Troy Deeney

[AKCJ]

One point I read the other day.

 

 

Due to the increase in television money. An 8m pound signing is effectively the same as a 5m signing from 2013.

[indierich06]

One point I read the other day.

 

 

Due to the increase in television money. An 8m pound signing is effectively the same as a 5m signing from 2013.

 

Sounds about right TBH. I think because we've been caught in the first transfer window since the change, we're going to pay an inflated price for whoever we sign. Clubs and agents are all very aware that there's significantly more money floating around now.

[5waller5]

One point I read the other day.

 

 

Due to the increase in television money. An 8m pound signing is effectively the same as a 5m signing from 2013.

 

 

 

Yes  .... and going forward there will be yet more money ... so a 4 years contract for that player will seem like great value in 2 years time!!

[Stan]

A lot of heat, but no light.

[johnny the fox]

A lot of heat, but no light.

you sound like my mrs..no wonder Iv'e lost confidence..

[jayfox26]

Jesus ****ing Christ, it's like listening to a group of people who haven't the foggiest what happens in football.

Ulloa cost £8m+add ons. He cost that much because:

1 - NP really wanted him having identified him as a player having all the attributes required to play a different role to what we have (bearing in mind it's patently obvious that Wood has been deemed surplus to requirements having not really shone since his first ten games here).

2- Ulloa has experience within English football and NP considers the ability to step up to Prem level.

3- the Prem is awash with money and any signing costs more than they should

4 - The Championship clubs have identified that the only way to get money from the latest TV Prem deal to filter down is to charge ridiculous prices. It's actually good for English football as a whole that they do this to get money out of the Prem. Bearing in mind the new TV deals are worth soooooo much more than ever before, and therefore Prem clubs have much much increased incomes, it's natural supply and demand that prices to those clubs will increase. It's basic economics. If everybody in the country erned £20k more then every item in Asda would cost more, that's the way money works.

5- Yes, you can buy cheaper abroad but you run into potential problems - first, there are a plethora of crap to average players that are marketed as cheaper versions of English players (think the likes of the Hondurus crowd that Bruce brought to the Prem). These are often fairly limited players potential wise. Secondly you have potential stars aboad - think Wolfswinkel, Alfonso, Veron etc etc etc - with no evidence tht they can play to the style or speed of English football there are huge risks in spending big on foreign players that aren't quite at the real top level (I realise Veron was or should have been)- there re so many examples of this it's unreal that people question why we don't spend £10m on x foerign player. I mean Slimani ffs - who can say they know anything about him yet many would happily see us spend on him but not Deeney who has proven he can play in England and score plenty of goals and who has looked to have some really useful attributes for the Prem - strength, a turn of speed over a short distance, power, good shot, knows where the goal is etc. People use players they hadn't heard of as examples of potential starts - Viera, Anelka, Morata etc but they were huge youth stars who were available to only top top quality teams not the likes of us right now. You wait, Stoke have bought two foreign players with bigish names and they'll both flop (Bojan and the ex utd guy). Neither are top quality. Deeney has all their attributes and more but yes will cost more due to the way finance in English football has gone.

6- On another issue, people are saying that NP has gone a different direction because Ulloa/Deeney are not unknowns but NP/Walsh are looking for quality at a reasonable price. Knocky and Mahrez were obviously within that envelope but the idea that Ulloa and Deeeny are a departure is stupid. They are players of a type we are looking for as with Knocky/Mahrez. There are no unheard of french league 2 strikers. strikers are the most sought after players going and nobody is unaware of what is out there. Knocky wsn't under the rdar - Newcastle had wanted him for a while but decided against going for him. Mahrez has suitors elsewhere but was only really breaking through. Do you really want us to spend £500k on a just breaking through striker in fench league 2 for the Prem?

not quite sure why everyone is having a go at you for this post. Although it is long, everything you've said is spot on. Too many people on here think only their opinions are valid!

[Guest]

not quite sure why everyone is having a go at you for this post. Although it is long, everything you've said is spot on. Too many people on here think only their opinions are valid!

 Now this is a guy I can agree with  

[Itsthejoeker]

 Now this is a guy I can agree with  

 

[Jace]

One point I read the other day.

 

 

Due to the increase in television money. An 8m pound signing is effectively the same as a 5m signing from 2013.

 

I think I read somewhere that Cardiff made more tv revenue money last season than Man Utd did winning the league the season before because of the new TV rights and the increase of the amount of money now involved

[RoboFox]

One point I read the other day.

Due to the increase in television money. An 8m pound signing is effectively the same as a 5m signing from 2013.

If that is the case, then it makes me very uncomfortable to think of the inflation-adjusted equivalent of the £5m we paid for Ade Akinbiyi in 2000...

[Master Fox]

Ha ha ha! MF buddy we gotta hook for some pre match, post match action

Indeed Mr Singh. Been way too long.

[AKCJ]

If that is the case, then it makes me very uncomfortable to think of the inflation-adjusted equivalent of the £5m we paid for Ade Akinbiyi in 2000...

 

 

Taking inflation into account, Ade is still our most expensive signing. Would cost around 8.08m in today's money. Just eclipsing the 8m we've spent on Ulloa

 

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-1633409/Historic-inflation-calculator-value-money-changed-1900.html

[RoboFox]

Taking inflation into account, Ade is still our most expensive signing. Would cost around 8.08m in today's money. Just eclipsing the 8m we've spent on Ulloa

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-1633409/Historic-inflation-calculator-value-money-changed-1900.html

Crikey. That means that in today's money he cost us approx. £727,000 for every goal he scored.

Still, could be worse... Could be Torres.

[Manwell Pablo]

We've paid Brighton 8m so far to buy Ulloa's contract. I imagine the remainder of his contract would have been worth another 9m. If the deal means we end up paying Brighton another 2m then the deal will have earnt/saved Brighton 11m.

 

 

 

 

 

I've not 'pulled' any figure out of my arse thankyou. Google "Demba Ba" and have a read yourself. To the right of the page.

 

 

 

 

Who cares what Besiktas are paying him? They're the buying club.

 

 

 

 

No. You really don't.

 

lol So you put a name into google, read the first figure you see on your right hand side and take it as gospel. And your the expert on football wages and I know nothing

 

From what I can see the figure you're reading is a salary, total after weekly wages, add ons, bonus's, sponsor payments, and other such income from the Senegese national side.

 

Every reliable report I can read seems to suggest he's on about 70k a week basic at Chelsea. Like the Telegraph about 4 links down, like the link Babs read, he's picked the article that claims he's on 80 as that obviously suits his flimsy argument better. Hence why your about 70 grand a week out.

 

Yes Beskitas are the buying club, so are we, I thought we were talking about our ability to pay wages as the buying club and the whole point of the conversation. How much Chelsea and or Brighton make or save from the deal is pretty irrelevant. This conversation is about our ability to sign a player and pay his wages.

 

Either way it's fairly obvious Ba was never on anything like 160k a week at Chelsea, and is probably on about 60 at Beskitas tops, which is around the same as we'll be paying a combination of Deeney and Ulloa should we take both on, I know which one I'd prefer, especially as the outlay for one is six and the other could be about 18 Million if it god forbid comes off.

 

Please continue to educate me on the subject of football wages though it is clear you know exactly what you're on about.

[Tielemans63]

I'm beginning to think you might have some doubts over the Ulloa deal Manwell.

[Jordan]

Even if Ba is on 60k a week, if he's looking for a similar salary at a different club, Leicester won't pay that to him. End of story.

[MPH]

I understand both of those points, perfectly.

 

What the rest of you don't seem to grasp if there are players who are A) Cheaper and B) Probably will play for less than a 10 million pound Ulloa, in European football. That simple.

Seemed to of completely overlooked my point about temperament being an important factor.

It isn't just about signing fee or even wages...

Can't you just trust Nigel?

I mean... has he not proven that he knows the right player for the club?

I mean; what is it you want? A Dennis wise type player? Just as long as he's good, but not too expensive and is on decent wages....

[Guest]

lol So you put a name into google, read the first figure you see on your right hand side and take it as gospel. And your the expert on football wages and I know nothing

From what I can see the figure you're reading is a salary, total after weekly wages, add ons, bonus's, sponsor payments, and other such income from the Senegese national side.

Every reliable report I can read seems to suggest he's on about 70k a week basic at Chelsea. Like the Telegraph about 4 links down, like the link Babs read, he's picked the article that claims he's on 80 as that obviously suits his flimsy argument better. Hence why your about 70 grand a week out.

Yes Beskitas are the buying club, so are we, I thought we were talking about our ability to pay wages as the buying club and the whole point of the conversation. How much Chelsea and or Brighton make or save from the deal is pretty irrelevant. This conversation is about our ability to sign a player and pay his wages.

Either way it's fairly obvious Ba was never on anything like 160k a week at Chelsea, and is probably on about 60 at Beskitas tops, which is around the same as we'll be paying a combination of Deeney and Ulloa should we take both on, I know which one I'd prefer, especially as the outlay for one is six and the other could be about 18 Million if it god forbid comes off.

Please continue to educate me on the subject of football wages though it is clear you know exactly what you're on about.

Okay so you've swapped two strikers for one striker.what do you propose we do about the other striker now you've put one on £60k?

[Bettsj2]

Ba has had massive dips in form every season in English football and you'd lose him to the ACON. On his day, he is a better player than Ulloa an Deeney but those days are few and far between so you can make the finances add up anyway you want to suit your argument (both Babs and Pabs are guilty of this) but at the end if it all, signing Ba would not give you value for money.

Whilst Ulloa and Deeney may be of an inferior quality, their work rate alone makes them more valuable to us as this is one of our main strengths as a team.

Ba is the kind of signing we should be making after spending a couple of years establishing ourselves in the Prem.

As for the fee for Ulloa, personally, I dont think its that high and we're only seeing it as high because we have never spent that much before on one player so you'd hope for your record buy to be someone of a higher profile. Its over ten years since we paid £5m for Akinbiyi (who at the time was a championship striker who'd just scored 16) so given the time passed, £8m is probably about right. He looks to have the attributes we've lacked over the years so in my view justifies his fee. I think paying the same for Deeney when he's a similar type of player seems odd, but we do need strength in depth so this would be a statement that we're not pissing about.

On another note, i've seen a few comments on here saying they cant understand why we havent looked further afield. Does our transfer activity over the last 2 years not show that we do exactly that?

Knocky, Mahrez, Was - bargain european signings

Hammond, Upson, Phillips - Experienced pros

Vardy - Hidden gem from the lower leagues

Drinky, James, Hamer - Highly rated youngsters

It seems obvious that our network does looks far and wide but they are just very fussy with the type of player (both talent and temperement) that they want to bring in.

[Bayfox]

Crikey. That means that in today's money he cost us approx. £727,000 for every goal he scored.

Still, could be worse... Could be Torres.

Try the maths on andy caroll.

[artursteppe]

Seemed to of completely overlooked my point about temperament being an important factor.

It isn't just about signing fee or even wages...

Can't you just trust Nigel?

I mean... has he not proven that he knows the right player for the club?

I mean; what is it you want? A Dennis wise type player? Just as long as he's good, but not too expensive and is on decent wages....

Sorry, but just fascinated by the use of the word 'of' to replace the correct word 'have', particularly when this person is not an illiterate. Everything else, grammar, spelling and punctuation seem to be ok. Bizarre really.

[Manwell Pablo]

Okay so you've swapped two strikers for one striker.what do you propose we do about the other striker now you've put one on £60k?

 

Not sign him in the first place. Obviously, we didn't need two more strikers this summer, we've got Nugent Vardy Wood here already who are capable Championship goal scorers why go out and sign another two for 18 Million. 

 

As I say it doesn't even have to be Ba, could be some kid I've never herd of if he does the job, I'm just not of the opinion that Ulloa, and especially Deeney, have what it takes to score goals in this division and if your chucking money around like we are you should probably try and pick up someone who is more of a sure bet.

 

But hey maybe I'll be wrong and they'll both go on to score tons.

Sorry, but just fascinated by the use of the word 'of' to replace the correct word 'have', particularly when this person is not an illiterate. Everything else, grammar, spelling and punctuation seem to be ok. Bizarre really.

 

But I'm just fascinated*

[Manwell Pablo]

Seemed to of completely overlooked my point about temperament being an important factor.

It isn't just about signing fee or even wages...

Can't you just trust Nigel?

I mean... has he not proven that he knows the right player for the club?

I mean; what is it you want? A Dennis wise type player? Just as long as he's good, but not too expensive and is on decent wages....

 

I've answered that question already in here twice that's probably why and I'm not going to repeat myself.

 

And again I think I've detailed what alternatives I would like enough times. 

[Nick]

[AKCJ]

lol So you put a name into google, read the first figure you see on your right hand side and take it as gospel. And your the expert on football wages and I know nothing

 

From what I can see the figure you're reading is a salary, total after weekly wages, add ons, bonus's, sponsor payments, and other such income from the Senegese national side.

 

Every reliable report I can read seems to suggest he's on about 70k a week basic at Chelsea. Like the Telegraph about 4 links down, like the link Babs read, he's picked the article that claims he's on 80 as that obviously suits his flimsy argument better. Hence why your about 70 grand a week out.

 

Yes Beskitas are the buying club, so are we, I thought we were talking about our ability to pay wages as the buying club and the whole point of the conversation. How much Chelsea and or Brighton make or save from the deal is pretty irrelevant. This conversation is about our ability to sign a player and pay his wages.

 

Either way it's fairly obvious Ba was never on anything like 160k a week at Chelsea, and is probably on about 60 at Beskitas tops, which is around the same as we'll be paying a combination of Deeney and Ulloa should we take both on, I know which one I'd prefer, especially as the outlay for one is six and the other could be about 18 Million if it god forbid comes off.

 

Please continue to educate me on the subject of football wages though it is clear you know exactly what you're on about.

 

I never claimed to know what Ba is on. I said that I got ~150k p/w from a google search. But you're missing the entire point.

 

Chelsea don't need to sell at such a high price because Besiktas bought out Ba's contract (however expensive that may be). What we do know is that Ba would have been on a shed load more than Deeney or Ulloa. You're so ignorant to think that the transfer fee is all that is relevant.

 

 

 

Right, i'll try and spell it out even simpler for you. Because this is like pulling teeth.

 

Right, lets say for the same of argument that Leo was on a wage of 5k p/w at Brighton which is just over the League average and probably about right. Lets also say that Ba was on this 60k that you've pulled out of your arse.

 

5000 x 52 = 260k

60000 x 52 = 3.12m

 

So Ulloa's salary would be 260k whereas Ba's would have been 3.12m.

 

Leo had 3 years remaining on his contract. 260k x 3 = 780k

Ba had 2 years remaining on his contract. 3.12m x 2 = 6.24m

 

Next we need to look at how valuable the player is to the selling club. Leo was Brighton's top scorer for two seasons in a row and is easily their best player. Whereas Demba Ba couldn't get into Chelsea's side.  From that you can pretty much guess that Ba wasn't needed at Chelsea whereas Leo was for Brighton.

 

Next you need to look at how different a transfer fee would have been for both clubs a year or so down the line. Ba would be 30 years old and into the final year of his conract. Chelsea would have had to decide if he'd have played much this season, the answer was clear that he was surplus to requirements. Whereas Leo would be 29 with two years of his contract left with a high chance that he'd have been Brighton's top scorer again (and also the league's top scorer). From that information you can tell that Ulloa would have kept his value whereas Ba would continue to lose his.

 

You also lose Ba to the ACON for a month, so his value drops even further.

 

 

Overall, Chelsea would have been glad of a 6m offer for Ba. It gets them out of a **** load of wages that would be wasted on the bench for an ageing player whereas Brighton wanted even more because he's the best player they have.