Twitter Transfer Rumours

[moore_94]

Just now, Babylon said:

He might not want to sign a contract extension. So it’s sell now or be in another Tielemans situation.

We have an option to extend, so wouldn't be in that position for another 2 years

[st albans fox]

Madders won’t earn a lot more moving to spurs but if we are forced to offer him out to raise funds then the writing is on the wall here and he would be nuts not to want to leave 

whilst he performed brilliantly in the second half of the season, we looked unbalanced as a side getting him in the team on the right side. 
 

it could be argued that losing him and bringing in a quality right sided player wouldn’t make us hugely weaker. 

Edited 15 July 2022 by st albans fox

[stu]

Just now, Babylon said:

He might not want to sign a contract extension. So it’s sell now or be in another Tielemans situation.

I thought we had an option to extend for another year?

[JimJams]

Surely that all depends on what figures are involved. "Lowering our valuation" when nobody has a cast iron figure for what we'd previously valued him at makes for a largely empty, redundant statement.

[ClaphamFox]

Just now, JimJams said:

Surely that all depends on what figures are involved. "Lowering our valuation" when nobody has a cast iron figure for what we'd previously valued him at makes for a largely empty, redundant statement.

It's not an empty statement because, whatever the previous valuation was, if we're lowering it that means we're actively trying to sell him, not keep him. That tells us something about the state we're in.

[Babylon]

2 minutes ago, stu said:

I thought we had an option to extend for another year?

People keep saying it, but the club never said that at the time. So where does it come from?

[Pliskin]

I did wonder if we would have to sell a key asset…. Losing Maddison this late in the window os far from ideal, but probably a necessary evil. 
 

It’s clear the club need to clear a few out and rebuild. 

[JimJams]

 

1 minute ago, ClaphamFox said:

It's not an empty statement because, whatever the previous valuation was, if we're lowering it that means we're actively trying to sell him, not keep him. That tells us something about the state we're in.

If we valued him at £200 mill and now only want half that, it doesn't mean we're trying to sell him.

[st albans fox]

We also don’t know what madders plans are re moving on next summer or 2024.  Add to that his hip problems - perhaps we may feel that we are playing a game of Russian roulette keeping him. A bit like drinks who we would have struggled to sell a year after than he left. 

[ClaphamFox]

2 minutes ago, JimJams said:

 

If we valued him at £200 mill and now only want half that, it doesn't mean we're trying to sell him.

Yes it does. The only possible reason that a club would reduce their valuation of a leading player is if they want to sell. What other reason can you think of?

Edited 15 July 2022 by ClaphamFox

[Spiritwalker]

This transfer window gets grimmer by the day.

[Sir Shep]

Finds this thread hot, gets excited, reads Burts message, decides to quickly fvck off again. Ya barstool! 

[Dahnsouff]

Just now, st albans fox said:

We also don’t know what madders plans are re moving on next summer or 2024.  Add to that his hip problems - perhaps we may feel that we are playing a game of Russian roulette keeping him. A bit like drinks who we would have struggled to sell a year after than he left. 

This was first thought. No-one wants a Tielemans scenario next year where he has 1 year left and he won’t sign. His value now will be far higher than next year, especially off the back of a good season.

[Clarkey123]

Whoever thinks we should cash in are absolutely nuts. The guy was mustard towards the back end of the season, arguably all we had to offer creativity wise!

[Dahnsouff]

1 minute ago, ClaphamFox said:

Yes it does. The only possible reason that a club would reduce their valuation of a leading player is if they want to sell. What other reason can you think of?

Because the player asks for it or they won’t sign or consider signing a new contract?

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

5 minutes ago, Babylon said:

People keep saying it, but the club never said that at the time. So where does it come from?

The Club announced he'd stay at the club until at least 2024. That indicates an option. Not that you'll believe it anyway....but plenty of reliable people have said the same.

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

Ah spurs rumours just when we start to discuss a new contract with him.....

[dbtcity]

I wouldn’t have been against this mid season when we shifted away from playing with a number 10 as I didn’t think madders had it in him to play anywhere else… buuut this second half of the season he seemed to really knuckle down and realise he had to up things and from then on in he looked fitter/stronger and much more willing to do the dirty work on the right hand side and he really was superb to the point I feel he could easily dip into that Youri roll and boss the midfield from deeper! Would really hate to see him go but it looks like he may be the only real option to kick start this re build

[st albans fox]

3 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

This was first thought. No-one wants a Tielemans scenario next year where he has 1 year left and he won’t sign. His value now will be far higher than next year, especially off the back of a good season.

Pretty sure that the YT scenario wouldn’t arise until 2024 - unless the year option we have is predicated on being in europe or something like that 

[ClaphamFox]

Just now, Dahnsouff said:

Because the player asks for it or they won’t sign or consider signing a new contract?

So Spurs enquire about Maddison. We quote them a figure they consider too steep. At the same time, we're trying to persuade Maddison to sign a new contract. He says, "I'll only sign a new contract with Leicester if you reduce the valuation you quoted to Spurs."

Yeah, that makes complete sense.

[Dahnsouff]

Just now, st albans fox said:

Pretty sure that the YT scenario wouldn’t arise until 2024 - unless the year option we have is predicated on being in europe or something like that 

Is that definitely true? Seems to be some doubt

[Dahnsouff]

Just now, ClaphamFox said:

So Spurs enquire about Maddison. We quote them a figure they consider too steep. At the same time, we're trying to persuade Maddison to sign a new contract. He says, "I'll only sign a new contract with Leicester if you reduce the valuation you quoted to Spurs."

Yeah, that makes complete sense.

 Thats because you are conflating the two things whereas they could be totally unrelated

[honeybradger]

3 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

The Club announced he'd stay at the club until at least 2024. That indicates an option. Not that you'll believe it anyway....but plenty of reliable people have said the same.

The base contract is until 2024 though, having an option would imply we could keep him until 2025.

[moore_94]

1 minute ago, Dahnsouff said:

Is that definitely true? Seems to be some doubt

Rob Tanner believes so

 

James Maddison (contract expires 2024)

There are options in Maddison’s contract to extend it as the club announced in 2020 that he would be at the club until at least 2024 and, after the season he has just had, they will surely want to extend his time at the club.

 

https://theathletic.com/3387590/2022/06/29/leicester-city-transfer-contracts/

[mozartfox]

Can we just sell YT, Madders, Timmy Chestnuts and Wes, then we will be the richest Club in the Championship next season. Bring it on.