|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 22, 2024 18:27:30 GMT
Have no idea who the player is/was mate. They were determined not to reveal the name in the event this happened I suppose but there was a genuine bid. You can't blame his club for accepting another offer if we are waiting to offload first. Why should they run the risk? They may have their own targets to get done that are reliant on the funds generated from the sale.
|
|
|
|
Post by norfolkrobin on Aug 22, 2024 18:36:48 GMT
Have no idea who the player is/was mate. They were determined not to reveal the name in the event this happened I suppose but there was a genuine bid. You can't blame his club for accepting another offer if we are waiting to offload first. Why should they run the risk? They may have their own targets to get done that are reliant on the funds generated from the sale. Yeah that's fair enough,transfers never done until they're done. Do you believe we will now roll onto plan B/C? |
|
|
|
Post by se17foxy on Aug 22, 2024 18:37:18 GMT
Why would we want a player released by a club in the same division as us last season? He was nowhere near their side so why ours? Think you’ve got the wrong end of the stick. It’s a player who’s named has popped several times in the last 3-4 windows. Was just shocked his name hadn’t popped up again through the usual football league world etc… |
|
burge
New Signing
Posts: 35
|
Post by burge on Aug 22, 2024 18:42:36 GMT
Unfortunately this is what happens when you faff around waiting for players to leave first. Club needs to realise you don’t always have the luxury of waiting to minimise risk. Can’t be too disappointed as I don’t know who the target was, but if they ended up in the champ. You’d expect they were pretty good for our level. We really do miss a lot of targets. Unfortunately this is what happens when you react to a rumour as if it's gospel. Not sure who’s put two pence in you, but it’s been reported by two fans who are in the know usually that a midfielder was ready to sign. The club waiting for others to leave has lost that deal… and my point being it’s not the first deal they’ve not got over the line. The list is growing. It’s a fair observation |
|
|
|
Post by Bexleyranger on Aug 22, 2024 19:06:36 GMT
It appears it was Marcus McGuane. Not fussed that we missed out on him whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 22, 2024 19:09:55 GMT
It appears it was Marcus McGuane. Not fussed that we missed out on him whatsoever. If that's the case I would be more concerned that we were ever interested in him than I am losing out. |
|
|
|
Post by addicksi on Aug 22, 2024 19:16:50 GMT
Some twitter account links us to an interest in Mpanzu the guy who went through all the leagues with Luton. Being mentioned on the other site.
|
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 22, 2024 19:17:24 GMT
Some twitter account links us to an interest in Mpanzu the guy who went through all the leagues with Luton. Being mentioned on the other site. Yes it's been posted above mate. |
|
|
|
Post by chertseyaddick on Aug 22, 2024 19:26:45 GMT
I'm not doubting this but, surely, the Premier League clubs would include some kind of waver for the solidarity payments - especially when we only pay a small percentage of their wages while they are with us? For example, if I were Chelsea I would insist that the solidarity payments are payable as a loan fee in the event that they sell the player later on, and/or I would make the wages due in full with the difference (between what the player earns and what we pay) held over as an interest free loan payable if we are entitled to any solidarity payments. If the lower league club don't agree to this then Chelsea will just loan the player to someone else. It does seem a bit cheeky that we get the benefit of a player for a year that costs us nothing (or very little) in exchange for giving him games then we expect to be paid for giving him games if he develops. I don’t think Chelsea would be able to circumvent it (although if any club would try to, you suspect it would be them). For starters it is FIFA who distribute the solidarity payments (they have a clearing house that does this) so Atletico Madrid give FIFA not Chelsea the £1.8m (5% of 36m transfer fee) which FIFA distributes based on the ‘player passport’ of which clubs Conor was training at during ages 12-23. In Gallagher’s case, Chelsea get most of this money (£1.26m), Palace and West Brom get 180k each, Charlton and Swansea (split season) get 90k each. Presumably the possibility of future solidarity payments factors into loan fees charged (as you hint at). Bear in mind we are potentially losing out on possible solidarity money every time we send our own young players out on loan, so it’s swings and roundabouts - a side effect of players being improved by loan moves and more playing time. Bear in mind also that solidarity payments are a FIFA mechanism that only applies when players move country. Had Chelsea sold Gallagher to another PL team nobody would be getting any solidarity monies. 26 for us, 19 for Swansea. Surely we'd be in line for £100k+. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Aug 22, 2024 19:41:47 GMT
It appears it was Marcus McGuane. Not fussed that we missed out on him whatsoever. Dodged a bullett there , don’t think we need another defensive midfielder. |
|
|
|
Post by ediaddick on Aug 22, 2024 19:49:39 GMT
Would not have thought McGuane was a better option than Taylor.
|
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 22, 2024 20:21:29 GMT
Would not have thought McGuane was a better option than Taylor. If he does go to Bristol City that will put Harry Cornick further down the pecking order. Has to be worth a loan bid surely? |
|
|
|
Post by aaronaldo on Aug 22, 2024 20:41:05 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by weststandfruitloop on Aug 22, 2024 23:34:56 GMT
26 for us, 19 for Swansea. Surely we'd be in line for £100k+. 26 and 19 what? Appearances? It's purely based on who the player is training with each year from age 12-23 and is nothing to do with appearances. He was with us for half a season, so we're due half a season's worth of solidarity money which is £90k. I guess if he was with us or Swansea for say a week longer than the other that might slightly tweak our respective amounts, but it doesn't matter if he never played for us - it's only how long he was here that matters re the payment amount. |
|
|
|
Post by redplanet on Aug 23, 2024 0:26:45 GMT
Unfortunately this is what happens when you react to a rumour as if it's gospel. Not sure who’s put two pence in you, but it’s been reported by two fans who are in the know usually that a midfielder was ready to sign. The club waiting for others to leave has lost that deal… and my point being it’s not the first deal they’ve not got over the line. The list is growing. It’s a fair observation Your rudeness suggests a nerve was inadvertently touched. So for the expenditure of another 2p, I find 'Two fans in the know usually' is still a rumour until it happens. And as for, "Unfortunately this is what happens when you faff around waiting for players to leave first. Club needs to realise you don’t always have the luxury of waiting to minimise risk." Maintaining a feasible budget and planning long-term, or spending like a drunken sailor, creating a bloated squad and having dead wood to pay wages to if you can't move them on? Pretty obvious which is the proper way to run a business. Otherwise, there's always Chelsea. |
|
|
|
Post by valleydobson1 on Aug 23, 2024 4:54:21 GMT
Surprised if Dixon don't sign this morning.
|
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 23, 2024 8:16:58 GMT
Not sure who’s put two pence in you, but it’s been reported by two fans who are in the know usually that a midfielder was ready to sign. The club waiting for others to leave has lost that deal… and my point being it’s not the first deal they’ve not got over the line. The list is growing. It’s a fair observation Your rudeness suggests a nerve was inadvertently touched. So for the expenditure of another 2p, I find 'Two fans in the know usually' is still a rumour until it happens. And as for, "Unfortunately this is what happens when you faff around waiting for players to leave first. Club needs to realise you don’t always have the luxury of waiting to minimise risk." Maintaining a feasible budget and planning long-term, or spending like a drunken sailor, creating a bloated squad and having dead wood to pay wages to if you can't move them on? Pretty obvious which is the proper way to run a business. Otherwise, there's always Chelsea. Understand what you are saying mate but you can't criticise how the board are running the business based on being unable to move on Fraser and/or TT. I say this because they didn't bring Fraser in and put him on silly money, same with Aneke. That's close on 15k a week which over a six week period is what we paid for Josh Edwards! |
|
|
|
Post by dickybaby on Aug 23, 2024 9:03:58 GMT
Its most frustrating as a fan but most managers need a few transfer windows to shape their squad. Think Arteta with Pepe and Aubameyang on high wages and having to suffer pain before he could shape what he has today. its just a job to most players and annoying as it is to see Fraser posting pictures of taking the family to zoo etc when he is being paid by us its the commercial reality and we would all do the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 23, 2024 9:29:29 GMT
Looking to reveal a player today which I expect to be Dixon.
|
|
|
|
Post by aucklandaddick on Aug 23, 2024 9:32:01 GMT
Looking to reveal a player today which I expect to be Dixon. Wonder what the situation is with Potts?…. Ness leaving should have opened up a space to fill? |
|
|
|
Post by cafcfan32 on Aug 23, 2024 9:33:04 GMT
Great signing if this comes off.
|
|
|
|
Post by aaronaldo on Aug 23, 2024 9:43:12 GMT
Dixon's size?
|
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 23, 2024 9:49:48 GMT
Great signing if this comes off. Had them on my top six of the top 6 bottom 6 thread |
|
|
|
Post by kings hill addick on Aug 23, 2024 9:56:39 GMT
Your rudeness suggests a nerve was inadvertently touched. So for the expenditure of another 2p, I find 'Two fans in the know usually' is still a rumour until it happens. And as for, "Unfortunately this is what happens when you faff around waiting for players to leave first. Club needs to realise you don’t always have the luxury of waiting to minimise risk." Maintaining a feasible budget and planning long-term, or spending like a drunken sailor, creating a bloated squad and having dead wood to pay wages to if you can't move them on? Pretty obvious which is the proper way to run a business. Otherwise, there's always Chelsea. Understand what you are saying mate but you can't criticise how the board are running the business based on being unable to move on Fraser and/or TT. I say this because they didn't bring Fraser in and put him on silly money, same with Aneke. That's close on 15k a week which over a six week period is what we paid for Josh Edwards! In the long term the club need to get away from paying players off and/or subsidising their wages. Frazer, for example, could, probably have left on a free in June. However, where he's going he is likely to earn a lot less so he wants someone (realistically Charlton) to guarantee his current wages while he plays in Scotland for a club that will pay him much less than we are, currently. The delay is, almost certainly, because we are trying to limit our exposure. If a deal can't be done then Frazer can train with the U21s for a season, while his family is in Scotland (assuming that reports are correct), and he can look to find another club (if he can) next summer when he's 30 and hadn't played for a whole season. Anything we can get another club to pay him each week comes off our costs, so we want to move him on. However, in order to prevent other players from being in this type of scenario we need to convince Fraser (and it's not only been him - it's just him in the seat now) that we will force him to train with the U21s if he doesn't waive some of his contracted wages. If we agree to cover the shortfall and let Fraser sign for any club he likes, on the money Sandgaard offered him, then, like Charlie Kirk and, presumably, Connor McGrandles we set ourselves up for this happening again. Players need to realise that if they don't deliver they can't go off and play lower league football while we continue to pay them serious money. I get all the 'they didn't sign him' and 'it's Sandgaard's fault' but Katrien Miere did the same, and we had fans demanding that George Dobson was given a blank cheque to stay, this summer, so this situation is likely to come up again. The club need to avoid giving the player whatever he demands to leave or we will, always, be doing it. So, maybe, we have to keep Fraser, not sign another player, and the next time we are negotiating a player's early exit he will be more realistic. For the record I don't want us to ruin Fraser's career, and I don't want him to be living alone in London while his family is in Scotland, nut I, also, don't want to be paying him (and whoever comes after him) c. £4k a week while he plays for someone else. Take the pay cut, and leave, or stay! |
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 23, 2024 10:25:18 GMT
Understand what you are saying mate but you can't criticise how the board are running the business based on being unable to move on Fraser and/or TT. I say this because they didn't bring Fraser in and put him on silly money, same with Aneke. That's close on 15k a week which over a six week period is what we paid for Josh Edwards! In the long term the club need to get away from paying players off and/or subsidising their wages. Frazer, for example, could, probably have left on a free in June. However, where he's going he is likely to earn a lot less so he wants someone (realistically Charlton) to guarantee his current wages while he plays in Scotland for a club that will pay him much less than we are, currently. The delay is, almost certainly, because we are trying to limit our exposure. If a deal can't be done then Frazer can train with the U21s for a season, while his family is in Scotland (assuming that reports are correct), and he can look to find another club (if he can) next summer when he's 30 and hadn't played for a whole season. Anything we can get another club to pay him each week comes off our costs, so we want to move him on. However, in order to prevent other players from being in this type of scenario we need to convince Fraser (and it's not only been him - it's just him in the seat now) that we will force him to train with the U21s if he doesn't waive some of his contracted wages. If we agree to cover the shortfall and let Fraser sign for any club he likes, on the money Sandgaard offered him, then, like Charlie Kirk and, presumably, Connor McGrandles we set ourselves up for this happening again. Players need to realise that if they don't deliver they can't go off and play lower league football while we continue to pay them serious money. I get all the 'they didn't sign him' and 'it's Sandgaard's fault' but Katrien Miere did the same, and we had fans demanding that George Dobson was given a blank cheque to stay, this summer, so this situation is likely to come up again. The club need to avoid giving the player whatever he demands to leave or we will, always, be doing it. So, maybe, we have to keep Fraser, not sign another player, and the next time we are negotiating a player's early exit he will be more realistic. For the record I don't want us to ruin Fraser's career, and I don't want him to be living alone in London while his family is in Scotland, nut I, also, don't want to be paying him (and whoever comes after him) c. £4k a week while he plays for someone else. Take the pay cut, and leave, or stay! Just put clauses in the final year of a players contract and that will stop all of this nonsense. |
|
|
|
Post by seriouslyred on Aug 23, 2024 11:25:25 GMT
Understand what you are saying mate but you can't criticise how the board are running the business based on being unable to move on Fraser and/or TT. I say this because they didn't bring Fraser in and put him on silly money, same with Aneke. That's close on 15k a week which over a six week period is what we paid for Josh Edwards! In the long term the club need to get away from paying players off and/or subsidising their wages. Frazer, for example, could, probably have left on a free in June. However, where he's going he is likely to earn a lot less so he wants someone (realistically Charlton) to guarantee his current wages while he plays in Scotland for a club that will pay him much less than we are, currently. The delay is, almost certainly, because we are trying to limit our exposure. If a deal can't be done then Frazer can train with the U21s for a season, while his family is in Scotland (assuming that reports are correct), and he can look to find another club (if he can) next summer when he's 30 and hadn't played for a whole season. Anything we can get another club to pay him each week comes off our costs, so we want to move him on. However, in order to prevent other players from being in this type of scenario we need to convince Fraser (and it's not only been him - it's just him in the seat now) that we will force him to train with the U21s if he doesn't waive some of his contracted wages. If we agree to cover the shortfall and let Fraser sign for any club he likes, on the money Sandgaard offered him, then, like Charlie Kirk and, presumably, Connor McGrandles we set ourselves up for this happening again. Players need to realise that if they don't deliver they can't go off and play lower league football while we continue to pay them serious money. I get all the 'they didn't sign him' and 'it's Sandgaard's fault' but Katrien Miere did the same, and we had fans demanding that George Dobson was given a blank cheque to stay, this summer, so this situation is likely to come up again. The club need to avoid giving the player whatever he demands to leave or we will, always, be doing it. So, maybe, we have to keep Fraser, not sign another player, and the next time we are negotiating a player's early exit he will be more realistic. For the record I don't want us to ruin Fraser's career, and I don't want him to be living alone in London while his family is in Scotland, nut I, also, don't want to be paying him (and whoever comes after him) c. £4k a week while he plays for someone else. Take the pay cut, and leave, or stay! Any new owners, and for that matter, new manager can always blame their predecessors for past mistakes and sub par performances. But the real challenge is to take stock of the existing assets and capabilities, explore what changes are required, and then execute. It's obviously too early to call, but if we're in the top six by October then we can certainly claim a change in outcome / direction. And go on to discuss exactly why. One thing is certain: we have far more experienced adults managing the football side than we did 18 months ago. Several people in their 40s and 50s with decades of experience within various levels of the EFL. As Cruyff (and Riga!) suggested, we need to make less mistakes. Once we see a settled pattern of play and player selection, we may well identify that there are less players not contributing. And ideally most of those contracts expire next summer. By the way it appears that something similar is happening at Wrexham where they are loaded down with players who did well at lower levels. In both cases owners may be more inclined to sanction more spending once management proves itself AND players not contributing run down the clock. We should recognise that this infuriates some who want to see what they call "ambition". They want virtually every player from last season terminated FFS! But here in the real world we should just want our club to finish each window in a better place than the start. And that's exactly what Nathan Jones is both communicating AND delivering. |
|
|
|
Post by weststandfruitloop on Aug 23, 2024 12:09:57 GMT
Incoming transfer moneys update:
In addition to £100k from Burstow (sell-on) and £90k from Gallagher (solidarity fee) we can now add:
£125k from Largie Ramazani (solidarity fee of three years aged 13-15 at 0.25% and one year age 16 at 0.5%, based on the reported £10m fee).
Nothing from Ian Maatsen (people have suggested on CL we'd get something, but training and solidarity fees both only apply to international moves - London to Birmingham, even though they talk funny there, isn't a foreign move).
That's a total of £315k so far. Hopefully it will be directed towards the incoming transfers pot (if there is one).
|
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 23, 2024 12:22:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by weststandfruitloop on Aug 23, 2024 12:25:49 GMT
As far as the ones that will really change our budgets go, just FYI:
We are due 1.25% of any Ademola Lookman move away from Spain (solidarity fee for 2.5 years at 0.5% each) - the rumoured £50m to Arsenal would net us £625k. NB This might be more as I don't know if non-league Waterloo FC get anything. If not (if it's 'professional development' only) then the 5% solidarity fee will be spread over fewer years, so our cut will rise to about a million.
For Joe Gomez we are rumoured to have a 20% sell on for anything above £6m, so the rumoured £40m would net us £8.5m. If Gomez moves overseas (rather than stays in the PL) we would also get a 2.5% solidarity payment, eg another £1m (although I guess skimming off the solidarity money might reduce the wider fee re sell-on percentage?).
Watch this space.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1978sussex on Aug 23, 2024 12:32:42 GMT
|
|
