Jump to content

Now That's What I Call Transfer Rumours! 7


Recommended Posts

Just now, gdm said:

We were looking to bring bruno in way under the £40m budget. Wilson gets injured and as Howe put it things changed slightly. There were clearing meetings after Wilson got injured. As o said before you even started arguing the reasons things changed slightly was open to interpretation but keep on arguing she trying to prove me wrong. 
 


Bruno was signed in January, so what has that to do with the Summer budget? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Flip said:

 

Is Big Joe really top 6? What top 6 side would get into? I think Joelinton is improving massively, but top 6 is a bit of ridiculous statement despite him being Brazilian :lol:

 

In a midfield 3 he's top 6.

 

I think the only midfield he doesn't get in to is City.

 

I'd have him over Keita, Henderson, Milner, Jones and Elliott at Liverpool and they all get plenty of game time.

 

McTominay and Fred aren't anywhere near Joelinton's level yet play regularly.

 

He'd get regular minutes at Chelsea, Spurs and Arsenal too.

 

What I would say is, he needs to play in a 3 man midfield. I don't think he'd work in a 2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the plan changed after Wilson was injured, that supports the idea that the budget isn't strict and we're being quite pragmatic.

 

That strict £80 million budget we were consistently told about all summer, has already been stretched to £115 million with potentially more to come.

 

I don't expect any more major signings this week, but if one of our major targets suddenly became available, I don't think they'd rule it out.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

When the budget was mentioned was that not in relation to how much was paid upfront on fees?

 

People keep taking full fees into account when discussing the budget, when it is very unlikely that is how things are being calculated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, KaKa said:

When the budget was mentioned was that not in relation to how much was paid upfront on fees?

 

People keep taking full fees into account when discussing the budget, when it is very unlikely that is how things are being calculated.

 

Hi Luke!

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KaKa said:

When the budget was mentioned was that not in relation to how much was paid upfront on fees?

 

People keep taking full fees into account when discussing the budget, when it is very unlikely that is how things are being calculated.

 

I doubt we would disclose any budget to journalists.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, gdm said:

I meant to say pedro. Since changed it 


Fair enough. We don't have a strict budget though, if the right players become available at the right price then they will be coming in. Prophet has summed up my thoughts on the budget 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

 

I doubt we would disclose any budget to journalists.

 

Yeah, you can doubt it if you want that's fine.

 

But I think if we actually looked at how much was paid upfront on each deal, we'll likely find it wasn't too far off the budget multiple sources quoted at the start of the window.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Flip said:


https://www.espn.com/soccer/west-ham-united-engwest_ham/story/4731550/brazils-lucas-paqueta-is-a-surefire-world-cup-starter-west-ham-fans-should-be-excited

 

Should have the same impact for West Ham as Bruno did for us. That being said, PL is an odd league and more talented players have failed to adapt. 

 

Interesting. The article also seems to hint that he's a bit of a prima donna, and that may have put Eddie off. There's only room for one at the club.

 

Just to confirm, I mean ASM.

Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

"Is that because the budget is exhausted?

 

"Your words Luke, not mine."

 

Did Howe say that? Says a lot while saying nothing :lol:

 

all I’ve ever meant about the budget is we won’t be going mad. Which is why I’m not surprised it’s now only loans we are looking at that 

 

 

Edited by gdm

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cronky said:

 

Interesting. The article also seems to hint that he's a bit of a prima donna, and that may have put Eddie off. There's only room for one at the club.

 

Just to confirm, I mean ASM.

 

I heard he takes up three spaces with his Lambo. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KaKa said:

 

Yeah, you can doubt it if you want that's fine.

 

But I think if we actually looked at how much was paid upfront on each deal, we'll likely find it wasn't too far off the budget multiple sources quoted at the start of the window.

 

It could be, but the point still stands.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KaKa said:

 

Yeah, you can doubt it if you want that's fine.

 

But I think if we actually looked at how much was paid upfront on each deal, we'll likely find it wasn't too far off the budget multiple sources quoted at the start of the window.


That's not the way the journalists were putting it across though when they were reporting on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, et tu brute said:


That's not the way the journalists were putting it across though when they were reporting on it.

 

They didn't put it across any way specifically. Think people interpreted the whole thing wrong and got wound up about it.

 

The whole point of structured deals is to do more with the budget. So that £90 million budget or whatever it was can go a hell of a long way depending on how the deals done are structured.

 

Pope's deal for example was £10 million, but we only paid £3 million this summer, so only £3 million would have come off the budget.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, KaKa said:

 

They didn't put it across any way specifically. Think people interpreted the whole thing wrong and got wound up about it.

 

The whole point of structured deals is to do more with the budget. So that £90 million budget or whatever it was can go a hell of a long way depending on how the deals done are structured.

 

Pope's deal for example was £10 million, but we only paid £3 million this summer, so only £3 million would have come off the budget.


I know about structuring and how that works very well. I still maintain that the budgets the journalists were reporting on, were for overall transfer fees. Edwards, Hope and Downie have been pushing all Summer on money not being available.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're not spending any more money this window I'd certainly take a look at barkley on a 1 year deal with option to extend now he's been released by Chelsea.

 

Got to be better than Longstaff in mid, and cover for shelvey.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Feels wrong to say it after we’ve had such a good window so far, but I’d be disappointed if we don’t get some cover at CM. With Bruno out the creativity and quality in the middle just evaporates, need someone else to shoulder that imo. Would feel like a missed opportunity to go through the first half of the season which such a gap 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, et tu brute said:


I know about structuring and how that works very well. I still maintain that the budgets the journalists were reporting on, were for overall transfer fees. Edwards, Hope and Downie have been pushing all Summer on money not being available.

 

Okay, well if so, then they were wrong.

 

However, I think people that thought there was no budget were wrong too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

They didn't put it across any way specifically. Think people interpreted the whole thing wrong and got wound up about it.

 

The whole point of structured deals is to do more with the budget. So that £90 million budget or whatever it was can go a hell of a long way depending on how the deals done are structured.

 

Pope's deal for example was £10 million, but we only paid £3 million this summer, so only £3 million would have come off the budget.

 

If it's ambiguous, isn't it a journalists job to make it clear that they're talking about the upfront, rather than the overall fee?

 

The same journalists have said thst nothing was ever confirmed by the club, so I'd wager they've just got it wrong. Like they did in January.

 

 

 

 

Edited by The Prophet

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Dokko said:

If we're not spending any more money this window I'd certainly take a look at barkley on a 1 year deal with option to extend now he's been released by Chelsea.

 

Got to be better than Longstaff in mid, and cover for shelvey.

Pay as you play

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Prophet said:

 

If it's ambiguous, isn't it a journalists job to make it clear that they're talking about the upfront, rather than the overall fee?

 

The same journalists have said thst nothing was ever confirmed by the club, so I'd wager theyvd just got it wrong. Like they did in January.

 

 

 

It's not ambiguous. Never understood why anyone would think it was for whole fees.

 

If you have a budget for a transfer window, it will be for how much goes out during that window, which will be down to what is paid upfront.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...