Premier League thread 26/27
- Thread starter weasel
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2014
- Messages
- 9,246
- Reaction score
- 775
Yes indeed, they've swapped Morgan Rodger's for Him basically. 
PSG want 170m for Barcola, i think that's yoyos so 140 in proper money.
For a bloke who keeps their bench warm…..aye, dead on.
Good luck to Diomande at Real. He has two seasons of professional football to his name and he is off to the world's biggest pressure cooker where fans and Presidents are famed for ******* players under a bus for no reason after one bad performance. Ohh and he's going there with a 100m price tag. That's gonna end well.
Also, Henderson and Wellbeck to Chelsea. I see the thinking, but…..WEIRD!!!!!
For a bloke who keeps their bench warm…..aye, dead on.
Good luck to Diomande at Real. He has two seasons of professional football to his name and he is off to the world's biggest pressure cooker where fans and Presidents are famed for ******* players under a bus for no reason after one bad performance. Ohh and he's going there with a 100m price tag. That's gonna end well.
Also, Henderson and Wellbeck to Chelsea. I see the thinking, but…..WEIRD!!!!!
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2014
- Messages
- 9,246
- Reaction score
- 775
Football has gone mad.
Eddie Howe gone. I can't say I'm surprised. I said he was bang in trouble if they didnt male the CL back in March (point 8 in the link)
https://www.starwarsforum.co.uk/threads/premier-league-25-26-thread.45858/page-10#post-580456
They have sold, Isak, Tonali, Gordon and I assume Gumares wants to go/the board want to sell him and Eddie has realised he's lost most of his decent players (Trippier is away too) . The new boss has a decent CV but does success in Austria and Saudi translate into the PL?
Given the outgoings and the fact their few signings are all kids with no PL experience, I could see them struggling next year.
What a down tirn they have had in 18 months
https://www.starwarsforum.co.uk/threads/premier-league-25-26-thread.45858/page-10#post-580456
They have sold, Isak, Tonali, Gordon and I assume Gumares wants to go/the board want to sell him and Eddie has realised he's lost most of his decent players (Trippier is away too) . The new boss has a decent CV but does success in Austria and Saudi translate into the PL?
Given the outgoings and the fact their few signings are all kids with no PL experience, I could see them struggling next year.
What a down tirn they have had in 18 months
The whole PSR thing is an absolute joke. Newcastle have been pretty hamstrung by it. It makes it impossible for anyone else to break into that top echelon. That's clearly its main purpose- Chelsea and Man City crashed the party and upset the overlords, so the door has been firmly shut behind them to stop it happening again.
And as for Chelsea, getting yet another little tap on the wrist...
And as for Chelsea, getting yet another little tap on the wrist...
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2014
- Messages
- 9,246
- Reaction score
- 775
I agree, albeit I can see both sides.
They claim the aim was to prevent sides "doing a Leeds" .... coming up, spending massively and gambling/assuming they will make the CL every year. That works, right up until the point that you miss the CL and then you implode, like Leeds, cos you have a lot of players on big wages that you can't afford and there's no guarantee anyone else will offer them those wages. Or offer you a price you'll accept, or one you need, for them.
In that respect, I think the FA/PL are right. No one wants to see a side implode and drop down the leagues. Unless it's United. Actually, or Chelsea/City who have been benefited from dodgy spending.
But, I totally understand, and agree that it's not fair that (say) Newcastle. who have Saudi owners, aren't allowed to spend £500m per window. Their owners have the money, if they want to spend it, I can totally understand why they are pissed at PSR saying "actually, you need to sell!"
It's a bit nuanced though. If Newcastle were allowed to spend 500m per window that knocks the whole global football market on it's arse. Suddenly someone, say Atleti, are getting £200m for Julian Alvarez. That then lets them buy four other players, and probably pushed up the price that other clubs have to pay for strikers as the selling club will highlight Alvarez' price as 'the going rate'.
I guess the counter argument there is 'that's what the big clubs have been doing for years.'
There must be some middle ground though. Some way to allow clubs to spend to try and break the glass ceiling but not leaving them exposed to potential bankruptcy if the owners get bored. The problem is you need turkeys to vote for Christmas there. All the PL clubs need to agree, or at least a majority (I think they work on 16 being the magic number) and there are enough clubs who will realise that allowing Newcastle to spend like there's no tomorrow is going to impact their PL chances.
On another note, I saw a stat on the BBC website today, Manchester United Boss Michael Carrick only became the club's boss in May but only ten PL managers have been in post longer than him.
He's had his job two and a bit months and is already the 11th longest serving PL boss!
They claim the aim was to prevent sides "doing a Leeds" .... coming up, spending massively and gambling/assuming they will make the CL every year. That works, right up until the point that you miss the CL and then you implode, like Leeds, cos you have a lot of players on big wages that you can't afford and there's no guarantee anyone else will offer them those wages. Or offer you a price you'll accept, or one you need, for them.
In that respect, I think the FA/PL are right. No one wants to see a side implode and drop down the leagues. Unless it's United. Actually, or Chelsea/City who have been benefited from dodgy spending.
But, I totally understand, and agree that it's not fair that (say) Newcastle. who have Saudi owners, aren't allowed to spend £500m per window. Their owners have the money, if they want to spend it, I can totally understand why they are pissed at PSR saying "actually, you need to sell!"
It's a bit nuanced though. If Newcastle were allowed to spend 500m per window that knocks the whole global football market on it's arse. Suddenly someone, say Atleti, are getting £200m for Julian Alvarez. That then lets them buy four other players, and probably pushed up the price that other clubs have to pay for strikers as the selling club will highlight Alvarez' price as 'the going rate'.
I guess the counter argument there is 'that's what the big clubs have been doing for years.'
There must be some middle ground though. Some way to allow clubs to spend to try and break the glass ceiling but not leaving them exposed to potential bankruptcy if the owners get bored. The problem is you need turkeys to vote for Christmas there. All the PL clubs need to agree, or at least a majority (I think they work on 16 being the magic number) and there are enough clubs who will realise that allowing Newcastle to spend like there's no tomorrow is going to impact their PL chances.
On another note, I saw a stat on the BBC website today, Manchester United Boss Michael Carrick only became the club's boss in May but only ten PL managers have been in post longer than him.
He's had his job two and a bit months and is already the 11th longest serving PL boss!
Keiran McKenna stepped away for personal reasons. I get the impression that's stress/illness or depression etc. NOT a euphemism for "we sacked him, but let's pretend it was something else."
