Other clubs' transfers

[Joelinton7]

6 hours ago, cubaricho said:

We could do way worse than Weah for depth on the right. Especially for that little of money. 

 

[r0cafella]

3 minutes ago, gbandit said:

I am once again beseeching everyone to recognise Dibling as the starting RW for us 

Price is too high but if Southampton are willing to be reasonable (Tino Money) then it could make sense and we could bed him in. 

[gdm]

 

[Ben]

18 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Price is too high but if Southampton are willing to be reasonable (Tino Money) then it could make sense and we could bed him in. 

 

The £100 million fee must be bullshit if they are prepared to let their number one keeper go out on loan to save his wages.

[Nucasol]

51 minutes ago, gdm said:

 

7 year deal. Classic.

[black_n_white]

1 hour ago, Ben said:

 

The £100 million fee must be bullshit if they are prepared to let their number one keeper go out on loan to save his wages.

Was BS. Fee would be around £40million, even that might be too much.

 

 

Edited 13 hours ago by black_n_white

[Fak]

Forest & Marseille linked with Jordan Henderson.

[Decky]

34 minutes ago, Fak said:

Forest & Marseille linked with Jordan Henderson.

 

You mean he isn't already on Wearside waiting to sign?

[Mattoon]

4 hours ago, gdm said:

 

Honestly, I'm cured of this, Chelsea for me is much worse than what is being levelled at Man City, they cheated their way to financial freedom by circumventing PSR rules. Whereas Chelsea are already part of the financially free chosen teams that PSR was built to protect and yet they continue to cheat the system to fuel their greed by hoovering up every single player they can get their hands on.

 

I hope it all collapses around them and they flounder into obscurity. /rant

[MagPar]

23 hours ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

90s was amazing for random overseas transfers in Scotland. Rousset to Hearts, Sauzee to Hibs, Gilhaus playing for Holland at Italia 90 while an Aberdeen player, etc. 

 

 

 

It was nuts. Mark Walters, Michael Laudrup, even F*lkirk (utter scum in a can) signed Chris bloody Waddle. 

[kingxlnc]

Just now, Mattoon said:

Honestly, I'm cured of this, Chelsea for me is much worse than what is being levelled at Man City, they cheated their way to financial freedom by circumventing PSR rules. Whereas Chelsea are already part of the financially free chosen teams that PSR was built to protect and yet they continue to cheat the system to fuel their greed by hoovering up every single player they can get their hands on.

 

I hope it all collapses around them and they flounder into obscurity. /rant

Agreed

Chelsea are by far the worst of the worst

Man City are operating from a huge advantageous position but their scouting and generally how they operate is professional, efficient and slick. They don't tend to 'overbuy' - just identify what they need and just get on with it. It's always not the most obvious names either, so they have a good scouting network. 

Liverpool are also benefitting from being way ahead but again, they buy and sell pretty well. 

Chelsea are blatant and so boring. Tosin is actually a prime example - they did NOT need him at all. He wasn't better than their CB's and they only seemed to show an interest because he was free. 

Man U also operate with impunity - crazy level of debt, miserable transfer record but seemingly impervious to the damage. Dust worself off and go again. Any other club would be doing an Everton if they had even half the recent record of Man U.  

The way before was the young wonderkids would go to the second tier clubs, Leverkusen, Leipzig, Ajax, Villareal, Atlanta etc, establish themselves and then the big clubs would swoop but the money would be distributed. Now the hype is so huge that even the Barca's and Madrids are going for young prodigies like Roony and Guler. 

I'm sure if it was a free market, it would be interesting to see if Newcastle could spend their way to the top - even if it was organically, like one or two big players a season. Same with Villa, Spurs etc. Under Ashley, he never spent so competing was pointless. Now, we can't spend, so there is also a level of pointlessness here too. When you're hamstrung deliberately, footballers have short careers. Isak and Bruno were promised title runs - which probably could have been the case by now if we'd been allowed to spend. PSR then actually does its job even through the back door as the top players get impatient and want to play for the 'top clubs' already challenging... and then we have to start again

Man City were allowed to get their spine with no limit that led them to their PL - Aguero, KDB, Yaya Toure, Hart, Kompany. Chelsea ditto under Mourinho. 
 

[madras]

1 hour ago, MagPar said:

It was nuts. Mark Walters, Michael Laudrup, even F*lkirk (utter scum in a can) signed Chris bloody Waddle. 

Caniggia at Dundee.

[The College Dropout]

City hoard via Multi-club ownership but it's not to the degree Chelsea do. This Chelsea stuff is unparalleled. They've always done it uner Roman but not to this extent.

 

 

Edited 7 hours ago by The College Dropout

[LFEE]

16 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

City hoard via Multi-club ownership but it's not to the degree Chelsea do. This Chelsea stuff is unparalleled. They've always done it uner Roman but not to this extent.

 

 

 

Was just thinking last night and have a feeling you’d know the answer…

 

Do you reckon the Chelsea’s idea with these 7 + year deals for young players the plan is if they work out and stay at the club for 5 years they are still at a good age to then sell in the 6th year at pure profit whilst having 2yrs minimum left on contract and therefore still hopefully get a decent chunk of money back due to fees always slowly rising with inflation?

 

I dare it would it apply if they just loan them out for 5 years for fees to various club also.

 

The only risk is demotivation or career ending injury early into contract. The upside is less power for the agent to renegotiate and what I stated above.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I thought it was just to spread the cost of the signing over a longer period. But I don't actually know. 

 

 

Edited 7 hours ago by AyeDubbleYoo

[LFEE]

5 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

I thought it was just to spread the cost of the signing over a longer period. But I don't actually know. 

 

 

 

I’m never sure. Maybe helps with actual payments however the PSR bit still maximum of 5yrs spread I believe on the books so nothing gained on that front.

[r0cafella]

14 minutes ago, LFEE said:

Was just thinking last night and have a feeling you’d know the answer…

 

Do you reckon the Chelsea’s idea with these 7 + year deals for young players the plan is if they work out and stay at the club for 5 years they are still at a good age to then sell in the 6th year at pure profit whilst having 2yrs minimum left on contract and therefore still hopefully get a decent chunk of money back due to fees always slowly rising with inflation?

 

I dare it would it apply if they just loan them out for 5 years for fees to various club also.

 

The only risk is demotivation or career ending injury early into contract. The upside is less power for the agent to renegotiate and what I stated above.

 

12 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

I thought it was just to spread the cost of the signing over a longer period. But I don't actually know. 

 

 

 

Fees can only be split over 5 years the loophole was closed a couple of seasons ago. 

 

To answer Lfe question, Chelsea are betting everyone is stupid in essence. They are basically saying we don't want players to ever leave on a free. People mock it but as long as you can afford it, it'd really smart. 

 

Think of it like this, if they buy a player for say 100m and give him a 8 year contract. Once 5 years is up (saying they don't renew them) they basically become an academy player as they are fully paid off. 

 

The other side of this coin is obviously if a player decides to chuck it in and not bother but it seems a market exists for all kinds of dross these days. 

[LFEE]

4 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

 

Fees can only be split over 5 years the loophole was closed a couple of seasons ago. 

 

To answer Lfe question, Chelsea are betting everyone is stupid in essence. They are basically saying we don't want players to ever leave on a free. People mock it but as long as you can afford it, it'd really smart. 

 

Think of it like this, if they buy a player for say 100m and give him a 8 year contract. Once 5 years is up (saying they don't renew them) they basically become an academy player as they are fully paid off. 

 

The other side of this coin is obviously if a player decides to chuck it in and not bother but it seems a market exists for all kinds of dross these days. 

 

As i thought really. Will be interesting to see how it pays off further down the line.

[LFEE]

 

Now on to Man City…

 

Is this one of the two young CH’s we wanted that they bought (both) and now just farming them out keeping them out of our grasp?

[Vaj]

Risk comes when something happens like what has happened with Mudryk. They are stuck with a player on a long term contract now who will be suspended for a while and even when playing was useless so they won't be able to shift him for any money even when he does return. 

[Bunk Moreland]

1 minute ago, LFEE said:

 

Now on to Man City…

 

Is this one of the two young CH’s we wanted that they bought (both) and now just farming them out keeping them out of our grasp?

 

The very same! Tbf though we probably would have sent him on loan too. Still annoying as fuck 

[Nucasol]

3 minutes ago, LFEE said:

 

Now on to Man City…

 

Is this one of the two young CH’s we wanted that they bought (both) and now just farming them out keeping them out of our grasp?

Him and the Uzbek lad. Absolute shitbags using the purchase and park approach. Them and Chelsea are football AIDS.

[LFEE]

Maybe what could be brought in to balance the clusterf@@k that is PSR is a limit of how many transfers a club can make per season. Say unlimited sales but maximum of 4-5 purchases.

 

 

Edited 6 hours ago by LFEE

[loki679]

The loan system needs an adjustment to prevent this horseshit.

[toon25]

The shitty thing about Chelsea is that they've done all of this whilst continuing to have declining success on the pitch.

 

The rest of us have to do well in order to even think about spending and investing in the team. Look at Villa as a case in point. Didn't make the CL and now they're in bother. Chelsea did the same and spent 200 fucking million on central midfielders from mid-table clubs