Absolutely, and those players cost about 2.5x when we paid for Lavia, if they've been good in a reputable league.
Not sure what everyone's worried about, as has already been mentioned, the last time we had to play a load of kids, we got relegated to League One. This kick started an upward curve for us and good times a plenty! If this works then great, we are gonna have a great season but if not, we will take 1 step back and then 6 steps forward which will be bloody exciting! Yeah yeah blue ink, I can't be arsed! Who here didn't ****ing well love our climb from points deduction at the foot of L1 to 6th in the Prem!
45m on Kalvin Pillips or 10m on 18yr old Romeo? I've got a feeling that this will be celebrated at the end of the season as a big success and WTF were City thinking!
We've also got to remember that there are 5 subs and 9 on the bench this season. Tactically there are a LOT more factors to consider so having young hungry players in the wings is a good position to be in. I think the new subs rule is going to have a big impact on games though it might not be taken advantage of early on as it will be in the future. Clubs will be hiring tactical analysts just to cope with the potential changes.
Still only 2 likes in the space of a day. He is either a wum or does not understand the saints general concept of buying young and hopefully talented players…. But ideally then keep? Well may be, but I see this kid has a buyback clause. If we get a few more like Tino I will be very happy.
This is a really good point. My feeling since the changes were announced was that two types of teams would benefit most: the clubs with 20-deep squads of superstars, and the teams with an eye toward youth development. We sure as hell aren't the former, but we're really well positioned to be the latter.
Also, Burnley had the oldest squad in the Premier League last year. Oozing with experience. A lot of gritty, ex-Championship players up for a fight in that squad, too. How'd that work for them?
I'd hardly call him a 'WUM'. If this sort of comment winds anyone up, then they are too sensitive. If someone has a different view point from you, just try to counter him rationally, rather than using terms like 'WUM'. (Unless of course they are being deliberately provocative, which I don't think this guy is). While I like nothing more than the idea of investing in youth and all that. The cold, hard reality is that our first team performed far, far below the required level for the last 3 months of the season. Therefore it is a reasonable stance to feel that a group of young and inexperienced players aren't going to provide the necessary impact that is required.
Kalvin Philips for 45m, at today's prices, is a bit of a bargain tbh. And regards City thinking WTF, - yes, hopefully you're right! - but they have a buy-back clause. So let's wait and see what the details of that are first. I think the most relevant comparisons will be between how Lavia performs, and how the other players that we could realistically be signing, perform. That would be the likes of Gibbs-White, Winks, Svanberg. I'm not going to make any predictions, because I haven't seen enough of any of them play, and of course you have to take in other factors such as Ralph's tactics and so on.
I think we've seen a bit of a rollback on player valuations post COVID so for what he offers I'm not sure I'd agree he's a bargain. The buy backs will be interesting, my gut is that we won't see many if any exercised. I would actually expect other clubs to move in first because of the buy backs and force the hand of the Chelsea's and City's. I think after a year or two there will always be other options on the top of the list rather than the players they hold the buybacks on. Still' hope I'm wrong because that will mean the players are really delivering for us.
Yeah, I'm not fussed about the buyback either because, unless this kid turns out to be the next Patrick Vieira, I can't see City coming back for him. And why would Lavia necessarily choose to go back, if he feels his playing opportunities will be restricted and so on? For Philips, I'm just going on the prices quoted for similar players. Rice at 120m and JWP at 75m. Can understand why City went with the 'cheap' option there.
The buy back we have are going to require these players to become good enough to challenge or replace : Reece James Rodri / Kalvin Phillips Ederson If that kind of thing happens then it will have been great business for us
True. But we're not limited to 10m. So it's gonna depend on how much is spent, and on how many players. Do we need to spend, say, 100m (I wish) on ten players, or the same amount on four players? I would argue after last season, the latter would be the better option, as I think we have the basics of a decent team. I don't feel we need a complete overhaul. But, at the same time, I'm not gonna deny that it's an exciting prospect signing all these talented young 'uns. To me the long term plan is starting to look good. It's just the short term plan that I think some people are understandably worried about.
Romeo Lavia was voted City's academy joint POTS in 2021 along with Delap, and Delap had a disgusting season that year. Nice.
I think Lavia will be a great addition from day 1. With JWP and Romeu we can afford to ease him in with appearances off the bench. Although we said that about Tino and Ralph threw him straight in!
This is the important factor which we won’t know til the end of the window. If we really are looking at bringing in 10 players then we obviously will sell some players, but right now it’s not clear who/how much. I’m sure lots of stuff is going on behind the scenes but right now if the plan is this massive squad overhaul then we need to be clever/shrewd with how we spend the money
