Google it- it's everywhere. An in the know on Knees Up Mother Brown (WHU forum) said a few weeks ago that the two players might be off to PSG and that all would become clear. Might all be nonsense of course!
Premier League 23/24 Thread
- Thread starter lejackal
- Start date
You're probably right. Time will tell...
Aye that Spuds offer of 50m is a joke. If I was Leicester I would tell them they now have to pay 25% more than the next highest bid, for either player, as an "arsehole/that'll teach you tax".
Naggelsmann has binned the idea of PSG, so not many managers left they would want. I thought it was Jose they were after though!?
Naggelsmann has binned the idea of PSG, so not many managers left they would want. I thought it was Jose they were after though!?
60-65 million for Haevertz. Someone is gonna have to explain that to me. Big big money for a player who is ehhh solid if unspectacular. He's a "forward" but not a striker, so ehh whose position does he take, Martinelli or Saka?
He's not a bad player and Arsenal do need more depth, but that one just looks like big auld money on a player they dont really need for a position they don't really need to strengthen (or at least they have more pressing needs).
Plus they have paid Chelsea a decent wedge which helps them with their own FFP issues. Add in whatever they got for Kante and the fact Utd look like being dumb enough to pay 60m for Mount and Chelsea's rivals are all very kindly having a whip round to bail them out. Which is, obviously, a very good idea.
Arsenal are also looking at spending 100m on Rice. WHERE THE **** are Arsenal getting all this money? Pool never spent anything like that when they were in the CL, bar when they sold Coutinho. On that note, according to Twitter Arsenal's net spend since 2019 is 550m. Is FFP calling?
Apparently City (the only other club mentioned in the tweet) have a net spend of 239m over the same period. Yes, they cheated before, but the difference is clear.
I suspect Liverpool's net spend is about 27pence.
He's not a bad player and Arsenal do need more depth, but that one just looks like big auld money on a player they dont really need for a position they don't really need to strengthen (or at least they have more pressing needs).
Plus they have paid Chelsea a decent wedge which helps them with their own FFP issues. Add in whatever they got for Kante and the fact Utd look like being dumb enough to pay 60m for Mount and Chelsea's rivals are all very kindly having a whip round to bail them out. Which is, obviously, a very good idea.
Arsenal are also looking at spending 100m on Rice. WHERE THE **** are Arsenal getting all this money? Pool never spent anything like that when they were in the CL, bar when they sold Coutinho. On that note, according to Twitter Arsenal's net spend since 2019 is 550m. Is FFP calling?
Apparently City (the only other club mentioned in the tweet) have a net spend of 239m over the same period. Yes, they cheated before, but the difference is clear.
I suspect Liverpool's net spend is about 27pence.
lejackal
Grand Master
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2015
- Messages
- 9,024
Net spend and profit and loss are not the same (although you know that already)
Arsenal have increased matchday revenue, increased merchandise revenue, finished higher up the league so got more funds there, have CL football next season and are likely to get 80-120 back in sales this summer.
As for the Havertz deal at this point I have to trust that Arteta knows what he's doing. There's some speculation that he could actually be the Xhaka replacement in the left 8 position and Rice is replacing Partey.
Arsenal have increased matchday revenue, increased merchandise revenue, finished higher up the league so got more funds there, have CL football next season and are likely to get 80-120 back in sales this summer.
As for the Havertz deal at this point I have to trust that Arteta knows what he's doing. There's some speculation that he could actually be the Xhaka replacement in the left 8 position and Rice is replacing Partey.
Oh aye, I know the difference between all the financial terms (I kinda have to, it's what I do for a living) but I am just amazed Arsenal are spending so much, relative to Liverpool. The Emirates is a bit bigger and their season tickets are more expensive, but Pool must have earned more prize money and TV money over the last 5 yrs (not last yr obv). I am just trying to get my head round how Arsenal can spend so much, again, relative to Pool.
Surely you cant play Havertz as a midfielder?
Gundogan supposedly off to Barca, which I guess is a case of he has won it all at City so he wants a change and they offered a longer contract. Does look a step down. As does City signing Kovacevic (spelling) from Chelsea As a replacement
Surely you cant play Havertz as a midfielder?
Gundogan supposedly off to Barca, which I guess is a case of he has won it all at City so he wants a change and they offered a longer contract. Does look a step down. As does City signing Kovacevic (spelling) from Chelsea As a replacement
lejackal
Grand Master
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2015
- Messages
- 9,024
I think the way we structure deals helps, paying in instalments etc
I think we've had loans from KSE as well.
The Xhaka role from last season was a lot more advanced than previous years, often ending up in and around the box. He got 9 goals last season and I think Havertz is probably a more natural finisher, plus he would give us a bit of much needed height in a still mostly small team in the attacking five players. I would think Arteta expects him to return 12-15 goals.
I think we've had loans from KSE as well.
The Xhaka role from last season was a lot more advanced than previous years, often ending up in and around the box. He got 9 goals last season and I think Havertz is probably a more natural finisher, plus he would give us a bit of much needed height in a still mostly small team in the attacking five players. I would think Arteta expects him to return 12-15 goals.
I'll take your word for it on Xhaka's role, I didn't see enough of Arsenal to comment. I would be amazed if Arteta wants Havertz to play in midfield though. That's a whole different skill set, much more work rate and positional importance than being a forward. I guess we'll see. I still think Arsenal over paid.
Talk of Bernardo Silva going to Saudi now too. What a waste of a career if he does, he is 28. He'll spend his peak years playing along side some semi pro fella.
Talk of Bernardo Silva going to Saudi now too. What a waste of a career if he does, he is 28. He'll spend his peak years playing along side some semi pro fella.
lejackal
Grand Master
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2015
- Messages
- 9,024
I mean I'll take their 40 million to get Partey gone but it's a pretty worrying time for the future of the game if they can get prime age talent away from the PL where players are not exactly underpaid.
Anyone seen the Liv Golf stuff recently?
Anyone seen the Liv Golf stuff recently?
How much a club spends seems to only depend on how frivolous the owners are with money. City have (or had) no international brand recognition and a half empty stadium week in week out, yet spend billions. United and Spurs have huge sold out stadiums and the global "big six" merchandising revenue, but the owners prefer to line their own pockets rather than invest in the squad. So revenue and spending seem to have little correlation.
Add Liverpool to the list of clubs who don't spend as much, relatively, as their revenue would suggest they could/should.
Partey to Saudi? That's VERY brave of him. They don't tend to let rapists drag **** out in the courts and use super injunctions to keep their name out of the papers. They just kill them.
Auld Thomas is in for a very big shock if he signs and continues with his penchant for rape.
Partey to Saudi? That's VERY brave of him. They don't tend to let rapists drag **** out in the courts and use super injunctions to keep their name out of the papers. They just kill them.
Auld Thomas is in for a very big shock if he signs and continues with his penchant for rape.
Would've been happy to keep him until his contract expired.
lejackal
Grand Master
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2015
- Messages
- 9,024
And I'll act as an aggregator/ITK with this quote taken out of contex;
"I would be amazed if Arteta wants Havertz to play in midfield though"
I'm genuinely interested to see if this works - clearly DR is Therapist replacement and Havertz is the Xhaka upgrade (
)Well this is a surprise - not only have Spurs signed players before mid August, they've also signed a goalkeeper below the age of 40, and Maddison seems like a relative bargain at 40m? 105 seems bonkers for Rice but I guess time will tell.
lejackal
Grand Master
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2015
- Messages
- 9,024
I think we were quoted 70 plus last season or the season before for Madison so I'd say 40 sounds good to fair.
105 is 30 or more too much imo but I'll take it right now. Subject to your POV it's either a statement signing that we can mix it with the big boys OR it's we're absolute mugs ripe for the taking
105 is 30 or more too much imo but I'll take it right now. Subject to your POV it's either a statement signing that we can mix it with the big boys OR it's we're absolute mugs ripe for the taking
View attachment 182759
And I'll act as an aggregator/ITK with this quote taken out of contex;
"I would be amazed if Arteta wants Havertz to play in midfield though"
I'm genuinely interested to see if this works - clearly DR is Therapist replacement and Havertz is the Xhaka upgrade (
HHmmmmm. I guess you can play anyone anywhere, but their effectiveness is the big issue. I just don't see Haevertz as a midfielder but let's wait and see how the season pans out for him.
65m for him is steep, especially as Chelsea need to sell (about 100 players).
40m for Madison is ok. I wouldn't say it was a bargain (Leicester did go down and need to sell to balance the books), but I wouldn't say it was a rip off.
105m for Rice............yeah 35m too much, possibly more than 35m. But then you have the young, english and we dont wanna sell/you are rich premiums so....
Kane to Bayern for 80m ish. That will leave a big old gap in Spurs squad.
I still can't get my head round how Arsenal have all this money and Pool haven't a pot to piss in. That's 170m Arsenal have spent this summer, having spent the same last summer. Pool are balking at paying over 35m for players this summer, bar McAllister, and have signed ONE midfielder in 5 yrs. He being McAllister. I dunno if Arsenal are storing up FFP problems or FSG (Pool's owners) are massive massive skinflints but the difference in spending between the two clubs over the last few years is confusing me. Especially given the fact Pool have finished higher every yr bar last yr, they have had 6 CL campaigns to Arsenal's none (I think) and 3 of those campaigns have resulted in a spot in the final. Throw in 2 domestic cup wins last yr, a silly world club cup and a European Super cup and I am struggling to understand Pool's lack of funds.
And, Yes, I know they are still a lot better off than most other clubs in the league/europe. My point is more they have done bloody well on limited funds and yet there still seems to be no money.
Ohh and bad news for WH fans, it looks like Moyesy wants to spend some of the RIce money on...............Harry Maguire. Burn your season tickets now
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2014
- Messages
- 9,032
Mount to Man Utd done, medical pending. £55 million plus £5 million in add ons. I'm just glad we've signed someone in June.
