Johnson signs for...

[Oncy]

[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=34311.msg893322#msg893322 date=1245743822]
Johnson is currently at best an incremental improvement on Arbeloa, but is two years younger and has more potential upside. He's a better fit for the league as well, a better athlete.

If we get 10 million for Arbeloa, not only will it, along with Johnson set a new inflationary standard from this point on for the new cost of a decent fullback, it'll still mean we have to see the improvement on the pitch to justify the fee.

There is absolutely no doubt we are overpaying though.

Oh, and whether there was a rule or not, I've no problem with us trying to have some English core, and paying more for it, I've just never been wowed by Johnson, but am looking forward to seeing him with an open mind.
[/quote]If only everyone was as open minded Fark.
I pity the lad the first bad game he has.

 

[keniget]

I don't know whether to put this in the footy misconceptions thread or in here.

We are not trading in a defensive RB for an attacking one. Johnson is far more capable on the attacking side of things for sure, but Arbeloa is no defensive powerhouse. He's just a good all-rounder.

 

[Oncy]

[quote author=keniget link=topic=34311.msg893328#msg893328 date=1245744403]
I don't know whether to put this in the footy misconceptions thread or in here.

We are not trading in a defensive RB for an attacking one. Johnson is far more capable on the attacking side of things for sure, but Arbeloa is no defensive powerhouse. He's just a good all-rounder.
[/quote]Theres so many reasons Johnson is an improvement. Hes faster, stronger, more agile, more skillful, a better crosser, a better finisher, hes just a much better player. I like Arbeloa and think hes been good for us, but we need progress, and this is it for me.
I also dont think we are losing much if anything defensively. Lm is the only other position i think we can immediately improve on. But what i think is important to keep in mind is that even if we just maintained our squad, uniteds weakening (ronaldo and Tevez-gone, giggs, scholes, neville and vds-age, hargreaves-dead) gives us our best chance ever to win the league.
Its the biggest reason to say fuck you to madrid and barca.

 

[doctor_mac]

If we're selling Arby then Johnson doesn't strengthen our league chances much or perhaps at all. We needed to strengthen the squad, the starting 11 was pretty fine- we wanted quality competing for positions. Arby couldn't play all season- but neither will Johnson- so essentially we're no better off.

That said, I agree that this is a good move with the impending 6+ 5 (if it ever goes ahead).

 

[Paddy]

I still can't believe people were comparing Johnson to Gerrard.

 

[Glock21]

[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=34311.msg893315#msg893315 date=1245743364]
[quote author=Glock link=topic=34311.msg893313#msg893313 date=1245743038]
Terrible bit of business being done on the Johnson deal. With the 7million owed to us by Pompey we should be paying no more than £3million. And that's including the inflation for an English player. Agreeing to an £17.5million deal is worse than the Keane deal last season. Darijo Srna is better in defense and attack and would cost around £10million. This crap of signing English players for the sake of signing English players is getting ridiculous, the nonsense with the Barry deal last summer and now this. £18million each time for average players who are not better than what we already have.

Selling Arbeloa is a good move because he's clearly going to be replaced this summer(although he's better than Johnson) and he won't sit on the bench in a World Cup year where he's certain to make the Spanish squad if he's starting regularly for whatever club he's at.

[/quote]Its not signing English for the sake of it though is it. Its to prepare for impending fifa rule changes. If the 6 plus 5 came in this year we would be FUCKED. Luckily we have 2 more years to get some homegrown players in. Im personally happy that we are targeting the 11 best players in the country (barry and Johnson) rather than scouring around signing Downings and Bentleys for now.
[/quote]

Barry isn't the best in England. You're a funny man.

 

[red_maradona]

out of ciriosity what os the reaction of our rivals to this transfer?

 

[Oncy]

[quote author=Glock link=topic=34311.msg893336#msg893336 date=1245745273]
[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=34311.msg893315#msg893315 date=1245743364]
[quote author=Glock link=topic=34311.msg893313#msg893313 date=1245743038]
Terrible bit of business being done on the Johnson deal. With the 7million owed to us by Pompey we should be paying no more than £3million. And that's including the inflation for an English player. Agreeing to an £17.5million deal is worse than the Keane deal last season. Darijo Srna is better in defense and attack and would cost around £10million. This crap of signing English players for the sake of signing English players is getting ridiculous, the nonsense with the Barry deal last summer and now this. £18million each time for average players who are not better than what we already have.

Selling Arbeloa is a good move because he's clearly going to be replaced this summer(although he's better than Johnson) and he won't sit on the bench in a World Cup year where he's certain to make the Spanish squad if he's starting regularly for whatever club he's at.

[/quote]Its not signing English for the sake of it though is it. Its to prepare for impending fifa rule changes. If the 6 plus 5 came in this year we would be FUCKED. Luckily we have 2 more years to get some homegrown players in. Im personally happy that we are targeting the 11 best players in the country (barry and Johnson) rather than scouring around signing Downings and Bentleys for now.
[/quote]

Barry isn't the best in England. You're a funny man.
[/quote]I mean the England team Glock.
Rio-no chance
terry-no chance
cole-no chance
johnson-bought
gerrard-ours
lampard-no chance
barry-was available
walcott-doubtful
rooney-no chance
heskey-erm

 

[Oncy]

[quote author=red_maradona link=topic=34311.msg893338#msg893338 date=1245745375]
out of ciriosity what os the reaction of our rivals to this transfer?
[/quote]my mate who's chelsea is gutted.

 

[Peatcheo]

[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=34311.msg893343#msg893343 date=1245745610]
[quote author=red_maradona link=topic=34311.msg893338#msg893338 date=1245745375]
out of ciriosity what os the reaction of our rivals to this transfer?
[/quote]my mate who's chelsea is gutted.
[/quote]

I bet the arrogant pricks dahn sawth cant comprehend how he chose us over them!

 

[gkmacca]

Why are some hacks SO insistent on inflating our transfer fees? Some are quoting the price for Johnson as £21m, and then only noting towards the end that this includes four years' wages. Now when do they do this with Chelski, Arsenal or the mancs? It's really very forced and tiresome. And you know during the coming season, if there's any debate about who's spent what, there'll be a "£21m for Johnson" mentioned. Ridiculous.

 

[leftpeg]

[quote author=gkmacca link=topic=34311.msg893376#msg893376 date=1245748688]
Why are some hacks SO insistent on inflating our transfer fees? Some are quoting the price for Johnson as £21m, and then only noting towards the end that this includes four years' wages. Now when do they do this with Chelski, Arsenal or the mancs? It's really very forced and tiresome. And you know during the coming season, if there's any debate about who's spent what, there'll be a "£21m for Johnson" mentioned. Ridiculous.
[/quote]

You mustn't allow yourself to get so worked up about such froth Macca.

 

[Peatcheo]

[quote author=leftpeg link=topic=34311.msg893377#msg893377 date=1245748806]
[quote author=gkmacca link=topic=34311.msg893376#msg893376 date=1245748688]
Why are some hacks SO insistent on inflating our transfer fees? Some are quoting the price for Johnson as £21m, and then only noting towards the end that this includes four years' wages. Now when do they do this with Chelski, Arsenal or the mancs? It's really very forced and tiresome. And you know during the coming season, if there's any debate about who's spent what, there'll be a "£21m for Johnson" mentioned. Ridiculous.
[/quote]

You mustn't allow yourself to get so worked up about such froth Macca.


[/quote]

Especially in this window in which i have not seen many positive articles, every article about Johnson seems to drift off into our terrible finances or our chances of keeping players rather than discussing the fact we have just signed one of the best right backs in the league and an England starter.

 

[Judge Jules]

[quote author=gkmacca link=topic=34311.msg893376#msg893376 date=1245748688]
Why are some hacks SO insistent on inflating our transfer fees? Some are quoting the price for Johnson as £21m, and then only noting towards the end that this includes four years' wages. Now when do they do this with Chelski, Arsenal or the mancs? It's really very forced and tiresome. And you know during the coming season, if there's any debate about who's spent what, there'll be a "£21m for Johnson" mentioned. Ridiculous.
[/quote]

Money, largely, would be my guess. Murdoch certainly has a sizeable stake in ManUre and goodness knows where Abramovich's tentacles extend. We're a threat to those teams, hence also to those investments. The Arse don't really come into it because Wenger hardly ever signs big anyway.

 

[gkmacca]

There's one in the Mirror that actually makes no sense. It's as though Maddock was so drunk he tried to write two articles, got confused and passed out:

Liverpool finally completed the £17million capture of Glen Johnson from Portsmouth last night.

But the massive deal – which will earn the England full-back around £4m a year – could force Liverpool to TREBLE Javier Mascherano’s wages to keep him.

Mirror Sport understands that the root of the Argentine’s unhappiness at Anfield is the fact that he is paid considerably less than the majority of the ability to set up chances for the former England star.

The 29-year-old scored 30 in 65 starts on Tyneside and cost Newcastle £41million in wages and transfer fee. He was dropped by boss Alan Shearer for the club’s relegation showdown at Aston Villa and has scored once this year.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/2009/06/23/liverpool-may-have-to-treble-javier-mascherano-s-wages-as-glen-johnson-signs-115875-21463513/

 

[LeTallecWiz]

[quote author=gkmacca link=topic=34311.msg893391#msg893391 date=1245749290]
There's one in the Mirror that actually makes no sense. It's as though Maddock was so drunk he tried to write two articles, got confused and passed out:

Liverpool finally completed the £17million capture of Glen Johnson from Portsmouth last night.

But the massive deal – which will earn the England full-back around £4m a year – could force Liverpool to TREBLE Javier Mascherano’s wages to keep him.

Mirror Sport understands that the root of the Argentine’s unhappiness at Anfield is the fact that he is paid considerably less than the majority of the ability to set up chances for the former England star.

The 29-year-old scored 30 in 65 starts on Tyneside and cost Newcastle £41million in wages and transfer fee. He was dropped by boss Alan Shearer for the club’s relegation showdown at Aston Villa and has scored once this year.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/2009/06/23/liverpool-may-have-to-treble-javier-mascherano-s-wages-as-glen-johnson-signs-115875-21463513/
[/quote]

http://sixcrazyminutes.com/forums/index.php?topic=34321.0

How did that pass editing though?

 

[737Max]

[quote author=gkmacca link=topic=34311.msg893391#msg893391 date=1245749290]
There's one in the Mirror that actually makes no sense. It's as though Maddock was so drunk he tried to write two articles, got confused and passed out:

Liverpool finally completed the £17million capture of Glen Johnson from Portsmouth last night.

But the massive deal – which will earn the England full-back around £4m a year – could force Liverpool to TREBLE Javier Mascherano’s wages to keep him.

Mirror Sport understands that the root of the Argentine’s unhappiness at Anfield is the fact that he is paid considerably less than the majority of the ability to set up chances for the former England star.

Ha ha ha WTF?

The 29-year-old scored 30 in 65 starts on Tyneside and cost Newcastle £41million in wages and transfer fee. He was dropped by boss Alan Shearer for the club’s relegation showdown at Aston Villa and has scored once this year.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/2009/06/23/liverpool-may-have-to-treble-javier-mascherano-s-wages-as-glen-johnson-signs-115875-21463513/
[/quote]

 

[keniget]

is the fact that he is paid considerably less than the majority of the ability to set up chances for the former England star

I still want to know what that means. What the fuck?

Anyways, they don't just do it to us. I saw an article that said City were ready to complete a 47M deal for Tevez, but then later on noted that the fee was 25M.

 

[Peatcheo]

[quote author=keniget link=topic=34311.msg893401#msg893401 date=1245749642]

is the fact that he is paid considerably less than the majority of the ability to set up chances for the former England star

I still want to know what that means. What the fuck?

Anyways, they don't just do it to us. I saw an article that said City were ready to complete a 47M deal for Tevez, but then later on noted that the fee was 25M.
[/quote]

Not one person on this site could understand that, not even Glock!

 

[gkmacca]

Well, with City they want to make every story about megabucks. With us it's always a snide 'oooh, they've paid too much!' angle. No mention of the Crouch money in most of these reports - that's bad enough - but to include wages is just clumsily manipulative. And mark my words, Jamie Redknapp and An Hairy Man will be blabbering on next season about '£21m for Johnson' the first poor match he has. It all comes into play when the hacks do their 'How much has Benitez spent compared to Ginsoak?' Suddenly Torres is priced at over £25m, Mascher at £20m - it's ridiculous.

 

[doctor_mac]

A lot of them still describe Torres as costing 27 mil. Which does my tits in even if he's worth twice that.

 

[Squiggles]

The further £6M was dependent on clauses, which surely he'll activate if he carries on in the same vain (I hope so anyway)

In fairness I've read a lot about Rooney costing United £30M before all the clauses were activated - it's just lazy journalism.

 

[Judge Jules]

[quote author=gkmacca link=topic=34311.msg893416#msg893416 date=1245750128]
Well, with City they want to make every story about megabucks. With us it's always a snide 'oooh, they've paid too much!' angle. No mention of the Crouch money in most of these reports - that's bad enough - but to include wages is just clumsily manipulative. And mark my words, Jamie Redknapp and An Hairy Man will be blabbering on next season about '£21m for Johnson' the first poor match he has. It all comes into play when the hacks do their 'How much has Benitez spent compared to Ginsoak?' Suddenly Torres is priced at over £25m, Mascher at £20m - it's ridiculous.
[/quote]

Absolutely, but that's Sky for you, a jewel in the Murdoch (= big-time investor in ManUre) crown.

 

[Tinto]

[quote author=gkmacca link=topic=34311.msg893416#msg893416 date=1245750128]
Well, with City they want to make every story about megabucks. With us it's always a snide 'oooh, they've paid too much!' angle. No mention of the Crouch money in most of these reports - that's bad enough - but to include wages is just clumsily manipulative. And mark my words, Jamie Redknapp and An Hairy Man will be blabbering on next season about '£21m for Johnson' the first poor match he has. It all comes into play when the hacks do their 'How much has Benitez spent compared to Ginsoak?' Suddenly Torres is priced at over £25m, Mascher at £20m - it's ridiculous.
[/quote]

I've never been one to believe that there was some sort of press conspiracy against us but the amount of negative stories about us this summer is just absolutely ridiculous.

United have lost two of their best players and all they talk about is the £80m they might spend it on and so losing Tevez and Ronaldo has somehow become a good thing.

There's been story after story about Mascher and Xabi leaving but they are still here and neither Real or Barca has actually made an offer yet.

We've just beaten Chelsea to one of the best fullbacks in the country and now they're exaggerating on how much we had to pay as we've somehow got a raw deal.

Oh, yeah... we're also completely broke too and RBS are going to ask for their money back despite us somehow overpaying for Johnson.

 

[doctor_mac]

[quote author=Squiggles link=topic=34311.msg893425#msg893425 date=1245750522]
The further £6M was dependent on clauses, which surely he'll activate if he carries on in the same vain (I hope so anyway)

In fairness I've read a lot about Rooney costing United £30M before all the clauses were activated
[/quote]

I think it's less than that even with clauses or whatever. We never did find out the precise nature of the deal with Athletico (as far as I recall), partly because they didn't want to be seen to be selling the family silver too cheaply.

All I know (and trust), is Rafa's comments that Torres cost a lot less than the amounts being reported.

 

[Judge Jules]

[quote author=Tinto link=topic=34311.msg893432#msg893432 date=1245750831]
[quote author=gkmacca link=topic=34311.msg893416#msg893416 date=1245750128]
Well, with City they want to make every story about megabucks. With us it's always a snide 'oooh, they've paid too much!' angle. No mention of the Crouch money in most of these reports - that's bad enough - but to include wages is just clumsily manipulative. And mark my words, Jamie Redknapp and An Hairy Man will be blabbering on next season about '£21m for Johnson' the first poor match he has. It all comes into play when the hacks do their 'How much has Benitez spent compared to Ginsoak?' Suddenly Torres is priced at over £25m, Mascher at £20m - it's ridiculous.
[/quote]

I've never been one to believe that there was some sort of press conspiracy against us but the amount of negative stories about us this summer is just absolutely ridiculous.

United have lost two of their best players and all they talk about is the £80m they might spend it on and so losing Tevez and Ronaldo has somehow become a good thing.

There's been story after story about Mascher and Xabi leaving but they are still here and neither Real or Barca has actually made an offer yet.

We've just beaten Chelsea to one of the best fullbacks in the country and now they're exaggerating on how much we had to pay as we've somehow got a raw deal.

Oh, yeah... we're also completely broke too and RBS are going to ask for their money back despite us somehow overpaying for Johnson.
[/quote]

...and despite the fact that all three of the other Big Four have bigger debts than ours.

I've never believed in an organised media conspiracy either, but it doesn't have to be.  The people employed by the media outlets concerned know full well what their bosses want, and make sure they serve it up in the approved manner.

 

[LadyRed]

When is Johnson gonna hold the shirt next to Rafa and smile cheesily for all the cameras?

 

[Ong]

I'm sure if Johnson's signed for manscum or Chelsea for 20M, the press will say it's a bargain and

what a signing. A young and potential world class player and the best right back in premier league. :🙂

 

[Squiggles]

[quote author=Anita link=topic=34311.msg894073#msg894073 date=1245841515]
When is Johnson gonna hold the shirt next to Rafa and smile cheesily for all the cameras?
[/quote]

July 1st probably.

[quote author=Ong link=topic=34311.msg894236#msg894236 date=1245854791]
I'm sure if Johnson's signed for manscum or Chelsea for 20M, the press will say it's a bargain and

what  a signing. A young  and potential  world class player and the best  right back in premier league. :🙂
[/quote]

I think that's an exaggeration but there would have been less eyebrows raised, clearly. Which papers have said we're being ripped off?