Dewsbury-Hall

[TommyK]

are people forgetting last year's transfers? Some of the best we've had for years. 

 

A mix of experience and up and comings.

Edited 28 June 2024 by TommyK

[RyCleary]

Watch Rudkin hold out until next week for an extra £5m and we fail psr as a result

[kenny]

2 hours ago, JimJams said:

This is how it's done.

£15mill for Hamer.

Carvalho in on loan.

Possibly get Wilf to sign up.

Money in t'bank lad.

 

 

Jon approves of this approach.

 

 

 

 

 

[Claudio Fannieri]

KDH will always have a place in every LCFC fans heart and memory but let’s be honest if we can get £30-40m and it sorts our PSR issues then so be it, yes he is a loss but we have lost players of the ilk of Lineker,, Smith, McAllister, Mahrez,, Kante, Lennon, Izzett, Madders, Barnes et al and we survived and moved on, same with this, yes it’s a blow but let’s hope we reinvest wisely and kick on again 

[Lesterlad]

9 minutes ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

KDH will always have a place in every LCFC fans heart and memory but let’s be honest if we can get £30-40m and it sorts our PSR issues then so be it, yes he is a loss but we have lost players of the ilk of Lineker,, Smith, McAllister, Mahrez,, Kante, Lennon, Izzett, Madders, Barnes et al and we survived and moved on, same with this, yes it’s a blow but let’s hope we reinvest wisely and kick on again 

What you said worked great until you said reinvest wisely

[DZ-LCFC]

 

[HankMarvin]

39 minutes ago, TommyK said:

are people forgetting last year's transfers? Some of the best we've had for years. 

 

A mix of experience and up and comings.

They looked good in the championship time will tell how they pan out. 

[Pliskin]

Just now, HankMarvin said:

They looked good in the championship time will tell how they pan out. 

They were still good signings….. it proved that we are willing to go back to what we were good at.

[HankMarvin]

15 minutes ago, DZ-LCFC said:

 

Recruitment level, seems a coincidence for Chelsea to be shopping for players that have just played in the championship and prior to that relegated.

[TommyK]

2 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

They looked good in the championship time will tell how they pan out. 

That's what we needed. 

 

But also the ability for them to step up. I'm excited to see how they do 

[Paninistickers]

I'm sure the point has been raised before, but why can't we (don't we) flog Iversen and AN Other to Leuven for 25m and then just take our time keeping our best players and shifting those that are surplus 

[UniFox21]

6 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

Recruitment level, seems a coincidence for Chelsea to be shopping for players that have just played in the championship and prior to that relegated.

Watch us buy a Chelsea academy player or two 

[Qwerty]

53 minutes ago, RyCleary said:

Watch Rudkin hold out until next week for an extra £5m and we fail psr as a result

My understanding is that the whole point of selling KDH is to get enough money to get us out of a financial hole for 23/24 season.  If Chelsea don’t offer enough for us to achieve that, we may as well keep KDH.  So I hope Rudkin does hold out for the right amount of money, because otherwise it’s pointless. 

[lcfc_forever]

1 hour ago, TommyK said:

are people forgetting last year's transfers? Some of the best we've had for years. 

 

A mix of experience and up and comings.

This is why I’m quite excited - looking forward to seeing what Glover does with a decent budget. 

[Phenom]

Im glad we’re not doing the Moder stuff

[hackneyfox]

3 hours ago, Chrysalis said:

Club is developing a problem of selling players brought up the ranks, star players, whilst leaving deadwood in squad to rot rejecting offers, dont like how the club is being run.  It stinks.

If he’d decided to run down his contract and leave for free you’d be moaning.

selling him now is probably the most we’d ever get for him, he’s not that good.

[sylofox]

6 hours ago, Paninistickers said:

I'm sure the point has been raised before, but why can't we (don't we) flog Iversen and AN Other to Leuven for 25m and then just take our time keeping our best players and shifting those that are surplus 

Leuven and Belgium will have it's own set of ffp psr rules.

 

Plus the Belgium fa could refuse to let them register him. Also Top would be enemy No 1 if he forced a deal like that on them.

[Koke]

What is he gonna add to Chelsea? He's not good enough for them .

[Pliskin]

13 minutes ago, Koke said:

What is he gonna add to Chelsea? He's not good enough for them .

Sounds very much like a Chelsea problem. If we get a wedge plus half decent prospect from them, we’re laughing. 

[LinekersLugs]

This is a good move for the player and club 

 

shared plenty in the past about how he was part of a negative grouping that now will be almost totally gone from the club when he leaves 

for me at times last year he was found wanting , I can’t believe Enzo is going after him but it’s a blessing for us as the cash is needed 

wish him well but this will be Drinkwater 2 

[UniFox21]

1 hour ago, Koke said:

What is he gonna add to Chelsea? He's not good enough for them .

Just feels like another FFP work around.

[Dames]

1 hour ago, Koke said:

What is he gonna add to Chelsea? He's not good enough for them .

Especially when him and Gallagher are essentially the exact same player. 

[RyCleary]

9 hours ago, Qwerty said:

My understanding is that the whole point of selling KDH is to get enough money to get us out of a financial hole for 23/24 season.  If Chelsea don’t offer enough for us to achieve that, we may as well keep KDH.  So I hope Rudkin does hold out for the right amount of money, because otherwise it’s pointless. 

That’s literally my point 

[Claudio Fannieri]

I actually think KDH will do well at Chelsea, the 12 months under Enzo means he has a head start over others, he isn’t world class by any stretch and has limitations however he will be a better fit than Gallagher and therefore will improve the team dynamic whilst not necessarily being an elite level player. I think he will be effective for them. 

[Dahnsouff]

1 minute ago, RyCleary said:

That’s literally my point 

You would imagine that some may become understandably furious if we only need £21m to meet FFP 23/24 guidance, and we get £21m! Suppose even then it may become ok if we can offset a lower fee with some sweeteners (p/x, loans, etc)