.com/article/amadou-onana-at-lille-2021-22-scout-report-tactical-analysis-tactics

 

 

 

Think this is a fair point. There's a chance we still get a defensive minded midfielder in there and put Bruno in one of the more advanced midfielder slots.

Just now, Optimistic Nut said:

It is now. Give it a year or so though.

I hear you. I think he'd be class, but that's just my personal opinion.

Just now, Optimistic Nut said:

 

If he's being drowned out at Lyon, is he going to manage at a Premier League team aiming to move up a notch or two?

Well, his competition there is Paqueta and here it will be Willock or Longstaff.

5 minutes ago, TRon said:

What's this lad like who they are thinking of bringing as a replacement for Maddison? Houssem Aouar? Is he worth looking at?

 

 

Lovely player, but in the last year or so has got a bit lost in the glut of talented players they have in midfield/attacking midfield, and also the changes in the formation they use hasn't helped.

He's a bit different to Maddison, but is very talented. Needs more consistent playing time, and clarity in what position he is used in and what role he is given IMO. He's in his last year and the last price I saw quoted for him was £13.5 million. I think someone will do very well to get him for that, and in the right situation he could really take off.

20 minutes ago, PlymouthGeordie said:

 

I'm not worked up, just debating what is being reported in the national news.

 

I'm sure the club are assured by the fact that you're "comfortable" with them targeting Maddison over Aouar and Brandt though.

 

It's ironic that you fail to realise that you suggesting the club should target alternative players is any different to others suggesting the club could/should approach negotiations differently.

 

In fact, it is one and the same. You're pretty much on the same page as those you're ridiculing. People are essentially saying if we can't afford or won't go to the price of Maddison, Diaby etc we should go for other players and you've gone one step further by actually suggesting players the club could/should target.

If you can't see the difference then there isn't much else I can say. I wish you well man.

10 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

But as I said earlier I’m basing it off the latest reports saying we won’t go anywhere near Leicesters valuation.  Im not kicking off or having a go at the owners, it’s an opinion based of the latest news. As I said it could be a load of rubbish.

 

Seems to be a theme on here that if anyone dares raises a question or disagrees with the owners then you are jumped on.

 

 

 

No one's jumping on you man. It just all seems a bit hysterical. Especially when folks start saying the club shouldn't put those bids in, and they should just pay the money. I mean come on man ... as if these folks have never been involved in high level negotiations in their lives.

I think it's all a bit silly, but if folks need to vent that way then it's fine. But some people will equally find it a bit much and respond to say so. Just the nature of the forum.