Lloyd Kelly

[frankpingel]

Even if both clubs agree a fee you'd have to think wages would be an even greater obstacle.

[Ikon]

No chance FB go for anything over 15m. If we can get say 15m or close to I think I would accept.  We might get a couple of extra million in the summer or further ahead, but if it helps us to bring in a new player now then I still think it’s worth it. Not that I see them going up to 15m. 

 

 

Edited Wednesday at 14:09 by Ikon

[The Prophet]

1 hour ago, Shak said:

 

Fingers crossed.

 

I suspect it's pretty close to the 100k mark. He'll have been bought with the expectation that he'll be a fairly important member of the squad, challenging to be first choice LB from the start and being a versatile squad member.

 

Given that we didn't pay a transfer fee, it's not an outrageous outlay in terms of the overall deal for the role we were buying him for.

 

It wasn't a dig or out, just more curiosity if any of the local journalists had reported anything about his wages.

[Cf]

1 hour ago, Shak said:

 

Fingers crossed.

 

I suspect it's pretty close to the 100k mark. He'll have been bought with the expectation that he'll be a fairly important member of the squad, challenging to be first choice LB from the start and being a versatile squad member.

 

Given that we didn't pay a transfer fee, it's not an outrageous outlay in terms of the overall deal for the role we were buying him for.

 

In terms of overall outlay it isn't but i'd be surprised if we've put him on 100k+ in terms of effect on the rest of the squad and our overall wage structure.

[Unbelievable]

1 hour ago, Lush Vlad said:

 

Does it?  Who verified it?  Talksport, Sky Sources, the club, Kelly's agent, Kelly himself  

 

I can entertain the idea we may have overpaid a bit and perhaps not coughed up the usual large signing on fee.  But balanced it out with a better salary than he was expecting.  But for him to more than likely be our second highest earner?  Absolute horse shit. 

 

FWIW: https://www.capology.com/features/#sources

[Kimbo]

I would accept anything over £10m. He’s the sort of player we could find ourselves trying to loan out in a year or 2 and struggling to shift.

[Lush Vlad]

10 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

 

FWIW: https://www.capology.com/features/#sources

 

Not having a pop at you.  More their definition.  I'm not buying that like.  Why the fuck would the club leak the wages?  Nefarious agents could, of course.  But then they could also lie and put dodgy info out there, probably lower than what they're actually on though, I would have thought.  Trying to get people talking about how underpaid their client is. 

 

Confirmed by 2+ sources.  So any journo or ITK type they have contact with, or if they read their articles stating a players wages (sources suggest) could just say a number and if 2 of them have the same number.  Then it is 'verified'?  

 

I cannot rap my head around, that basically everywhere you look.  Kelly would be our joint highest earner after Bruno along with Joelinton and Gordon?  No club in their right mind would do that.  

 

I've always found the Targett £100K one really odd and all.  If that's true, no wonder we ended up in PSR hell and Staveley and Mehrdad copped all that flak.  Surely he would have doubled his money giving him say £60-70k a week (said similar about Kelly).  So why on earth would we give out such a ridiculous deal? 

 

 

Edited Wednesday at 14:32 by Lush Vlad

[healthyaddiction]

3 minutes ago, Lush Vlad said:

 

Not having a pop at you.  More their definition.  I'm not buying that like.  Why the fuck would the club leak the wages?  Nefarious agents could, of course.  But then they could also lie and put dodgy info out there, probably lower than what they're actually on though, I would have thought.  Trying to get people talking about how underpaid their client is. 

 

Confirmed by 2+ sources.  So any journo or ITK type they have contact with, or if they read their articles stating a players wages (sources suggest) could just say a number and if 2 of them have the same number.  Then it is 'verified'?  

 

I cannot rap my head around, that basically everywhere you look.  Kelly would be our joint highest earner after Bruno along with Joelinton and Gordon?  No club in their right mind would do that.  

 

I've always found the Targett £100K one really odd and all.  If that's true, no wonder we ended up in PSR hell and Staveley and Mehrdad copped all that flak.  Surely he would have doubled his money giving him say £60-70k a week (said similar about Kelly).  So why on earth would we give out such a ridiculous deal? 

 

 

 

It says it needs to be verified by two sources, but it mentions sources include news publications. So, that's still very unreliable and calling it "verified" is pretty dishonest of them.

[Stal]

2 minutes ago, Lush Vlad said:

 

Not having a pop at you.  More their definition.  I'm not buying that like.  Why the fuck would the club leak the wages?  Nefarious agents could, of course.  But then they could also lie and put dodgy info out there, probably lower than what they're actually on though, I would have thought.  Trying to get people talking about how underpaid their client is. 

 

Confirmed by 2+ sources.  So any journo or ITK type that they may or may not have could just say a number and if 2 of them have the same number.  Then it is 'verified'?  

 

I cannot rap my head around, that basically everywhere you look.  Kelly would be our joint highest earner after Bruno along with Joelinton and Gordon?  No club in their right mind would do that.  

 

I've always found the Targett £100K one really odd and all.  If that's true, no wonder we ended up in PSR hell and Staveley and Mehrdad copped all that flak.  Surely he would have doubled his money giving him say £60-70k a week (said similar about Kelly).  So why on earth would we give out such a ridiculous deal? 

 

Aye, I don't buy it either. Wouldn't that really fuck over the morale of the squad if you're keeping someone out of the team who is on double your wages? I don't believe the Targett or the Kelly wage claims.

 

[The College Dropout]

1 hour ago, LFEE said:

That’s why I keep saying there is no such thing as a free transfer and generally in the long term turn out to be less cost effective.

It's great for bigger clubs. The best team at free transfers is Real Madrid. Don't have to negotiate with clubs, get players in their prime years. Pay them the big bucks. Happy to let them go for free at the end of the contract anyway.

 

Real Madrid are the biggest contract bullies in the sport. 

[MagCA]

It’s utter nonsense. They’re only good for the big American sports contracts because they are usually common knowledge and announced by the clubs themselves. 
 

For PL they just guess at it. 

[The College Dropout]

Capology is crap. But rumoured wages tend to be close to the truth.

 

The fact there are rumours Kelly might leave make me think he doesn't earn £150k. Who is going to pay him £150k and a fee? The fact there are no rumours for Targett make me believe there are more truth to the 100k rumours.

[LFEE]

5 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

It's great for bigger clubs. The best team at free transfers is Real Madrid. Don't have to negotiate with clubs, get players in their prime years. Pay them the big bucks. Happy to let them go for free at the end of the contract anyway.

 

Real Madrid are the biggest contract bullies in the sport. 

Like I said.

 

In a sport containing 1000’s of clubs you can probably count on one if not two hands those that benefit. In general they are never as good a deal as they look.

 

 

Edited Wednesday at 14:53 by LFEE

[Lush Vlad]

1 minute ago, The College Dropout said:

Capology is crap. But rumoured wages tend to be close to the truth.

 

The fact there are rumours Kelly might leave make me think he doesn't earn £150k. Who is going to pay him £150k and a fee? The fact there are no rumours for Targett make me believe there are more truth to the 100k rumours.

Agree on the first bit and the Kelly stuff. 
 

Targett has barely played for the last season and a half. Riddled with injuries and even had to sit out because of his eczema for I think a couple of games at one point. So I don’t know why  teams would be in a rush to sign him. 
 

I think they said on Sunday that was his first start since November 2023. 

[sushimonster85]

I really don't know where the 'Lloyd Kelly is on 150k p/w' thing came from. Always seemed pretty obvious that that was ridiculous. 

[The College Dropout]

1 minute ago, Lush Vlad said:

Agree on the first bit and the Kelly stuff. 
 

Targett has barely played for the last season and a half. Riddled with injuries and even had to sit out because of his eczema for I think a couple of games at one point. So I don’t know why  teams would be in a rush to sign him. 
 

I think they said on Sunday that was his first start since November 2023. 

He's a proven PL player though. Not even linked with a loan.

 

I agree the injuries are offputting. But potentially the salary demands are also offputting.

[Lush Vlad]

2 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

He's a proven PL player though. Not even linked with a loan.

 

I agree the injuries are offputting. But potentially the salary demands are also offputting.

I thought loans were rumoured at one point. Before he got injured again? Although I might be wrong? 

[80]

1 hour ago, Lush Vlad said:

 

Not having a pop at you.  More their definition.  I'm not buying that like.  Why the fuck would the club leak the wages?  Nefarious agents could, of course.  But then they could also lie and put dodgy info out there, probably lower than what they're actually on though, I would have thought.  Trying to get people talking about how underpaid their client is.

Would've thought they'd say the wages were higher to pressure other clubs to pay more, and look like better negotiators to other potential client players. 

 

Agree with most of what you're saying, by the way.

[Kid Icarus]

The wage thing is a mindset thing more than anything surely? 

 

If we'd signed him for ~£12m and he was on £50k a week it shouldn't be less of a problem because Bournemouth got the money instead of him. Players who run down their contracts nigh on always get paid more because they have that leverage don't they. 

[Sibierski]

Saudi clubs buying anyone from Fenerbache who then buy from us?

[STM]

1 hour ago, frankpingel said:

Even if both clubs agree a fee you'd have to think wages would be an even greater obstacle.

 

Clubs don't bid for players unless they already have an idea of whether they can afford the players wages, or should I say competent clubs don't.

[80]

6 minutes ago, Sibierski said:

Saudi clubs buying anyone from Fenerbache who then buy from us?

This did cross my mind.

[ponsaelius]

You can see why we'd maybe look at moving him on if there's interest when you look at it objectively.

 

Hall is long term left back. Targett is probably unshiftable at this point beyond subsidising a loan. 

 

At LCB we now have Botman back Burn in that position. One is a fully fledged purple and the other is great but at an age profile with little to no resale value.

 

Kelly is a useful player who fits into depth in those positions and the cover is comforting given injury issues there previously. But he is probably overpaid given his use to the squad, and is at an age where he can still be actively sold. If we moved him on and it gave us room to move for a long term RCB target you'd have to say it would make a lot of sense.

 

 

Edited Wednesday at 15:52 by ponsaelius

[Weezertron]

9 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

The wage thing is a mindset thing more than anything surely? 

 

If we'd signed him for ~£12m and he was on £50k a week it shouldn't be less of a problem because Bournemouth got the money instead of him. Players who run down their contracts nigh on always get paid more because they have that leverage don't they. 

 

Six and two threes, until it comes to selling the player. The one on 50K can be sold easier, and the free transfer can't be. Personally wouldn't piss about with free transfers if I was an owner.

[ponsaelius]

I agree that traditionally free transfers are often more trouble than they're worth. Although some big clubs (Madrid and Inter) particularly have used that market to their strength in recent years.

 

I do think you've basically got to be at the top of the tree to really get value out of that market.