Jump to content
Newcastle-Online

Other clubs' transfers

Greg

by Greg
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

GeordieDazzler

GeordieDazzler

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Menace said:

All this yet second part of the season they were one of the best teams in the prem. They'll eventually click and they'll be a decent outfit. Boehly hasn't got a fucking clue but they've wrapped up some serious talent and younger talent too, so which one is it

 


They looked good by the end of the season granted but they then fired the manager hired a novice and demanded a completely new style of play. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ben

Ben

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Menace said:

All this yet second part of the season they were one of the best teams in the prem. They'll eventually click and they'll be a decent outfit. Boehly hasn't got a fucking clue but they've wrapped up some serious talent and younger talent too, so which one is it

 

 

Not so sure about that with a Yes man in charge 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Disco

Disco

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Hudson said:

The way I see it is, having 8 a year contracts helps keep the inflated resale value up as the have more years remaining and means players are less likely to wait out contracts expiring and leaving on a free.

 

 


The long contracts are too mitigate paying high wages somewhat. They don’t pay anywhere near the basic wage for first teamers that the others do anymore. It’s why Mount and Gallagher weren’t overly keen to sign new deals and they’re hoovering up talent from midtable Euroball/lesser leagues or age based. Their wages go up 2-300% but compared to a top PL it’s nowhere near but the financial security of the long deal means they’re more inclined to sign as it’s still a huge rise compared to established pros. 
 

In a way it makes sense but to me it breeds complacency and I can’t wait to see it fail, again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
leffe186

leffe186

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, Disco said:


The long contracts are too mitigate paying high wages somewhat. They don’t pay anywhere near the basic wage for first teamers that the others do anymore. It’s why Mount and Gallagher weren’t overly keen to sign new deals and they’re hoovering up talent from midtable Euroball/lesser leagues or age based. Their wages go up 2-300% but compared to a top PL it’s nowhere near but the financial security of the long deal means they’re more inclined to sign as it’s still a huge rise compared to established pros. 
 

In a way it makes sense but to me it breeds complacency and I can’t wait to see it fail, again.


Chelsea pay nowhere near the basic wage of a top PL team? I genuinely don’t believe that, unless you only mean Man City, Man U and Arsenal. Might be paying them less than they used to, but it’s still comparable surely?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Disco

Disco

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, leffe186 said:


Chelsea pay nowhere near the basic wage of a top PL team? I genuinely don’t believe that, unless you only mean Man City, Man U and Arsenal. Might be paying them less than they used to, but it’s still comparable surely?


Those three aye. That’s who they measure themselves against Id imagine. It’s nowt like what they used to be. Most of the new lads are rumoured to be on £100-120k max.

 

3 minutes ago, Nobody said:

The likes of Fernandes and Caicedo have to be on a canny wedge, surely? I'd be pretty pissed off with my agent if a club signed me for that much and I'm making less than I would at an Arsenal or Man Utd. 

Their fifty thousand Brazilians and talents from around Europe is probably different mind.


They’ll have still doubled at least their wages, if not more given how recently they’d arrived from South America, and it’s guaranteed for 8 years at least. Security is a big thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nobody

Nobody

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, leffe186 said:


Chelsea pay nowhere near the basic wage of a top PL team? I genuinely don’t believe that, unless you only mean Man City, Man U and Arsenal. Might be paying them less than they used to, but it’s still comparable surely?

The likes of Fernandes and Caicedo have to be on a canny wedge, surely? I'd be pretty pissed off with my agent if a club signed me for that much and I'm making less than I would at an Arsenal or Man Utd. 

Their fifty thousand Brazilians and talents from around Europe is probably different mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites
leffe186

leffe186

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Disco said:


Those three aye. That’s who they measure themselves against Id imagine. It’s nowt like what they used to be. Most of the new lads are rumoured to be on £100-120k max.


Yeah but they used to pay silly money. 100-120K is certainly comparable for new, younger players, surely?

Link to post
Share on other sites
kingxlnc

kingxlnc

Posted
Posted

Would love us to resign Merino and sell Longstaff, 25m is a no brainer.

 

Merino could fill in for either Tonali or Bruno or even play with them. 

Joe and Willock could come in depending on the opposition. 
 

Solid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ikon

Ikon

Posted
Posted (edited)

Ridiculously good signing. They also manage to do them quickly/quietly. 
 

Doubt we will sign another CM but I think we lack in that area. We don’t have quality in depth there. We barely have any backup of similar standard. 

 

 

Edited by Ikon

Link to post
Share on other sites
Whitley mag

Whitley mag

Posted
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, Ikon said:

Ridiculously good signing. They also manage to do them quickly/quietly. 
 

Doubt we will sign another CM but I think we lack in that area. We don’t have quality in depth there. We barely have any backup of similar standard. 

 

 

 

Would love to have seen us go for Ederson, or the lad from Celtic definitely lacking quality in depth when we play with 3 in there.

 

 

Edited by Whitley mag

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ben

Ben

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Whitley mag said:

Would love to have seen us go for Ederson, or the lad from Celtic definitely lacking quality in depth when we play with 3 in there.

 

 

 

 

I'm not so sure with Willock, the Mileys, Longstaff we probably have enough, I'm not against upgrades but if we sign a CB and RW, PSR will tell us our money has run out 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Unbelievable

Unbelievable

Posted
Posted

I don’t think we do. Not compared to other positions at least. We have four “purples” for those 3 positions, a pretty reliable backup and a few youngsters who are good enough backup and will only get better (Miley and could even add Hall if needed).

 

Bigger gaps to plug with the limited funds we have.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ikon

Ikon

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

I don’t think we do. Not compared to other positions at least. We have four “purples” for those 3 positions, a pretty reliable backup and a few youngsters who are good enough backup and will only get better (Miley and could even add Hall if needed).

 

Bigger gaps to plug with the limited funds we have.


Yes we have more important areas, I get that. But for me it doesn’t change the fact that we don’t have quality in depth there and that we are vulnerable in that area. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
SUPERTOON

SUPERTOON

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, Ikon said:

We have enough in numbers, yes, but not in quality! We look very vulnerable there. 

I think we would if we had the money tbh, or any takers for Longstaff. Unfortunately we have neither.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...