Jump to content

Other clubs' transfers


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, brummie said:

 

No.

 

We've got Watkins and then nobody up front. This is the thing for clubs like us and you, we need to stop thinking we can't have more than one really good player in a given position.

 

There must be a temptation to cash in, I bet Emry has alternatives 

Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, brummie said:

 

No.

 

We've got Watkins and then nobody up front. This is the thing for clubs like us and you, we need to stop thinking we can't have more than one really good player in a given position.


Surely you’d take 60-70m for Duran and invest say 40m of that into a proven PL striker - like a Callum Wilson? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Ben said:

 

There must be a temptation to cash in, I bet Emry has alternatives 

 

He might have, but not when we're in with a very good chance to qualify for the CL last 16 directly, and it's the January market for anyone else we want to bring in.

 

And again, the only reason we'd cash in is because of the limits of FFP - as for anyone - but really, it only becomes an unanswerable argument if you're going to bank 80 or 90m.

 

You've got Isak, if Duran was your second option, and you were in the CL still, would you sell him, in January?

 

It would make zero sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Mikky said:


Surely you’d take 60-70m for Duran and invest say 40m of that into a proven PL striker - like a Callum Wilson? 

 

TBH we'd be more likely to splash it on Antonio, better injury record.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Bunk Moreland said:

 

Think we were linked to him as a potential youth prospect.

There centre back targets I assume we would have been interested in… all signed for City in the same month. 
 

profit and sustainability come to mind. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, MagCA said:

There centre back targets I assume we would have been interested in… all signed for City in the same month. 
 

profit and sustainability come to mind. 

It does rules there to allow them to keep spending and not us

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, duo said:

It does rules there to allow them to keep spending and not us

 

City had huge sales in the summer and only bought Savinho. 

 

Big sales on academy players like Delap (£15m) and Harwood-Bellis (£20m) plus huge profit on Julian Alvarez (~£70m). 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Froggy said:

 

City had huge sales in the summer and only bought Savinho. 

 

Big sales on academy players like Delap (£15m) and Harwood-Bellis (£20m) plus huge profit on Julian Alvarez (~£70m). 

That's part of the problem though isn't it. They buy Alvarez, don't actually play him that much and then sell him for triple what they bought him. They then use that money to buy Khusonov and Vitor Reiss, will again sell them in a few years for double or triple.

 

It's why Liverpool fans going on about their net spend is nonsense. It's all a lot easier when you've already got a massive squad filled with valuable players you don't even need.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, healthyaddiction said:

That's part of the problem though isn't it. They buy Alvarez, don't actually play him that much and then sell him for triple what they bought him. They then use that money to buy Khusonov and Vitor Reiss, will again sell them in a few years for double or triple.

 

It's why Liverpool fans going on about their net spend is nonsense. It's all a lot easier when you've already got a massive squad filled with valuable players you don't even need.

Absolutely and it's an issue with the rules. The historic spend has a compounding affect. It's why if we actually wanted competitive balance we need to index for football inflation and give every club an allowance meaning they can spend as much as the highest spender. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, healthyaddiction said:

That's part of the problem though isn't it. They buy Alvarez, don't actually play him that much and then sell him for triple what they bought him. They then use that money to buy Khusonov and Vitor Reiss, will again sell them in a few years for double or triple.

 

It's why Liverpool fans going on about their net spend is nonsense. It's all a lot easier when you've already got a massive squad filled with valuable players you don't even need.

 

Alvarez had 100+ apps in two seasons and scored over 30 goals. 

 

It's just good scouting. Nothing else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, healthyaddiction said:

That's part of the problem though isn't it. They buy Alvarez, don't actually play him that much and then sell him for triple what they bought him. They then use that money to buy Khusonov and Vitor Reiss, will again sell them in a few years for double or triple.

 

It's why Liverpool fans going on about their net spend is nonsense. It's all a lot easier when you've already got a massive squad filled with valuable players you don't even need.

Smacks of Chelsea all over again stockpiling loan players distributed all around the feeder clubs / global sporting club model. Grim for those of us stuck on the ladder whilst they’re dancing on our fingers.

 

One of these days we’ll get fully Richtered.

 

IMG_6414.jpeg.c2448d05b720c116cf9e5560555664d1.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, healthyaddiction said:

He was the new Gabriel Jesus. He played due to injury and that was it.

 

I would disagree. I thought Alvarez was class, and £14m for him was outstanding business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...