Transfer Tweets - Summer 2017 | Keep it on topic
- Thread starter Damien
- Start date
They'll move 10 points clear at the top of that list by time the window closes.
Fellaini for £10M is excellent value imo.
You can't be serious. Not only it is there to prevent the build-up of unsustainable debt mainly through reckless spending, it adds guard rails to maintain a competitive balance throughout the sport, as not every club can be bankrolled with trillions of family fortune.
So you'd be happy if Jeff Bezos got bored running Amazon, came in and bought Liverpool then proceeded to spend £2billion in one transfer window? Then again in the next window if they weren't top of the league?
FFP is to ensure clubs don't spend more than they have so we don't have clubs going bankrupt, it's not stupid at all.
Can't bring myself to accept this. If a club can drag themselves up and earn what they have, that's great. If they get some help then that's ok if it keeps things competitive, but if one or two clubs are just handed near limitless funds then it just ruins the fun and true competitive nature of the sport for me.
I mean, you could do that in any sport and I'd feel the same way. Where is the point of a sport if it becomes influenced to a major extent by billionaires who want to play their own games? I genuinely don't really count Man City's title wins as being title wins for them. I consider it to be Mansour wins because he could have literally taken any soulless club and done exactly the same thing. They ceased being Man City after they'd changed basically everything about the club and personnel.
If there were some ways to ensure he'd have to use his personal income/properties as securities against liverpool's debt, sure. Why not.
Before you reply maybe you should understand the context I was replying too. Did I say that we should not spend? I was only referring to the point that the owners might be a bit cautious not tight with the money. Goodness me.
He's so rich he could pay the release clause for every Barcelona and real Madrid player. You think that'd be good for football do you?
I don't care. If he has that money and is willing to spend it, good for him, and his club. I don't particularly care for competitive balance. It doesn't exist anyways and never did. And i'd watch every liverpool game if they put a team of modric-kroos-pogba-messi-neymar-cristiano on the pitch
We're so rich we could buy every single West Ham player. Is that good for football?
The implication of your statement is that United should donate a portion of their revenue with poorer teams as that would be good for football.
might actually grab the bubbly if this Fellaini thing materialises
There is definitely something in this.
I don't think you'll be able to see much from inside a bin.
Nah. Mahrez is a winger with goals, great dribbler
But we couldn't buy every West ham player so the foundation of your argument is bollocks.
Of course all players contributed. Still, he scored some important goals for us in arguably the most important games of the season. He was excellent towards the final stages of the EL. Check his stats in the EL final.
Just because he is not Iniesta, Pirlo or Scholes doesn't mean he has to get all the hate, especially from our fans.
It has been a long time since I saw a tweet about a player close to us.
Hope Juve aren't briefing this to Italian journalists like they did with Fabinho.
Clubs don't have to follow it.
Malachians was right then.
I'm sorry, i don't get the joke
So matic it is then. Mourinho likes to weaken rivals.
Happy with Matic he's far better than Fellaini. Much needed midfield reinforcement, I think we could do with another CM on top of him as well.
Of course we could. We've spent £500m in 4 years and their best player of the last 10 years left for around £25m.
We could comfortably buy their entire team.
That implication does not follow at all, although we kind of are already with the UK TV deal. We have states backing football teams and playing a game of international keeping up with the Jonses. This is way beyond some teams having a bit more cash than others.
Also, we really couldn't buy the whole West Ham team for a whole host of reasons.
I think I appreciated what your reply was meant to be quite well. If i were in the room with the Glazers and one of them raised the same doubts you had, then this would be my reply. If it's a harsh tone that's because this truth should sting the owners. They miscalculated how quickly the money would flow into the sport w other teams in under investing before SAF retired. They screwed up monumentally hiring DM. Now They are on the cusp of making or breaking this business in the short term and need a shake up.
I say short term because we are fortunate to have become the most successful club in England during a golden period of globalization. It's allowed us to build a worldwide fanbase larger than the clubs I mentioned as warning. This will extend our period of grace but shouldn't be seen as an excuse to cut corners.
And there it is. The obligatory SS breaking news.
How come it seems like a club of our size can only work on one deal at a time?
Lindelof - time passes - Lukaku - time passes - Matic (?) - time passes?
Can't we multi task??
That's just how the press report it. It's common knowledge we've been working on Matic and Perisic at the same time.
It's to get us used to how slow the team is going to be again this season.
How many clubs have gone bankrupt? Yes, some have suffered from over spending, but not that many.
If someone has deep pockets they should be allowed to use them as they want. Just because you spend the most money doesn't mean you will have the best team.
At the risk of detailing the thread I will leave it there.
I suspect Matic wasn't our first choice and we were waiting for something else to materialise that didn't happen/looks unlikely so we pulled the trigger on this one.
As I found it so irrelevant that I thought perhaps you were joking and now you're blaming me for making an argument out of nothing.
No quote on this, just that he's picked the #10 himself when it's been up to him and no one else, in the Swedish national team, for example – hence why I brought it up, even though it's not a club, just to point out his previous choices.
And by the way, he couldn't exactly oust the players wearing #10 at two of those four clubs. If my memory serves me right, Del Piero and Messi were wearing it upon Zlatan's arrival at Juve and Barcelona, respectively.
http://m.bbc.com/sport/football/39098913
"Then Jose called. When he called, it was basically: 'Tell me what number I should wear.' My kids are satisfied with what I am doing, but this time I am the boss, not them."
= Mourinho's decision.
With all things in life, you don't take something that belongs to someone else and pass it on. Even though I can see the reasoning behind it, as Zlatan is an established senior player and a star at that, I expect a more reasonable decision from a 50+ year old adult.
Unprofessional and disrespectful towards Martial. At the time when Mourinho arrived, Martial was basically our go-to-guy. So, as #9 was occupied, I just don't understand why he didn't give, say, the vacant #11 to Zlatan instead of complicating this.
Yeah, could well be I suppose. Fabinho, Naingollen, Veratti etc - but I'm sure Matic is just as good...