Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Outfox the Fox

James Tarkowski

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

Erm, are not ALL people born in England English?  To my mind that does not mean ethnicity as such, as there are many. However, born in England, English blood. 

My dad is Welsh and my mum is Scottish/Irish. I was born in Manchester and have lived in Leicester for 95% of my life. I feel very English, but I wouldn't say I have English blood lol

 

I do strangely support all the home nations :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CrispinLA in Texas said:

Liverpool's Nat Philips also a CB and Forest's Joe Wirral a defender both 24 years old and available for the pricely sum of under 10m

One got to play PL footbal for Liverpool due to them having no recognised CBs, the other has no PL experience?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, wardyfox86 said:

My dad is Welsh and my mum is Scottish/Irish. I was born in Manchester and have lived in Leicester for 95% of my life. I feel very English, but I wouldn't say I have English blood lol

 

I do strangely support all the home nations :ph34r:

Ethnically, you’re fuched, but according to the law of the land you’re English.  Same with the most Welsh guy I know who lives at the bottom of our land - born in Sussex, legally English but so Welsh it’s untrue.
 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

Burnley don't have the sole ambition of "wanting to get the best price".  Burnley don't want to sell, and there is a price at which it is in Burnley's best interests to keep him for another year and let him go for free.  What that amount is, is anyone's guess.  But if Leicester's best offer is below Burnley's minimum acceptable sum, then so be it - that suits Burnley.

It's a pretty silly stance to take when faced with a player of value entering their final year of their contract. If teams low ball then you'd be best suited to keep him but if you want more than £15m it's pretty silly. With his wages as well you'd be missing out on potentially £17.5m that baring in mind how you are ran as a club is nonsensical. You get an additional £2m approx for every finishing position in the PL, so unless Tarkowski is going to guarantee you finishing 7 places above where you'd finish without him then it's a bad stance to take, especially as output diminishes from players invariably when they are determined to leave in the final year of their deal.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

It's a pretty silly stance to take when faced with a player of value entering their final year of their contract. If teams low ball then you'd be best suited to keep him but if you want more than £15m it's pretty silly. With his wages as well you'd be missing out on potentially £17.5m that baring in mind how you are ran as a club is nonsensical. You get an additional £2m approx for every finishing position in the PL, so unless Tarkowski is going to guarantee you finishing 7 places above where you'd finish without him then it's a bad stance to take, especially as output diminishes from players invariably when they are determined to leave in the final year of their deal.

 

 

 

Given that Burnley is roughly a quarter of Leicester's size and is one of England's poorest towns it is amazing how they sustain a premiership team. Their transfer dealings over the last few years have been very clever. We can't criticize their business sense. As for Tarkowski , he will be in no hurry . It is highly probable that other premiership teams will be interested and they will almost certainly guarantee him a starting position. As I have said before he is most unlikely to come to us if we can't do the same.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tarkowski is seriously underrated , he is far better than Stones and he gets in the team of the season. He would be a fine addition to our squad but at this point in his career ,he would want to play in the greater majority of our games.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

Given that Burnley is roughly a quarter of Leicester's size and is one of England's poorest towns it is amazing how they sustain a premiership team. Their transfer dealings over the last few years have been very clever. We can't criticize their business sense. As for Tarkowski , he will be in no hurry . It is highly probable that other premiership teams will be interested and they will almost certainly guarantee him a starting position. As I have said before he is most unlikely to come to us if we can't do the same.

I'd criticise their transfer policy if they cut their nose off to spite their face and let Tarkowski run his contract down. £15-20m for Burnley is significant when you measure their cash model. I respect them for not caving in all the while when teams coming sniffing but once you get to this position it's foolish, Arsenal got hammered doing it and for a team that don't spend much and don't also have a history of selling high value assets to keep the conveyor belt running, knowingly losing out on £15-20m in a year is poor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

Tarkowski is seriously underrated , he is far better than Stones and he gets in the team of the season. He would be a fine addition to our squad but at this point in his career ,he would want to play in the greater majority of our games.

Remember evans picks up a lot of knocks. Wouldn't surprise me if he was playing on the edge of injured half the season. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

I'd criticise their transfer policy if they cut their nose off to spite their face and let Tarkowski run his contract down. £15-20m for Burnley is significant when you measure their cash model. I respect them for not caving in all the while when teams coming sniffing but once you get to this position it's foolish, Arsenal got hammered doing it and for a team that don't spend much and don't also have a history of selling high value assets to keep the conveyor belt running, knowingly losing out on £15-20m in a year is poor.

It’s a judgement call on their part, as if they genuinely feel they risk relegation without Tarkowski, and would be better served landing his replacement, bedding him in, learning from Tarkowski for a year, effectively writing off 20m this year but securing EPL riches next year. Who are we to disagree with any choices validity, when any decision will only be validated in hindsight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

It’s a judgement call on their part, as if they genuinely feel they risk relegation without Tarkowski, and would be better served landing his replacement, bedding him in, learning from Tarkowski for a year, effectively writing off 20m this year but securing EPL riches next year. Who are we to disagree with any choices validity, when any decision will only be validated in hindsight.

Of course but as fans or anyone with an interest in football will call things as they see them and weighing everything up it doesn't make sense to keep a player who wants out who can leave for free next summer.

 

I reiterate, they aren't a team who will generate such money to reinvest in their squad in other deals. For example if this was us and we decided to stand firm and let a player run their contract down worth £15-20m, there's a good chance we'd move other players on in the short to medium team far in excess of that and wouldn't then restrict our ability to improve the squad over that period of time. Burnley would be faced with needing a key player next summer and they don't grow on trews for a team who tend to spend about £20m a season across the board. So they'd be impacting on the squad as a whole just to replace one player whom they know will leave next season and whom will potentially ease up next season and not be as dominant as he has been for them. Seen it happen many times before, stupid. We wouldn't do it I know that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Of course but as fans or anyone with an interest in football will call things as they see them and weighing everything up it doesn't make sense to keep a player who wants out who can leave for free next summer.

 

I reiterate, they aren't a team who will generate such money to reinvest in their squad in other deals. For example if this was us and we decided to stand firm and let a player run their contract down worth £15-20m, there's a good chance we'd move other players on in the short to medium team far in excess of that and wouldn't then restrict our ability to improve the squad over that period of time. Burnley would be faced with needing a key player next summer and they don't grow on trews for a team who tend to spend about £20m a season across the board. So they'd be impacting on the squad as a whole just to replace one player whom they know will leave next season and whom will potentially ease up next season and not be as dominant as he has been for them. Seen it happen many times before, stupid. We wouldn't do it I know that.

Read on a some Burnley forum that they were selling Dwight whatshisname, Chris Wood and Tarkowski, but that might be normal doom mongering on there. :dunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Read on a some Burnley forum that they were selling Dwight whatshisname, Chris Wood and Tarkowski, but that might be normal doom mongering on there. :dunno:

They need a shake up, selling the odd high value asset and reinvesting is obviously a great model but not easy to start from scratch as reputation of developing players increases prices massively, we have shown that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ric Flair said:

They need a shake up, selling the odd high value asset and reinvesting is obviously a great model but not easy to start from scratch as reputation of developing players increases prices massively, we have shown that.

The interesting query posed in that forum was, would you rather lose those 3 players or Dyche. The answer seemed pretty unanimous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tarkowski may himself chose to run his contract down and then ,at 29, have a real choice as to where he goes with the probability of a signing on fee and a bigger salary.Burnley cannot sell him without his agreement. And before anybody questions his commitment he is a real competitor and professional and will give his best in every match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

Tarkowski may himself chose to run his contract down and then ,at 29, have a real choice as to where he goes with the probability of a signing on fee and a bigger salary.Burnley cannot sell him without his agreement. And before anybody questions his commitment he is a real competitor and professional and will give his best in every match.

He's wanted to leave for 2 seasons, so Burnley may well not be able to sell him without his agreement but if he chooses to do that this summer then he goes down in my estimations a little even though he has every right to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Chocolate Teapot

More reliable Burnley sources says nothing doing - Sam really isn't ITK like he claims to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

More reliable Burnley sources says nothing doing - Sam really isn't ITK like he claims to be.

Maybe not, but @Ashley has a track record in signing information.


Called the Perez transfer before anyone else if recall right.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

It's a pretty silly stance to take when faced with a player of value entering their final year of their contract. If teams low ball then you'd be best suited to keep him but if you want more than £15m it's pretty silly. With his wages as well you'd be missing out on potentially £17.5m that baring in mind how you are ran as a club is nonsensical. You get an additional £2m approx for every finishing position in the PL, so unless Tarkowski is going to guarantee you finishing 7 places above where you'd finish without him then it's a bad stance to take, especially as output diminishes from players invariably when they are determined to leave in the final year of their deal.

 

 

 

I read that the playoff final to get into the Premier League is football's most valuable game as getting to the Premier League was worth £168 million (?). If getting relegated could cost Burnley that much then it would makes sense for Burnley to not risk that by selling a player who could make a difference, even if it means he leaves for nothing 12 months later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Chocolate Teapot
30 minutes ago, stu said:

Maybe not, but @Ashley has a track record in signing information.


Called the Perez transfer before anyone else if recall right.

Yeah I trust @ashley a lot more 👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...