England’s Anthony Gordon

[Beren]

Just hope we can stave off owt but an absolutely astronomical release clause. 

[HayDen Traces]

If rumours of his current contract ending in 2026 are true then this makes so much sense for us.

He's one of the 4 untouchables as far as I'm concerned.

[healthyaddiction]

2 minutes ago, HayDen Traces said:

If rumours of his current contract ending in 2026 are true then this makes so much sense for us.

He's one of the 4 untouchables as far as I'm concerned.

I'm probably being stupid, but who's the fourth untouchable?

[Paully]

12 minutes ago, healthyaddiction said:

I'm probably being stupid, but who's the fourth untouchable?

 

Big Joe surely?!

[Joelinton7]

16 minutes ago, healthyaddiction said:

I'm probably being stupid, but who's the fourth untouchable?

My friend, Big Joe is here.

[Joe1984]

6 minutes ago, Joelinton7 said:

My friend, Big Joe is here.

Which is hilarious considering how he started at the club.

 

But he is absolutely an untouchable.

 

 

Edited August 2, 2024 by Joe1984

[mondonewc]

4/6 at bet365 to still be here when window closes, for those who like a short priced bet seems great value, would've expected much shorter, he ain't leaving! 

[TRon]

2 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Reckon it might have been his agent working himself to get an improved deal?

 

Best scenario for us tbh. Gets him on a longer contract which he deserves, and kills the Liverpool talk stone dead.

[Unbelievable]

There should be no "untouchables" if we want to progress, just players we would only let go if an offer too good to refuse comes in or if their value is only going to go down (contract ending, player agitating for a move). 

[kingxlnc]

I honestly think if Gordon was to leave, we'd go all out to get Kvaratshelia

[TRon]

37 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

There should be no "untouchables" if we want to progress, just players we would only let go if an offer too good to refuse comes in or if their value is only going to go down (contract ending, player agitating for a move). 

 

 

I agree with this, but would add as long as we have an equally good player lined up to replace them.

[Unbelievable]

1 hour ago, TRon said:

 

 

I agree with this, but would add as long as we have an equally good player lined up to replace them.

The only player on our books where I think that would be too much to ask is Isak, so if any one player would be untouchable it would be him. Still though, if a really big offer comes in I think we would have to consider it and accept we’re probably not going to get a player of quite similar ability to replace him, but it would allow us to strengthen the team as a whole.

[healthyaddiction]

21 hours ago, Paully said:

 

Big Joe surely?!

I'd have never had him down as an untouchable. I certainly wouldn't have him down as our fourth best player.

[SUPERTOON]

2 years left on his deal according to Douglas. If that is the case, I can see him going if Liverpool bid.

[Coffee_Johnny]

Him and Tripps must be due back today/this week? 

[Nucasol]

Just now, SUPERTOON said:

2 years left on his deal according to Douglas. If that is the case, I can see him going if Liverpool bid.

Yep, new contract or flogged sadly. We can’t be slow sellers given PSR. Might be painful but this is the shocking reality we have to work in until someone crushes the PSR farce.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

We used to have to sell a player if they had one year left on their contract, now it's two years?

[Paully]

I’m astounded we only gave him a 3.5 year contract - as above - it’s either new deal this summer or sell sadly due to the shite PSR

[Pilko]

3 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

2 years left on his deal according to Douglas. If that is the case, I can see him going if Liverpool bid.

 

I don't see a world where we outlay £45m + clauses on a three-and-a-half year deal. 

[The Prophet]

15 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

2 years left on his deal according to Douglas. If that is the case, I can see him going if Liverpool bid.

 

Doesn't sound sure in the comments mind:

 

[r0cafella]

He has no idea

 

He just googled what’s out there and ran with it. 

[SUPERTOON]

17 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

We used to have to sell a player if they had one year left on their contract, now it's two years?

Based on you will get more value if they have 2 years rather than one ?

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Well sure, but they have more value if they have 3 as well

 

Point being I didn't notice when the expectation changed. 

[Unbelievable]

35 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

Well sure, but they have more value if they have 3 as well

 

Point being I didn't notice when the expectation changed. 

It's a fair question. I suppose clubs like Real Madrid happily turning a top player's head then telling them to wait until their contract has expired has made clubs needing to sell to progress a little more anxious about letting it come to the final year of contract.

[80]

The other thing is PSR (once again). It's basically created a parallel economy. If you lose a player on a freebie, you don't just lose the money, you effectively lose the permission to replace them - it's catastrophic.