Transfer Rumours transfer thread fact and fiction

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Roo said:
this season a good one is playing well and enjoying watching Tottenham again. Don’t have any other expectations, and it leaves one far happier.

Ange will do his best, and that’s all we can ask for.
Click to expand...

Enjoying football has definitely been a huge plus already - Tuesday night aside - and it’s felt like we may have taken playing well for granted, but considering the size of our club, the money us fans get exploited over and the fact we keep being given false promises by the hierarchy “stadium will be a game changer” or “determined to achieve on field success”, I feel like we should be able to demand and expect more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roo and "Thanks for that Brian"
Sami Mokbel says initial £45m package for Johnson has been agreed, with bonus payments now left to sort.
 
£10m apart in the Gallagher valuation according to one or two journos.

Chelsea want £45m, we’re offering £35m.
 
£80-90m on Johnson and Gallagher. FML.

There was once a time when selling a player for £85m got you 7 new players.

now it only gets you 2.

let’s hope these two turn out like Eriksen and Lamela. And not Chiriches, Paulinho and Soldado.
 
  • Like
Reactions: remembercolinlee
Roo said:
£80-90m on Johnson and Gallagher. FML.

There was once a time when selling a player for £85m got you 7 new players.

now it only gets you 2.

let’s hope these two turn out like Eriksen and Lamela. And not Chiriches, Paulinho and Soldado.
Click to expand...

Told ya, we get Levy’d nowadays, not the other way round.

Liverpool have just point blank refused a £150m offer from the Saudi’s for Salah too. We should’ve done the same to any bid for Kane. Kane for one more season is better than getting £100m.
 
Dier Hard said:
Told ya, we get Levy’d nowadays, not the other way round.

Liverpool have just point blank refused a £150m offer from the Saudi’s for Salah too. We should’ve done the same to any bid for Kane. Kane for one more season is better than getting £100m.
Click to expand...

levy’s got just under 10 hours for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spurlock
Dier Hard said:
You know what’s crazy as well, I don’t think we’ve signed one single player from a calibre perspective that we couldn’t have signed at WHL.

And the fact that at WHL we probably wouldn’t have been able to afford the likes of Richarlison, it makes you miss the place even more!
Click to expand...
The stadium has generated about £250m of extra income, all of which has been spent on players. So without it we could have a team without any of Romero, VdV, Sarr, Bissouma Udogie, Maddison, Kulusevski and Bentancur.
 
If only there was some way of knowing Ange actually wants these players...

If I knew that, I'd be fully accepting of it, even if I don't personally understand or agree with it.

But there is such a long and painful history here of signings being made because someone in an executive office somewhere thought it was a 'good idea', that I just cannot trust in the idea that the manager is being backed - with consistency and transparency.

Ally Gold's recent comments about Richarlison came as an absolute shock to me. Not sure if anyone else read the piece but the long and short of it was that - contrary to what I believed the whole way through last season - Richarlison was more of a club signing than a Conte one. Levy basically knew Everton was desperate and in his head, saw Richarlison as some sort of marquee signing we'd all get excited about. Conte wasn't against the signing per se, but strongly preferred that money to be spent on the defence. Which it wasn't. And the best part is we didn't even get a bargain, Everton absolutely fleeced us!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roo
PowerSpurs said:
The stadium has generated about £250m of extra income, all of which has been spent on players. So without it we could have a team without any of Romero, VdV, Sarr, Udogie, Maddison, Kulusevski and Bentancur.
Click to expand...

Sarr, Udogie and Bentancur all cost below £20m, so we could’ve signed them playing at WHL.

As for others, good players but again I highlight that from a calibre perspective none are better than what we’ve signed at WHL.

For instance:
Jan and Toby > Van de Ven and Romero
Eriksen and van de Vaart > Maddison
Lamela = Kulusevski

In fact all of those could’ve likely been signed at WHL, as £40m would’ve likely been our budget for a big money signing. Ndombele and Richarlison are likely the only two post-WHL we wouldn’t have been able to afford.
 
Citizen Kane. said:
If only there was some way of knowing Ange actually wants these players...

If I knew that, I'd be fully accepting of it, even if I don't personally understand or agree with it.

But there is such a long and painful history here of signings being made because someone in an executive office somewhere thought it was a 'good idea', that I just cannot trust in the idea that the manager is being backed - with consistency and transparency.

Ally Gold's recent comments about Richarlison came as an absolute shock to me. Not sure if anyone else read the piece but the long and short of it was that - contrary to what I believed the whole way through last season - Richarlison was more of a club signing than a Conte one. Levy basically knew Everton was desperate and in his head, saw Richarlison as some sort of marquee signing we'd all get excited about. Conte wasn't against the signing per se, but strongly preferred that money to be spent on the defence. Which it wasn't. And the best part is we didn't even get a bargain, Everton absolutely fleeced us!
Click to expand...
Conte was quoted at the time as having specifically been involved in recruiting Richarlison...
And which signings have been made because someone in an executive office thought it was a good idea? Most of our mistakes seem to be the coaches choices.
 
Citizen Kane. said:
If only there was some way of knowing Ange actually wants these players...

If I knew that, I'd be fully accepting of it, even if I don't personally understand or agree with it.

But there is such a long and painful history here of signings being made because someone in an executive office somewhere thought it was a 'good idea', that I just cannot trust in the idea that the manager is being backed - with consistency and transparency.

Ally Gold's recent comments about Richarlison came as an absolute shock to me. Not sure if anyone else read the piece but the long and short of it was that - contrary to what I believed the whole way through last season - Richarlison was more of a club signing than a Conte one. Levy basically knew Everton was desperate and in his head, saw Richarlison as some sort of marquee signing we'd all get excited about. Conte wasn't against the signing per se, but strongly preferred that money to be spent on the defence. Which it wasn't. And the best part is we didn't even get a bargain, Everton absolutely fleeced us!
Click to expand...

I said this to @PowerSpurs the other week, Richarlison actually seemed more of a club signing than a Conte one according to credible reports, Conte’s treatment of him would further back that up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back