Wesley Fofana - He is no more - finished - forgotten.

[kristianity77]

52 minutes ago, Gevans_97 said:

The issue here, in my opinion, is that even with a £100m bid, it doesn't necessarily allow us to spend that money on the 2/3 players we need. The squad is still too big and the wage budget still stretched so even with a massive fee we probably won't be able to do much business. 

 

What we need is multiple, big contract players leaving, not 1 wonderkid. 

But, could a 100 million sale of Fofana, allow us wiggle room to sever players contracts immediately that would otherwise run out in 12 months anyway?

 

Surely we could negotiate a payoff that is less than the wages they are entitled to.  Especially seeing as any player could then command a decent signing on fee at another team and ya know....play some football

[sacreblueits442]

1 hour ago, lanefox said:

Gammon supporters of Chelsea and the media don’t realise we have all the cards because he has 5 years left

....if  Fofana or his agent agitate for a sale, then we will have a problem!!!

We can always say no, but you are going to have an upset player on your hands and things can have an adverse effect in the dressing room. Clubs may hold the contracts but they are at the mercy of the player and what he wishes to happen.

[goose2010]

10 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

....taking players off the list, still leaves us with their wages to be paid!!!

if we brought in 3 young players and due to our usual generosity we pay them £60k per week each we would be saving £40k per week in view of your scenario. I am working on the assumption that a transfer fee received is classed as revenue and therefore would heavily impact the ratio, of Wages to Revenue.

I imagine (and pretty sure its been confirmed) we wouldnt pay the injured players, insurances would be in place. 

 

we wouldnt give the likes of Bowler from Blackpool 60k a week! there is value out there that we could get to work in our budget. 

 

 

[Twitcher]

40 minutes ago, turlo said:

The issue is we're massively overspending on wages due to handing out new contracts and overpaying squad players in recent years. We had over 100m worth of players, earning 500k+ a week unused at the weekend. There's possible some truth that Rodgers & the board are at odds with each others, as while Rodgers wants new players but the board will see unused players earning big wages, mostly recruited during Rodgers time at the club. 

I know but it hasn't answered my question; cam we sign players?

[sacreblueits442]

51 minutes ago, Twitcher said:

Just watched a debate on Sky Sports re. the Fofana situation, and Leicester's transfer position generally.

At no point was ffp mentioned. So, are we/would we be under any restrictions, or a chance of falling foul of the rules if we made signings? I can’t believe Sky would be that out of touch with the facts. Their portrayal was more that it's the club strategy to improve the training facilities, increase the stadium size, move on fringe players on high salaries, and generally have a structured, strategic approach, but not a situation where our hands are tied in terms of transfers.

Another thing that may support this is the suggestion that BR was at odds with the board re. signings. If that was true, the only way that scenario could materialise is if there was opportunity to sign players, otherwise BR would be aware of the situation and keep schtum.

So in our hands to sign players now, or not? 

...perhaps Sky Sports were taken by surprise, that there is a club out there prepared to adhere to the FFP rules!!!

If it was not for infrastructure spending we would be in a much better situation, so yes they are right. With the delay of the stadium expansion could they have diverted money to the playing side in this window and this recent knowledge of the FFP restrictions in our ability to bring in players, maybe a convenient ruse by the powers that be to stop Rodgers from spending in this window.

  All very convoluted.

[Finn Claw II]

Soumane, Tielemans and Fofana and possibly Vestegard will likely go by the end of the window.    That and Kasper / Hamza / Lookman is a significant cut in the wage bill - likely to something broadly sustainable.

 

[ozleicester]

1 hour ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

Cryptic messages on Twitter/insta could be others or Fofana himself.

..."Its,,,,Rebecca Vardy!!"

[Mickyblueeyes]

1 hour ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

Rob Dorset currently discussing this on Sky Sports. 
 

Says Fofana agents pushing for move as it’s quite lucrative. A lot of the noise is the agent.

 

Cryptic messages on Twitter/insta could be others or Fofana himself. People shouldn’t look so much into it. I’d say the same on people trying to analyse everything he does on the pitch too. 

 

Fofana is a level headed guy. Quite happy and respectful at Leicester and isn’t pushing yet. Leicester keen not to be pushed over. Situation changes if Fofana pushes which he isn’t doing at the moment for the above reasons. 
 

Leicester fans are frustrated, understandably but squad is too big. Leicester owners very realistic. Leicester short of quality but far too many in terms of numbers. Leicester owners have a long term plan which won’t be risked. They want one or two big signings but future of club more important. 

He mentioned something which I thought was very interesting. The cryptic message on instagram a few days ago where he posted Denzel Washington and the message that following what he wants could upset others could also mean that his decision to stay at Leicester could annoy his agent. Basically saying it could be looked at from a different perspective. 

 

As far he was concerned Wes will play against Arsenal unless an offer comes in that makes the board think. He's trained as well as he has ever done according to Dorsett. 

 

We also need to take Rob Dorsett's opinion with a pinch of salt. Just like Ben Jacobs. Rob's contacts are probably within the club. With Jacobs contact being the agent. No one actually knows what Fofana is thinking!

[Bluetintedspecs]

Like the club , I've revised my standpoint , not selling, if it's North of £100 million we may have a brief chat 😉

On other matters 3 frozen out of matchday squad Saturday one gone already 👍

[lcfc_forever]

4 minutes ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

He mentioned something which I thought was very interesting. The cryptic message on instagram a few days ago where he posted Denzel Washington and the message that following what he wants could upset others could also mean that his decision to stay at Leicester could annoy his agent. Basically saying it could be looked at from a different perspective. 

 

As far he was concerned Wes will play against Arsenal unless an offer comes in that makes the board think. He's trained as well as he has ever done according to Dorsett. 

 

We also need to take Rob Dorsett's opinion with a pinch of salt. Just like Ben Jacobs. Rob's contacts are probably within the club. With Jacobs contact being the agent. No one actually knows what Fofana is thinking!

He’s posted an article and it’s clear a club source has spoken to him on background to get our owners’ views across. 
 

Good to see them doing this and reassuring fans. 

[mozartfox]

40 minutes ago, OriginalRobboFOX said:

Do St Etienne get a % of what we sell for? Surely they would have asked for a sell in fee….

20% of the Profit.

[Spudulike]

3 minutes ago, Bluetintedspecs said:

Like the club , I've revised my standpoint , not selling, if it's North of £100 million we may have a brief chat 😉

On other matters 3 frozen out of matchday squad Saturday one gone already 👍

Who's gone? 

[mozartfox]

36 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

....if  Fofana or his agent agitate for a sale, then we will have a problem!!!

We can always say no, but you are going to have an upset player on your hands and things can have an adverse effect in the dressing room. Clubs may hold the contracts but they are at the mercy of the player and what he wishes to happen.

Not always.  Harry Kane?

[jv1]

9 minutes ago, Bluetintedspecs said:

Like the club , I've revised my standpoint , not selling, if it's North of £100 million we may have a brief chat 😉

On other matters 3 frozen out of matchday squad Saturday one gone already 👍

If you are saying Vesty and Perez have new homes agreed as well then what a week this could be!!

[taupe]

51 minutes ago, OriginalRobboFOX said:

Do St Etienne get a % of what we sell for? Surely they would have asked for a sell in fee….

Yes. 20% of profit apparently. 

 

As mentioned on pages 15, 18, 23, 27....

[turlo]

12 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

Who's gone? 

Hamza has gone to Watford on loan with an option to buy next summer. Not sure on wage % contribution 

[Bucks fox]

13 minutes ago, mozartfox said:

20% of the Profit.

Is it 20% of the profit or is it 20% of the actual transfer fee? 

[taupe]

11 minutes ago, mozartfox said:

Not always.  Harry Kane?

Well, in Kane's case, they just told him he'd been transferred to Real Madrid and changed the name on the letterhead. He's not noticed. 

 

But, yes, you're right. Players can and do get over it. 

[Fox 4 Life]

12 minutes ago, Bucks fox said:

Is it 20% of the profit or is it 20% of the actual transfer fee? 

Refer to pages 15, 18, 23, 27

[mozartfox]

46 minutes ago, turlo said:

Hamza has gone to Watford on loan with an option to buy next summer. Not sure on wage % contribution 

We are probably paying them.

[ClaphamFox]

If the owners are as determined to hold onto Fofana as they appear to be (and Rob Dorsett's article seems to back this up), then any attempt by Chelsea to push it over the line by offering another £5-10m or whatever will be completely futile. If it's really not about the money and Fofana does not aggressively push for the move, he stays no matter what Chelsea offer.

[lanefox]

1 hour ago, Bluetintedspecs said:

Like the club , I've revised my standpoint , not selling, if it's North of £100 million we may have a brief chat 😉

On other matters 3 frozen out of matchday squad Saturday one gone already 👍

I did find it interesting in his post match interview with OPA he was asked about Soumare specifically and then mentioned Hamza and Vestegaard being left out as well

[An Sionnach]

1 minute ago, ClaphamFox said:

If the owners are as determined to hold onto Fofana as they appear to be (and Rob Dorsett's article seems to back this up), then any attempt by Chelsea to push it over the line by offering another £5-10m or whatever will be completely futile. If it's really not about the money and Fofana does not aggressively push for the move, he stays no matter what Chelsea offer.

This is one thing that would push Rodger's over the line I reckon. If Top sold Fofana and then results nosedived Rodgers would look to save his reputation and put the blame on the club. Resigning might then protect his future in management. I am pretty sure Top suspects he will do just that.

[weller54]

10 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

If the owners are as determined to hold onto Fofana as they appear to be (and Rob Dorsett's article seems to back this up), then any attempt by Chelsea to push it over the line by offering another £5-10m or whatever will be completely futile. If it's really not about the money and Fofana does not aggressively push for the move, he stays no matter what Chelsea offer.

I'm sure he'll be chuffed as fvck if he doesn't get the move he wants!

Mardy Mahrez Mk2.

[ClaphamFox]

1 minute ago, weller54 said:

I'm sure he'll be chuffed as fvck if he doesn't get the move he wants!

Mardy Mahrez Mk2.

Well Rob Dorsett's article suggests that while Fofana's agent has been pushing for the move, Fofana himself is happy at the club, gets on very well with Rodgers and is not the type to down tools. So assuming that he will be a 'Mardy Mahrez Mk2' seems a bit presumptuous.