Adrien Silva - Terms Agreed

[Gerard]

1 minute ago, Chrysalis said:

 

Money isnt everything.

 

It seems many on here think its more important to haggle for maximum profits than to build a squad, unreal.

 

Too much time playing football manager?

 

You can't really build a squad in the future when instead of buying Musa for £17m you bought him for £22m, Mendy didn't cost £13m he cost £18m, etc. Also they both wanted another £40k a week but who cares that's only £2m each per year.

 

You're philosophy would bankrupt us eventually. 

[filbertway]

Just set a date and an asking price for key players if they are available. If both aren't met then no deals will take place. It's really not that hard and I hope it's a policy we adopt from now on.

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, inckley fox said:

I understand what you're saying but I'm not sure we can defend the club if the policy has been 'let's see the cash before we splash the cash'. If the margins were that fine then the Drinkwater deal either had to be done earlier or not at all. Or we raise the money elsewhere to cover these eventualities - for example by lowering our asking price for Mendy / Slimani etc. Not spending millions on a back-up keeper who finds himself third choice and so on. 

 

Selling a key player without a replacement lined up is such a red-line for a forward-thinking club that, should FFP be the issue, you have to do everything possible to avoid putting yourself in that position. Including, if necessary, risking a breach of FFP. What we've done is clearly prioritised financial gain over the footballing side.

 

Months ago I posted about an agent who'd been talking about how well-run clubs avoid Deadline Day chaos. He said (i) You speak clearly with all players in May to establish where there are likely to be issues, and how far your club will go to accommodate them, rather than allowing issues to surface in August. (ii) You set very clear internal deadlines and share them first with your staff, and later with any club expressing interest. Then you stick to them. For example, if no bid approaching our valuation has been formally received by Day 1 of the season, then no business will be done.

 

He pointed out that these rules can be broken, but said it's surprising how many supposedly well-run clubs simply don't do these things.

I'm not defending the club, if you read my posts I've clearly stated there is enough ammunition to slate them over (releasing a player before having the replacement sorted). I'm merely combating the point of view that we could and should have just bought Silva no matter what happened with DD.

 

It's quite feasible that we couldn't do that without breaking rules. Want to argue we shouldn't have released DD until it was done... fire away, because they deserve the bashing they will get.

The same people moaning now on that point, are most likely the same ones who would slate Rudkin if we signed a player and then broke FFP / premier league rules.

[somebum]

3 minutes ago, Babylon said:

You just stating something doesn't make it true. Why don't you attempt to educate us all then as to why it's not valid... when quite clearly it's a perfectly valid reason.

You seem to be the only one having difficulty understanding it me ol pal

[Wortho]

Just now, Chrysalis said:

We shouldnt have even been waiting, at that point it was already too late and we should have kept drinkwater.

And we shouldn't have bought Silva or not

[hackneyfox]

3 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

is 15 million a lot in the EPL then?

 

You need to speculate to make money, finish higher up in the league e.g. soon gets you that 15 million back.  Our title winning season made us an extra 47 million in revenue from league placing and tv appearances, not to mention the CL money the year after.

 

This comes to, are you ambitious, or you just want to survive.

 

What we did is not the actions of an ambitious club.

£15m is still a lot, the money you'd happily chuck away potentially comes to a lot more than that.

[Babylon]

Just now, somebum said:

You seem to be the only one having difficulty understanding it me ol pal

I'm still waiting for the explanation as to why FFP and premier league finance rules don't count in this instance. Your continued dodging of actually answering the question is telling.

[Chrysalis]

Funny enough I believe we didnt even haggle on musa, was one of our quick signings.  Likewise with slimani.

 

I get he feeling the owners felt burnt over those signings, and decided to play hard ball, but playing hardball in football is not very prudent unless you literally cannot afford it, some clubs are in that position but we are not.

 

You keep saying the magic word as if to try and hype it up, but we would not go bankrupt from 20 or 30 million, we lost 100 million before promotion and the owners already proved that wouldnt be enough to dissolve the club.

 

Also the club can spend an extra 30 million and still be in the black.

 

Listen to what I aam saying carefully.

 

The problem is you are approaching this argument to try and just prove yourself right, everything else is moot. "na na na" with ears covered.

 

I will explain again, its basic business, you spend money to make money.

 

In the EPL, each placing is worth 2million.

 

http://www.totalsportek.com/money/premier-league-prize-money/

 

Quote

1. 25% Merit based: divided according to final league position in 2016-17 season (Thats around £2 million for 20th place team rising higher by £2m for every position all the way to £24 million for the champiosn)

Second this 20-30mill losses, is all assumptions.

 

I said I would accept a lower fee if it meant buying time.  If I found the lower fee too hard to accept, I simply wouldnt sell the player.

We know shiva initial asking price was lower than we paid, so again this so called 20-30 mill loss is not that amount.

 

What happens if we get relegated? 20million suddenly seems a small figure compared to cost of relegation, we too good to go down without silva and drinkwater? dont know.

Sunderland and villa all those seasons were prudent, just like you guys asked, they now struggling to get top half of championship.  Its a bit like the argument where relegation doesnt matter cause can just bounce back up.

 

I am giving up trying to explain this tho, you are set in stone that money means more than strengthening the team, and seem to think we dont have the financial muscle to absorb what it would have took to get the deal done in a timely manner.

Also what about cutting losses? I expect we may have had bids of 5 million or so for musa and mendy but likely we considered that unacceptable, musa is still on our wage bill and probably will be of no use to us, mendy out on loan.  Its also bad to keep players just for the sake of not wanting to be ripped off if they are to play no part in the team.

[EastAnglianFox]

Reports over social media now saying it was Sporting who were late in sending the papers over to us which left us sod all time to get it done before 12.

[Gerard]

3 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

is 15 million a lot in the EPL then?

 

You need to speculate to make money, finish higher up in the league e.g. soon gets you that 15 million back.  Our title winning season made us an extra 47 million in revenue from league placing and tv appearances, not to mention the CL money the year after.

 

This comes to, are you ambitious, or you just want to survive.

 

What we did is not the actions of an ambitious club.

 

If we win the appeal then we'll be £15m richer than if we done it your way.

 

Our transfer budget is about £20m net per season for us to break even and you've just pissed 75% of next season's away on a whim.

[shen]

14 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Are we paying his wages? I'd imagine any deal would be subject to international clearance.

The deal is OK, but the registration (which seemingly is needed for Silva to step onto a pitch) isn't. That's my understanding of it anyway.

In principle, I don't believe there is any objection to a club buying a player outside the transfer windows, but they're not allowed to train or play without a registration?

 

5 minutes ago, SCP4Ever said:

Here in Portugal there is that rule, that you cannot play for more than 2 clubs per season. I don't know if that's true elsewhere, but if it is, and LCFC want to loan him so he keeps playing, we are the better (only?) option.

I still think it's better for him and LCFC for him to stay and train with his new coach and team mates, maybe play in a few friendlies.

That's a FIFA rule which was introduced not too long ago. I believe Hatem Ben Arfa was in trouble a few years ago when he'd played for Newcastle and Hull and subsequently signed for Nice. He was ineligible as a result.

 

[SCP1906]

1 minute ago, Dan LCFC said:

To be honest it doesn't help when there's another Sporting (Gijon) that we signed a player off too.

 

It's similar to people calling Inter Milan that name.

Inter Milan really is F. C. Internazionale Milano. Sporting Gijon really is Real Sporting de Gijon.

Sporting Clube de Portugal only wants to be called by his name.

 

Sporting have Portugal in his name because Club founder [in 1906] wanted Sporting to be as big as the big european Clubs - not only in football but in all kind of sports.

So Sporting is ' Sporting de Portugal' because it's motto is representing Portugal across borders.

 

And indeed Sporting CP is one the biggest european sports Club, considering all sports. 

Only Barcelona and Real Madrid surpasses Sporting CP in european titles, considering all kind of sports. 

 

 

1 minute ago, Ian Nacho said:

Isn't Leicester Forest a rugby club?  

I didn't knew that.

 

 

 

 

 

[Wortho]

I can't see that the club has done much wrong this time. DD wanted to go and we wanted Silva, it was only administration that held it up.

[Manwell Pablo]

14 Seconds eh, Rudkins fault. Curse you Rudkin

[Stevosevic]

Sky saying he won't actually be our player

[hackneyfox]

3 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

Funny enough I believe we didnt even haggle on musa, was one of our quick signings.  Likewise with slimani.

 

You keep saying the magic word as if to try and hype it up, but we would not go bankrupt from 20 or 30 million, we lost 100 million before promotion and the owners already proved that wouldnt be enough to dissolve the club.

 

You don't know whether we haggled or not, you're just making this up.

20 or 30m per transfer window soon adds up, we'd be 100m in debt within 2 seasons (that's without salaries).

 

Again, it was a one off 100m clearance of debt, it won't happen again.

[katieakita]

8 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

So if we pay more, FIFA will look the other way?

 

So, like a bribe then?

Only asking a question of someone who seems to have a real downer with the club. There are penalty clauses and penalty clauses, I will break it down to figures most can probably grasp, your buying a house for £220,000 and need a couple of hours to sort the money and paperwork out. You miss the deadline by 14 seconds all the money is in as agreed all the paper work is correct but because you were allegedly 14 seconds late everything can go through as long as you pay an extra £66,000 to who land registry? Someone try to justify FIFA's position and we are talking £6.6 million if these claims are correct.

[Kasey Keller]

[Babylon]

Just now, hackneyfox said:

You don't know whether we haggled or not, you're just making this up.

20 or 30m per transfer window soon adds up, we'd be 100m in debt within 2 seasons (that's without salaries).

 

Again, it was a one off 100m clearance of debt, it won't happen again.

Pretty sure we refused to pay the release clause / asking price of £20m+ for Musa in the January didn't we, then went back for him in the summer and got him for less. Clear to me if I'm remembering correctly that we weren't just happy to pay anything.

[Babylon]

4 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

Sky saying he won't actually be our player

Hmmm... only if we've stipulated in the contract that it's dependent on getting clearance. OR, if we decide to challenge the contract with them.

[SCP4Ever]

13 minutes ago, 5waller5 said:

 

Let's say this "not selling a player on deadline day at any price" caught on .... and all clubs thought it was a good idea .... You'd just have a new deadline day 24 hours earlier!!!

Yeah. How dare those "bastard" clubs, actually wanting to be paid what they consider is fair value for a player?

 

7 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Just set a date and an asking price for key players if they are available. If both aren't met then no deals will take place. It's really not that hard and I hope it's a policy we adopt from now on.

Nice sentiment, but sometimes, the offer is too good to refuse, no matter when it's submitted. Besides, that doesn't prevent clubs triggering the release clause in the contracts.

 

4 minutes ago, shen said:

The deal is OK, but the registration (which seemingly is needed for Silva to step onto a pitch) isn't. That's my understanding of it anyway.

In principle, I don't believe there is any objection to a club buying a player outside the transfer windows, but they're not allowed to train or play without a registration?

 

That's a FIFA rule which was introduced not too long ago. I believe Hatem Ben Arfa was in trouble a few years ago when he'd played for Newcastle and Hull and subsequently signed for Nice. He was ineligible as a result.

 

I stand informed, then. Cheers.

 

3 minutes ago, SCP1906 said:

Inter Milan really is F. C. Internazionale Milano. Sporting Gijon really is Real Sporting de Gijon.

Sporting Clube de Portugal only wants to be called by his name.

 

Sporting have Portugal in his name because Club founder [in 1906] wanted Sporting to be as big as the big european Clubs - not only in football but in all kind of sports.

So Sporting is ' Sporting de Portugal' because it's motto is representing Portugal across borders.

 

And indeed Sporting CP is one the biggest european sports Club, considering all sports. 

Only Barcelona and Real Madrid surpasses Sporting CP in european titles, considering all kind of sports. 

 

The reasoning behind the name was that the founders didn't want the club to be bound by the regionalisms, they wanted a club that, while headquartered in Lisbon, would be national in scope.

Also, we have more european trophies than Real Madrid, only Barcelona have more.

[Fox 4 Life]

The fact Sporting have previous experience with this scenario tells me they are a little more to blame than we have been led to believe. Either way it's a ****ing shambles.

[Chrysalis]

4 minutes ago, hackneyfox said:

You don't know whether we haggled or not, you're just making this up.

20 or 30m per transfer window soon adds up, we'd be 100m in debt within 2 seasons (that's without salaries).

 

Again, it was a one off 100m clearance of debt, it won't happen again.

I am not the one saying we "will" go bankrupt"

The 20 million "would" be losses.

 

Neither of the above two are true.

 

Slimani and musa were deals done fairly quickly, clearly they were done in a different manner.  For a start both transfers we didnt sell a player first to make way for them, I dont need to speculate there, I just look at the ins and outs of that summer.

 

Again you posted without thinking, slow down, think boy.

 

If you making 36 million on profit for a season, then how does spending 20 million bankrupt you?

[Gerard]

2 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Hmmm... only if we've stipulated in the contract that it's dependent on getting clearance. OR, if we decide to challenge the contract with them.

 

You would certainly think that there would be a clause pending on international clearance. It seems crazy not to have stipulations.

[Fox Ulike]

6 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Just set a date and an asking price for key players if they are available. If both aren't met then no deals will take place. It's really not that hard and I hope it's a policy we adopt from now on.

 

Perfect. Now all we need is a time machine to take us back to 10pm last Thursday and we're back in business.