Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
sylofox

Maguire to Man Utd / Man City

Recommended Posts

Just now, Col city fan said:

If the 65mill is on the table, I doubt even Brendan would turn this down mate.

We have to offload the ‘deadwood’ as you say though. For me I’d bin off Ghezzal, Slim, Nacho, Diabetes, King, James and even Amartey. None of them good enough at this level imo.

I'm not sure it is.

 

There's no decent source as far as I'm aware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, volpeazzurro said:

I think Silva could only raise about 10 in a 40m deal. He may be looking ok there but realistically he's average and towards the arse end of his career.

Didnt we get £12m for Schlupp a few years ago? I'd say Silva is worth more than that?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

 

We have to offload the ‘deadwood’ as you say though. For me I’d bin off Ghezzal, Slim, Nacho, Diabetes, King, James and even Amartey. None of them good enough at this level imo.

 

35 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

Oh and I agree with all the above deadwood names!

 

Not so sure about Amartey ...  he was just stating to look good before his injury ...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Col city fan said:

If the 65mill is on the table, I doubt even Brendan would turn this down mate.

We have to offload the ‘deadwood’ as you say though. For me I’d bin off Ghezzal, Slim, Nacho, Diabetes, King, James and even Amartey. None of them good enough at this level imo.

 

Bin off Amartey as he’s returning from a terrible injury? Whether you rate him or not I don’t think that’s how our club operates these days. This is without mentioning he’s under contract and still recieving treatment/rehab. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Swan Lesta said:

After clearing out the dead wood, we’ll drop £50 - £70 million on new players in this window.

 

The training ground is financed anyway and Brendan will want Youri, a striker and another winger.

 

I don’t reckon Maguire will go anywhere and I doubt Chilwell will either.

Unless we sell an asset I don't see where that money is coming from? We've secured a loan for the infrastructure work, but that loan still needs paying back and our costs have been rising year on year, amounts owed to other clubs for previous transfers going up and up.

 

We've only spent anything close to £40m twice and they were exceptional financial seasons for us above what we expected.

 

2018-2019 - Net Spend £18,80m

2017-2018 - Net Spend £39,95m

2016-2017 - Net Spend £25,55m

2015-2016 - Net Spend £40,45m

2014-2015 - Net Spend £22,86m

 

Unless there anything exceptional happening with the prize money going up next season, then you'd be looking in the £20-£40m range again I'd imagine.

Edited by Babylon
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If another team did come in with a large offer for HM, then taking the money and investing it wisely could be sensible (we *really* need to invest in a striker, or we're going to see Ryan Loft on the bench next season), but saying "no" would also be fine as a statement of LCFC's ambitions.  However, if such an offer were accompanied by HM requesting a transfer and we still said "no" (a la Mahrez) then that would be a mistake as it could put off potential incoming players (including YT) who would not like the prospect of being "trapped" at LCFC when future opportunities arise.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Babylon said:

Unless we sell an asset I don't see where that money is coming from? We've secured a loan for the infrastructure work, but that loan still needs paying back and our costs have been rising year on year, amounts owed to other clubs for previous transfers going up and up.

 

We've only spent anything close to £40m twice and they were exceptional financial seasons for us above what we expected.

 

2018-2019 - Net Spend £18,80m

2017-2018 - Net Spend £39,95m

2016-2017 - Net Spend £25,55m

2015-2016 - Net Spend £40,45m

2014-2015 - Net Spend £22,86m

 

Unless there anything exceptional happening with the prize money going up next season, then you'd be looking in the £20-£40m range again I'd imagine.

The infrastructure loan doesn’t need to be paid off in one season. We spent I reckon half of what we might of done last year, as nobody wanted to give Puel the funds and still have a substantial amount to come back to us when dead wood cleared plus the budget for this summer which Brendan will happily spunk.

 

I don’t think we need to sell a major asset to drop around £50 million. Maybe £70 is a bit dreamy but I think even with FFP there’s maybe more cash to play with than Top would like to let on about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Babylon said:

Unless we sell an asset I don't see where that money is coming from? We've secured a loan for the infrastructure work, but that loan still needs paying back and our costs have been rising year on year, amounts owed to other clubs for previous transfers going up and up.

 

We've only spent anything close to £40m twice and they were exceptional financial seasons for us above what we expected.

 

2018-2019 - Net Spend £18,80m

2017-2018 - Net Spend £39,95m

2016-2017 - Net Spend £25,55m

2015-2016 - Net Spend £40,45m

2014-2015 - Net Spend £22,86m

 

Unless there anything exceptional happening with the prize money going up next season, then you'd be looking in the £20-£40m range again I'd imagine.

I think we'll loan in some players next season, which won't please some of our fans but could easily see Perreira from Utd if we don't get Tielemans and Wilson from Liverpool filling a couple of spots we need and then spend £20m on a new striker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

The infrastructure loan doesn’t need to be paid off in one season.

Aware of that, but as I said it needs to start being paid back. If the training ground is £100m and you want to pay it back in 10 years it's £10m a season minimum, more with interest. Not forgetting the ground expansion project which could easily cost the same. We've secured loans against 2/3's of the Mahrez transfer and two seasons prize money payments. That's a large commitment to have to pay back if the loan facility is the same as those amounts. 

 

27 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

We spent I reckon half of what we might of done last year, as nobody wanted to give Puel the funds and still have a substantial amount to come back to us when dead wood cleared plus the budget for this summer which Brendan will happily spunk.

Based on what? We might have space on the books for wages, but we're not suddenly making huge amounts of money more than we have been to pay those sorts of fees.

 

27 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

I don’t think we need to sell a major asset to drop around £50 million. Maybe £70 is a bit dreamy but I think even with FFP there’s maybe more cash to play with than Top would like to let on about. 

Having looked at the numbers I just don't see it unless we do something clever. We've had £80m prize money from the champions league and not spent that kind of money. We could use up our cash reserves, presuming we already haven't, or we can dip into the loan facility to pay for transfers. But somewhere along the line we're going to have to pay if we did that (ie. selling a player or two next summer and buying cheap replacements).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Aware of that, but as I said it needs to start being paid back. If the training ground is £100m and you want to pay it back in 10 years it's £10m a season minimum, more with interest. Not forgetting the ground expansion project which could easily cost the same. We've secured loans against 2/3's of the Mahrez transfer and two seasons prize money payments. That's a large commitment to have to pay back if the loan facility is the same as those amounts. 

 

Based on what? We might have space on the books for wages, but we're not suddenly making huge amounts of money more than we have been to pay those sorts of fees.

 

Having looked at the numbers I just don't see it unless we do something clever. We've had £80m prize money from the champions league and not spent that kind of money. We could use up our cash reserves, presuming we already haven't, or we can dip into the loan facility to pay for transfers. But somewhere along the line we're going to have to pay if we did that (ie. selling a player or two next summer and buying cheap replacements).

All fair points, guess we’ll just have to wait and see what the Summer brings!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

Aware of that, but as I said it needs to start being paid back. If the training ground is £100m and you want to pay it back in 10 years it's £10m a season minimum, more with interest. Not forgetting the ground expansion project which could easily cost the same. We've secured loans against 2/3's of the Mahrez transfer and two seasons prize money payments. That's a large commitment to have to pay back if the loan facility is the same as those amounts. 

 

Based on what? We might have space on the books for wages, but we're not suddenly making huge amounts of money more than we have been to pay those sorts of fees.

 

Having looked at the numbers I just don't see it unless we do something clever. We've had £80m prize money from the champions league and not spent that kind of money. We could use up our cash reserves, presuming we already haven't, or we can dip into the loan facility to pay for transfers. But somewhere along the line we're going to have to pay if we did that (ie. selling a player or two next summer and buying cheap replacements).

I think the latter point you raise there will be evident if Top, Rudkin and Whelan have been woohed by Rodgers enough to take a few risks financially and loosen the shackles. I would find it surprising as Puel insinuated on a number of occasions that we aren't a bottomless pit but we may well have been keeping it tight with him as he was always seen as a short term manager. I can't see how we won't sell an asset this summer if we want to bring in £50m+ worth of new players, i'll be mildly annoyed if we don't as I think Maguire has hit a ceiling that will cave in on him soon and Chilwell could attract a daft bid by Man City or Arsenal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Babylon said:

Unless we sell an asset I don't see where that money is coming from? We've secured a loan for the infrastructure work, but that loan still needs paying back and our costs have been rising year on year, amounts owed to other clubs for previous transfers going up and up.

 

We've only spent anything close to £40m twice and they were exceptional financial seasons for us above what we expected.

 

2018-2019 - Net Spend £18,80m

2017-2018 - Net Spend £39,95m

2016-2017 - Net Spend £25,55m

2015-2016 - Net Spend £40,45m

2014-2015 - Net Spend £22,86m

 

Unless there anything exceptional happening with the prize money going up next season, then you'd be looking in the £20-£40m range again I'd imagine.

Why does it need to be an Asset?

 

What about all the dead wood players 

slim

silva

mendy

Elder

kaputska

nacho

gray is an option

Ghezzal

Amartery 

 

Plus there should be quite a significant drop in wages 

with the likes of 

Simpson 

fuchs

okazaki 

maybe king too

leaving ontop of any from above which can be offset as millions in less expenditure.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, HankMarvin said:

Why does it need to be an Asset?

 

What about all the dead wood players 

slim

silva

mendy

Elder

kaputska

nacho

gray is an option

Ghezzal

Amartery

Last time I checked those players are all still assets.

 

If we have to sell to spend £50m+, then that's exactly the point I'm making. Without doing so I can't see the money being there.

 

Lets not forget as well, that you'd be lucky to get about £500k for many of them. Then they'd need replacing so you end up diluting the money across more players and we don't spend it all on the areas we really need.

Edited by Babylon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

I think the latter point you raise there will be evident if Top, Rudkin and Whelan have been woohed by Rodgers enough to take a few risks financially and loosen the shackles. I would find it surprising as Puel insinuated on a number of occasions that we aren't a bottomless pit but we may well have been keeping it tight with him as he was always seen as a short term manager. I can't see how we won't sell an asset this summer if we want to bring in £50m+ worth of new players, i'll be mildly annoyed if we don't as I think Maguire has hit a ceiling that will cave in on him soon and Chilwell could attract a daft bid by Man City or Arsenal.

I don't buy the kept the purse strings tight theory, we spent £100m+.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Babylon said:

I don't buy the kept the purse strings tight theory, we spent £100m+.

Mahrez and Musa wiped out a lot of that though, but it was more the noises coming from Puel from October through to January about not being able to compete with the likes of Everton and Wolves etc and the fact we only got Tielemans on loan in January. Would Rodgers have gone all window without making signings if he were here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Mahrez and Musa wiped out a lot of that though, but it was more the noises coming from Puel from October through to January about not being able to compete with the likes of Everton and Wolves etc and the fact we only got Tielemans on loan in January. Would Rodgers have gone all window without making signings if he were here?

It did, but our net spend was about normal for seasons when we've not been expecting exceptional income. £20m.

 

I don't know if Rogers would or not, but no manager will have a blank cheque

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, HankMarvin said:

Why does it need to be an Asset?

 

What about all the dead wood players 

slim

silva

mendy

Elder

kaputska

nacho

gray is an option

Ghezzal

Amartery 

 

Plus there should be quite a significant drop in wages 

with the likes of 

Simpson 

fuchs

okazaki 

maybe king too

leaving ontop of any from above which can be offset as millions in less expenditure.

id hazard a guess that there are a few names on that list we have been trying to get rid of already... simpson, kaputska, Slim, silva. if there are no buyers then there’s no way you can sell them. also you can’t consider ghezzal deadwood and neither mendy- both have played games this season neither can you call Gray deadwood or elder... if we got rid of Fuchs and Okazaki we won’t get a penny for them.. we’d be able to pay a new persons wages but not the fee.  suddenly  the list is looking  empty , asset wise

Edited by MPH
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...