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
 Share
HankMarvin

Maddison

By HankMarvin, in Transfer Talk

Recommended Posts

mozartfox

mozartfox

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, TheFish said:

Possibly, but given their wealth is certainly capable of paying 'over the odds' for Maddison, you have to assume it's because they don't want him.

 

Only if teams want to buy your deadwood. Getting rid of empty shirts isn't easy. Even harder to make money on it. 

On the subject of deadwood, there must be a nice little wooded area in your squad, unless multiple contracts expired at the end of last season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paninistickers

Paninistickers

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, TheFish said:

That's what I'm saying, if the reported figure for the second bid is accurate, Newcastle are offering 33% on top of his market value. That £60m is an over inflated price. 

 

There certainly appears to be a perceived need for Leicester to sell. Sharks are circling for Maddison, Fofana, Tielemans, Schemichel, Barnes, Soumare. I just read something on The Athletic and it's reported that you have a big squad, not in Europe. That you need to sell before you buy, but your players are fairly well paid which is putting off suitors. Also, that you can't afford to have another big loss for fear of falling foul of FFP. 

 

 

 

Thanks for the transfer  lecture Dude,  but whilst you lot have this last decade been dealing with Steve Bruce, Alan Carr's Dad and those ginger twins, we've watched our administration be involved in some of the biggest transfer dealings with the biggest clubs. Plus, when we deal for a player, we just go in and help ourselves like we did with your star player Perez. No fannying. We just cucked you and took him 😛

Edited by Paninistickers
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scotch

Scotch

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, TheFish said:

That's what I'm saying, if the reported figure for the second bid is accurate, Newcastle are offering 33% on top of his market value. That £60m is an over inflated price. 

 

There certainly appears to be a perceived need for Leicester to sell. Sharks are circling for Maddison, Fofana, Tielemans, Schemichel, Barnes, Soumare. I just read something on The Athletic and it's reported that you have a big squad, not in Europe. That you need to sell before you buy, but your players are fairly well paid which is putting off suitors. Also, that you can't afford to have another big loss for fear of falling foul of FFP. 

 

 

 

Why did you need to read that in The Athletic? We've been telling you this for days in this thread. 

 

We have too many players. As it stands, we will be paying out a fair bit of wages on players not registered in the squad next year. That's the issue we have at Leicester but selling Maddison doesn't solve that. He's a player we would need to replace, leaving us in exactly the same position. 

 

The only way we solve that issue is selling our dead wood. I have no doubt we will, I just imagine it will be very late in the window, leaving us little time to do much in terms of incomings.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tommy Fresh

Tommy Fresh

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, TheFish said:

Possibly, but given their wealth is certainly capable of paying 'over the odds' for Maddison, you have to assume it's because they don't want him.

 

Only if teams want to buy your deadwood. Getting rid of empty shirts isn't easy. Even harder to make money on it. 

Not if they've spent a lot this summer already, if he was available for the insulting figures you lot have thrown out they'd probably see it as too good to not make a move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lesta Legend

Lesta Legend

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Paninistickers said:

Tha and for the transfer  lecture Dude,  but whilst you lot have this last decade been dealing with Steve Bruce, Alan Carr's Dad and those ginger twins, we've watched our administration be involved in some of the biggest transfer dealings with the biggest clubs. Plus, when we deal for a player, we just go in and help ourselves like we did with your star player Perez. No fannying. We just cucked you and took him 

😆

 

Klarna FC do have a lot to learn

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mozartfox

mozartfox

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, jmono84 said:

Sky sports loving this. They always seem to have a negative spin on us.

Those two muppets on there are extremely irritating. Preferred Natalie Sawyer.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mozartfox

mozartfox

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Scotch said:

Why did you need to read that in The Athletic? We've been telling you this for days in this thread. 

 

We have too many players. As it stands, we will be paying out a fair bit of wages on players not registered in the squad next year. That's the issue we have at Leicester but selling Maddison doesn't solve that. He's a player we would need to replace, leaving us in exactly the same position. 

 

The only way we solve that issue is selling our dead wood. I have no doubt we will, I just imagine it will be very late in the window, leaving us little time to do much in terms of incomings.

:appl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dames

Dames

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, TheFish said:

That's what I'm saying, if the reported figure for the second bid is accurate, Newcastle are offering 33% on top of his market value. That £60m is an over inflated price. 

 

There certainly appears to be a perceived need for Leicester to sell. Sharks are circling for Maddison, Fofana, Tielemans, Schemichel, Barnes, Soumare. I just read something on The Athletic and it's reported that you have a big squad, not in Europe. That you need to sell before you buy, but your players are fairly well paid which is putting off suitors. Also, that you can't afford to have another big loss for fear of falling foul of FFP. 

 

 

 

Compare Grealish's statistics and Maddison statistics for the last 2 seasons and you'll find them to be very similar although Maddisons numbers for GA are better. One is a 100m player the other you are saying is over inflated at 60m? No chance.

 

If anything 75m is a fair price considering the going rate for similar players and taking into account Maddisons contract situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scotch

Scotch

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Paninistickers said:

Tha and for the transfer  lecture Dude,  but whilst you lot have this last decade been dealing with Steve Bruce, Alan Carr's Dad and those ginger twins, we've watched our administration be involved in some of the biggest transfer dealings with the biggest clubs. Plus, when we deal for a player, we just go in and help ourselves like we did with your star player Perez. No fannying. We just cucked you and took him 

Hold on just a second..... Are we really at the stage where we are taunting people about overpaying for Ayoze Fvcking Perez??!!

 

That's like a bunch of Saudi fans showing up and mocking us about taking Musa from us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheFish

TheFish

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

And yet we're knocking back offers for our players - even those we actually want to sell! So I suspect that 'perceived need' has been significantly exaggerated by the media. Do we need to sell before we can spend big on a player? Yes. Are we so desperate that we'll sell our best players for less than we value them? Not a chance.

Honestly? I think you're just being shrewd. You have an asset you're reluctantly willing to part with, but you don't want to set a precedent that you'll sell on the cheap. That's a terrible image to portray. It would be insidious and far reaching.

 

You bat back a few low-ball offers, then accept a higher bid, you're not pushovers and you can demand high prices for other in-demand assets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Number 6

Number 6

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

I'm rarely speechless and I shouldn't be now given its been common knowledge that Newcastle fans as a collective are absolute prats but some of what I'm reading is beggars belief.

 

9 minutes ago, Ashley said:

Why have the majority of Newcastle fans turned into deluded **** wits?

Yep, they're insufferable. When the takeover happened they all donned their tin foil hats and thought there was a major conspiracy against them re: it being blocked or scrutiny of sponsorship. Now they think they are a massively attractive proposition so they can low ball us and chuck in players we don't want. They're only gonna get worse too.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Number 6

Number 6

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, TheFish said:

Honestly? I think you're just being shrewd. You have an asset you're reluctantly willing to part with, but you don't want to set a precedent that you'll sell on the cheap. That's a terrible image to portray. It would be insidious and far reaching.

 

You bat back a few low-ball offers, then accept a higher bid, you're not pushovers and you can demand high prices for other in-demand assets.

"High prices" are not even in the peripheral vision with these offers at the moment.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EnderbyFox

EnderbyFox

Posted
Posted

At least someone on their forum is showing some sense, well done The College Dropout if you are reading this lol

 

Quote

Do you think we would have finished 3 points behind had we played in a European competition Sept - May?

 

European football is a massive factor. Injuries to CB's is a massive factor. 

 

Looking at the quality of both squads as it is. No European football for either side. The gap is pretty considerable in quality.

 

Aye atmosphere and momentum is in our benefit. That is true. And our manager is in a better position as well. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jmono84

jmono84

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Ashley said:

Why have the majority of Newcastle fans turned into deluded **** wits?

Listen to their version of the god channel, Sky Sports News and believe all the bile coming from their mouths!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheFish

TheFish

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, mozartfox said:

On the subject of deadwood, there must be a nice little wooded area in your squad, unless multiple contracts expired at the end of last season.

We have the bloody Amazon out the back of St James' 

 

Darlow, Gillespie

Manquillo, Fernandez, Lascelles (in my opinion), Lewis

Murphy, Shelvey, Longstaff(s), Ritchie,

 

+ Clark, Hayden and Hendrick winding down their contracts on loan already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ClaphamFox

ClaphamFox

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, TheFish said:

Honestly? I think you're just being shrewd. You have an asset you're reluctantly willing to part with, but you don't want to set a precedent that you'll sell on the cheap. That's a terrible image to portray. It would be insidious and far reaching.

 

You bat back a few low-ball offers, then accept a higher bid, you're not pushovers and you can demand high prices for other in-demand assets.

Yes, honestly. With respect, we know our football club a lot better than you do. We’re in a better position to know when our owners will likely do a deal and when they won’t. All the signs suggest we’re willing to let Tielemens and Schmiechel go, but not Maddison or Fofana. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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