Transfer Rumours 21/22
- Thread starter King Binny
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Well they did nearly get in the top 4 so that must count for something.
Meanwhile every year we seem to be totting up sales of squad players to try to balance the books. Not like we've got to 3 CL finals in 5 years or anything...
I do shudder at the thought of John W Henry having to reach into his threadbare pocket every now and again.
Really keeps me awake at night.
Hahahahahahahaha
The source is the s*n take it with a large dose of bullshit.
However.. at this point I'd accept a straight swap with Rodrygo.
I said SWAP @doctor_mac
That's why I ignored it when I saw it ... shit stirring fucking cunts. Mo saying he's definitely staying this season can be legitimately ignored, it seems, when in search of internet page hits.
Arsenal had been sitting on a load of cash for a number of years and the only debt they had was re the Emirates. They repaid that in 2021 and it looks like Stan Kroenke is bank-rolling them now. He's probably happy to do that for a few years, hence going into spending mode. I suppose they know that if it all goes pear-shaped then they can cash in on Saka, Smith-Rowe and Martinelli as a nuclear option.
Kroenke is not a bad owner. The LA Rams have spent their way to a super bowl victory. I feel that if he is convinced by the project, he backs them with money.
Unlike ours, who have an all-time great manager and still leaves the squad a key player or too short. Looks like the big midfield purchase will be for next summer. Next summer, we will need that midfielder plus Ox, Milner, and Salah replacement with no obvious player to generate large amount of cash through sales.
Isn't it kind of besides the point to pick through the accounts of these companies to see where exactly the money comes from when Chelsea have just been sold for like £4.5bn?
That's why clubs appear to spend what they can't afford - the owners are sitting on huge unrealised gains.
It'll be the same for FSG. They've just managed to convince most of the fanbase that them getting their gain at minimal upfront cost is some kind of point of pride.
Definitely should be all over this
I sort of get it with player purchases, you don't want to sacrifice equity for that, or add loads of unserviceable debt. But improvements to the infrastructure? Borrow for all that and don't pretend it impinges on the day to day, when it's all improving the value of the asset anyway.
I don't mind us being sustainable and basically prudent - the discipline probably helps keep everything focused anyway - but it went too far when they basically refused to spend on a centre half when we desperately needed one. That's nuts. Almost cost us top 4 and god knows how much money.
I don't see anything unreasonable in at least expecting them to act as lender of last resort in those sort of cases - and probably with the midfield this summer tbh. They run things really really well but they shouldn't be above criticism.
Damn them ! I hadn’t paid enough attention/realised the source ..caught out again me 🙄
A swop is beginning to appeal,(if there’s any truth) cos imo it can rock the boat in the team and with salah himself …all this constant mention..
Edit; will watch out for that source in future ..shit stirring bastards! Got me mad reading that
Last edited:
No it does my head in too, but I understand their philosophy to an extent. It becomes a complete farce when like you say there are obvious circumstances that need addressing or when they start saying shit like redevelopment of the stadium impinges on cashflow.
They're actually really weird owners.
Early on they seemed quite financially supportive, gave Kenny loads of money and if I remember right Rodgers got plenty too in the end. The problem was they seemed incompetent. Panicked into the Carroll signing, let Rodgers demand power over transfers, then sort of backtracked on that and had that weird tandem transfer strategy for a while, whereby Firmino and Benteke signed in the same summer.
It just seemed like a mess.
Now it's the opposite. No money, incredibly well run. It's definitely better this way I suppose.
Is it not partly that we’ll only buy specific players and they’re not always available at ghe orice we’re willing to go to.
We bought Konate - we probably wouldn’t have got him a year earlier.
It’s not as if we’re not buying anyone and people tend to work themselves up over who everyone else is buying.
I’m all for holding off buying, if it means we get the right player in the end - and it seems pretty clear that when we spend big we generally get it right.
We’ve could also utilise some of our youth team better - if the coaching team really do rate them so highly.
We keep saying “we’ve no money” or “why won’t they spend”, yet we’ve brought in Jota, Konate, Diaz & Nunez from r teasing manly big fees and it looks like we would have spent the money on Tchouaméni as well.
I think there’s plenty of money there - we’re just very careful about what we spend it on.
Are there many players anyone else has signed that we wished we signed? That goes for the same in most transfer windows.
I don't think we would have bought both Tchouameni and Nunez in the same window. We went for Nunez once the Tchouameni deal fell through.
I won't complain too much about the owners. They do have a clear strategy. But at the same time, I wish they would go a bit extra. I don't expect a City-like squad but the transfer approach means we always have a weakness in our squad which is going to hamper us from crossing the line in terms of the big two - PL and CL.
Next summer we will have the existing midfield issues plus Ox and Milner replacement and Salah replacement. I doubt we will replace all of them which will mean again a weakness for the season after. It might just be the bane of trying to live within the budget.
They had no excuse for not signing a good defender that January. It was ridiculous - and incredibly risky.
Even if it had to be a stopgap then we should have signed a good one, not some 20 year old kid and a journeyman.
And we don't spend. It's consistent over a long period. Net spend over 6 years or so is one of the lowest.
If fans are happy with that then fair enough, but that still doesn't explain why they can't smooth the process out by spending more when necessary.
Is it absolutely impossible to get Bellingham this summer? Or would it just take a bit more cash than they ideally want to spend? And that's before we consider that we probably need two midfiders anyway.
They're tight and are trying to make billions without the normal investment that requires. Fair play to them really. Just not the fans who pipe up to defend every reasonable criticism.
No way FSG was spending 100 million on Nunez and another 100 million on Tchouameni in the same window.
I don't think the price was driven up. It was just falsely reported as some low amount by bullshitting journalists.
He's considered one of the best young midfielders in the world. He was always gonna cost a fortune, just like Darwin.
We spent 64 mill on Nunez, and would have spent 60 mill on Tchouameni. Why wouldnt we, when we should be looking at 50-60 mill in transfer income as well.
Makes no sense to go for an attacker because our preffered central midfielder went to Real Madrid.
It has been reported several times that more money is available this summer.
I think his price was driven up with his performances late in the season, Real missing out on Mbappe and the reported PSG interest.
We just simply don't spend these amounts. It's year after year now, regardless of how much prize money we bring in. I think the only time remotely recently that I thought we were sort of splashing out was 2018 when we were gonna sign Fekir. That seemed fairly extravagant, but then that collapsed and we didn't bother signing anyone else.
Otherwise it's always been a smallish net spend or net income, basically every year.
- Status
