Jump to content

Alexander Isak


Disco

Recommended Posts

There's two tiers in the Sky 6. Tier 1 being Man City, Arsenal and Liverpool and Tier 2 being Chelsea, Spurs and Man Utd. Given we've been in amongst all those teams and we're richer than all of them, there is no reason any of the Tier 2 clubs should be able to take any of our players.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Skeletor said:

There's two tiers in the Sky 6. Tier 1 being Man City, Arsenal and Liverpool and Tier 2 being Chelsea, Spurs and Man Utd. Given we've been in amongst all those teams and we're richer than all of them, there is no reason any of the Tier 2 clubs should be able to take any of our players.

They're still years ahead of us in revenue streams though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to think of it as a good thing that other clubs are interested in our players.

 

Whilst they can obviously get stuffed, it shows we're doing something right and it feels good that we're seemingly not prepared to budge.

 

And also that there are no stories about the players themselves or their agents rattling on about "dream clubs" etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Beth said:

They're still years ahead of us in revenue streams though.

 

And squad strength. Just compare their benches to ours last season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Skeletor said:

There's two tiers in the Sky 6. Tier 1 being Man City, Arsenal and Liverpool and Tier 2 being Chelsea, Spurs and Man Utd. Given we've been in amongst all those teams and we're richer than all of them, there is no reason any of the Tier 2 clubs should be able to take any of our players.

I agree we shouldn't be selling any of our players to them clubs, at the same time though we are never going to be pay the wages they can and at the end of the day that's what matters to the majority of players .
 

Man United and Chelsea for example don't even need champions league football to attract players due to the wages they can pay . Thats why when people say we have spent 400 million or whatever we should be top 6 it's not that simple , our wage bill will be far far less than any of them clubs so Eddie is performing miracles getting us to compete with them really .

 

 

Edited by Geogaddi

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Geogaddi said:

I agree we shouldn't be selling any of our players to them clubs, at the same time though we are never going to be pay the wages they can and at the end of the day that's what matters to the majority of players .
 

Man United and Chelsea for example don't even need champions league football to attract players due to the wages they can pay . Thats why when people say we have spent 400 million or whatever we should be top 6 it's not that simple , our wage bill will be far far less than any of them clubs so Eddie is performing miracles getting us to compete with them really .

 

 

 

?

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Skeletor said:

There's two tiers in the Sky 6. Tier 1 being Man City, Arsenal and Liverpool and Tier 2 being Chelsea, Spurs and Man Utd. Given we've been in amongst all those teams and we're richer than all of them, there is no reason any of the Tier 2 clubs should be able to take any of our players.

We're not richer than them - Chelsea, Spurs and Man Utd all have turnovers double ours, have (in Man Utd's and Chelsea's cases) ridiculous track records of success, and are far bigger 'names' at the moment.  It would be head-turning to our players for Man Utd or Chelsea to bid for them at the moment.  That doesn't mean that they leave, but there isn't an argument that exists that we are bigger than Man Utd or Chelsea

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

We're not richer than them - Chelsea, Spurs and Man Utd all have turnovers double ours, have (in Man Utd's and Chelsea's cases) ridiculous track records of success, and are far bigger 'names' at the moment.  It would be head-turning to our players for Man Utd or Chelsea to bid for them at the moment.  That doesn't mean that they leave, but there isn't an argument that exists that we are bigger than Man Utd or Chelsea

 

We would be richer than them if it wasn't for FFP. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

We're not richer than them - Chelsea, Spurs and Man Utd all have turnovers double ours, have (in Man Utd's and Chelsea's cases) ridiculous track records of success, and are far bigger 'names' at the moment.  It would be head-turning to our players for Man Utd or Chelsea to bid for them at the moment.  That doesn't mean that they leave, but there isn't an argument that exists that we are bigger than Man Utd or Chelsea

 

It's a bitter pill to swallow, but we are still at a stage where these richer clubs can conceivably turn the heads of our best players. I'm sure no one at the club likes it, but the PL are doing everything in their power to keep the scales balanced in favour of the cartel clubs. Not that much of a surprise since they've bankrolled the PL for the past 20 years so they have more clout than is let on publicly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Club literally put out in it's propaganda documentary on Amazon that we were now the richest club in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The answer should just be "no deal" regardless of what's offered 

 

Can't believe a few are suggesting that there is a price this summer, Isak is key to the champions league push, if we fail I'm that and he has a similar season to last, he'll be worth even more. Which, then allows for a rebuild, if he wants to leave. I don't think he will though, I think we've got 2 seasons minimum, as long as we nab any European spot through the league or win a cup

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...