KelvinsRightGlove

Same as any other asset. Whatever a buyer is willing to pay.

Blackpool was 2 levels up when we were L1. He then went to QPR in the Prem when we had just been promoted to the Championship.

I liked Pele Not really sure why. Probably just for the name.

The thing is, I don't really blame them. They didn't break any rules. So really, are they the problem, or the system?

We were relatively late to bring it in, compared to other countries at least. Wasn't it around 03/04 they started to allow it here?

It's an interesting topic, the loan system. I do agree it's a bit crazy, not a huge fan of it in the same league. But think it's value for smaller clubs, and getting experience for nippers is great. That said, I wouldn't have minded if we got Moses - mostly as I think he is a decent player. Would obviously much rather it was a permanent deal though. Also don't get those that think loans moves are seen as cheap alternatives. Lukaku will most likely be costing in the region of £6m for the season - with no chance of recouping that (unless he alone propels them to a position they would not have achieved otherwise). When people say "I would rather have loaned x or y than spent £12m on player z", it seems a bit daft to me. It's as if that fee for signing someone only applies to the first year. For example Big Vic, signed for £12.5(ish) on a 4 year deal. So really that is about £3m per season - which makes him of a similar value to what Liverpool & Everton will be paying for Moses & Lukaku. It's a tricky one though. Many European leagues have been doing it for a while, without too much fuss. Some of the deals that go on in Italy, with co-ownership and loans I just find bizarre. If I was in charge I would scrap it, it's just silly and definitely favours the bigger teams. Another good example of your point re Chelsea was Manchester United a few years ago. They had either 2 or 3 keepers out on loan at Premiership clubs (think it was Howard & Foster - possibly Carroll too?), whilst not direct rivals to them, it still made opponents weaker when it came to the games against Utd.

Don't know for sure, but would imagine that they will train and play with the dev squad. Can't imagine people would want to take players totally out of shape.

The gf loves it. I have a fair few mates that are mad for it. Haven't actually watched it myself. Heard good things though. Sorry, this probs isn't entirely helpful.

If you are going to be a pedant about it, I never said 3 made bids either.

Oh silly me, must have made it up. Could have sworn you said it somewhere. Oh yeah, right here on this thread.

I don't think he is great, but the few Everton fans I know say he was one of their better performers last year, and preferred him in the first XI to Jelavic, who just never looked like scoring. Still, he is doing his best to reassemble that relegated squad.

Don't question GS, he is ITK. If he says it, it is true. Like the 3 premiership clubs coming in for Billy, and our bid for Remy.

Sorry, I disagree. Martinez got a team relegated last season, and has now done his best to reassemble that squad on Merseyside. Whilst selling one of their best players, and in Victor one of their better performers from last season.

In fairness, most of (clearly not all) the kids that come through have a pretty good attitude. Going back quite a way. Lallana, surman, Walcott, bale, oxo, JWP, Shaw...

Ok fair point. I think the league is unrealistic. I think Utd, City, Chelsea, Spurs, Arsenal & Liverpool at the very least will finish above them. Not forgetting He is also unable to play against Chelsea too. Cups are a bit of a lottery, it's why we love them, so maybe, maybe not. I think the overall point stands true though. Whilst there is an element of risk and gamble in all transfers, i think there is a far greater chance of not losing money through investing in players you own outright, rather than relying on others assets. All this is also based on a slightly unfair comparison, when you consider that when we sign someone like Bic Vic for £12.5m, it is for 4 seasons or around £3m per season - getting closer to the cost of what Everton have paid for Lukaku for the season. I don't know the ins and outs of their contracts, but I wouldn't have thought the two are a million miles apart in wages.

The flying of agent/player could be anyone really, as the article suggests. May very well have happened in either/both of the mentioned transfers. But could just have easily been anyone! Also, seeing as how much the bit about the agent sounds like Big Vic, I doubt they would make the whole article about us. I mean, the beeb hate us.

It's not just that though is it. Everton have paid a fee - probably several £m to have Lukaku on loan for the season. On top of this they are also paying his wages - most likely another few £m over the course of the season. I'm confident he will do well for them - he is a very good player. Thing is, at the end of the season he will go back to Chelsea and they will have nothing to show for that outlay. In the case of Wanyama, we own the player. Therefore if he does well for us, and other clubs are interested we stand in a good position to recoup what we paid for him or even turn a profit. Money which can then be used to reinvest in the squad, purchasing their replacement. When Lukaku goes back to Chelsea, Everton will have lost a very good player, who may even turn out to be a key player for them - with no remuneration whatsoever. Basically, that is an unsustainable model. In the long run, that is a more costly tactic to take.

I feel quite confident in saying that if we were to have said on July 1st: "Right, both players (puncheon & gaston) are for sale, 1 day auction, highest bidder wins" (granted not remotely likely to happen, but go with it for a second) That Gaston would receive both a higher offer than for Puncheon, and would end up at a team that finishes higher in the league - if even in the same league.

I'm still waiting for Glasgow to share his source on this 3 Premier League bids for Sharp. I'm not sure which I find harder to believe, this claim - or the part that we were unwilling to sell to Premiership rivals - considering we just let Puncheon move on loan to Crystal Palace. Considering we actually used Puncheon last year - he would be considered a bigger threat? Find the above quote much more believable, and matches the snippets I heard elsewhere. I've heard from a couple of Doncaster fans (my family are from there) that there was definitely interest from their end, but ultimately there were financial hurdles that could not be overcome.

Did they ever! I was so excited in the summer of '03, then we signed Neil McCann for £1.5m.

Agree with both of these points. He was ok last season, had some good games and went missing in some. Again, he is a young player, playing a mid-table (being polite about last season if anything). If he was consistently the best player on the pitch, taking on the whole team, scoring 5, and making 7 in each game he would be playing for the Utd/Barca/Real's of this world. It beggars belief that the same people that say it is impossible for Saints to break into the top 4/6/8 are the ones that demand all our players have great games every week - and that the team play great every week - i.e. do what the title winners do.

Frankly, once a player is on the pitch, the price they cost is irrelevant. It's what they do there that matters. Should we only sign players for £1m, so that we have low expectations for them all, and they can't disappoint and can look good only in comparison to this? We took this sort of approach in the early 00's - and look what happened there.

Do goals and assists count less from set pieces?

Goals & Assits combined Gaston provided more in less games.

Where did you get 39? I can only see 30 in the places I have looked. He was top scorer with 10 goals. That is still hardly setting the league alight. Serious question - if it was not Billy Sharp - and we were talking about a 27 year old striker that had just scored 10 League goals last season, would people still be clamouring for his inclusion in the squad in the same way?