With so many loans being looked at and 'LVBPT' (who seems to be in the know) mentioning we are not looking to pay over £15M for players, I was wondering how big our kitty really is.
The fact that we haven't gone all out for the much needed CB and instead are dancing around a few tell me that we might not have as much to spend as we think we have.
Don't get me wrong the deals that we have done are excellent business, but with all these loans we end up biting ourselves in the back.
Great strategy if we don't stay up, but if we do, we have to fork out a huge amount for the 'option to buy' s next transfer window without actually strengthening ourselves.
I hope I will be proven wrong, but we really need 1 or 2 players with quality (Winger and CB) and they don't come for less than £15M (besides the fact that every week without a CB is points dropped)
That's not what LVBPT stated I believe. He said that he didn't expect us to spend more than 15m on the targets he knew of, not that we had that as a ceiling.
Quote from: Sting of the North on September 21, 2020, 09:14:30 PM
That's not what LVBPT stated I believe. He said that he didn't expect us to spend more than 15m on the targets he knew of, not that we had that as a ceiling.
That's correct, but I have been wondering where that big purchase will be then?
Our acquisitions so far:
-- A Championship LB with no PL experience
-- A goalkeeper with significant pedigree but no PL experience
-- A RB with some pedigree but no PL experience
-- A RB/LB who hasn't featured yet at all
-- Re-signing Reed who really had no PL experience and looks lightweight
-- A central mid with some skill but not very much positive PL experience
-- Bringing back Anguissa, who had bad PL experience but looked good on Saturday
Now we're looking at a loan for Lookman (again, no legit PL experience) and may buy a Brazilian CB whose weakness is aerial defending and has no PL experience.
I know it's hard for promoted clubs to convince people to join sometimes, but it seems like we're taking a lot of gambles again with zero sure things.
Mate, I know you mean well and its a decent topic....but I just know its another flag for the select few to turn into the barrage against Tony khan to say the same old crap we've heard on post after post.
Anyway, in regards your post. Is it 3 loans we have in?
Quote from: Sting of the North on September 21, 2020, 09:14:30 PM
That's not what LVBPT stated I believe. He said that he didn't expect us to spend more than 15m on the targets he knew of, not that we had that as a ceiling.
I stand corrected in that case - it sounded like we were only looking at £15M targets.
Always appreciate his contribution
It's loans that get 'crystallized' to transfers if we stay in the Prem, a bit like when we got promoted to the Prem, we signed Cav, Knok, Reed and Reid. Same sort of arrangement.
Sky Sports News' Kaveh Solhekol on The Transfer Show...
"One of the frustrations for Manchester United fans is that this window was the perfect opportunity to address some of the weaknesses in Ole Gunnar Solskjaer's squad because prices are depressed due to the coronavirus pandemic.
"Players are typically cheaper than we would have seen in any other window, and clubs like Chelsea have taken advantage of that. That's what is frustrating, United could have done more business in a market that is a buyer's market.
"Even more crucially, their usual competitors for signings are not in the market this summer. Real Madrid are not signing any players, Barcelona are selling players, Juventus are doing loan deals – the big European clubs are not spending money."
If players at the top of the tree are cheaper in this window, I think our club has every right to expect that players lower down the ladder are going to be cheaper too.
I am not sure that the gripe "no PL experience" has any bearing on a player value to a club. The top clubs habitually buy players from other leagues and accept the odd dud as part of the process and not all of their PL purchases work out either.
Why do we expect is to be any different for us.
If reports are to be believed Spuds blew a wad on Ryan S last summer and are looking to offload him now !
Quote from: 70sPimlico on September 21, 2020, 09:23:37 PM
Mate, I know you mean well and its a decent topic....but I just know its another flag for the select few to turn into the barrage against Tony khan to say the same old crap we've heard on post after post.
Anyway, in regards your post. Is it 3 loans we have in?
Yeah, 3 so far, but I get the feeling that all that is floating around is other rumours with loan deals. Feels a bit 'cheap' If that makes sense
Quote from: Roberty on September 21, 2020, 09:42:07 PM
Sky Sports News' Kaveh Solhekol on The Transfer Show...
"One of the frustrations for Manchester United fans is that this window was the perfect opportunity to address some of the weaknesses in Ole Gunnar Solskjaer's squad because prices are depressed due to the coronavirus pandemic.
"Players are typically cheaper than we would have seen in any other window, and clubs like Chelsea have taken advantage of that. That's what is frustrating, United could have done more business in a market that is a buyer's market.
"Even more crucially, their usual competitors for signings are not in the market this summer. Real Madrid are not signing any players, Barcelona are selling players, Juventus are doing loan deals – the big European clubs are not spending money."
If players at the top of the tree are cheaper in this window, I think our club has every right to expect that players lower down the ladder are going to be cheaper too.
I am not sure that the gripe "no PL experience" has any bearing on a player value to a club. The top clubs habitually buy players from other leagues and accept the odd dud as part of the process and not all of their PL purchases work out either.
Why do we expect is to be any different for us.
If reports are to be believed Spuds blew a wad on Ryan S last summer and are looking to offload him now !
Of course you can buy well elsewhere. I'm just surprised we haven't brought in anyone with an established track record in this division. I think it shows. Unless you're buying super-premium players, there's an adjustment period to the pace and physicality, and we can't really afford to waste matches.
Quote from: Denver Fulham on September 21, 2020, 11:15:02 PM
Quote from: Roberty on September 21, 2020, 09:42:07 PM
Sky Sports News' Kaveh Solhekol on The Transfer Show...
"One of the frustrations for Manchester United fans is that this window was the perfect opportunity to address some of the weaknesses in Ole Gunnar Solskjaer's squad because prices are depressed due to the coronavirus pandemic.
"Players are typically cheaper than we would have seen in any other window, and clubs like Chelsea have taken advantage of that. That's what is frustrating, United could have done more business in a market that is a buyer's market.
"Even more crucially, their usual competitors for signings are not in the market this summer. Real Madrid are not signing any players, Barcelona are selling players, Juventus are doing loan deals – the big European clubs are not spending money."
If players at the top of the tree are cheaper in this window, I think our club has every right to expect that players lower down the ladder are going to be cheaper too.
I am not sure that the gripe "no PL experience" has any bearing on a player value to a club. The top clubs habitually buy players from other leagues and accept the odd dud as part of the process and not all of their PL purchases work out either.
Why do we expect is to be any different for us.
If reports are to be believed Spuds blew a wad on Ryan S last summer and are looking to offload him now !
Of course you can buy well elsewhere. I'm just surprised we haven't brought in anyone with an established track record in this division. I think it shows. Unless you're buying super-premium players, there's an adjustment period to the pace and physicality, and we can't really afford to waste matches.
If someone is any good in the PL, the club they are at now is not going to let them go
If we are only going to recruit players with "an established track record in the PL" it will be the cast offs.
This was the case with Mawson, who everyone on here wanted TK to buy, but who turned out to be a dud
Quote from: Roberty on September 22, 2020, 03:17:13 AM
If someone is any good in the PL, the club they are at now is not going to let them go
If we are only going to recruit players with "an established track record in the PL" it will be the cast offs.
This was the case with Mawson, who everyone on here wanted TK to buy, but who turned out to be a dud
Mawson wasn't a cast-off. His team had been relegated and could no longer persuade/afford him to stay.
Quote from: Statto on September 22, 2020, 08:22:37 AM
Quote from: Roberty on September 22, 2020, 03:17:13 AM
If someone is any good in the PL, the club they are at now is not going to let them go
If we are only going to recruit players with "an established track record in the PL" it will be the cast offs.
This was the case with Mawson, who everyone on here wanted TK to buy, but who turned out to be a dud
Mawson wasn't a cast-off. His team had been relegated and could no longer persuade/afford him to stay.
I think the point is recruiting players in that are current playing in the top 17 teams is extremely difficult and the only available Premier League experienced player available are those already in the Championship or heading into the Championship like Mawson. The complete lacks of options for Tony Khan is one explaining for the lack of recruitment that is yet to be disproven.
Quote from: Denver Fulham on September 21, 2020, 09:20:05 PM
-- A Championship LB with no PL experience
-- A goalkeeper with significant pedigree but no PL experience
-- A RB with some pedigree but no PL experience
-- A RB/LB who hasn't featured yet at all
-- Re-signing Reed who really had no PL experience and looks lightweight
-- A central mid with some skill but not very much positive PL experience
-- Bringing back Anguissa, who had bad PL experience but looked good on Saturday
Now we're looking at a loan for Lookman (again, no legit PL experience) and may buy a Brazilian CB whose weakness is aerial defending and has no PL experience.
I know it's hard for promoted clubs to convince people to join sometimes, but it seems like we're taking a lot of gambles again with zero sure things.
Whilst I appreciate your last sentence (perhaps more so after the start we've got off to), your resume of incomings so far is one of the most negative things I've read. How about:
-- A Championship LB with international experience and v close to joining AC Milan in January
-- An international goalkeeper with significant playing time at two of Europes biggest clubs
-- A RB with good experience and first choice wherever he's played (and started season early so ready to go)
-- A RB/LB who has to fight to get into the team
-- Re-signing Reed who has some PL experience and was outstanding for us after lock down
-- A central mid who was rated amongst the best when at Juve, looking to restart and our try as you buy may work out week
-- Bringing back Anguissa, who excelled in La Liga last season and looks every bit the £25m player that he is
I would still imagine we have to be quite tight this summer.
Last summer, we delayed the signing of Hector until the Ryan Sess funds had cleared due to FFP concerns.
We then splashed:
£10m on Cavaleiro
£10m on Knockaert
£10m on Bobby Reid
£8m on Reed
£6m on Hector
£2m on Robinson
£2m on Lemina Loan
£3m on Tete
£2m on Aina loan
£7m on wages for Areola.
Puts us at around £60m outlay since the money from Sessegnon was cleared. Which is just over a year ago now.
This seems like a good place to share this. I decided to go through our squad and table up committed spend by season to see how much money we really have and how we were setting us up for potentially future seasons in the Championship.
(https://i.imgur.com/0FWbTzR.png)
Few assumptions: loans fees are all guesses, I'm assuming that for our three forwards the reported fees include the initial outlay for the loan, and I'm adding Marlon's signing as it seems close to done. Also assuming the contract length over which transfers are amortised doesn't include "club option of the further year" years, and that when someone signs a contract extension (e.g. Mitrovic) the remaining transfer fee isn't amortised over the length ofthe new contract (please correct if I am in error).
But they key headline is that I reckon our committed spend on transfer fees and loans is around £10m higher this year than last time around in the Premier League. We never know quite how close to the sun we are flying regards to FFP because there are deductables (e.g. academy operating costs, property depreciation etc.) that aren't broken down in the company accounts, but my assumption with Khan is that he's always giving the management as much as he can within reason.
So from this I wouldn't expect any more big incoming permanent signings after Marlon, unless we manage to sell an asset for a profit, with only Anguissa being a decent candidate (and I think we need him tbh)
The other big thing the club needs to be thinking of is how we challenge in the Championship next year if we return. Last year I make £47m in transfer amort + loan fees but that was supported by the Sessegnon transfer (£25m, or £20m + Josh Onomah) and we probably got some kind of loan fees for Anguissa and maybe Seri at a stretch. At the moment we don't have that much committed (only £40m) but you would still expect players to leave. The good news is we will be able to afford players like Seri and Mawson to perhaps leave for something close to what people will pay for them.
After that our committed spend falls drastically due to the end of the Mawson/Seri debacles, which is fortunate because our parachute payments fall by £15m in the second year. Again we would have to sell a player to balance the books (probably Mitrovic if he's still around). However, if we are promoted the good news is we will have a bigger transfer kitty with which to buy better players. This is I think where the real value of the play-off final win lies: it's given us a much longer runway to correct for the bad deals of Summer 2018.
Edit: forgot a player
@Dougie
The £10m increase in committed spend disappears almost entirely if you take Seri out the equation, which we likely will he doing shortly, and add Babel to the 2018 numbers (or have I missed him somewhere?)
I don't think we're anywhere near the FFP limit. We probably have £30-40m in surplus revenue after the payment of wages, and another £35m of permitted losses. I agree we won't want to screw ourselves in the event of relegation but there are exit strategies to guard against that, eg buying young players that we can sell or loan out if we go down, or loaning players now and only making them permanent if we stay up. I suspect any big signings (Luis, Ikone?) will be structured like that.
Quote from: Statto on September 22, 2020, 02:39:43 PM
@Dougie
The £10m increase in committed spend disappears almost entirely if you take Seri out the equation, which we likely will he doing shortly, and add Babel to the 2018 numbers (or have I missed him somewhere?)
I don't think we're anywhere near the FFP limit. We probably have £30-40m in surplus revenue after the payment of wages, and another £35m of permitted losses. I agree we won't want to screw ourselves in the event of relegation but there are exit strategies to guard against that, eg buying young players that we can sell or loan out if we go down, or loaning players now and only making them permanent if we stay up. I suspect any big signings (Luis, Ikone?) will be structured like that.
:plus one:
I really don't believe money is our issue right now.
@Dougie: thanks for the neat table, interesting little read.
@dougie - the £2m outlay for Robinson was paid up front in full as per Wigan's administrator mentioning.
I think we still could see Florentino Luis come in - although that is a loan it seems with view to a perm, so would be a small initial fee and the rest would be spread over the period of his contract.
Quote from: General on September 22, 2020, 02:44:02 PM
@dougie - the £2m outlay for Robinson was paid up front in full as per Wigan's administrator mentioning.
I think we still could see Florentino Luis come in - although that is a loan it seems with view to a perm, so would be a small initial fee and the rest would be spread over the period of his contract.
I believe the table is meant to show how we account for the transfer fees, not how we pay them.
Quote from: Statto on September 22, 2020, 02:39:43 PM
@Dougie
The £10m increase in committed spend disappears almost entirely if you take Seri out the equation, which we likely will he doing shortly, and add Babel to the 2018 numbers (or have I missed him somewhere?)
Whether we can write him off the balance sheets if he goes depends on whether we can get £15m for him (the remaining un-amortised transfer fee), or else how the transfer fee is officially split between him and MLM.
Good shout on Babel, that was £2m wasn't it? Brings it down to +£8m.
Quote
I don't think we're anywhere near the FFP limit. We probably have £30-40m in surplus revenue after the payment of wages, and another £35m of permitted losses
I think we're always close to it. We made a £22m loss in 18/19 (take £5m out of that for academy costs) but we made a £34m loss in 17/18 (much bigger than the £13m/year you can lose in the EFL) because of probably £15m+ in promotion bonuses we paid out, which don't have to be amortised that particular year. Last year our having to wait on Sessegnon money shows we were flying close to the FFP sun last year. It's doubtful we generated more than £10m of slack for the 3-year rolling period from our 18/19 PL campaign, our amortised transfers are up several million this season, and our revenues will be down due to lost matchday income.
Quote from: Sting of the North on September 22, 2020, 02:42:03 PM
I really don't believe money is our issue right now.
I think it's part of the issue. The other part is convincing players to sign when their wages are likely to halve in a year's time. That's why I think we're looking at players in the Chapionship and Serie A and not signing players from other Premiership teams.
Quote from: General on September 22, 2020, 02:44:02 PM
@dougie - the £2m outlay for Robinson was paid up front in full as per Wigan's administrator mentioning.
As with most our signings I'd have thought. However, within our financial accounts, it will be amortised across the length of his contract.
Quote from: Statto on September 22, 2020, 08:22:37 AM
Quote from: Roberty on September 22, 2020, 03:17:13 AM
If someone is any good in the PL, the club they are at now is not going to let them go
If we are only going to recruit players with "an established track record in the PL" it will be the cast offs.
This was the case with Mawson, who everyone on here wanted TK to buy, but who turned out to be a dud
Mawson wasn't a cast-off. His team had been relegated and could no longer persuade/afford him to stay.
Glad you agree that Mawson was a cast off who didn't make a difference for Cardiff
His much vaunted PL experience did nothing for us and we were relegated too.
I notice that he's now been shipped off to Bristol to play in the Championship
Quote from: Roberty on September 22, 2020, 04:01:28 PM
Quote from: Statto on September 22, 2020, 08:22:37 AM
Quote from: Roberty on September 22, 2020, 03:17:13 AM
If someone is any good in the PL, the club they are at now is not going to let them go
If we are only going to recruit players with "an established track record in the PL" it will be the cast offs.
This was the case with Mawson, who everyone on here wanted TK to buy, but who turned out to be a dud
Mawson wasn't a cast-off. His team had been relegated and could no longer persuade/afford him to stay.
Glad you agree that Mawson was a cast off who didn't make a difference for Cardiff
His much vaunted PL experience did nothing for us and we were relegated too.
I notice that he's now been shipped off to Bristol to play in the Championship
What a dishonest post.
Firstly Statto didn't agree. Secondly, just because a team is relegated doesn't mean that no player made any difference whatsoever. Thirdly, there is every reason to believe that Mawson being sent out on loan has less to do with his ability than it has to do with off the field issues.
By the way, Mawson did not play for Cardiff, so that also fits with the rest of this post.
You do have a point though, in that it is difficult for us to recruit proven PL players unless there is a downside to the deal (relegated team, previous injuries, age, lack of form etc.). That doesn't mean that those deals are not out there, but it is definitely not so easy as some people on here seem to believe.
Quote from: Sting of the North on September 22, 2020, 04:17:22 PM
Quote from: Roberty on September 22, 2020, 04:01:28 PM
Quote from: Statto on September 22, 2020, 08:22:37 AM
Quote from: Roberty on September 22, 2020, 03:17:13 AM
If someone is any good in the PL, the club they are at now is not going to let them go
If we are only going to recruit players with "an established track record in the PL" it will be the cast offs.
This was the case with Mawson, who everyone on here wanted TK to buy, but who turned out to be a dud
Mawson wasn't a cast-off. His team had been relegated and could no longer persuade/afford him to stay.
Glad you agree that Mawson was a cast off who didn't make a difference for Cardiff
His much vaunted PL experience did nothing for us and we were relegated too.
I notice that he's now been shipped off to Bristol to play in the Championship
What a dishonest post.
Firstly Statto didn't agree. Secondly, just because a team is relegated doesn't mean that no player made any difference whatsoever. Thirdly, there is every reason to believe that Mawson being sent out on loan has less to do with his ability than it has to do with off the field issues.
By the way, Mawson did not play for Cardiff, so that also fits with the rest of this post.
You do have a point though, in that it is difficult for us to recruit proven PL players unless there is a downside to the deal (relegated team, previous injuries, age, lack of form etc.). That doesn't mean that those deals are not out there, but it is definitely not so easy as some people on here seem to believe.
As I read it, he said Mawson was not a cast off and then went on to explained that he was ?
It was somewhere in Wales and they were relegated which was my point.
The only off field issue I'm aware of is that SP wants to keep him off the field, by one hundred and twenty miles or so.
In any event my original point that Statto took exception to was that the PL players that we could attract are mostly damaged goods, which you seem to agree with too
Quote from: Roberty on September 22, 2020, 05:44:49 PM
As I read it, he said Mawson was not a cast off and then went on to explained that he was ?
You read wrong then.
Try again :003:
Quote from: Dougie on September 22, 2020, 03:01:08 PM
I think we're always close to it. We made a £22m loss in 18/19 (take £5m out of that for academy costs)
I've realised on looking again that your figures assume we'll sign Marlon for £15m.
Then if Seri's sold, that potentially makes room for another £30m signing (amortised over four years) depending on whether we recover his book value, as you say.
Then at that point, we're in the same position that we were in 18/19 which, if we made a £22m loss and indeed can take £5m out for academy costs, would still leave us £18m under the maximum permitted losses (£35m).
Those further permitted losses would allow us to make what, £70m-£90, worth of additional signings if they were amortized over 4-5 years?
All in all, another £115m-£135m worth of transfers from this point in time (Marlon + Seri's replacement + spending further permitted losses).
I'm not saying that's how much we'll spend. It wouldn't be prudent to push the limit like that, clearly. But it shows how much more room we have if we need it.
Quote from: Statto on September 22, 2020, 08:26:47 PM
Quote from: Dougie on September 22, 2020, 03:01:08 PM
I think we're always close to it. We made a £22m loss in 18/19 (take £5m out of that for academy costs)
I've realised on looking again that your figures assume we'll sign Marlon for £15m.
Then if Seri's sold, that potentially makes room for another £30m signing (amortised over four years) depending on whether we recover his book value, as you say.
Then at that point, we're in the same position that we were in 18/19 which, if we made a £22m and indeed can take £5m out for academy costs, would still leave us £18m under the maximum permitted losses (£35m).
Those further permitted losses would allow us to make what, £70m-£90, worth of additional signings if they were amortized over 4-5 years?
All in all, another £115m-£135m worth of transfers from this point in time (Marlon + Seri's replacement + spending further permitted losses).
I'm not saying that's how much we'll spend. It wouldn't be prudent to push the limit like that, clearly. But it shows how much more room we have if we need it.
People often misunderstand that we actually only spent £44m (£44,062k) in 2018-19, as the £120m (£120,108k) was just the amount to be amorized over five seasons (including this one). We will surely spend the maximium amount on amoritising player transfer fees this season, but we can spend it on existing players (impairment) or new players (amoritization). Impairment will help us get long-term and Amotization will help us short-term.
If we spend the transfer budget on devaluing existing players, then the exising squad will cost a lot less when in the Championship and that will help us get back up. I would advise buying the players we need for the championship, getting a few loans to try to keep us up and writing off players in the second half of the season if we don't need winter transfer window reinforcements.
The point is the decisions are hard, teams promoted from the championship though the playoffs rarely stay in the league for more than two seasons unless promoted in the 2011-13 period.
Of the Ten Championship teams promoted though the playoffs from 2006-to-2010 and 2014-to-2020; Fulham 2018 is so far the only one to be in the Premier League two seasons later, so much for Tony Khan being rubbish when nine other DOFs have done worse and none promoted though the playoffs in this period have done better.
And, despite what pundits make you believe it is likely the two most successful playoff teams (Fulham and Aston Villa) in this period (2006-to-2010 and 2014-to-2020) are likely to have both invested more than £120m upon going up.
Quote from: Statto on September 22, 2020, 08:02:52 PM
Quote from: Roberty on September 22, 2020, 05:44:49 PM
As I read it, he said Mawson was not a cast off and then went on to explained that he was ?
You read wrong then.
Try again :003:
I know that you are a font of knowledge, like the original Statto, but in this instance I just read what you wrote:-
Mawson wasn't a cast-off. Statement of your view, that was clearly different to mine
His team had been relegated and could no longer persuade/afford him to stay. Qualifying remark that says that he had to go. If he had to go, surely he was a cast-off, which is what I said and you had disagreed with me about.
Or did I miss something ? :beer:
Quote from: Roberty on September 23, 2020, 06:44:35 AM
Quote from: Statto on September 22, 2020, 08:02:52 PM
Quote from: Roberty on September 22, 2020, 05:44:49 PM
As I read it, he said Mawson was not a cast off and then went on to explained that he was ?
You read wrong then.
Try again :003:
I know that you are a font of knowledge, like the original Statto, but in this instance I just read what you wrote:-
Mawson wasn't a cast-off. Statement of your view, that was clearly different to mine
His team had been relegated and could no longer persuade/afford him to stay. Qualifying remark that says that he had to go. If he had to go, surely he was a cast-off, which is what I said and you had disagreed with me about.
Or did I miss something ? :beer:
Yes you missed the definition of a cast off being a player that is unwanted
For example:
Bettinelli to Middlesbrough = Fulham cast off
Van der Sar to Man Utd = NOT a Fulham cast off
Get it?
Surely the two big factors in our transfer budget are whether or not Seri and Anguissa are staying with us or not. Their combined transfer value must be about £50m.
Quote from: Statto on September 23, 2020, 09:23:09 AM
Quote from: Roberty on September 23, 2020, 06:44:35 AM
Quote from: Statto on September 22, 2020, 08:02:52 PM
Quote from: Roberty on September 22, 2020, 05:44:49 PM
As I read it, he said Mawson was not a cast off and then went on to explained that he was ?
You read wrong then.
Try again :003:
I know that you are a font of knowledge, like the original Statto, but in this instance I just read what you wrote:-
Mawson wasn't a cast-off. Statement of your view, that was clearly different to mine
His team had been relegated and could no longer persuade/afford him to stay. Qualifying remark that says that he had to go. If he had to go, surely he was a cast-off, which is what I said and you had disagreed with me about.
Or did I miss something ? :beer:
Yes you missed the definition of a cast off being a player that is unwanted
For example:
Bettinelli to Middlesbrough = Fulham cast off
Van der Sar to Man Utd = NOT a Fulham cast off
Get it?
Yes, you made it clearer than I ever could. What you said was so helpful
definition of a cast off being a player that is unwanted We didn't want Bettinelli so he's a cast off, but did want to keep VDS so he's not cast off
Mawson, was not wanted by Swansea so therefore a cast off
You made it so simple to work it out
Quote from: Roberty on September 23, 2020, 10:25:00 AM
Quote from: Statto on September 23, 2020, 09:23:09 AM
Quote from: Roberty on September 23, 2020, 06:44:35 AM
Quote from: Statto on September 22, 2020, 08:02:52 PM
Quote from: Roberty on September 22, 2020, 05:44:49 PM
As I read it, he said Mawson was not a cast off and then went on to explained that he was ?
You read wrong then.
Try again :003:
I know that you are a font of knowledge, like the original Statto, but in this instance I just read what you wrote:-
Mawson wasn't a cast-off. Statement of your view, that was clearly different to mine
His team had been relegated and could no longer persuade/afford him to stay. Qualifying remark that says that he had to go. If he had to go, surely he was a cast-off, which is what I said and you had disagreed with me about.
Or did I miss something ? :beer:
Yes you missed the definition of a cast off being a player that is unwanted
For example:
Bettinelli to Middlesbrough = Fulham cast off
Van der Sar to Man Utd = NOT a Fulham cast off
Get it?
Yes, you made it clearer than I ever could. What you said was so helpful
definition of a cast off being a player that is unwanted
We didn't want Bettinelli so he's a cast off, but did want to keep VDS so he's not cast off
Mawson, was not wanted by Swansea so therefore a cast off
You made it so simple to work it out
I have never seen any evidence that Mawson was not wanted by Swansea. I am sure that they would have loved to keep him, but surely either their financial situation made it impossible or he really wanted to stay in the PL. Very much comparable to the VDS situation. Which is also what Statto said, but I am starting to suspect that you are just trolling at this point but I am giving you the benefit of doubt.
Quote from: Roberty on September 23, 2020, 10:25:00 AM
Quote from: Statto on September 23, 2020, 09:23:09 AM
Quote from: Roberty on September 23, 2020, 06:44:35 AM
Quote from: Statto on September 22, 2020, 08:02:52 PM
Quote from: Roberty on September 22, 2020, 05:44:49 PM
As I read it, he said Mawson was not a cast off and then went on to explained that he was ?
You read wrong then.
Try again :003:
I know that you are a font of knowledge, like the original Statto, but in this instance I just read what you wrote:-
Mawson wasn't a cast-off. Statement of your view, that was clearly different to mine
His team had been relegated and could no longer persuade/afford him to stay. Qualifying remark that says that he had to go. If he had to go, surely he was a cast-off, which is what I said and you had disagreed with me about.
Or did I miss something ? :beer:
Yes you missed the definition of a cast off being a player that is unwanted
For example:
Bettinelli to Middlesbrough = Fulham cast off
Van der Sar to Man Utd = NOT a Fulham cast off
Get it?
Yes, you made it clearer than I ever could. What you said was so helpful
definition of a cast off being a player that is unwanted
We didn't want Bettinelli so he's a cast off, but did want to keep VDS so he's not cast off
Mawson, was not wanted by Swansea so therefore a cast off
You made it so simple to work it out
Does Ryan Sessegnon count as a cast off? Yes or No.
If Yes, then "Why did Tony Khan offer Sessegnon a new contract before selling him?"
If No, then "How is Sessegnon sale and Mawson's sale much different?"
Are Ollie Watkins and James Maddison also casts offs? If they are, then Alfie Mawson is a cast off too.
If a £90m bid for Mitrovic comes in, Tony Khan will be casting him off in a flash.
I would define a cast off, as someone that is sold on a free transfer or not offered a new contract even though they could afford to.
Mawson was sold, because Swansea needed money and he wanted to leave, not really a cast off based on the above definition.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on September 23, 2020, 10:31:40 AM
1. Does Ryan Sessegnon count as a cast off? Yes or No.
2. If Yes, then "Why did Tony Khan offer Sessegnon a new contract before selling him?"
3. If No, then "How is Sessegnon sale and Mawson's sale much different?"
4. Are Ollie Watkins and James Maddison also casts offs? If they are, then Alfie Mawson is a cast off too.
5. If a £90m bid for Mitrovic comes in, Tony Khan will be casting him off in a flash.
6. I would define a cast off, as someone that is sold on a free transfer or not offered a new contract even though they could afford to.
7 Mawson was sold, because Swansea needed money and he wanted to leave, not really a cast off based on the above definition.
I take it this is for me1. No
3a. RS forced his departure by not signing a new contract and was sold to a high bidder by a club who wanted to keep him. In fact TK is on record as saying that if they didn't stump up the cash he would let the contract run down and accept the cost
3b, AM was part of a relegation fire sale and there is no evidence that Swansea wanted or could afford to keep him
4a. OW was sold for full value by a club who thought that they'd got more than full value out of him
4b. JM I think is still with Leicester, but has allegedly been the subject of increasing bids that have so far been rejected
4c. AM see answer for 3b, he was a cast-off
5 I refer you the Statto definition -
"a cast off being a player that is unwanted" an offer of that magnitude overvalues the player to the point of even TK not being able to refuse.
6 Refer to Statto definition in 5 and can add that it is player who the selling club goes to some effort to move on
7 The scenario in 6 fits perfectly to the AM situation
This has to be one of the more absurd discussions in a while, trying to bend over backwards to redefine something to become something else for the sake of it.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on September 23, 2020, 10:31:40 AM
Quote from: Roberty on September 23, 2020, 10:25:00 AM
Quote from: Statto on September 23, 2020, 09:23:09 AM
Quote from: Roberty on September 23, 2020, 06:44:35 AM
Quote from: Statto on September 22, 2020, 08:02:52 PM
Quote from: Roberty on September 22, 2020, 05:44:49 PM
As I read it, he said Mawson was not a cast off and then went on to explained that he was ?
You read wrong then.
Try again :003:
I know that you are a font of knowledge, like the original Statto, but in this instance I just read what you wrote:-
Mawson wasn't a cast-off. Statement of your view, that was clearly different to mine
His team had been relegated and could no longer persuade/afford him to stay. Qualifying remark that says that he had to go. If he had to go, surely he was a cast-off, which is what I said and you had disagreed with me about.
Or did I miss something ? :beer:
Yes you missed the definition of a cast off being a player that is unwanted
For example:
Bettinelli to Middlesbrough = Fulham cast off
Van der Sar to Man Utd = NOT a Fulham cast off
Get it?
Yes, you made it clearer than I ever could. What you said was so helpful
definition of a cast off being a player that is unwanted
We didn't want Bettinelli so he's a cast off, but did want to keep VDS so he's not cast off
Mawson, was not wanted by Swansea so therefore a cast off
You made it so simple to work it out
Does Ryan Sessegnon count as a cast off? Yes or No.
If Yes, then "Why did Tony Khan offer Sessegnon a new contract before selling him?"
If No, then "How is Sessegnon sale and Mawson's sale much different?"
Are Ollie Watkins and James Maddison also casts offs? If they are, then Alfie Mawson is a cast off too.
If a £90m bid for Mitrovic comes in, Tony Khan will be casting him off in a flash.
I would define a cast off, as someone that is sold on a free transfer or not offered a new contract even though they could afford to.
Mawson was sold, because Swansea needed money and he wanted to leave, not really a cast off based on the above definition.
Pretty much textbook here, TRF. Well played.
Can we move on now? Very obviously Mawson was not a cast off.
On a side note, say just as an example we buy Marlon from XXXX club for £50m. That £50m would be payed over many years. Even the £100m plus we spent in our relegation season would be payed over many years. Clearly the other club has to agree to it.
Quote from: Sting of the North on September 23, 2020, 02:16:46 PM
This has to be one of the more absurd discussions in a while, trying to bend over backwards to redefine something to become something else for the sake of it.
I so agree with you. I have refrained from commenting on here for some time. I think I will be taking another sabbatical
