I wonder who that is. The options available aren’t great or they’re out of our range in terms of salary demands. Hasan Kuruçay would make sense.
What 2 players salaries could be covered for 500k? It's buttons in the footballing world that we exist in!!! Probably enough to cover Acuns rental property and chauffeur for a season...
I’ve just read that we’ve agreed a deal for another free agent centre-half but aren’t announcing it until after the appeal has been heard. Erm, why?
Like you, I'm thinking this is media spin to keep the fans relatively happy about losing both Jones and Macca. £3M is decent money for Jones and I suppose we either take the money for Macca now or lose him for nothing in a year or so. Let's see if this FACH materializes
3.5m+ for Macca and Jones when they aren’t going to be playing is excellent business. Hopefully all of it can be given to the EFL to persuade them to let us burn it all down paying McBurnie 60k a week to score 8 goals.
Whilst we're merrily dismantling,and rebuilding on the cheap, a successful defence, we're looking at moving on any long term quality in midfield. Meanwhile the neglectful approach to strengthening an underperforming attack is palpable. Which only leaves the position between the sticks. We've loads of goalkeepers; current recruitment logic suggests we should try to get the 2 best performing ones off our books.
Don’t really understand this unless he wants out. Steady player, fits in two positions. You won’t replace him for 500k, even on a free, all seems a bit pointless.
HT2 said recently that a few players wanted out. Macca will want 1st team football and he isn't guaranteed that here -plus he's entering the final year of his deal. Be interesting to see what sort of replacement we have lined up
The '500k a week' that Baz and others keep quoting is a rounded up figure Maguire gave which was something like 350/375k a week. The way he arrived at that figure was taking our operating loss from Rosenior's season. The only issue with doing so is that the operating loss excludes player sales - but includes player purchases for some bizarre reason. So it's basically a way of saying 'In an absolute worst case scenario if the club kept operating the way it is without any sugar hit player sales, this is how much the club is losing'. It's a fantasy, fake number. Using it as if that's a consistent, ongoing loss figure ignores the fact that, yes in fact we have continued to sell players (obviously not at the same levels), but also that the state of the wage bill has changed amongst other things. While the reality may be that we are losing maybe 300k a week, it's not quite as extreme as people make out.
How to interpret the sign now, announce later decision? If we announce now, then whoever it is will look like a **** swap for Macca. Announce after an unpalatable outcome of the appeal, then the signing will be in the any incoming is better than no incoming category. Perhaps.