sunderland

[OverThere]

Anyone know what Le Fee for Le Fee would be if he was signed permanently?

[Geordie Ahmed]

12 minutes ago, OverThere said:

Anyone know what Le Fee for Le Fee would be if he was signed permanently?

 

€23m 

 

It's an obligation to buy if they get promoted

 

 

Edited 14 hours ago by Geordie Ahmed

[et tu brute]

1 hour ago, Lush Vlad said:

 mental. 
 

What was the Burton game when we were down there? Should have had a retaken penalty. But the ref gave an indirect free kick. 

Up here it was

[TheBrownBottle]

9 minutes ago, Geordie Ahmed said:

 

€23m 

 

It's an obligation to buy if they get promoted

 

 

 

Roma must be laughing about that one and praying that they do - there's nothing in Le Fee's past which suggests that the fee that they paid Rennes was good value.

[Geordie Ahmed]

That decision was about 8 years ago and I still remember that it was Keith Stroud 

 

I barely remember referees names in the Premier League more than a game back, actually I can't even remember who the ref was for our last game 

[Geordie Ahmed]

1 minute ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Roma must be laughing about that one and praying that they do - there's nothing in Le Fee's past which suggests that the fee that they paid Rennes was good value.

 

Considering he flopped for them to get there money back would be immense business 

 

They should probably convincing a couple of there better players to go on loan to help them get promoted so they don't miss out on the €23m 

[Lush Vlad]

3 hours ago, et tu brute said:

Up here it was

Sorry. Down there. As in the Champo. 

[Wallsendmag]

If they come up they are next seasons Southampton without massive investment, which won't be possible even if that kid who runs them was prepared to put his hand in his pocket, due to PSR rules.

[Stifler]

26 minutes ago, Wallsendmag said:

If they come up they are next seasons Southampton without massive investment, which won't be possible even if that kid who runs them was prepared to put his hand in his pocket, due to PSR rules.

Surely any punishment they got for over spend next season would be applied the season after?

[St1pe]

Ive just seen the goal they had disallowed. I don’t think I could go back to no VAR now. 

[Keegans Export]

16 minutes ago, Stifler said:

Surely any punishment they got for over spend next season would be applied the season after?

Isn't that what happened to Leicester? They broke the rules in one competition but argued the punishment couldn't be handed out by another?

[Wallsendmag]

1 hour ago, Stifler said:

Surely any punishment they got for over spend next season would be applied the season after?

 

So they'd be fucked either way then. Just a year later. That squad they've got now needs upgraded in more or less every position if they want to give themselves even half a chance of staying up. They can't invest as they need to without breaking PSR rules, and that's assuming the bairn who runs them could get access to any money in the first place. Even in the top league Sunderland don't generate the money.

 

Their best player of the past few years by an absolute mile looks completely out of his depth in a poor Ipswich team. That's what they're up against.

 

The gap between the 2 leagues is now a massive chasm. Tbh that's not a good thing but it's why all 3 promoted teams were relegated last season and the same will likely happen this season. Never used to be the case.

[Stifler]

20 minutes ago, Wallsendmag said:

 

So they'd be fucked either way then. Just a year later. That squad they've got now needs upgraded in more or less every position if they want to give themselves even half a chance of staying up. They can't invest as they need to without breaking PSR rules, and that's assuming the bairn who runs them could get access to any money in the first place. Even in the top league Sunderland don't generate the money.

 

Their best player of the past few years by an absolute mile looks completely out of his depth in a poor Ipswich team. That's what they're up against.

 

The gap between the 2 leagues is now a massive chasm. Tbh that's not a good thing but it's why all 3 promoted teams were relegated last season and the same will likely happen this season. Never used to be the case.

The argument would be that in year 1 they could just go all out to built a squad capable of staying in the Premier League, and building from there. Year 2 they would get a points deduction, but if they did a good enough rebuild, the points taken off them may not be enough to send them down.

[Wallsendmag]

17 minutes ago, Stifler said:

The argument would be that in year 1 they could just go all out to built a squad capable of staying in the Premier League, and building from there. Year 2 they would get a points deduction, but if they did a good enough rebuild, the points taken off them may not be enough to send them down.

 

It's an absolutely ridiculous risk which is probably the reason other promoted clubs aren't doing it and simply accepting their fate.

 

Plus Leicester pulled the Premier Leagues pants down so expect a loophole to appear now to stop that happening again.

[Keegans Export]

From a purely financial perspective you're better off just having the year in the PL and all the extra money that brings, worst case scenario you go down and bag however much in parachute payments. If you manage to stay up in year one it's a bonus.

 

Investing huge sums to try and stay in the PL first time is a massive risk these days, although Forest are proving it can be done.

[OverThere]

It's possible that you have to yo-yo for a few years to be in a financial position then to try and stay up. 

[sleazy]

13 hours ago, Geordie Ahmed said:

That decision was about 8 years ago and I still remember that it was Keith Stroud 

 

I barely remember referees names in the Premier League more than a game back, actually I can't even remember who the ref was for our last game 

I took this pic at the time:

[Infinitely Content]

4 hours ago, Wallsendmag said:

If they come up they are next seasons Southampton without massive investment, which won't be possible even if that kid who runs them was prepared to put his hand in his pocket, due to PSR rules.

Is this necessarily true though? I know next to nothing about the intricacies of PSR and plan to keep it that way for cleanliness of mind, however Ipswich who had rose from league one managed to spend £125 million this season without any player sales, so is there not potentially a scenario where Sunderland would be able to spend a similar amount, meaning more than most, including us?