Tielemans

[murphy]

21 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

Topic was hot

 

Read through and nothing has happened

 

Typical foxestalk

Why add to the heat then?

 

Thread has only moved on one page and we're discussing our biggest hope for the summer.  Transfer talk would be pretty boring if we're only allowed to discuss transfers when they actually happen.  We're here to speculate wildly and bicker, same as every year.  Get on board.

 

[Bluetintedspecs]

40 minutes ago, murphy said:

Why add to the heat then?

 

Thread has only moved on one page and we're discussing our biggest hope for the summer.  Transfer talk would be pretty boring if we're only allowed to discuss transfers when they actually happen.  We're here to speculate wildly and bicker, same as every year.  Get on board.

 

This is luke warm not hot  42 more pages of finance, FM expertise and inane drivel...then its hot!

[ARM1968]

How long was Nicky Maynard’s thread .........

 

Not long enough

[Jacnah]

1 hour ago, murphy said:

Why add to the heat then?

 

Thread has only moved on one page and we're discussing our biggest hope for the summer.  Transfer talk would be pretty boring if we're only allowed to discuss transfers when they actually happen.  We're here to speculate wildly and bicker, same as every year.  Get on board.

 

Excellent point, well made!

[urban.spaceman]

 

The club is doing a lot of bullshit if it sells Tielemans below 50 million.

 

Please stop to do bullshit!!!

[Deeg67]

8 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

 

The club is doing a lot of bullshit if it sells Tielemans below 50 million.

 

 

Lira?

[MPH]

25 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

 

The club is doing a lot of bullshit if it sells Tielemans below 50 million.

 

Please stop to do bullshit!!!

 

 

They would be very idiot

[Chrysalis]

10 hours ago, FIF said:

£40m would make him one of the top 50 highest transfers in world football history. Is he really worth that much?

 

Is it possible that we've decided we can actually get 2 players of similar ability for that sort of money?

 

When you think that Ziyech has a buy-out clause of only 25m and he's certainly got a better pedigree, you have to think that maybe LCFC are being reasonable in saying no to 40m. Having read up on 21yo Vasiliadis I'd be tempted to go for him (only 15m) or Lo Celso the Argentine if Tielemans or Monaco don't want to play ball.

 

I am trying to think of the best way to explain it.

 

Imagine you have a choice of 2 cars.  Both non refundable.

 

One car is £10000 but its guaranteed to have all features you want.

Second car is half the price but the parts are randomised, it may work out for you or it may not, if it doesnt you either have to put up with it, or buy again and hope you get lucky the second time.

 

Which is better value?

[Chrysalis]

6 hours ago, FIF said:

Perhaps you should be the new Leicester head of scouting. Perhaps the LCFC staff paid to do the job don't think he's worth 40m but they have other people that will cost less that they believe are as good or better. Perhaps you don't think so but I guess it isn't your job or your speciality. Please tell me that you are a paid, professional PL team scout.

 

I dont think there is a single scout in the game who gets it right all the time, there is duds and good buys.

 

There is obviously added value when you have already found a player improves your team, I think your point would have been valid if the normal going rate for a player was say 500k and hence it been 80 times that value, so in theory you could roll the dice 80 times to get someone as good, but now days 40 million isnt that much for a player.  We paid 8 million for ulloa a championship striker almost 30 years of age and that was 5 years ago, we have had inflation since then. 

 

So a scout believing someone is as good doesnt really cut it. 

[weller54]

5 hours ago, Chrysalis said:

 

I am trying to think of the best way to explain it.

 

Imagine you have a choice of 2 cars.  Both non refundable.

 

One car is £10000 but its guaranteed to have all features you want.

Second car is half the price but the parts are randomised, it may work out for you or it may not, if it doesnt you either have to put up with it, or buy again and hope you get lucky the second time.

 

Which is better value?

 Bit like signing Carlos Teves then? 

[car1os]

11 hours ago, Bluetintedspecs said:

This is luke warm not hot  42 more pages of finance, FM expertise and inane drivel...then its hot!

You forgot to mention the medicals!

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Chrysalis said:

 

I am trying to think of the best way to explain it.

 

Imagine you have a choice of 2 cars.  Both non refundable.

 

One car is £10000 but its guaranteed to have all features you want.

Second car is half the price but the parts are randomised, it may work out for you or it may not, if it doesnt you either have to put up with it, or buy again and hope you get lucky the second time.

 

Which is better value?

Just because you think something is the case doesn't make it so. 

 

It amazes me how you think you know better than the professionals. They think that Tielemans isn't worth the exorbitant price of £40m ( top 50 player of all time), They believe they can get better for less. 

 

Why would I believe you over them?

 

btw your explanation is non-sensical.

 

All cars can break down. A car's price doesn't represent it's value. Cars don't have randomised parts. Need I go on ?

 

 

6 hours ago, Chrysalis said:

 

I dont think there is a single scout in the game who gets it right all the time, there is duds and good buys.

 

There is obviously added value when you have already found a player improves your team, I think your point would have been valid if the normal going rate for a player was say 500k and hence it been 80 times that value, so in theory you could roll the dice 80 times to get someone as good, but now days 40 million isnt that much for a player.  We paid 8 million for ulloa a championship striker almost 30 years of age and that was 5 years ago, we have had inflation since then. 

 

So a scout believing someone is as good doesnt really cut it. 

You point may be valid if I accept that no other player can improve our team, even with £40m to spend.

 

Your use of Ulloa as an example is also ridiculous.

 

Tielemans wasn't good enough to play in a very poor Monaco team. Silva has even been proven to be a better fit. A more apt comparison is if Celtic offer £40m for Benkovic.

 

I'll stick with the idea that a paid professional at the highest level is more reliable than your opinion. It "cuts it" better for me.

 

Tielemans has played some good games for us, maybe double figures games. We should try to sign him but that doesn't mean we should pay £40m or however much Monaco ask for him.

[Clarkey123]

Getting tired of talking about tielemans now, just table the offer if they say no then get Silva back and move on, we shouldn’t be held to ransom by a club like monaco who had our loanee in the starting line up every week. He’s been a great player for us but it’s not the end of the world if he dosen’t come, we’ve got too much to look forward too.

[Mehrez]

Basically confirmed imo

[Bluetintedspecs]

1 hour ago, car1os said:

You forgot to mention the medicals!

I do apologise  

[murphy]

7 hours ago, Chrysalis said:

 

I am trying to think of the best way to explain it.

 

Imagine you have a choice of 2 cars.  Both non refundable.

 

One car is £10000 but its guaranteed to have all features you want.

Second car is half the price but the parts are randomised, it may work out for you or it may not, if it doesnt you either have to put up with it, or buy again and hope you get lucky the second time.

 

Which is better value?

That's a bit of a clumsy analogy.  Why don't you go with this?

 

Imagine you have a choice between 2 footballers.

 

One costs £40m, has already played a third of a season in our team and has made all the difference to us an attacking threat.  We know what he can do for us.  He has scored or assisted 8 times in 10 games.  He is 22 and is considered one of the best prospects in Europe.  A player that should be out of our league but given his circumstances at Monaco with Jardim we have a chance.  His re sale value will rise.

 

The other player will probably cost around £25 and in all likelihood will not be in the same class.  An unknown quantity and gamble.  Worst case he could turn out to be another Silva or Inler  and we have blown our wad, yet again, on a player with much less resale value and we're stuck with Mendy and Wilf in midfield.

[Dahnsouff]

Too much tunnel vision in this thread!

Seeing as we are playing the "my analogy is bigger than your analogy" game - let me have a go.

Scenario

We need/want to buy 4 players and we have X amount to spend

We also have a guy on loan who has proven (In large part anyway) his quality and value to this team

However this guy costs quite a lot (Most of X), and buying him means we can only get 2 of the 4 required players

But we could get an unproven (to this team) who seems to tick similar boxes to this proven player, and this would allow us to get the 4 players we wanted.

Result

It absolutely is NOT a cut and dried decision.

 

Simples.

[Chrysalis]

1 hour ago, FIF said:

Just because you think something is the case doesn't make it so. 

 

It amazes me how you think you know better than the professionals. They think that Tielemans isn't worth the exorbitant price of £40m ( top 50 player of all time), They believe they can get better for less. 

 

Why would I believe you over them?

 

btw your explanation is non-sensical.

 

All cars can break down. A car's price doesn't represent it's value. Cars don't have randomised parts. Need I go on ?

 

 

You point may be valid if I accept that no other player can improve our team, even with £40m to spend.

 

Your use of Ulloa as an example is also ridiculous.

 

Tielemans wasn't good enough to play in a very poor Monaco team. Silva has even been proven to be a better fit. A more apt comparison is if Celtic offer £40m for Benkovic.

 

I'll stick with the idea that a paid professional at the highest level is more reliable than your opinion. It "cuts it" better for me.

 

Tielemans has played some good games for us, maybe double figures games. We should try to sign him but that doesn't mean we should pay £40m or however much Monaco ask for him.

 

FIF you talking like a football manager player, where you just look at players stats and think you need only find a player with same stats, real life football doesnt work like that, and how the player fits in is as important as technical ability.  Whenever a player is brought into a team, its always a gamble, even if your scout is godly its a trip to the unknown.  This means on basic common sense when you already know how a player improves your team then naturally that player is worth more to you, I am scratching my head as to why you dont understand this.

 

Also if scouts decide the amount one bids for a player I would consider it a flaw in the game they not business men, just talent hunters.

 

Also please point me to the scout who says tielemans is supposedly not worth snapping up at the market value (market value is set by selling club), because make no mistake if we try to get him on the cheap and prolong negotiations someone else will swoop in and nab him.

 

Also your comment about him been low value because he didnt fit into their team is another football manager game way of thinking, its a bit like saying if messi doesnt fit into luton town's team then it must mean hes a crap player.

 

You just have a very very strange way of thinking, and yes I know cars arent sold like that, because they wouldnt manage to sell them.  Doesnt mean I cannot use that as an example tho.

 

So I am waiting for you to post the scouts name who says their valuation is too high and I will check this scouts record to see if he has it right 100% of the time.

[Chrysalis]

41 minutes ago, murphy said:

That's a bit of a clumsy analogy.  Why don't you go with this?

 

Imagine you have a choice between 2 footballers.

 

One costs £40m, has already played a third of a season in our team and has made all the difference to us an attacking threat.  We know what he can do for us.  He has scored or assisted 8 times in 10 games.  He is 22 and is considered one of the best prospects in Europe.  A player that should be out of our league but given his circumstances at Monaco with Jardim we have a chance.  His re sale value will rise.

 

The other player will probably cost around £25 and in all likelihood will not be in the same class.  An unknown quantity and gamble.  Worst case he could turn out to be another Silva or Inler  and we have blown our wad, yet again, on a player with much less resale value and we're stuck with Mendy and Wilf in midfield.

Because many of us already have and people dont understand.

[Rusko187]

9 hours ago, Chrysalis said:

 

I am trying to think of the best way to explain it.

 

Imagine you have a choice of 2 cars.  Both non refundable.

 

One car is £10000 but its guaranteed to have all features you want.

Second car is half the price but the parts are randomised, it may work out for you or it may not, if it doesnt you either have to put up with it, or buy again and hope you get lucky the second time.

 

Which is better value?

I live by the term "buy cheap, pay twice" and think you could use it in this context.

 

- Buy Tielemans, we know it works out here... he's good enough and young enough to make this deal a no brainer. 

- Buy a cheaper player, doesn't work out, we go back to the market and get someone else who is also a gamble. Probably pay more in the end both in wages and fees.

[Nick]

Just now, Rusko187 said:

I live by the term "buy cheap, pay twice" and think you could use it in this context.

 

- Buy Tielemans, we know it works out here... he's good enough and young enough to make this deal a no brainer. 

- Buy a cheaper player, doesn't work out, we go back to the market and get someone else who is also a gamble. Probably pay more in the end both in wages and fees.

Yep, do it once, well.

[murphy]

2 hours ago, FIF said:

Just because you think something is the case doesn't make it so. 

 

It amazes me how you think you know better than the professionals. They think that Tielemans isn't worth the exorbitant price of £40m ( top 50 player of all time), They believe they can get better for less. 

 

Why would I believe you over them?

 

btw your explanation is non-sensical.

 

All cars can break down. A car's price doesn't represent it's value. Cars don't have randomised parts. Need I go on ?

 

 

You point may be valid if I accept that no other player can improve our team, even with £40m to spend.

 

Your use of Ulloa as an example is also ridiculous.

 

Tielemans wasn't good enough to play in a very poor Monaco team. Silva has even been proven to be a better fit. A more apt comparison is if Celtic offer £40m for Benkovic.

 

I'll stick with the idea that a paid professional at the highest level is more reliable than your opinion. It "cuts it" better for me.

 

Tielemans has played some good games for us, maybe double figures games. We should try to sign him but that doesn't mean we should pay £40m or however much Monaco ask for him.

 

I hate this kind of argument and I know that you're better than that FIF.

 

Firstly, no one is asking you to trust them over 'paid professionals'.  No one is asking you to do anything.  We are merely here offering our own very unqualified opinions, the same as you.  It has never stopped me before.  We don't have to be Premier League scouts to have an opinion or to disagree with you. 

 

Secondly, you don't know what our recruitment team our thinking on the matter and shouldn't pretend to.  If you're outlook is just to wait and see what they do come up with and don't offer any opinion that might differ from their's then why bother to enter the transfer debate at all?

 

Thirdly, recent history shows that your faith in qualified professionals might be misplaced.  I could give you a dozen Slimani or Silva shaped examples.  

 

 

 

 

[Buce]

1 hour ago, murphy said:

That's a bit of a clumsy analogy.  Why don't you go with this?

 

Imagine you have a choice between 2 footballers.

 

One costs £40m, has already played a third of a season in our team and has made all the difference to us an attacking threat.  We know what he can do for us.  He has scored or assisted 8 times in 10 games.  He is 22 and is considered one of the best prospects in Europe.  A player that should be out of our league but given his circumstances at Monaco with Jardim we have a chance.  His re sale value will rise.

 

The other player will probably cost around £25 and in all likelihood will not be in the same class.  An unknown quantity and gamble.  Worst case he could turn out to be another Silva or Inler  and we have blown our wad, yet again, on a player with much less resale value and we're stuck with Mendy and Wilf in midfield.

2

 

For £25 I don't think there is any room for doubt.

[Nick]

21 minutes ago, murphy said:

 

I hate this kind of argument and I know that you're better than that FIF.

 

 

He’s really not.

[Babylon]

2 hours ago, FIF said:

Just because you think something is the case doesn't make it so. 

 

It amazes me how you think you know better than the professionals. They think that Tielemans isn't worth the exorbitant price of £40m ( top 50 player of all time), They believe they can get better for less. 

 

Why would I believe you over them?

Better what? Better player or better value? It's vastly more probable that we're not going to spend £40m on someone because we don't actually have £40m to spend on one player, and it's not good value when you need to buy other players as well. Rather than us thinking we can get a better player for less, when we've all clearly seen how good he has been and how much potential he has to improve as well.