Page 43 of 54 FirstFirst ... 33414243444553 ... LastLast
Results 2,101 to 2,150 of 2688

Thread: The January Transfer Window 2019!

  1. #2101

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by angelman View Post
    People keep on saying that. Do you have anything to confirm that?
    Actually i’ve been having a look at this because the issue of funds is brought up so often from both sides of the argument that I wanted to know what the truth actually was. Looking strictly at transfers since we came back to the Prem you have the following figures year-on-year (all figures taken from https://www.transferleague.co.uk/sou...pton-transfers)

    2012-2013 – First season back in the prem – I’m not including costs of players this year as we obviously needed to strengthen to become a Prem quality team and this could skew the figures unfairly. For reference though we spent about £32.7m bringing in the likes of JRod, Clyne, Yoshida and Gaston.

    2013-2014 – Buys = £37.5m, Sales = £1.75m, Net = -£35.75m

    2014-2015 – Buys = £67.9m, Sales = £92.6m, Net = +£24.7m

    2015-2016 – Buys = £39.2m, Sales = £36.5m, Net = -£2.7m

    2016-2017 – Buys = £57.8m, Sales = £65m, Net = +£7.2m

    2017-2018 – Buys = £35.4m, Sales = £89.7m, Net = +£54.3m

    2018-2019 – Buys = £59m, Sales = £22m, Net = -£37m

    Add up those Net figures and you get a total of +£10.75m however for some reason that site hasn’t included Carrillo in their figures so you can take off another £19.2m for him. We also know we are obligated to buy Ings in the summer which takes off another £20m. Subtracting these 2 figures gives a final Net figure of -£28.45m.

    This suggests that in terms of transfer activity we are already in the red. Add on top of that the costs for replacing managers, costs of improved contracts / wages and the money spent on Staplewood and I think it’s fair to say that we’re not exactly swimming in money.

    The increased TV and prize money for being in the premiership obviously helps cover these costs and the shortfall but I don’t think it’s enough to give us some bumper transfer kitty that others seem to think we should have. I don’t believe the owners have / will be putting in more of their own money to cover transfers either.

    What this all means is that we are in the current situation where it appears we need to sell before we can buy (the bloated squad size is also a good reason for this). I’d imagine the biggest reason for this is that we still have a number of players we bought for considerable amounts out on loan that we’ve not recouped any money for in regards to their fees and yet we have still needed to replace them with further signings. Between Boufal, Carrillo, Clasie, Hoedt and now Cedric you’re talking about £61.8m worth of player signings that we’ve got nothing back for yet. Once we’ve sold some / all of these in the summer I’d guess we’d then see the fees we receive for them spent on new players to improve the squad.

  2. #2102

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Diabolus Ex Machina View Post
    Actually i’ve been having a look at this because the issue of funds is brought up so often from both sides of the argument that I wanted to know what the truth actually was. Looking strictly at transfers since we came back to the Prem you have the following figures year-on-year (all figures taken from https://www.transferleague.co.uk/sou...pton-transfers)

    2012-2013 – First season back in the prem – I’m not including costs of players this year as we obviously needed to strengthen to become a Prem quality team and this could skew the figures unfairly. For reference though we spent about £32.7m bringing in the likes of JRod, Clyne, Yoshida and Gaston.

    2013-2014 – Buys = £37.5m, Sales = £1.75m, Net = -£35.75m

    2014-2015 – Buys = £67.9m, Sales = £92.6m, Net = +£24.7m

    2015-2016 – Buys = £39.2m, Sales = £36.5m, Net = -£2.7m

    2016-2017 – Buys = £57.8m, Sales = £65m, Net = +£7.2m

    2017-2018 – Buys = £35.4m, Sales = £89.7m, Net = +£54.3m

    2018-2019 – Buys = £59m, Sales = £22m, Net = -£37m

    Add up those Net figures and you get a total of +£10.75m however for some reason that site hasn’t included Carrillo in their figures so you can take off another £19.2m for him. We also know we are obligated to buy Ings in the summer which takes off another £20m. Subtracting these 2 figures gives a final Net figure of -£28.45m.

    This suggests that in terms of transfer activity we are already in the red. Add on top of that the costs for replacing managers, costs of improved contracts / wages and the money spent on Staplewood and I think it’s fair to say that we’re not exactly swimming in money.

    The increased TV and prize money for being in the premiership obviously helps cover these costs and the shortfall but I don’t think it’s enough to give us some bumper transfer kitty that others seem to think we should have. I don’t believe the owners have / will be putting in more of their own money to cover transfers either.

    What this all means is that we are in the current situation where it appears we need to sell before we can buy (the bloated squad size is also a good reason for this). I’d imagine the biggest reason for this is that we still have a number of players we bought for considerable amounts out on loan that we’ve not recouped any money for in regards to their fees and yet we have still needed to replace them with further signings. Between Boufal, Carrillo, Clasie, Hoedt and now Cedric you’re talking about £61.8m worth of player signings that we’ve got nothing back for yet. Once we’ve sold some / all of these in the summer I’d guess we’d then see the fees we receive for them spent on new players to improve the squad.
    If you use Transfermarkt's figures for those seasons instead, you get a net transfer spend of about -£5.5m as of 18/19 (i.e. not including Ings, as we don't know how the cost of his transfer will be offset by sales during the 19/20 season).

    If all the things we've been told about the way the club is run are true (i.e. no debt, no money taken out by the owner) and there's been no kitty built up over 6 seasons of cost-neutral transfer activity and bumper revenues, then we must've been subject to some quite staggering financial mismanagement.

  3. Default

    I'd guess that we probably had for this season a budget for transfer fees of around 40-50 million and most of that has been used up in purchases in the summer. There might be like £10-12 million left to spend.

    The outs have not really generated any cash yet, they are loans, so we might generate a decent kitty in the summer if those loans turn into permanent transfers. (Gabbiadini, Hoedt, Boufal, Carrillo, Clasie, Cedric, Carillo + maybe Austin) we could generate like £50 - £70 million there, plus clear like £300 - 400k from the wage budget, and might have a planned transfer budget again of about £30 - 40 million to add on top.

    (depending where the funds for Ings is coming from)

    Which could all set it up nicely for the summer but makes the big fees being demanded by clubs now more problematic.

  4. #2104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by verlaine1979 View Post
    If you use Transfermarkt's figures for those seasons instead, you get a net transfer spend of about -£5.5m as of 18/19 (i.e. not including Ings, as we don't know how the cost of his transfer will be offset by sales during the 19/20 season).

    If all the things we've been told about the way the club is run are true (i.e. no debt, no money taken out by the owner) and there's been no kitty built up over 6 seasons of cost-neutral transfer activity and bumper revenues, then we must've been subject to some quite staggering financial mismanagement.
    True. About the only Premier League team you'd take us to be able to outbid in the transfer market is Huddersfield. All others, including Bournemouth, seem to have more money available for transfers than we do. When you consider that we sold van Dijk just last January and we've sold Tadic and Gabbiadini since, that is shocking.

  5. #2105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by verlaine1979 View Post
    If you use Transfermarkt's figures for those seasons instead, you get a net transfer spend of about -£5.5m as of 18/19 (i.e. not including Ings, as we don't know how the cost of his transfer will be offset by sales during the 19/20 season).

    If all the things we've been told about the way the club is run are true (i.e. no debt, no money taken out by the owner) and there's been no kitty built up over 6 seasons of cost-neutral transfer activity and bumper revenues, then we must've been subject to some quite staggering financial mismanagement.
    Has this included agent costs and loyalty bonuses?

  6. #2106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nordic Saint View Post
    True. About the only Premier League team you'd take us to be able to outbid in the transfer market is Huddersfield. All others, including Bournemouth, seem to have more money available for transfers than we do. When you consider that we sold van Dijk just last January and we've sold Tadic and Gabbiadini since, that is shocking.
    What leads you to that conclusion? Just because they've spent more, doesn't mean they can outbid us, it's just that we have different targets. To prove this you need to show where we've both bid for players, and we've pulled out due to not being able to compete financially.

  7. Default

    West Ham close-in on Maxi Gomez:

    West Ham are close to agreeing a deal with Celta Vigo that would see striker Maxi Gomez arrive in the summer. Gomez will remain at Celta Vigo for the rest of the season.

    The compromise means West Ham are expected to pay less than the £43.3m release clause - it is thought the fee will be around £40m.
    (IF they avoid relegation & IF they want either of them, it would give Celta the cash for Boufal & Hoedt).

  8. #2108

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    In the doghouse...again
    Posts
    2,900

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Unbelievable Jeff View Post
    Has this included agent costs and loyalty bonuses?
    If course it doesn't, people always forget that. And wages. And running costs of the club. And tax. Etc.

  9. #2109

    Default

    As a bit of a follow up – my previous post was focused mainly on our incoming transfers versus our outgoing transfers and showing we’ve had a net negative amount (i.e. we’ve spent more than we’ve received on players).

    After a bit more research though this does not necessarily reflect the overall profitability of the club. In fact taking a look at previous accounts and reporting from the guardian about yearly club profits you can see that between the 2013-14 seasons and 2016-17 seasons we consistently made a healthy profit with figures of +£29m, +£15m, +£6m and +£42m following an -£7 million loss in the 2012-13 season (all figures pre-tax, last years accounts won’t be made available until March this year).

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/c...filing-history
    https://www.theguardian.com/football...-guide-2016-17
    https://www.theguardian.com/football...s-club-by-club
    https://www.theguardian.com/football...own-david-conn
    https://www.theguardian.com/football...lub-david-conn

    This would suggest that the club does have some money but that it is not being put back into the playing squad. The clubs mantra that any money from player sales going back into the squad would still technically be true with the caveat that income/profits from other sources is not going back into the squad.

    I suppose the big question then is how this profit is being used and is it to the betterment of the club? At a guess some of it has gone into trying to improving our commercial revenue streams (which if profits are rising would indicate it is working) but you’d like to think if push came to shove that some of this could be used on the squad if we were in danger of relegation.

  10. #2110

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Meon Valley
    Posts
    2,288

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by egg View Post
    If course it doesn't, people always forget that. And wages. And running costs of the club. And tax. Etc.
    And the percentage of the fee that Celtic Bournemouth Lyon and Salzburg got for the players we sold.

  11. #2111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by egg View Post
    If course it doesn't, people always forget that. And wages. And running costs of the club. And tax. Etc.
    It's more that those transfer fees are massively inflated due to it - be more interesting if they actually used the proper transfer figures.

  12. #2112

    Default

    Why can't the board be less evasive and just say at the start of the window don't expect any signings lads we are scraping the barrel....

  13. #2113

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Marseille, France
    Posts
    385

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ally_uk View Post
    Why can't the board be less evasive and just say at the start of the window don't expect any signings lads we are scraping the barrel....
    Krueger pretty much did say that, no? But perhaps in a more Davos friendly parlance

  14. #2114

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Hidden behind enemy lines
    Posts
    11,055

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ally_uk View Post
    Why can't the board be less evasive and just say at the start of the window don't expect any signings lads we are scraping the barrel....
    Because that would be a ridiculous thing to say and wouldn't achieve anything.

  15. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Black Sea Saint View Post
    Krueger pretty much did say that, no? But perhaps in a more Davos friendly parlance
    Did he tell Ralph?

  16. #2116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by egg View Post
    If course it doesn't, people always forget that. And wages. And running costs of the club. And tax. Etc.
    The thing is wages, agent fees and loyalty bonuses are highly likely to correlate directly with the transfer activity of the club. Since our transfer activity is entirely unremarkable compared with our league peers (total amount spent, record signing value etc), I see no reason to assume that these ancillary costs are vastly out of proportion with the rest of the league. In other words, they're pretty much irrelevant when asking the question of why we appear skint in contrast to the clubs around us.

  17. Default

    Nixon: SOUTHAMPTON. Bit of a dilemma. Trying to move out Austin. Meanwhile FOREST and SWANSEA make surprise loan requests for Gallagher.

  18. #2118

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    In the doghouse...again
    Posts
    2,900

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by verlaine1979 View Post
    The thing is wages, agent fees and loyalty bonuses are highly likely to correlate directly with the transfer activity of the club. Since our transfer activity is entirely unremarkable compared with our league peers (total amount spent, record signing value etc), I see no reason to assume that these ancillary costs are vastly out of proportion with the rest of the league. In other words, they're pretty much irrelevant when asking the question of why we appear skint in contrast to the clubs around us.
    Our wage bill is not an 'ancillary cost'. It is massive and represents our biggest expenditure item. Seeking to draw comparisons between our finances and those of our peers is pointless when you are unaware of our finances or theirs. The reality, contrary to popular belief, is that we have spent a shed load of cash on players, agents, wages etc thus its obvious that we are not rolling in cash. Whether other clubs are in the same position is irrelevant.

  19. #2119

    Default

    A mate of mine who is a Blackburn fan is suggesting they may be looking at getting Sam Gallagher back on loan plus Charlie Austin.

    Cant see latter myself

  20. #2120

    Default

    When does the German transfer market close?
    I was hoping RB Leipzig could get someone in after us taking in a striker from them on loan.
    Ive read it somewhere they were interested in a couple of players but failed with some big bids.

  21. #2121

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tajjuk View Post
    I'd guess that we probably had for this season a budget for transfer fees of around 40-50 million and most of that has been used up in purchases in the summer. There might be like £10-12 million left to spend.

    The outs have not really generated any cash yet, they are loans, so we might generate a decent kitty in the summer if those loans turn into permanent transfers. (Gabbiadini, Hoedt, Boufal, Carrillo, Clasie, Cedric, Carillo + maybe Austin) we could generate like £50 - £70 million there, plus clear like £300 - 400k from the wage budget, and might have a planned transfer budget again of about £30 - 40 million to add on top.

    (depending where the funds for Ings is coming from)
    Which could all set it up nicely for the summer but makes the big fees being demanded by clubs now more problematic.
    This is my thought exactly but couldn’t be arsed to type it, so thanks.

    Also think that if RH thinks the squad left is capable of staying up and the already co firmed requirement of a small squad surely that means spending the summer bushet on maybe 2 really decent players sprinkles in with the youth team players to fill the squad.

  22. #2122

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    22,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperSAINT View Post
    West Ham close-in on Maxi Gomez:



    (IF they avoid relegation & IF they want either of them, it would give Celta the cash for Boufal & Hoedt).
    West Ham will keep spending on fees and wages to a degree that would bankrupt us. And they will keep failing to get near the heights of our teams when we were selling our best players. They're a pathetic club and even in this dire season not that far ahead of us.

  23. #2123

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    22,383

    Default

    If Gallagher is loaned out we need to insist he actually starts otherwise its pointless. His career has been held back enough with poor loan moves. He was brilliant at Blackburn in a dire side, but Birmingham were a mess.

    Would be daft to lose him AND Austin without replacement. Personally I'd rather ditch Austin due to wages and inability to run.

  24. #2124

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    22,383

    Default

    Pompey's big signing is...

    Lloyd Isgrove.

    Lol.

  25. #2125

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Hidden behind enemy lines
    Posts
    11,055

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by adriansfc View Post
    If Gallagher is loaned out we need to insist he actually starts otherwise its pointless. His career has been held back enough with poor loan moves. He was brilliant at Blackburn in a dire side, but Birmingham were a mess.

    Would be daft to lose him AND Austin without replacement. Personally I'd rather ditch Austin due to wages and inability to run.
    Why would we need to do that? If he's half as good as many seem to think, he'll be the first name on the team sheet. If he doesn't actually start and barely gets into the team, it pretty much proves he is nowhere near Premier League level and that he just needs to leave.

    I do agree that I'd sooner lose Austin but that's not saying much.

  26. #2126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Diabolus Ex Machina View Post
    As a bit of a follow up – my previous post was focused mainly on our incoming transfers versus our outgoing transfers and showing we’ve had a net negative amount (i.e. we’ve spent more than we’ve received on players).

    After a bit more research though this does not necessarily reflect the overall profitability of the club. In fact taking a look at previous accounts and reporting from the guardian about yearly club profits you can see that between the 2013-14 seasons and 2016-17 seasons we consistently made a healthy profit with figures of +£29m, +£15m, +£6m and +£42m following an -£7 million loss in the 2012-13 season (all figures pre-tax, last years accounts won’t be made available until March this year).

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/c...filing-history
    https://www.theguardian.com/football...-guide-2016-17
    https://www.theguardian.com/football...s-club-by-club
    https://www.theguardian.com/football...own-david-conn
    https://www.theguardian.com/football...lub-david-conn

    This would suggest that the club does have some money but that it is not being put back into the playing squad. The clubs mantra that any money from player sales going back into the squad would still technically be true with the caveat that income/profits from other sources is not going back into the squad.

    I suppose the big question then is how this profit is being used and is it to the betterment of the club? At a guess some of it has gone into trying to improving our commercial revenue streams (which if profits are rising would indicate it is working) but you’d like to think if push came to shove that some of this could be used on the squad if we were in danger of relegation.
    A bigger question is what are the goals of the owners? Kat has already made quarter of a billion out of the club but Gao has yet to make his pile. His major asset when he bought the club was his company, Lander Sports Development. The share price of Lander was at a peak of 21.87 yuan in June, 2016 but it has been falling ever since. At the time he bought the club, in August 2016, it had halved in value to 10.57 yuan. But, since then, in order to raise cash, presumably to pay back the loan he took out to pay Kat, he has been selling off most of his shares cheaply so now the share price is down to just 2.95 yuan and he owns only 24% of Lander. This means, that apart from the football club, he is now only worth a small fraction of what he once was. Depending on how much money he needs for his retirement, it seems likely he'll want to make money for himself out of the club. Of course, he must know, as Kat did, that the club will be worth much more if it stays in the Premier League. At the time he bought the club, it was said that his main reason was to help promote Lander Sports' ambitious football town projects in China but now he no longer owns Lander Sports, you'd have to speculate that his best way to get any return on his investment now would be to sell the club while it's still in the Premier League. The good thing is, he must know it would be a financial disaster for him if the club were relegated before he sold it.

  27. #2127

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Near Brighton
    Posts
    3,284

    Default

    This window is quickly turning into a big disappointment. Initially I was very happy when we started shipping players out, all good from my perspective as it was fringe players on high wages. However, I did actually assume that we would be bring someone in. At this point, if Ings/Redmond get a knock then we're seriously light going forward. That makes me feel pretty uneasy, and the RB slot is a big question mark too.

    As time ticks on I get more concerned.

  28. #2128

    Default

    Still no signings, not good


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  29. #2129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by adriansfc View Post
    Pompey's big signing is...

    Lloyd Isgrove.

    Lol.
    oh they are gonna love him arent they ?

  30. #2130

    Default

    What was the total tv revenues during this period. Hasn’t the last couple of years awarded the bottom side around 100m per year? Investment transfer budgets would usually be set around total picture

  31. #2131

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    22,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post
    Why would we need to do that? If he's half as good as many seem to think, he'll be the first name on the team sheet. If he doesn't actually start and barely gets into the team, it pretty much proves he is nowhere near Premier League level and that he just needs to leave.

    I do agree that I'd sooner lose Austin but that's not saying much.
    Because you don't become decent without playing. If you see potential in a player you want them to play and realise it, not sit on the bench, make the wrong move and go backwards in their career.

    I don't know why people get so annoyed about Gallagher. If you don't rate him, fine. I've watched him a lot and rate him highly.

  32. #2132

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    22,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by saints-cris View Post
    This window is quickly turning into a big disappointment. Initially I was very happy when we started shipping players out, all good from my perspective as it was fringe players on high wages. However, I did actually assume that we would be bring someone in. At this point, if Ings/Redmond get a knock then we're seriously light going forward. That makes me feel pretty uneasy, and the RB slot is a big question mark too.

    As time ticks on I get more concerned.
    When they said we'll only sign people if it's a good long-term deal they meant it.

    All that's happened is we've ruled out the big short term panic signings, and we're trying to reduce a daft wage bill after a couple of years of mismanagement.

    Hoedt, Boufal, Elyousnoussi, Carrillo style signings might be exciting and brighten up a window but too often they've wasted huge sums of money.

  33. #2133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by trousers View Post
    What if RH wasn't happy with Cedric's supposed 'don't really want to be here anymore' attitude and it was affecting the 'all for one and one for all' ethos that RH has instilled in the squad? Might the pros of ditching him not outweigh the pros of keeping him in that scenario?
    Only 15 matches left. I'm sure Cedric wouldn't have kicked up a fuss being told he'd be a backup until the summer, and would be free to leave then.

  34. #2134

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Medals, Trophy Lallana can also earn at Southampton- Andy Durman 16/05/14
    Posts
    29,338
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by saints-cris View Post
    This window is quickly turning into a big disappointment. Initially I was very happy when we started shipping players out, all good from my perspective as it was fringe players on high wages. However, I did actually assume that we would be bring someone in. At this point, if Ings/Redmond get a knock then we're seriously light going forward. That makes me feel pretty uneasy, and the RB slot is a big question mark too.

    As time ticks on I get more concerned.
    Why did you assume it would be any different from the last two Januarys?

  35. #2135

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Camden, London
    Posts
    10,016

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Munster View Post
    Only 15 matches left. I'm sure Cedric wouldn't have kicked up a fuss being told he'd be a backup until the summer, and would be free to leave then.
    Perhaps we're so broke we needed his wages off the payroll. Which is pretty scary. Or perhaps he was just a bit of a moaner behind the scenes. Or maybe the loan is as good as it gets, when we wanted a sale. Ho hum. This is still a pretty underwhelming window. Get the spotters out for players in the crowd tonight?

  36. #2136

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    22,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ally_uk View Post
    Why can't the board be less evasive and just say at the start of the window don't expect any signings lads we are scraping the barrel....
    The manager said we'd only sign people if good long-term options became available. They have been clear. It's good they're not just throwing money around for the sake of it like so many clubs.

    For the first time since Koeman we properly invested in a manager while than poorly judged expensive signings that abysmal managers can confuse.

  37. #2137

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    22,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Munster View Post
    Only 15 matches left. I'm sure Cedric wouldn't have kicked up a fuss being told he'd be a backup until the summer, and would be free to leave then.
    No long-term future here, loan fee from Inter, plus him playing most weeks. Far better chance of him actually leaving on a permanent deal that way.

    This forum has shifted from endless comments about how rubbish Cedric has been to endless comments worrying about coping without him.

  38. #2138

    Default

    In news elsewhere reports in France suggest Everton agreed a fee with PSG for Idrissa Gueye, but Silva is threatening to quit if Everton go through with it.

    https://twitter.com/parisunited6/sta...771529216?s=19

  39. Default

    We don’t buy/loan anyone - "moan moan moan...buy anyone!"
    We buy Carrillo and loan Caceres - "moan moan..waste of money, what’s the point?"

    We get rid of deadwood - "moan moan...will come back to bite us".
    We keep deadwood - "moan moan...ffs clear the deadwood, wasting wage money, taking up squad places".

  40. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bewildered View Post
    In news elsewhere reports in France suggest Everton agreed a fee with PSG for Idrissa Gueye, but Silva is threatening to quit if Everton go through with it.

    https://twitter.com/parisunited6/sta...771529216?s=19

  41. #2141

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    11,508
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OttawaSaint View Post
    We don’t buy/loan anyone - "moan moan moan...buy anyone!"
    We buy Carrillo and loan Caceres - "moan moan..waste of money, what’s the point?"

    We get rid of deadwood - "moan moan...will come back to bite us".
    We keep deadwood - "moan moan...ffs clear the deadwood, wasting wage money, taking up squad places".
    Caceres was not a loan, he was a free agent.

  42. #2142

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Right here, right now
    Posts
    1,433

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OttawaSaint View Post
    We don’t buy/loan anyone - "moan moan moan...buy anyone!"
    We buy Carrillo and loan Caceres - "moan moan..waste of money, what’s the point?"

    We get rid of deadwood - "moan moan...will come back to bite us".
    We keep deadwood - "moan moan...ffs clear the deadwood, wasting wage money, taking up squad places".
    You've been here 12 years and this still surprises you?

  43. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OttawaSaint View Post
    We don’t buy/loan anyone - "moan moan moan...buy anyone!"
    We buy Carrillo and loan Caceres - "moan moan..waste of money, what’s the point?"

    We get rid of deadwood - "moan moan...will come back to bite us".
    We keep deadwood - "moan moan...ffs clear the deadwood, wasting wage money, taking up squad places".
    Cedric, Hoedt, Gabbiadini, Davis were not "deadwood"

  44. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OttawaSaint View Post
    We don’t buy/loan anyone - "moan moan moan...buy anyone!"
    We buy Carrillo and loan Caceres - "moan moan..waste of money, what’s the point?"

    We get rid of deadwood - "moan moan...will come back to bite us".
    We keep deadwood - "moan moan...ffs clear the deadwood, wasting wage money, taking up squad places".
    Would you really describe Cedric as deadwood?

  45. #2145

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    THE NOU CAMP
    Posts
    1,612

    Default

    mark my words, if we lose tonight their will be a major meltdown on here how we have totally screwed up this transfer window letting all thee fringe players go and getting no one in. Praying for a win

  46. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trout-Tickler View Post
    Would you really describe Cedric as deadwood?
    Yep. His crossing is appalling. Wing backs important to RH. Cedric either fannies around waiting for the opposing defense to set themselves or balloons the ball into row Z. Not needed in this team. Sorry.

  47. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Heisenberg View Post
    Cedric, Hoedt, Gabbiadini, Davis were not "deadwood"
    How many games total did that lot play for RH?

    Not in his plans. Not needed.

  48. #2148

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OttawaSaint View Post
    We donít buy/loan anyone - "moan moan moan...buy anyone!"
    We buy Carrillo and loan Caceres - "moan moan..waste of money, whatís the point?"

    We get rid of deadwood - "moan moan...will come back to bite us".
    We keep deadwood - "moan moan...ffs clear the deadwood, wasting wage money, taking up squad places".
    Easy to resolve,have enough football nous at the club not to buy the deadwood in the first place. Saves on money and moans.

  49. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hackedoff View Post
    Easy to resolve,have enough football nous at the club not to buy the deadwood in the first place. Saves on money and moans.
    You underestimate this lot on here. If we won the league they'd be complaining about the type of bus used to do the parade.

  50. #2150

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OttawaSaint View Post
    You underestimate this lot on here. If we won the league they'd be complaining about the type of bus used to do the parade.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •