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
lcfcsnow

Other clubs transfer news

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Phenom said:

They’re similar players. Maupay is not the reason for Brighton’s scoring woes.

 

Not sure I'd agree with that? 

 

Iheanacho is pretty much above all else an excellent shooter of the ball. He's a great finisher as long as he's on balance and fairly confident. 

 

Maupay couldn't hit a barn door with no distractions, which is a big problem for Brighton. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Interested to see how he does. Not a great record of Italian forwards in the PL over recent years. Zola a rarity 

Harsh on Andrea Silenzi at Forest all those years ago in the Prem. lol

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Southampton's new strategy is an interesting one. Having had success with Livramento, they appear to have gone fully in on buying mid to top prospects from the big clubs academy's. 

A gamble in many ways, still decent transfer fees of £15m+, but likely not massive wages.

 

They get the potential of hitting a gem who will make huge money back in one sale, but also have the risk of them not hitting their potentials. The risk of them not coping in the Prem or not having the right balance with experienced pros. 

 

Really interested to see how they fare this year. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, UniFox21 said:

Southampton's new strategy is an interesting one. Having had success with Livramento, they appear to have gone fully in on buying mid to top prospects from the big clubs academy's. 

A gamble in many ways, still decent transfer fees of £15m+, but likely not massive wages.

 

They get the potential of hitting a gem who will make huge money back in one sale, but also have the risk of them not hitting their potentials. The risk of them not coping in the Prem or not having the right balance with experienced pros. 

 

Really interested to see how they fare this year. 

It's the most logical model to go with given this 70% wages to turnover nonsense that PL clubs will have to adhere to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

It's the most logical model to go with given this 70% wages to turnover nonsense that PL clubs will have to adhere to.

Just another way the rich will get richer. 

Sell on clauses, first refusals etc just supports the upper echelons. 

 

Edit: I'm also hoping this model taking off will hit some sense into players signing for clubs like ours or Southampton earlier in their development

Edited by UniFox21
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

The thing is you can't really magic up over the market value commercial revenue and sponsorship unless you want to risk the microscope being on you and I guarantee a club like us wouldn't get away with it like Man City and others have. 

 

We absolutely need to increase that but if our wage bill is £180m as it stands and we pull in £200m. 70% of £200m is £140m, to lose £40m in wages is 8 players on £100k a week. It's going to be very difficult to do and compete.

I was under the impression that our value was increasing but perhaps too slowly or at least out of line with how we have seriously misstepped with our transfers, and our pertual (need to?)  increasing of wages for long term players

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

Not sure I'd agree with that? 

 

Iheanacho is pretty much above all else an excellent shooter of the ball. He's a great finisher as long as he's on balance and fairly confident. 

 

Maupay couldn't hit a barn door with no distractions, which is a big problem for Brighton. 

About that…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just read an article in the Newcastle chronicle and the comments from the Geordie fans, they are not very happy with their transfer window. Think the deluded fools were thinking they could sign anyone they wanted to with their new wealthy owners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Foxes1 said:

Just read an article in the Newcastle chronicle and the comments from the Geordie fans, they are not very happy with their transfer window. Think the deluded fools were thinking they could sign anyone they wanted to with their new wealthy owners.

To be fair I think thats the social media fans and we know all clubs have them - but some more than others such as Arsenal. Newcastle fans I know are being pretty level headed about it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/07/2022 at 10:04, Ric Flair said:

The thing is you can't really magic up over the market value commercial revenue and sponsorship unless you want to risk the microscope being on you and I guarantee a club like us wouldn't get away with it like Man City and others have. 

 

We absolutely need to increase that but if our wage bill is £180m as it stands and we pull in £200m. 70% of £200m is £140m, to lose £40m in wages is 8 players on £100k a week. It's going to be very difficult to do and compete.

Don't forget if you do get in Europe, you're guaranteed a certain amount of income. So it's more like £20m in wages. The 70% thing is the UEFA FFP and not the Prem's, so only kicks in if you get in Europe.

 

Still, the big clubs get their way again to make it a closed shop.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Don't forget if you do get in Europe, you're guaranteed a certain amount of income. So it's more like £20m in wages. The 70% thing is the UEFA FFP and not the Prem's, so only kicks in if you get in Europe.

 

Still, the big clubs get their way again to make it a closed shop.

True, the reward of qualifying for Europe only to be punished by having to comply to unrealistic rules is mitigated by extra income. Suppose the only question is does the rules relate to the year in which you are in Europe or once qualified the year just gone? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/07/2022 at 07:38, Dahnsouff said:

That’s why we need more extensive outside investment, larger sponsorship deals, but not sure KP, would be keen.  :dunno:

Like pull our first lever and sell 50% of future broadcast rights for the Correndon Cup defence…

I do wonder if we've done enough commercially in terms of investment since the title win. It feels like we haven't made the most of it. A team realistically chasing top 6 most seasons should be bringing in big money from sponsorship and commercial deals. Whereas it feels like we're relying on tv and prize money as most of our income.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

True, the reward of qualifying for Europe only to be punished by having to comply to unrealistic rules is mitigated by extra income. Suppose the only question is does the rules relate to the year in which you are in Europe or once qualified the year just gone? 

I think I read you are argue your case and they take into account exceptional circumstances regarding revenue. Eg. Huge bump due to European money. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Don't forget if you do get in Europe, you're guaranteed a certain amount of income. So it's more like £20m in wages. The 70% thing is the UEFA FFP and not the Prem's, so only kicks in if you get in Europe.

 

Still, the big clubs get their way again to make it a closed shop.

It is also worth remembering that 70% isn't until 24/25, so we have time to build income and reduce wages.

 

It's never been about fair play, it's always been about keeping the status quo. 

 

6 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

True, the reward of qualifying for Europe only to be punished by having to comply to unrealistic rules is mitigated by extra income. Suppose the only question is does the rules relate to the year in which you are in Europe or once qualified the year just gone? 

Good question. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, filbertway said:

I do wonder if we've done enough commercially in terms of investment since the title win. It feels like we haven't made the most of it. A team realistically chasing top 6 most seasons should be bringing in big money from sponsorship and commercial deals. Whereas it feels like we're relying on tv and prize money as most of our income.

I think that would be easy to argue if we were getting outperformed by other none top 6 clubs, but we were 30m ahead of the likes of West Ham, Everton and Wolves. 

 

I think the title win whilst a massive achievement but was viewed by many as a one-off, I think being a regular around the top of the table 2or 3 years has made more of an impact.

 

Only by having sustained success do you start attracting better sponsorship and commercial deals. 

 

Edited by coolhandfox
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

It is also worth remembering that 70% isn't until 24/25, so we have time to build income and reduce wages.

 

It's never been about fair play, it's always been about keeping the status quo. 

 

Good question. 

These next couple of years are crucial. 10 players out of contract next summer but also some key players potentially running contracts down that we really need resolving which we either sell or increase their wages to put further strain on our overall wages (Ndidi, Maddison etc). It's why we need our academy to be producing players ready to step in, as well as recruiting half a dozen players in the next year or two on salaries less than we currently pay. It's a big job.

  • Like 4
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...