Jump to content

Anthony Gordon: undergoing medical ahead of £40M+£5M move from Everton (SSN)


Jack27
 Share

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

For what it's worth, Mr Talbot is reporting that his source at Everton hasn't changed their tune despite reports today. Everton are likely to accept our offer of £35 million plus £15 million in add-ons.

 

The bluster about playing hardball must be coming from our end.

 

Could be a PR thing. They know it may not be the most popular signing, so if they can get it out there as much as possible that Everton were wanting 60m, and then we announce at 'undisclosed' but brief that it's 35m (then whisper with add-ons up to 50) it makes it more palatable. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Miggys First Goal said:

Is he trying to force a move? What’s with him not showing up for training? Not too sure on his professionalism if this is the way he’s going on. 

Issue being would he do the same with us at a later date to try the same game

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

 

Is he not showing up, or left out by agreement?

The Times reported that Everton were aware that he wouldn’t be at training, but didn’t specify whether they had agreed to it or not. Onana also wasn’t there and allegedly had “an appointment”. Don’t think it’s a case of Gordon simply not turning up. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

 

Is he not showing up, or left out by agreement?

 

If a deal is as close as it seems it's in no ones interest to have him training right now, Everton included. They have likely already started to put plans in place for how they will be using the cash. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I follow TheOther14 so this popped up on my Twitter. Just regarding shot accuracy, but I'm sure we're all a bit sick of seeing shots flying over the bar.

Gordon also has 0.27 xG per 90 this season, higher than Willock, Joelinton and Maxi in a far worse team.

 

As a bonus stat.

2022-23 Everton with Gordon on the pitch

1095 minutes Goals for 10 Goals against 13

2022-23 Everton without Gordon on the pitch

705 minutes Goals for 5 Goals against 15

 

I would normally expect fans to be the best judge of their own players, but those numbers suggest the Everton boo boys have the wrong target.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Nine said:

60m is a huge fee for him, somewhere around 40m would seem about right. I wonder about the number of instalments/years we have offered on this deal to try and lessen the dent in our FFP, perhaps that is a sticking point with Everton.

 

 

 

Paying in instalments has no bearing on FFP

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a bit confusing, in other sports it's wages that are spread over the contract, like in baseball.

 

Presumably you could agree to spread the transfer fee over as many years as you wanted, regardless of how long you would actually have the player for. That's what I don't get about this new approach that Chelsea are using. I guess it wouldn't be financially prudent to still be paying for an asset after they had left the business. Transfer fees have been spread over time for ages. 

 

Don't know if I care enough to find out :lol:

 

 

Edited by AyeDubbleYoo

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, nufcnick said:

That’s correct 


But the player contract doesn’t necessarily have to be linked to the transfer fee instalments as simply as that, does it? You could always have paid a fee in instalments if you could get the selling club to agree. 

 

 

Edited by AyeDubbleYoo

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Groundhog63 said:

Need to put a halt on this transfer. Amad's better, Barnes is better & you can pick up better for nowt every summer, apparently..... 

Screenshot_20230125_142654_com.android.chrome_edit_2418288233006506.jpg

Screenshot_20230125_142707_com.android.chrome_edit_2418266875893488.jpg


I’m convinced these idiots only watch our games, ignore theirs, then go on to compare our players or transfer targets to their middle of the pack Champo squad.

 

[emoji38] no other fan base does this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:


But the player contract doesn’t necessarily have to be linked to the transfer fee instalments as simply as that, does it? You could always have paid a fee in instalments if you could get the selling club to agree. 

 

 

 

 

It doesn't matter how you pay the fee. £100m player on a 5 year deal is £20m per year in terms of FFP even if you pay the £100m upfront in one go. Give them a 10 year deal and it's now only £10m per year regardless of when the money is sent to the selling club. That's the reason for these new ridiculous contact lengths. Costs the team more in wages so the deal is worth more but it's less of a hit in terms of FFP. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:


But the player contract doesn’t necessarily have to be linked to the transfer fee instalments as simply as that, does it? You could always have paid a fee in instalments if you could get the selling club to agree. 

 

 

 

Yeah FFP has no link to how the deal is staggered between clubs. For FFP purposes the total fee paid is divided between how many years is on the contract. If a contract is renegotiated 2 years into the deal the FFP is then worked out on the new length of the contract. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jaqen said:

 

It doesn't matter how you pay the fee. £100m player on a 5 year deal is £20m per year in terms of FFP even if you pay the £100m upfront in one go. Give them a 10 year deal and it's now only £10m per year regardless of when the money is sent to the selling club. That's the reason for these new ridiculous contact lengths. Costs the team more in wages so the deal is worth more but it's less of a hit in terms of FFP. 

This is correct.

 

The best way to think of it is that FFP is accountancy, not football. It's measuring amortisation (or depreciation of the value of an asset).

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jaqen said:

 

It doesn't matter how you pay the fee. £100m player on a 5 year deal is £20m per year in terms of FFP even if you pay the £100m upfront in one go. Give them a 10 year deal and it's now only £10m per year regardless of when the money is sent to the selling club. That's the reason for these new ridiculous contact lengths. Costs the team more in wages so the deal is worth more but it's less of a hit in terms of FFP. 

Take a massive risk on the long contract though in case the player is a lemon and then they have a FFP hit on a worthless player 

Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Jaqen said:

 

It doesn't matter how you pay the fee. £100m player on a 5 year deal is £20m per year in terms of FFP even if you pay the £100m upfront in one go. Give them a 10 year deal and it's now only £10m per year regardless of when the money is sent to the selling club. That's the reason for these new ridiculous contact lengths. Costs the team more in wages so the deal is worth more but it's less of a hit in terms of FFP. 


In other words, Gordon for £50m over 5 years would hit our FFP requirements the same way it did with Wood when we got him for £25m over 2.5 years :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Solitude20 said:


In other words, Gordon for £50m over 5 years would hit our FFP requirements the same way it did with Wood when we got him for £25m over 2.5 years :D

 

If we sell Wood in the summer for £15m it would be classed as a £5m profit as he'd only be valued at £10m too :saylor:

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

×
×
  • Create New...