Other Teams Transfers 26/27

[Ryy]

 

[Md9]

[fox_favourite]

1 hour ago, Md9 said:

Good lord that's a lot. 

[Chelmofox]

1 hour ago, Md9 said:

Bloody hell. That’s an insane amount. British and Man City tax on that for sure. Or maybe someone going for a similar amount the other way and an amortisation fiddle?

Edited 6 August by Chelmofox

[FoxesWalk]

8 hours ago, fox_favourite said:

Good lord that's a lot. 

Yep, though if (as expected) with regular game time he displaces Pickford and becomes England keeper it may not look it anymore. It does say “potential” £45m and “up to £45m”, and given his high potential I bet a good chunk of that is add ons based on his potential future development into a top keeper and international. 

[PlymouthFox]

2 hours ago, FoxesWalk said:

Yep, though if (as expected) with regular game time he displaces Pickford and becomes England keeper it may not look it anymore. It does say “potential” £45m and “up to £45m”, and given his high potential I bet a good chunk of that is add ons based on his potential future development into a top keeper and international. 

A few days ago before it went through it was reported on sky as £42m made up of 40 + 2 in add ons, so now it's confirmed as £45m I would assume it's 40 + 5.

[FoxesWalk]

1 minute ago, PlymouthFox said:

A few days ago before it went through it was reported on sky as £42m made up of 40 + 2 in add ons, so now it's confirmed as £45m I would assume it's 40 + 5.

Yeah… in which case that is a lot. I feel like when paying for potential like that a bigger portion of the fee should be add ons. Pickford went for £30m back in the day, so I guess on that scale with transfer fee inflation it’s somehow not that bad? But 35+10 seems like a fairer structure given he’s not overly proven 

[AKCJ]

12 hours ago, fox_favourite said:

Good lord that's a lot. 

It is but he's pretty much guaranteed to be England number 1 for a 10 year stretch.

 

I would say that he's worth that. He's a fantastic keeper.

[fkas]

11 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

It is but he's pretty much guaranteed to be England number 1 for a 10 year stretch.

 

I would say that he's worth that. He's a fantastic keeper.

Maybe worth that to a settled top 10 team looking for a long term option in goal and who are looking at more marginal gains as they have a good squas. Leeds were 14th last year, does a £45m goalkeeper really move them up into top 6 contention? Could they have strengthen more than one area with that £45m?

[AKCJ]

4 minutes ago, fkas said:

Maybe worth that to a settled top 10 team looking for a long term option in goal and who are looking at more marginal gains as they have a good squas. Leeds were 14th last year, does a £45m goalkeeper really move them up into top 6 contention? Could they have strengthen more than one area with that £45m?

It's been a big problem position for Leeds for years. Fixing it was their biggest priority.

[shen]

34 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

It is but he's pretty much guaranteed to be England number 1 for a 10 year stretch.

 

I would say that he's worth that. He's a fantastic keeper.

That's a pretty big assumption. Is it unthinkable that a rival young keeper would emerge in the next few years?

And because you're England #1 doesn't necessarily mean much either. It's been a long time since England had a genuine top class keeper.

[Tommy Fresh]

Missed Yirenkyi going Cov, absolutely sickening

[Long Eaton Fox]

Why would man city sell a goalkeeper who's destined to be England's  number one for the next 10 years if he was that good. He's not that's why.

[coolhandfox]

3 minutes ago, Long Eaton Fox said:

Why would man city sell a goalkeeper who's destined to be England's  number one for the next 10 years if he was that good. He's not that's why.

Because they have one of the best keeper in the world who is only 27 and coming into his prime.

 

 

[Stopharage]

35 minutes ago, Long Eaton Fox said:

Why would man city sell a goalkeeper who's destined to be England's  number one for the next 10 years if he was that good. He's not that's why.

They have a buyback option. 

[Lambert09]

This is simply what Danny ward does to you 

[shen]

9 hours ago, Long Eaton Fox said:

Why would man city sell a goalkeeper who's destined to be England's  number one for the next 10 years if he was that good. He's not that's why.

There could be plenty of reasons. Maybe they treat their players well and don't let them rot on the bench or in the reserves when there is demand for them. It's also good business from a PSR perspective. Cole Palmer is an example that they let great talent go, even if it makes their competition stronger.

[stu]

Did it ever get confirmed if we had a sell on clause?

[coolhandfox]

34 minutes ago, stu said:

Did it ever get confirmed if we had a sell on clause?

I think so, more than likely 10% or 15% on the profit.

 

[AjcW]

1 hour ago, stu said:

Did it ever get confirmed if we had a sell on clause?

Stoke have spent big again this summer and still looked shit at the weekend  

 

Think they signed someone who they had last season for like £5m and he's been loaned out already! Which is why they need Hirst

[Foxes96]

1 hour ago, stu said:

Did it ever get confirmed if we had a sell on clause?

What are we looking at then? Somewhere in the region of £300k - £500k? 

That’ll keep the lights on another couple weeks 

Edited 19 August by Foxes96

[stu]

Yeah, around £400k was my initial thoughts, if the clause exists!

[lcfc_forever]

Percy confirmed that Jordan James is going to Wolves. Good luck to him, hopefully one day he'll return. 

[teblin]

5 minutes ago, lcfc_forever said:

Percy confirmed that Jordan James is going to Wolves. Good luck to him, hopefully one day he'll return. 

Yep, think family live in west midlands too. So a good move for him.

[FrankieADZ]

shame the club didnt just fork out the 4.5/5m for JJ in January

 

good to see we should get a bit of money from the Hirst to Stoke deal too