Many many deals will go to the wire.. tis the problem with 'windows' look at the prices come the last day of the month..
Errrr no. I said exactly what I meant to say. I said "had to" because they "had to" pay that amount if they wanted him. What is so hard to understand about that?
It's hard, nay impossible, to understand, because you said they didn't have to in the same sentence. Which bring me back to my original point, that they wanted him badly enough to pay £35m for him, and therefore, to them, he was worth that much money. It's their problem and no one else's that it was obviously a mental decision, and that they didn't make the far more sane decision of buying someone else for far less. It has nothing to do with prices being inflated. In fact, it's impossible for players to have inflated prices, because they don't have market values. They are worth whatever a buying team is willing to pay.
The fact that you didn´t understand the first, nor the second time, shows that in fact, it was/is hard for you to understand. ...All I´m saying is that clubs have to spend over the odds on players in the premier league as practically every team is financially sound and has no need to sell. I would think that is pretty obvious but for some reason you don't think it is.
Okay, let's get off the semantics and poorly-structured sentences. Where we agree is that the fee paid by Liverpool on Carroll was a ridiculous amount to pay for a player who is just not that good. What I'm trying to get across to you is that they wouldn't have paid the amount if they didn't think it was worth it. They may have desperately wanted him, but there had to be somewhere they would draw the line and say "right, that's too much, we're not paying that". They paid £35m thinking that he would score enough goals to justify that amount. If they hadn't thought that, they simply wouldn't have bought him.
Is it just me that thinks Joe and Alan are basically agreeing with each other? You have to pay a lot of money to buy Premier League players, that's because clubs choose to pay that amount rightly or wrongly, most teams have enough money that they don't need to sell their first team players.
No, everyone knows that value is an exponential curve. If you want someone twice as good, you have pay four times as much. For example.
Well no, there is a difference in our opinions. Alan is arguing that clubs are having to pay more for players than they're actually worth, and I'm arguing that they're not actually "worth" anything, other than what the highest bidder values them at.
I was on your side (believe it or not) but to imply that nothing has any inherent value strikes me as wrong. Surely the club puts a value on them without someone having to bid? Lambert is valuable to us, but that doesn't mean anyone else values him, for example.
The PL has a great deal of financial clout, just the way things are and clubs will hold out for silly money while other clubs are throwing it around. Clubs have 4 options: 1. Pay the price - it happens! 2. Go abroad - a player from one of the major European leagues can be cheaper and relatively low risk. 3. Go unproven - risky, but there are rewards for teams that do their scouting. 4. Make your own - it's a lucrative game for teams who can bring their own players through. I predict that next summer we'll be fighting off bids for JWP and Shaw with a sh*tty stick.
I understand what you´re trying to say but my point is that Liverpool paid 35 million knowing that they were paying over the odds. They obviously thought he was a great player but I don't think that even they would have thought he was actually worth 35 million. They paid that amount because that is what happens when you have a lot of money and spend silly. When they bought him I´m sure they knew he was worth 15 million less but because Newcastle wanted more, and they had the money to do it, they thought, why not? It´s not an issue for us. If they didn´t have the money injected into the club by John Henry and wanted to buy Carroll when he was at Newcastle, I´m sure that their offer would have been a lot less...and if Mike Ashley would have said to them that they would only accept a bid for 35 million, then I think it´s fair to say that Liverpool would have said no as he´s not worth that much. Once you have someone prepared to spend a lot of money, transfer fees because less important and you are willing to spend much more than you would/should do.
Pretty easy to believe, considering I'm always right. What I mean is that there is no set market value, because players are sold through bidding rather than typical market practice. A player doesn't have a label price, and the value of him to his owner can change at any time.
We'll be fighting off much bigger offers once they've broken through than the paltry sums being banded about at the moment. It's all hot air at the moment and offers will be instantly rejected.
