Transfer Rumours Summer 2024

  • 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!
Saintemarie said:
Brighton seem to have moved away from M O'R. He seems to have been back up to a back up if they couldn't get their first/second choice. Atlanta are still in pole position with Euro footy.
Click to expand...
Who are their first two choices rumoured to be? Perhaps we should be looking at their second choice!
 
SaintsFan86 said:
As soon as it goes through I'm hoping to start hearing chatter tomorrow. Saints will surely want him in for Newcastle if a fee can be agreed.
Click to expand...
When would the cut off be? Especially as it’s an away game. Seems too late now. Would need to be Thursday at the latest ?
 
SaintsFan86 said:
I thought I understood it as you could bring in more than 2 loans, you just couldn't register them.

I guess if this Mandela is under 21 though it might not matter.
Click to expand...

He’s not, he’s 22

You can loan 4 players total a season but only have 2 registered at any time, so yeah 2 available at any time. If we loan Mandela then that counts as one of our loan slots, we could make it permanent in Jan and then loan someone else for example (or even cancel the loan if we are able to)
 
  • Like
Reactions: SaintsFan86
I get that the PL is doing its utmost to sabotage itself and its worldwide appeal with this PSR nonsense but do we really believe that clubs are waiting to sell before sealing deals that they deem essential? It seems far more likely to me that they'd get the essential bit done first and then have a clear understanding of what they need to do to balance the books. Also, given that the calculation itself is over a three year period and that nobody has a functioning crystal ball, that makes it seem even less likely. Assuming that MOR is our bona fide top target and that he's willing to join us on terms already agreed, I can't see that selling ABK first is a factor at all. It's always been hard getting players away from Celtic before the season starts. Always.
 
hotbovril said:
I get that the PL is doing its utmost to sabotage itself and its worldwide appeal with this PSR nonsense but do we really believe that clubs are waiting to sell before sealing deals that they deem essential? It seems far more likely to me that they'd get the essential bit done first and then have a clear understanding of what they need to do to balance the books. Also, given that the calculation itself is over a three year period and that nobody has a functioning crystal ball, that makes it seem even less likely. Assuming that MOR is our bona fide top target and that he's willing to join us on terms already agreed, I can't see that selling ABK first is a factor at all. It's always been hard getting players away from Celtic before the season starts. Always.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's why there were all those nonsense deals towards the end of June this summer, whilst certain clubs were attempting to get themselves back on the right side of the rules. Spend first, rectify later.

But it's also why I had no sympathy with Forest's argument last summer about the timing of when they sold Johnson. Selling him in August, rather than June, got them a higher transfer fee - fair enough - but their argument that the rules were punishing them for not selling at a lower price earlier was nonsense. They too spent first. It was that which put them the wrong side of the rules. They had an opportunity to get themselves out of that hole by selling Johnson before the end of June, but decided against it. Fine. But that didn't result in them being the wrong side of the rules, it meant that they messed up the "spend first, rectify later" strategy.
 
RSS said:
I thought after Chelsea took the piss with that last season to snake around PSR it was clamped down on, but obviously not because Chelsea are still spending hundreds of millions and still giving out long contracts too.

Edit: I don't understand PSR and tbf have made no effort to find out more about it. But I thought the entire long contract thing was to spread the cost of buying a player over the length of that contract? So if that is the case, why would West Ham do that for a player that only cost £15m?
Click to expand...

Cole Palmer just signed a new 9 year deal, looks like nobody is bothered about PSR except for us

Looking more likely we just don’t have the money in the bank to actually spend rather than not spending it due to PSR
 
  • Like
Reactions: LincolnSaint
Saintmagic said:
Cole Palmer just signed a new 9 year deal, looks like nobody is bothered about PSR except for us

Looking more likely we just don’t have the money in the bank to actually spend rather than not spending it due to PSR
Click to expand...
Nah. It's Saints masterplan on how we are going to win the league. Everyone else gets points deducted, and we stay clean. Lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: thereisonlyoneno7
RSS said:
I thought after Chelsea took the piss with that last season to snake around PSR it was clamped down on, but obviously not because Chelsea are still spending hundreds of millions and still giving out long contracts too.

Edit: I don't understand PSR and tbf have made no effort to find out more about it. But I thought the entire long contract thing was to spread the cost of buying a player over the length of that contract? So if that is the case, why would West Ham do that for a player that only cost £15m?
Click to expand...

They were talking about this and Wan Bissaka’s 7-year deal on White and Jordan today. I think they said the rules have changed so that if a club give a player a 6/7/8 year contract, the PSR calculation will still be done over 5 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RSS
Saints FC 76 said:
They were talking about this and Wan Bissaka’s 7-year deal on White and Jordan today. I think they said the rules have changed so that if a club give a player a 6/7/8 year contract, the PSR calculation will still be done over 5 years.
Click to expand...
Which seems like it would make the long contracts just extra risk for the club. Because it’s not like they could also do “normal accounting” and PSR accounting where the former benefits from the longer contracts
 
  • Like
Reactions: OddRiverOakWizards
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back