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
moore_94

Patson Daka

By moore_94, in Transfer Talk

Recommended Posts

MPH

MPH

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, JimJams said:

@MPHEven if they get £40mill from West Ham?

Yes.

 

 

A team the size of Bournemouth will never be able to splash even close to the amount of money they get in. Theyve signed a couple of players for about 20m this year already so that figure seems to be about their limit - but they were playing that for established players not bit part players like Daka..

Edited by MPH
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Finnegan

Finnegan

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
13 minutes ago, MPH said:

Maybe there's a team in the Saudi league also called Bournemouth and there has been a mix up.... English Bournemouth are no way paying 25m for him...

 

Their record signing is 30m. They've spent 20m+ multiple times already this season alone.

 

And despite the perception of them being 'little' Bournemouth, they're bankrolled by a pretty massive American financial services firm aren't they?

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FrankieADZ

FrankieADZ

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Their record signing is 30m. They've spent 20m+ multiple times already this season alone.

 

And despite the perception of them being 'little' Bournemouth, they're bankrolled by a pretty massive American financial services firm aren't they?

indeed they have, theyve been took over by an American investment group or something of the like, spent a reasonable amount too the last couple of transfer windows as well, but sensible spending imo

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MPH

MPH

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Their record signing is 30m. They've spent 20m+ multiple times already this season alone.

 

And despite the perception of them being 'little' Bournemouth, they're bankrolled by a pretty massive American financial services firm aren't they?

i read it as 30m Euros , which is being picky, i know... and their other signings were arounf the 23-24m mark was still listed as being in Euros so without totally working it out, i figured that would be around the 20m GBP. And yes they have decent owners atm, but they can still only make a certain percentage loss based on ther revenue - like us all, of course.. and without meaning to sound patronizing, id figure that to be be a smaller amount than say us or Leeds purely based on the fact they have a ground capacity of less than 12,000... i dont think its wrong to still refer to them as a small club..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
99 Problems

99 Problems

Posted
Posted

Daka was a real prospect before Rodgers got hold of him. He will do well if he goes to Bournemouth - he needs regular game time as a no.9 - he can run in behind effectively and is a good finisher: similar to Kramaric - we just didn’t know how to use him and it’s always the same when looking for the next Vardy. We end up just playing the old one

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Finnegan

Finnegan

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, MPH said:

i read it as 30m Euros , which is being picky, i know... and their other signings were arounf the 23-24m mark was still listed as being in Euros so without totally working it out, i figured that would be around the 20m GBP. And yes they have decent owners atm, but they can still only make a certain percentage loss based on ther revenue - like us all, of course.. and without meaning to sound patronizing, id figure that to be be a smaller amount than say us or Leeds purely based on the fact they have a ground capacity of less than 12,000... i dont think its wrong to still refer to them as a small club..

 

I mean you're still probably right I imagine they aren't going to spend 25m on him. Or anyone else.

 

But these days I basically work under the assumption that almost any Premier League club COULD turn around and spend 30-40m on a player. That's just how mad the finances in the top flight are now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MPH

MPH

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

I mean you're still probably right I imagine they aren't going to spend 25m on him. Or anyone else.

 

But these days I basically work under the assumption that almost any Premier League club COULD turn around and spend 30-40m on a player. That's just how mad the finances in the top flight are now.

 

 

Fair point

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimJams

JimJams

Posted
Posted

Yeah I think it's fair to go on the assumption that everywhere outside the premier league struggle to put together a package worth more than a Nissan Sunny, whereas Premier League clubs will spend the deficit of a small nation on a 16 year old with 6 minutes in the u23's because he looks like he might maybe one day possibly could well end up becoming not too shabby....probably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stopharage

Stopharage

Posted
Posted (edited)

I know it’s a Friday night and some people might be on the sauce, but there is not a cat in hell’s chance we’re getting £25m for him. 
 

If we were to get a £20m offer for him, I’d respond and say they can have Daka and Ward for £19m. 

Edited by Stopharage
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
desertfox2

desertfox2

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Finnegan said:

 

Their record signing is 30m. They've spent 20m+ multiple times already this season alone.

 

And despite the perception of them being 'little' Bournemouth, they're bankrolled by a pretty massive American financial services firm aren't they?

Billionaire American chairman who is also chairman of Fidelity Insurance which is a fortune 500 company. Fidelity Insurance is massive. Little old Bournemouth have a big backer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HitchinFox

HitchinFox

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, desertfox2 said:

Billionaire American chairman who is also chairman of Fidelity Insurance which is a fortune 500 company. Fidelity Insurance is massive. Little old Bournemouth have a big backer. 


This is what made me laugh the first time they came up, the whole "little ol' Bournemouth" line. 


Even Sky used it, until they realised that it was futile as all the fans knew that there are billions behind the team. 

That shed they play in should be a clue that money might just be coming from somewhere else than their fanbase. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
desertfox2

desertfox2

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, HitchinFox said:


This is what made me laugh the first time they came up, the whole "little ol' Bournemouth" line. 


Even Sky used it, until they realised that it was futile as all the fans knew that there are billions behind the team. 

That shed they play in should be a clue that money might just be coming from somewhere else than their fanbase. 

Exactly.  It doesn't matter how good your manager, scouts, coaches etc are you're not getting into and then staying in the Premier league with 11000 tickets being sold for home games. Maybe 1 fluke of a season but sooner or later without a backer relegation would have been inevitable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dan LCFC

Dan LCFC

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

First things first, lets just make this clear, Bournemouth fans throwing shade at anyone are having a laugh, especially a club that's won both of the two main pieces of domestic English silverware in the last  seven years on a non-Big Six budget. I don't really think we're a basket case club, I think we're a club that made some mistakes, are paying for them and are showing some positive signs in recovering from them.

 

There is no one universal model on running a football club. Every club is a different corporation and has an ever so slightly different structure and even within that, different staff are going to have different strengths and weaknesses. I think what's abundantly clear about Leicester is that Jon Rudkin's management style revolves heavily around being able to delegate to the staff beneath him. Whilst someone like Txiki Begiristain or Michael Zorc might be extremely hands-on, very knowledgeable about football and will lead the charge at their respective clubs when it comes to establishing a football culture and a recruitment direction, Rudkin is going to be a lot more reliant on his Head Coach and his Head of Recruitment to steer the ship.

 

For a span of four or so years, Nigel Pearson and Steve Walsh were probably the best double-act in English football in this regard. They knew exactly what they wanted, they had a pretty clear tactical direction, they understood the kind of footballers they wanted to recruit and they had an extremely clear idea of the sorts of personalities they wanted to bring in to the football club. They championed a growth in our recruitment intelligence which saw the likes of Riyad, Vardy, Kante and co' come in but they also understood the need for guys like Morgan, Fuchs, Huth, Cambiasso, Nugent, Wasilewski and co', hard grafting professionals with a lot of experience and leadership who wanted to fight to succeed.

 

It all started to go rotten when Rodgers came in. Rudkin, again, not really a massive football mind, cedes responsibility to Brendan Rodgers and appoints his buddy Monsieur Congerton and the two of them share a different philosophy on recruitment. The two of them, fuelled by Rodgers' hubris, his arrogant over-confidence in his own ability to "coach", have a fixation on what they termed 'broken players.' They actively went off to find players who had failed, they were looking for players with a lot of potential but for whom their careers had gone wrong. The archetypal Congerton 'broken' player pre-Leicester was someone like Fabio Borini, the one time next-big-thing that had flopped at Chelsea and Liverpool. And so begins the gradual transformation of Leicester's squad from a team of warriors to one with a soft, meek belly and a lack of spirit. Players with obvious flaws, players with easily shaken confidence, players desperately needing a coach and finding Poundshop David fvcking Brent when times were hard. 

 

We know what happened next and now the two are gone. The hope is that Maresca is the answer and certainly the early signs are positive. He's a strong personality and he'll need to be because, yet again, he'll be expected to lead the direction of the football club because - yet again - we don't have a technical director / director of football with a clear football vision and philosophy of his own. Rudkin will continue to drift from regime to regime just casually doing the business side of dealings and keeping the squad ticking over with nothing to actually contribute on who exactly we hire.

 

It doesn't make us a basket case, it just makes us a club whose philosophy is prone to shift with the changing of each regime. There are lots of clubs out there that do this and Bournemouth aren't exactly any great exception, are they?

This is a good post, far better than the majority on this topic, and a pretty good analysis of our situation. It's a pretty old fashioned model. But I also think this does mean we're pretty volatile and I still think this shows that Rudkin is still ultimately out of his depth. I mean even working in the style he does, there've just been too many **** ups on his watch for me. The contract situation(s) and the persistence with Rodgers when it was clear to absolutely anybody he needed to go.

 

My instinct does tell me we have a good one in Maresca though. My frustration has been that we've appointed another dogmatic manager and we weren't really giving him the nuclear overhaul he needed. But should we get in numerous well-fitting signings this week things will come good again.

  • Like 1
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...