Transfer Rumours Saints January Transfer Window Rumour Thread

Can't see Everton matching our valuation .......so he won't be going there.
However UTD,City might.......we have to keep him for at least one more season.

 

If virgil leaves so soon into a new contract i will start to question the boards motives to be honest

 

I think we all will. Unless the asking price is upwards of £60 million, there will be major questions.
We all know that Virgil is destined for greater things, but we need to keep him for a while yet - otherwise, why bother with long contracts at all?

 

Or question the point of a Contract in the first place?

 

I'm not going to stand here and say that I know the FFP rules inside out. But I'd suggest there's one fact which very much suggests you are right - if we, of all clubs, are on the FFP line, then there must be a number of clubs in this division who smash it by some distance. They don't recoup millions and millions every single summer, positing a net profit on player sales (not to mention no signing of players who are a little past their best, on questionable wages). The fact that we don't hear about sides breaking the thresholds suggests to me that they aren't any, which in turn suggests to me that we have a lot of room for manoeuvre. If there is one club in the league who your average football fan would put their house on not falling foul of FFP, I'd suggest that we'd come out very near the top.

As you said earlier, Les has a vested interest here. Any comments he makes are hardly being made by an impartial commentator.

 

As for Virgil, yes this news can be taken as further indication that he'll be off in the summer. But for me personally, I'm already absolutely certain that he'll be sold (and he deserves to be, far too good for us) in the summer, so I can't become any more certain as a result of this news.

 

Well if he doesn't go in January that would be a start, gives us more time to line up a better replacement.

 

There's a thought though that Virgil might have every intention of staying at the club for his contract UNLESS someone stumps up this release fee of £40m.

If someone is willing to pay that for a CB then it means he's performing at an exceptionally high level, and a level that will mean major players will come in for him, at which point he's willing to move on to one of the traditional big clubs, be that here or abroad. There is a point to it, but for him to stay for it's duration, we kinda need him to be playing an awful lot worse

 

What does "far too good for us" mean? I don't like this attitude among our fans that we can't expect to keep good players. What's the point in finding young players just for other clubs to take them? It's sickening and destroys the illusion that football is a sport. At least in American Football this process works in reverse: the worst team gets first pick at the best players. Football is a money factory where achievement in the future is firmly rooted in the past.

The truth is that players would stay if they saw their friends staying and more blood coming in. We could have become a footballing power over the last few years - but chose to become a footballing transition zone. That works in small leagues where there isn't much cash - but here all it does is keep us pressed against the glass ceiling.

The truth is that Man Utd are no better than us, but history says they deserve good players (even if they use them appallingly). Liverpool have been mediocre for years, but history says they deserve all our players now. English football is awful at the moment - look at the Champions League. In truth, no one "deserves" VvD in this country. He can go to Barcelona or Real Madrid. That's fine. But not Liverpool. Or Everton. Or Man Utd. Or Arsenal. Or Tottenham.

 

Two things:

1. I presume you've answered your own starter question, given that you're happy for him to move Barcelona or Madrid. You've put them in a bracket. I'm not sure that anyone is suggesting that "too good for us" means "It's fair enough if he chooses to leave us for Everton". (I also note that you've made no mention of Chelsea or City...)

2. Fans will take their heed from what is in front of them. If Lallana, Lovren, Shaw, Morgan, Clyne, and various others have left, why wouldn't Virgil? If we're finishing outside the top four and not winning trophies, why would Virgil not want to go somewhere where he can? I agree with you that if we kept our players, then others would be less likely to leave. If we had won the title last season and were playing in the CL this season, they would be less likely to leave. But unfortunately, you can't just pretend that that is the case. They have been leaving. And ultimately, I don't believe that we are on a par with someone like Arsenal. Where are our trophies, CL football, big stadium, and fellow players of the ilk of Sanchez and Ozil?

 

1. I left out City and Chelsea because they don't seem to take our players... If sport is about the best teams constantly hoovering up the best players, it isn't really sport, is it? It's just shopping with silly clothes on.

2. If we started keeping those players, as Cortese had intended, then maybe "fellow players" of a decent ilk would be there to convince the others. We have to stop the rot sometime. We were told that was this summer with all those big contracts - but that was most likely a fiction, wasn't it? At what point can we blame the club? When they sell our best players and buy cheaper ones? When they give big contracts but don't ensure they're kept to? When we start to drift down the league? When we get relegated? When they sell us to Mexican Drug Barons? The club are not being run as a business for the fans' benefit...

 

1. And I'd be taking that position further, and thinking about why City and Chelsea haven't yet taken any of our players. My view is that, until now, they simply haven't been good enough. It's taken Lallana, for example, long enough to show that he's even good enough for Liverpool. And whether he's right or wrong, Jose clearly doesn't think that Morgan or Shaw are good enough for Utd. Remember that this is a Chelsea side who have been happy to sell the likes of KDB and Lukaku during that time. They're hardly going to be buying Chambers.

I'm not at all surprised that it's mainly been Liverpool and (in part, through Poch) Spurs have been purchased, or been interesting in purchasing, our players. Virgil is a different kettle of fish though. He's good enough to walk in Barcelona or Madrid's team today. He is an equal of the aforementioned Sanchez and Ozil. And if he's good enough for those two teams, he's good enough for City and Chelsea too. I agree with you, I'd be disappointed if he went to an Everton or a Spurs. He's better than that.

2. I understand where you're coming from. But my comment - and it's the same for others - is coming from the point of the view of a fan. I'm not Les Reed here, typing that Virgil is too good for us. All those things that ideally you want, I want, we all want, are outside of our powers. Based on what the club have done to date (on and off the field), I think it would be mightily unfair to keep Virgil here. He deserves to be winning trophies, playing CL football, and surrounded by top players. And doing that now, not in five years.

 

Cortese never intended to keep every player.

 

Why are people talking about this release clause as if it actually exists?
I've read that he has a £25m, £35m and £40m release clause. He can't have all 3! Minimum fee release clauses are relatively rare in English football. Seen more often in Europe as it's a requirement in many countries.

 

If he really wants to go, he'll go. Do you honestly believe we can actually stop him?

 

Why has nobody mentioned that those teams can pay someone of the top grade £250k a week too? We can't. We just can't.

The idea that we have a hope of holding on to the very, very top, world class players, that we have in the team is a pipe dream. We have a 32k capacity stadium which we don't fill constantly.

 

Because there technically is one.

 

How do you know that?
Also can you explain what you mean by "technically"? Surely there either is or isn't

 

£40m and he is gone.