Summer Silly Season Transfer Thread 2024

[FFC1987]

with Mbabu and Vini, the Club does have the option to terminate their contracts my mutual consent , takes the wages off the book , we do take a hit with Vini's contract but frees up two squad places for Loans or younger players etc

It does take the wages off, but you are or could be settling part of the contract (maybe all of it), so you still take a hit

I think tidying up the wage bill would have a more significant impact for us than the losses on these two tiny transfers? Vini would be like 8m euros was it? over a contract since 2022, which included some loan fee's in there and Mbabu 3.5m euros in 2022, again with loan fee's, combined wages off the bill of roughly £80k a week for the two? Can;t imagine, even if they were fully released, there'd be much of a dent but I expect we'll get small amounts for them if they do go.

Not sure how paying them off could ever make commercial sense.

If the combined wages are £80k pw, each with a year left, you're talking £4m to pay them off, and no fee.

If we can find someone willing to buy them, even if we only get £3m for the pair, net position is £7m better than mutual termination.

Even if we loan them for a small fee each and the loanee clubs pay 50% their wages, that's much better than paying them off.

If you can find a suitor, then sure, you're slightly better off. Pretty sure I acknowledged that anyway. But even if you settle, after the loan fee's and the releases since 2022, the 'hit' is tiny. Depends what you want to achieve I guess but its splitting hairs really.

[LRCN]

with Mbabu and Vini, the Club does have the option to terminate their contracts my mutual consent , takes the wages off the book , we do take a hit with Vini's contract but frees up two squad places for Loans or younger players etc

It does take the wages off, but you are or could be settling part of the contract (maybe all of it), so you still take a hit

I think tidying up the wage bill would have a more significant impact for us than the losses on these two tiny transfers? Vini would be like 8m euros was it? over a contract since 2022, which included some loan fee's in there and Mbabu 3.5m euros in 2022, again with loan fee's, combined wages off the bill of roughly £80k a week for the two? Can;t imagine, even if they were fully released, there'd be much of a dent but I expect we'll get small amounts for them if they do go.

Not sure how paying them off could ever make commercial sense.

If the combined wages are £80k pw, each with a year left, you're talking £4m to pay them off, and no fee received.

If we can find someone willing to buy them, even if we only get £3m for the pair, net position is £7m better than mutual termination on those numbers.

Even if we loan them out again for a tiny fee each and the loanee clubs only pay 50% their wages, that's still much better than paying them off.

We've no obligation to include them in the PL squad in any scenario so freeing up places isn't an issue.

pay offs usually come in at lower than the total wage owed over the period

having said that theres inherent value in mbabu and vini so i am certain we will not release them from contract

[@jolslover]

I would like to see Jack Clarke join us. Fits the profile, he's English, and plays on the left. Probably available for about £20m.

So funny @Woolly Mammoth I saw the word English and knew you would have liked it hahah, as soon as I saw English and one like I knew you would be the person to like

Clarke good player, rate him. Think Cherki defo better option but one to revisit if Cherki rejects. Asprilla and Gnonto also would be great options from Champ.

Well you need to have a certain amount of home grown players so the fact he's English is always a legitimate benefit. I also believe English Premier League clubs needs to give young talent a chance if our national team are ever going to win anything.

I always thought we had a great chance to buy Bowen but he went to West Ham.

Yeah 8 is the number.

We have: Benda, Robinson, Sessegnon, Bassey, Reed, Cairney, Smith-Rowe, Iwobi, Wilson, Stansfield, Pereira

11 in our squad. We are good
Today I learnt Benda counts as home grown, their you go.

[FFC1987]

with Mbabu and Vini, the Club does have the option to terminate their contracts my mutual consent , takes the wages off the book , we do take a hit with Vini's contract but frees up two squad places for Loans or younger players etc

It does take the wages off, but you are or could be settling part of the contract (maybe all of it), so you still take a hit

I think tidying up the wage bill would have a more significant impact for us than the losses on these two tiny transfers? Vini would be like 8m euros was it? over a contract since 2022, which included some loan fee's in there and Mbabu 3.5m euros in 2022, again with loan fee's, combined wages off the bill of roughly £80k a week for the two? Can;t imagine, even if they were fully released, there'd be much of a dent but I expect we'll get small amounts for them if they do go.

Not sure how paying them off could ever make commercial sense.

If the combined wages are £80k pw, each with a year left, you're talking £4m to pay them off, and no fee received.

If we can find someone willing to buy them, even if we only get £3m for the pair, net position is £7m better than mutual termination on those numbers.

Even if we loan them out again for a tiny fee each and the loanee clubs only pay 50% their wages, that's still much better than paying them off.

We've no obligation to include them in the PL squad in any scenario so freeing up places isn't an issue.

pay offs usually come in at lower than the total wage owed over the period

having said that theres inherent value in mbabu and vini so i am certain we will not release them from contract

Yep, pretty much my assessment too. If we can;t find a perma deal, I don;t see why loaning out again wouldn't be sensible.

[Willham]

with Mbabu and Vini, the Club does have the option to terminate their contracts my mutual consent , takes the wages off the book , we do take a hit with Vini's contract but frees up two squad places for Loans or younger players etc

It does take the wages off, but you are or could be settling part of the contract (maybe all of it), so you still take a hit

I think tidying up the wage bill would have a more significant impact for us than the losses on these two tiny transfers? Vini would be like 8m euros was it? over a contract since 2022, which included some loan fee's in there and Mbabu 3.5m euros in 2022, again with loan fee's, combined wages off the bill of roughly £80k a week for the two? Can;t imagine, even if they were fully released, there'd be much of a dent but I expect we'll get small amounts for them if they do go.

Not sure how paying them off could ever make commercial sense.

If the combined wages are £80k pw, each with a year left, you're talking £4m to pay them off, and no fee.

If we can find someone willing to buy them, even if we only get £3m for the pair, net position is £7m better than mutual termination.

Even if we loan them for a small fee each and the loanee clubs pay 50% their wages, that's much better than paying them off.

If you can find a suitor, then sure, you're slightly better off. Pretty sure I acknowledged that anyway. But even if you settle, after the loan fee's and the releases since 2022, the 'hit' is tiny. Depends what you want to achieve I guess but its splitting hairs really.

The two ways to release a player under contract are;

Released by club, the club pays all of the remaining contract and the player is released,
Or by
Mutual consent, clues in the name, the club and player have agreed to waiver part or all of the remaining contract and the player is released,

In today's football climate of such large contracts both aren't used as often, players who are unsure of getting as large or any contract upon release are often unwilling to accept less and clubs are unwilling to pay a large sum to lose an asset,

And a player, even an unhappy one is better at the club with a possibility to help in someway, however minor, then paying that exact same amount of money upfront but you lose that potential for any good to come from that player.

If I was told I have to pay 120 pounds,
I could either have something and pay 10 pounds monthly for 12 months,
Or
Pay 120 pounds upfront and not have anything

Then it becomes a clear decision.

[IloveFFC]

How many players leaving until de the end of market?

Pajaziti?, Mbabu Vini, Bowat?

Godo and King probably staying...

[LRCN]

Pay off is only lower if the player agrees. If we can't find someone to take them off our hands, even for free on lower wages, that probably tells the players they won't be able to get a contract elsewhere if we terminate. So not sure why they'd agree to that for anything less than payment in full.

Pay off is only lower if the player agrees. If we can't find someone to take them off our hands, even for free on lower wages, that probably tells the players they won't be able to get a contract elsewhere if we terminate. So not sure why they'd agree to that for anything less than payment in full.

Because they can essentially take the earnings from 2 contracts simultaneously, or be less incentivised by money to get a playing contract where they will get more mins. It's a bit of a gamble sure unless something is already lines up but it's known to happen

All theoretical here of course as we won't be doing that here

[FFC1987]

Pay off is only lower if the player agrees. If we can't find someone to take them off our hands, even for free on lower wages, that probably tells the players they won't be able to get a contract elsewhere if we terminate. So not sure why they'd agree to that for anything less than payment in full.

Pay off is only lower if the player agrees. If we can't find someone to take them off our hands, even for free on lower wages, that probably tells the players they won't be able to get a contract elsewhere if we terminate. So not sure why they'd agree to that for anything less than payment in full.

Because they can essentially take the earnings from 2 contracts simultaneously, or be less incentivised by money to get a playing contract where they will get more mins. It's a bit of a gamble sure unless something is already lines up but it's known to happen

All theoretical here of course as we won't be doing that here

I started a response but I can;t be bothered to follwo through. If this statement made sense:

'If I was told I have to pay 120 pounds,
I could either have something and pay 10 pounds monthly for 12 months,
Or
Pay 120 pounds upfront and not have anything'

Then its not worth talking football contracts, or accounts with people. I don;t say that to be mean, but it should be obvious this binary scenario isn't applicable in football.

[LRCN]

Pay off is only lower if the player agrees. If we can't find someone to take them off our hands, even for free on lower wages, that probably tells the players they won't be able to get a contract elsewhere if we terminate. So not sure why they'd agree to that for anything less than payment in full.

Pay off is only lower if the player agrees. If we can't find someone to take them off our hands, even for free on lower wages, that probably tells the players they won't be able to get a contract elsewhere if we terminate. So not sure why they'd agree to that for anything less than payment in full.

Because they can essentially take the earnings from 2 contracts simultaneously, or be less incentivised by money to get a playing contract where they will get more mins. It's a bit of a gamble sure unless something is already lines up but it's known to happen

All theoretical here of course as we won't be doing that here

I started a response but I can;t be bothered to follwo through. If this statement made sense:

'If I was told I have to pay 120 pounds,
I could either have something and pay 10 pounds monthly for 12 months,
Or
Pay 120 pounds upfront and not have anything'

Then its not worth talking football contracts, or accounts with people. I don;t say that to be mean, but it should be obvious this binary scenario isn't applicable in football.

I have no idea what you're on about mate

But to clarify the common scenario let's take a hypothetical
A player has 2 years left on their contract worth £1m
Player and club agree to a payout worth less than £1m to release them from their contract (sometimes this is £0)
Now released, player can sign for another club on a free
They have now earnt the payout + whatever they get from their new contract

Example: ndombele who reached an agreement with spurs to be released from his contract this summer, a year early. He has now signed a contract for Nice starting this summer.

[FFC1987]

Pay off is only lower if the player agrees. If we can't find someone to take them off our hands, even for free on lower wages, that probably tells the players they won't be able to get a contract elsewhere if we terminate. So not sure why they'd agree to that for anything less than payment in full.

Pay off is only lower if the player agrees. If we can't find someone to take them off our hands, even for free on lower wages, that probably tells the players they won't be able to get a contract elsewhere if we terminate. So not sure why they'd agree to that for anything less than payment in full.

Because they can essentially take the earnings from 2 contracts simultaneously, or be less incentivised by money to get a playing contract where they will get more mins. It's a bit of a gamble sure unless something is already lines up but it's known to happen

All theoretical here of course as we won't be doing that here

I started a response but I can;t be bothered to follwo through. If this statement made sense:

'If I was told I have to pay 120 pounds,
I could either have something and pay 10 pounds monthly for 12 months,
Or
Pay 120 pounds upfront and not have anything'

Then its not worth talking football contracts, or accounts with people. I don;t say that to be mean, but it should be obvious this binary scenario isn't applicable in football.

I have no idea what you're on about mate

But to clarify the common scenario let's take a hypothetical
A player has 2 years left on their contract worth £1m
Player and club agree to a payout worth less than £1m to release them from their contract (sometimes this is £0)
Now released, player can sign for another club on a free
They have now earnt the payout + whatever they get from their new contract

Example: ndombele who reached an agreement with spurs to be released from his contract this summer, a year early. He has now signed a contract for Nice starting this summer.

I was agreeing with your post, and quoted someone from a previous post. I'm with you dont worry.

[LRCN]

Pay off is only lower if the player agrees. If we can't find someone to take them off our hands, even for free on lower wages, that probably tells the players they won't be able to get a contract elsewhere if we terminate. So not sure why they'd agree to that for anything less than payment in full.

Pay off is only lower if the player agrees. If we can't find someone to take them off our hands, even for free on lower wages, that probably tells the players they won't be able to get a contract elsewhere if we terminate. So not sure why they'd agree to that for anything less than payment in full.

Because they can essentially take the earnings from 2 contracts simultaneously, or be less incentivised by money to get a playing contract where they will get more mins. It's a bit of a gamble sure unless something is already lines up but it's known to happen

All theoretical here of course as we won't be doing that here

I started a response but I can;t be bothered to follwo through. If this statement made sense:

'If I was told I have to pay 120 pounds,
I could either have something and pay 10 pounds monthly for 12 months,
Or
Pay 120 pounds upfront and not have anything'

Then its not worth talking football contracts, or accounts with people. I don;t say that to be mean, but it should be obvious this binary scenario isn't applicable in football.

I have no idea what you're on about mate

But to clarify the common scenario let's take a hypothetical
A player has 2 years left on their contract worth £1m
Player and club agree to a payout worth less than £1m to release them from their contract (sometimes this is £0)
Now released, player can sign for another club on a free
They have now earnt the payout + whatever they get from their new contract

Example: ndombele who reached an agreement with spurs to be released from his contract this summer, a year early. He has now signed a contract for Nice starting this summer.

I was agreeing with your post, and quoted someone from a previous post. I'm with you dont worry.

Apologies, I misunderstood.

[hopper]

Peter Rutzler also updating on Cherki 'Cherki has not committed to the deal at this stage and is considering his options.

https://x.com/peterrutzler/status/1826563364241236035

[Willham]

The ndombele situation I thought I acknowledged did occur when I mentioned if a player knows he can get another contract elsewhere. The fact there's not much traction for either player as Telford said shows the players camp probably don't believe they can get a contract elsewhere that they'd be happy with so the player will prefer to stay at our club for the full contract money plus ability to train at our facilities.

[FFC1987]

'there's not much traction for either player as Telford said' He has no idea if that's true though so the rest of it becoems mute.

[Bassey the warrior]

I'm sure they're trying to move them on, they won't want to burn money. Benda won't leave though, he'll probably be on lowish wages.

I don't think we should sell Benda. I think we should get another goalkeeper and let Benda be the third choice goalkeeper.

Can't see that happening. I'd suggest giving him some time, I'm sure they've done their research on him.

Incidentally, another keeper that was pretty dodgy for us is now going to be playing in the Champions League as number 1, Paulo Gazzaniga for Girona.

You may be right and he turns out to be a great goalkeeper, but I don't have high hopes for him unfortunately.

Who do you think will fill out the remaining two squad places then, providing Andersen is a done deal and we get an attacker Marco wanted too?

I also think there's a huge difference between Benda and Gazzaniga. Gazzaniga had some great performances at the highest level, including the Champions League, before he joined us. So he did at least play at a very high level before he joined us.

Firstly, someone capable of playing left wing. Also,I wouldn't be surprised to see Stansfield go out on loan, so maybe a striker on loan. Just think another keeper is not a high priority for Marco.

We may also move players on and that would change things. Obviously I am guesstimating here, may be completely wrong.

[SerbianLad]

Firstly, someone capable of playing left wing. Also,I wouldn't be surprised to see Stansfield go out on loan, so maybe a striker on loan. Just think another keeper is not a high priority for Marco.

We may also move players on and that would change things. Obviously I am guesstimating here, may be completely wrong.

But I counted that player in. Andersen and someone like Cherki brings us to 23 senior players. We have 23 now, and assuming Mbabu and Vini leave and we get Andersen and an attacking player we have 23. Unless you'd sign two players for attacking positions which I don't think we need. Another gk makes most sense to me, but as you said it's complete guesswork from both of us. Only the Khans and Marco know what positions we're looking at.

[ElRay]

How many players leaving until de the end of market?

Pajaziti?, Mbabu Vini, Bowat?

Godo and King probably staying...

I can see Godo getting a deadline day loan champ/Lg1

[Deeping_white]

Based on the other night, Josh King deserves regular play time in the championship/a top league 1 team this season, or at least a 6 month loan so that he gets exposure to regular first team football. At this point he looks the most likely to make the first team so time to chuck him into mens football and see how he gets on

[jayffc]

Based on the other night, Josh King deserves regular play time in the championship/a top league 1 team this season, or at least a 6 month loan so that he gets exposure to regular first team football. At this point he looks the most likely to make the first team so time to chuck him into mens football and see how he gets on

Inclined to agree, although conversely maybe a year of training with the first team guys with some cup minutes might also really help his development too.

Would be totally up for him getting a year loan to a league 1 or higher club though.

Been out for the day but indeed the comments around Berge at DM seem pretty categoric to me. So I look forward to seeing what Marco does with him. Clearly they have faith in his abilities there and I certainly like that we've added his height and physicality too. We caused a lot of problems from corners etc  under Marco, and were indeed missing some height and aerial ability with the outgoings, so it is useful to have in that respect even just for his presence in those spaces.

He played there predominantly when he was named in the "Champions League Breakthrough Team of the Year" before his move to Sheffield so I look forward to seeing what he has to offer, whilst accepting no one coming in was gonna be Palhinha exactly. It will be interesting to see where Andre lands and if he ends up proving himself. Hopefully it's not in the premier league away from us, bracing for that possibility 🙈! Having watched a few games there now the quality of football really was a far cry from the prem, whilst a young Brazilian always feels more exciting and fancy...(which I think is a large part of the appeal over other options) I think Andre certainly does look very good in that league, but I accept it's a tricky one to gauge the risk for a club our size when being asked to pay around the amount we were allegedly quoted with their counter offer, so on we move.

Loving the moves we're making, very interested to see what I believe are likely the last 2 pieces of the puzzle fall into place...Andersen ( Big thumbs up from me) and Cherki or another. All in all I think if we pull those off it's been a pretty top window all round and in some ways it may well make more sense to leave ourselves some spending room to re-evaluate how it's going in January and indeed have room for more improvements then or next year. If those last 2 additions land (or another exciting attacking option) this squad on paper looks very capable of challenging for the top 10 this year and we'll see how we do from there. As many have stated we were never going to replace the best tackler in Europe like for like so we'll adjust and I put my faith in Marco to work it out as he has before.

COYW!

[bill taylors apprentice]

Palhinha only became a statement signing and a key player for us once he started playing and performed beyoned what the vast majority expected.

Or is that wrong?

That's wrong, he was a Champions League player. That's always a coup. I liked him from the first friendly game.

All I'm saying is, there are many CL players that are not known by the majority of football fans, even the knowledgeable ones.
He would have been unknown by the vast majority of FFC fans before he arrived or at least not know how good he could be, therefore it's reasonable to say he wasn't seen as a statement signing.

Of course, once we all saw him he was very highly regarded and we couldn't believe how good he was but how many fans expected it.