Maddison

[AllGoneTitsSchlupp]

11 minutes ago, TheFish said:

We're neither as hampered by FFP or free to spend what we like as the Media are portraying. We can definitely afford to sign Maddison and pay his wages without breaking FFP rules though. 

 

We also recently took out a loan so we've plenty of liquid capital sloshing about. (Loan is to get around rules because we're very much the bad guys now.)

my mate is a newcastle fan and tells me you’ve put a self-imposed wage cap at 100k now? not sure how signing maddison would work given he’s already on more than that if that’s true? 

 

he also told me wood is on 100k so not sure how true that is

[st albans fox]

12 minutes ago, TheFish said:

We're neither as hampered by FFP or free to spend what we like as the Media are portraying. We can definitely afford to sign Maddison and pay his wages without breaking FFP rules though. 

 

We also recently took out a loan so we've plenty of liquid capital sloshing about. (Loan is to get around rules because we're very much the bad guys now.)

your wages will accelerate as you buy better players. Your t/over has to catch up quickly to meet the t/o to wage bill ratio.  Whilst Maddison’s wages wouldn’t cause you an immediate issue, it would bring the elephant firmly into the room whereas it currently is sitting outside …….

[SheppyFox]

2 minutes ago, Tanya said:

Brendan may have run his course here but there are always people willing to slag him off just for the sake of it.

If he has ran his course, it is not for the sake of it. 🤔 

[ealingfox]

As if we are only asking for 'closer to 60m' from 40. We are finished.

[MadsEmil]

18 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

As if we are only asking for 'closer to 60m' from 40. We are finished.

Do you still believe in the tooth fairy?

[TheFish]

20 minutes ago, AllGoneTitsSchlupp said:

my mate is a newcastle fan and tells me you’ve put a self-imposed wage cap at 100k now? not sure how signing maddison would work given he’s already on more than that if that’s true? 

 

he also told me wood is on 100k so not sure how true that is

Dunno where your mate has that from. I know we're trying not to disrupt the squad by bringing in a player or two on massive wages, but when Shelvey is on £70-80k pw, you'd have to assume Bruno and Botman are comfortably clear of it. 

 

For someone like Maddison we'd have to pay the going rate. 

 

20 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

your wages will accelerate as you buy better players. Your t/over has to catch up quickly to meet the t/o to wage bill ratio.  Whilst Maddison’s wages wouldn’t cause you an immediate issue, it would bring the elephant firmly into the room whereas it currently is sitting outside …….

That's why we have this bridging loan. The sponsorship deals we're trying to bring are under heavy scrutiny. They have to be 'fair market value', which is code for 'We know you're going to try and buy the league, but don't make it too obvious, eh?'

 

We're already getting £7m a season from Noon (Saudi version of Amazon) for our sleeve sponsorship. We'll no doubt agree a deal with Aramco, or Saudia or whomever at the  end of the season when we can ask for significantly more than we're on now from Fun88. If we could get something in line with West Ham for the shirts, that'd be 'reasonable' and significantly swell the coffers. Plus I know there's a lot of work being done on getting income from corporate partnerships. I'm looking forward to the day I can tell my little lad that I was there when we announced our first official Pillow or Cooking Oil partner. 

 

Consensus up here is that we should offer c£40m + Dubravka, if it's true Schmeichel's off for pastures new?

[JimJams]

As said before, closer to 60 doesn't mean 60. 80 is closer to 60 than 40. 120 is closer to 60 than 40. 1billion is closer to 60 than 40. 45 is closer.. ah shit.

[JimJams]

Just now, TheFish said:

Consensus up here is that we should offer c£40m + Dubravka, if it's true Schmeichel's off for pastures new?

Is Consensus the village idiot?

[ealingfox]

5 minutes ago, MadsEmil said:

Do you still believe in the tooth fairy?

 

No, but I believe that people generally don't brief that they'd accept a lower price than they actually would. It's usually the opposite.

[MadsEmil]

4 minutes ago, TheFish said:

Consensus up here is that we should offer c£40m + Dubravka, if it's true Schmeichel's off for pastures new?

Why not throw in Shelvey as well, just what we need, more deadwood of other clubs

[TheFish]

2 minutes ago, JimJams said:

Is Consensus the village idiot?

If you're having money problems it's a way to get a good proven PL 'keeper in for no fee, smaller wages.

 

Is Schmeichel off then?

[MadsEmil]

Just now, TheFish said:

If you're having money problems it's a way to get a good proven PL 'keeper in for no fee, smaller wages.

 

Is Schmeichel off then?

For the last time, we're not having money problems. We've got squad size problems 

[Muzzy_Larsson]

I may being a bit idealistic and I know players must be sacrificed in order to get the funds required to freshen things up but Maddison and Fofana, the ones with the reported interest would be the 2 I'd most want to keep and that would be hardest to replace imo.

[JimJams]

7 minutes ago, TheFish said:

If you're having money problems it's a way to get a good proven PL 'keeper in for no fee, smaller wages.

 

Is Schmeichel off then?

Dubravka can't be relied on for a full season which is why you've gotten Pope in. Also given what our valuation would likely be of Maddison your number 2 keeper with a spotty fitness record regardless of how anyone judges his ability is somewhat over the top. If the original offer of £40mill was knocked back, just how much value is Dubravka actually adding to the deal? 2mill?

 

Kas is off this summer or next. 

Edited 1 August 2022 by JimJams

[ian__marshall]

11 minutes ago, TheFish said:

Consensus up here is that we should offer c£40m + Dubravka, if it's true Schmeichel's off for pastures new?

To be quite frank with you... that wouldn't even be enough to buy Maddison's LV see through bag 

[JimJams]

6 minutes ago, Muzzy_Larsson said:

I may being a bit idealistic and I know players must be sacrificed in order to get the funds required to freshen things up but Maddison and Fofana, the ones with the reported interest would be the 2 I'd most want to keep and that would be hardest to replace imo.

Which is why we'd have to have their pants down.

[CrazyKopCorner]

36 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

As if we are only asking for 'closer to 60m' from 40. We are finished.

Youri is bound to be gone by 1st Sept and if we sell Maddison for £60m we are indeed finished for this year and the thought of either putting the wind up the Big 6 or being any sort of premier league force will be gone for years I believe 

[Spudulike]

3 minutes ago, Muzzy_Larsson said:

I may being a bit idealistic and I know players must be sacrificed in order to get the funds required to freshen things up but Maddison and Fofana, the ones with the reported interest would be the 2 I'd most want to keep and that would be hardest to replace imo.

Clearly, neither will be going anywhere this season unless some ridiculous, outrageous offer is forthcoming. Every player has a price but these ones are laughable, if true (which I doubt). Are Newcastle owners and fans really that stupid? 

[coolhandfox]

15 minutes ago, TheFish said:

Dunno where your mate has that from. I know we're trying not to disrupt the squad by bringing in a player or two on massive wages, but when Shelvey is on £70-80k pw, you'd have to assume Bruno and Botman are comfortably clear of it. 

 

For someone like Maddison we'd have to pay the going rate. 

 

That's why we have this bridging loan. The sponsorship deals we're trying to bring are under heavy scrutiny. They have to be 'fair market value', which is code for 'We know you're going to try and buy the league, but don't make it too obvious, eh?'

 

We're already getting £7m a season from Noon (Saudi version of Amazon) for our sleeve sponsorship. We'll no doubt agree a deal with Aramco, or Saudia or whomever at the  end of the season when we can ask for significantly more than we're on now from Fun88. If we could get something in line with West Ham for the shirts, that'd be 'reasonable' and significantly swell the coffers. Plus I know there's a lot of work being done on getting income from corporate partnerships. I'm looking forward to the day I can tell my little lad that I was there when we announced our first official Pillow or Cooking Oil partner. 

 

Consensus up here is that we should offer c£40m + Dubravka, if it's true Schmeichel's off for pastures new?

 

Chunk some coop coupons in as well. 

[Sunbury Fox]

17 minutes ago, TheFish said:

Dunno where your mate has that from. I know we're trying not to disrupt the squad by bringing in a player or two on massive wages, but when Shelvey is on £70-80k pw, you'd have to assume Bruno and Botman are comfortably clear of it. 

 

For someone like Maddison we'd have to pay the going rate. 

 

That's why we have this bridging loan. The sponsorship deals we're trying to bring are under heavy scrutiny. They have to be 'fair market value', which is code for 'We know you're going to try and buy the league, but don't make it too obvious, eh?'

 

We're already getting £7m a season from Noon (Saudi version of Amazon) for our sleeve sponsorship. We'll no doubt agree a deal with Aramco, or Saudia or whomever at the  end of the season when we can ask for significantly more than we're on now from Fun88. If we could get something in line with West Ham for the shirts, that'd be 'reasonable' and significantly swell the coffers. Plus I know there's a lot of work being done on getting income from corporate partnerships. I'm looking forward to the day I can tell my little lad that I was there when we announced our first official Pillow or Cooking Oil partner. 

 

Consensus up here is that we should offer c£40m + Dubravka, if it's true Schmeichel's off for pastures new?

At least that's made me chuckle on an otherwise miserable Monday morning. 

[Guest Mee-9]

Don't know why people are saying 'offer this and so on.' Keep him at all costs. 

[st albans fox]

Our fans need to appreciate that others don’t see our players as having the same value as we do. We add in an amount that reflects how important we feel they are to us.

an example would be vestergaard - most on here would be happy to take around £8m for him. Other fans would probably rate him at £10/12m. 
 

V few fans out there will appreciate the £80m for wes. They will think we’re taking the piss and yet we see £80m as cheap! 
 

similarly madders. Few of our fans would be content below £60m and yet opposition supporters wouldn’t understand how we can ask £50m - more likely 40/45m. 
 

but they are players contracted to Lcfc and as such, we set a price where we will do business. 

[Simoken]

Rodgers said: “He’s still very much a player here. Naturally the players are sought after because they are talents. You see his performance, you see how happy he is and he’s not a player we want to sell.

"It’s not for me to put valuations on the players, it’s not my side, but that might just cover three-quarters of his left leg, that price. He’s a top player.”

[st albans fox]

1 minute ago, Simoken said:

Rodgers said: “He’s still very much a player here. Naturally the players are sought after because they are talents. You see his performance, you see how happy he is and he’s not a player we want to sell.

"It’s not for me to put valuations on the players, it’s not my side, but that might just cover three-quarters of his left leg, that price. He’s a top player.”

Basically that says every player has a price and it’s not up to Brendan to decide what that is. 
this isn’t news

BUT, a week ahead of the season beginning, I’d expect him to add that irrespective of transfer values,  it’s too late in the window for a club to be selling a player as important to us as madders. 

[JimJams]

The price just goes up the later (and more desperate) it gets. But a sale will never be off the table.