Transfer Rumours Transfer Rumours thread

  • 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!
SIR_KENNY_KLOPP_KING said:
2 in 2days. Another 2 in the next two will do. I still feel that we need a 6 or at least a versatile CM.

have a suspicion that we might sneak in a late offer to Rabiot. (I’m not saying that I would like this, just that it still might happen) Given that he’s a freebie, am not sure if the normal deadline day applies? If Gomez still wants out, then a swap deal with palace or villa might occur with money going in the opposite direction. We are still serious about the Italian fella too by all accounts.

So still serious chance of that crescendo!

baby….
Click to expand...

Free transfers can be done outside the window
 
Kept telling you guys the crescendo was just in regards to outgoings. We’ve seen plenty, no one ever mentioned a crescendo of incomings
 
  • Like
Reactions: saintanton
moreinjuredthanowen said:
That is true but I don't care about those greedy ****s.

Anyone who's joined that mess in the last 12 months deserves what they get now. (And not tlaking wages)

But it's still bad for football in general and the types of rules I suggest would be of no harm imo
Click to expand...
I agree. It's less about individual players and clubs and more about trying to maintain the integrity of the game. I know people say 'what integrity?' and given the way those in charge of the game seem.to have sold out, it's a valid point but if you don't at least try to have some enforceable rules like FFP, then it's just making more of a mockery of what was once a fairly level playing field.
 
johnsonsbaby said:
I agree. It's less about individual players and clubs and more about trying to maintain the integrity of the game. I know people say 'what integrity?' and given the way those in charge of the game seem.to have sold out, it's a valid point but if you don't at least try to have some enforceable rules like FFP, then it's just making more of a mockery of what was once a fairly level playing field.
Click to expand...

If 50 players can be accumulated by a club without going bankrupt (thry are paying far more wages out of far less revenue than some) then something is wrong.

Maybe the accounting practices being allowed are totally misaligned (are chelsea being allowed to report half their club expenses in a different company to keep them hidden form ffp)

Or maybe it's just pain unethical to allow a few clubs hoover up players form all over and stockpile. It's just unhealthy as if cheslea can "get away with it" then others will join thr party and a flood of it will start
 
moreinjuredthanowen said:
If 50 players can be accumulated by a club without going bankrupt (thry are paying far more wages out of far less revenue than some) then something is wrong.

Maybe the accounting practices being allowed are totally misaligned (are chelsea being allowed to report half their club expenses in a different company to keep them hidden form ffp)

Or maybe it's just pain unethical to allow a few clubs hoover up players form all over and stockpile. It's just unhealthy as if cheslea can "get away with it" then others will join thr party and a flood of it will start
Click to expand...

Helps when you can sell non football properties to yourself
 
moreinjuredthanowen said:
If 50 players can be accumulated by a club without going bankrupt (thry are paying far more wages out of far less revenue than some) then something is wrong.

Maybe the accounting practices being allowed are totally misaligned (are chelsea being allowed to report half their club expenses in a different company to keep them hidden form ffp)

Or maybe it's just pain unethical to allow a few clubs hoover up players form all over and stockpile. It's just unhealthy as if cheslea can "get away with it" then others will join thr party and a flood of it will start
Click to expand...
Chelsea can because of the way PSR works however sooner or later the Ponzi scheme will collapse as always either in terms of actual real financial losses or more likely PSR since their owners seem totally unconcerned about actual value as shown by the fact they paid so much for Chelsea with the added hit of being legally obliged to spend at least a billion on upgrading SB or building new stadium - though no one in authority seem,s bothered that they are showing no signs of doing any such thing .
 
  • Like
Reactions: moreinjuredthanowen and Ivan Dobsky
Solid Air 2 said:
Chelsea can because of the way PSR works however sooner or later the Ponzi scheme will collapse as always either in terms of actual real financial losses or more likely PSR since their owners seem totally unconcerned about actual value as shown by the fact they paid so much for Chelsea with the added hit of being legally obliged to spend at least a billion on upgrading SB or building new stadium - though no one in authority seem,s bothered that they are showing no signs of doing any such thing .
Click to expand...

You could say the same about FSG though (or NESV, as they were). They got the club at what was generally agreed to be half of the book price, though it has to be understood that it was a distressed sale and absolutely nobody at the time was going to pay Hicks' demand of the $1bn estimation of Forbes (roughly £660m at the time). When taken to the high court by Hicks in a farcical attempt to overturn the sale, RBS, and Houghton in particular, defended the sale by saying that NESV had a contractual duty - and funds in place - to build a new stadium. I don't blame them for not doing so, but your reminder that the redevelopment of Anfield, costing @ £190m so far (please tell me that one day they can extend the Kop by redeveloping the area :undecided:) has all to be paid back by the club.

Whatever happens with Chelsea, I'm prepared to bet the Boehy won't be charging them back the £1-2bn it will cost to rebuild Stamford Bridge. :bandit:
 
Prince Knut said:
You could say the same about FSG though (or NESV, as they were). They got the club at what was generally agreed to be half of the book price, though it has to be understood that it was a distressed sale and absolutely nobody at the time was going to pay Hicks' demand of the $1bn estimation of Forbes (roughly £660m at the time). When taken to the high court by Hicks in a farcical attempt to overturn the sale, RBS, and Houghton in particular, defended the sale by saying that NESV had a contractual duty - and funds in place - to build a new stadium. I don't blame them for not doing so, but your reminder that the redevelopment of Anfield, costing @ £190m so far (please tell me that one day they can extend the Kop by redeveloping the area :undecided:) has all to be paid back by the club.

Whatever happens with Chelsea, I'm prepared to bet the Boehy won't be charging them back the £1-2bn it will cost to rebuild Stamford Bridge. :bandit:
Click to expand...
at least it has happened and technically they did supply the funds for the main stand <whistle>
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ivan Dobsky
Sauerkraut Inia said:
Reads to me like he is leaving it open to see what he can get
On the positive side he will be wanting to impress I would imagine
Click to expand...

Reads to me like he's off after this season.

I'd guess that we aren't willing to give him as much money or a lengthy contract (rightly) but he isn't happy with what is being offered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bumps
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back