Guest addedtime Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 1 minute ago, HirstWhoScoredIt said: So Wickham is on a decent whack, £40K per week? - Total guess. He's extremely injury prone. We agree to take him on loan until the end of May. Total cash cost:- circa £700K. Total FFP loss £700K No sell on value. Just £700K tipped down the drain. Similarly, we could go for the best striker in league One or a good youngster that's not quite going to make it in the PL for lets say £3m. Give him a 4.5 year contract and wages of say £20K per week. Cash cost to the end of June (our year end) of £3m plus £400k wages. But FFP cost of £3m amortised for the 6 months of a 4.5 year contract = 333K + wages + total cost of £733K. So from an FFP point of view, one method costs you £700K down the drain. The other costs you £733K and you have an asset that may appreciate in value. This is where we continually get it wrong. Money spunked on loan players. Money spunked on players that are of an age where they won't appreciate in value. The likes of SUFC, Norwich and Brentford have shown us the way. Even WBA, a club with parachute payments has caught on. It might be 700k well spent if he scores goals to help us avoid relegation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
royalowlisback Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 2 minutes ago, HirstWhoScoredIt said: So Wickham is on a decent whack, £40K per week? - Total guess. He's extremely injury prone. We agree to take him on loan until the end of May. Total cash cost:- circa £700K. Total FFP loss £700K No sell on value. Just £700K tipped down the drain. Similarly, we could go for the best striker in league One or a good youngster that's not quite going to make it in the PL for lets say £3m. Give him a 4.5 year contract and wages of say £20K per week. Cash cost to the end of June (our year end) of £3m plus £400k wages. But FFP cost of £3m amortised for the 6 months of a 4.5 year contract = 333K + wages + total cost of £733K. So from an FFP point of view, one method costs you £700K down the drain. The other costs you £733K and you have an asset that may appreciate in value. This is where we continually get it wrong. Money spunked on loan players. Money spunked on players that are of an age where they won't appreciate in value. The likes of SUFC, Norwich and Brentford have shown us the way. Even WBA, a club with parachute payments has caught on. The best striker on League 1 is Ivan Toney, he will probably move for north of 10m, possible double knowing Peterborough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnsie Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 2 minutes ago, addedtime said: It might be 700k well spent if he scores goals to help us avoid relegation. It was only just before Christmas we were thinking differently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HirstWhoScoredIt Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 Just now, addedtime said: It might be 700k well spent if he scores goals to help us avoid relegation. It may well be. But similarly he might get injured after one minute. Also, the player you buy may score the goals you need to avoid relegation. You have to have a strategy and a vision. Its no good keeping making the same mistakes for 20 years. If you have a strategy and a vision like Brentford and then implement it successfully you are not worried about FFP or relegation or point deductions. It seems ridiculous to try and solve your short term plight by adopting a strategy that has got you into this mess in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HirstWhoScoredIt Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 1 minute ago, royalowlisback said: The best striker on League 1 is Ivan Toney, he will probably move for north of 10m, possible double knowing Peterborough. That may well be correct but doesn't really detract from my point. I am sure there are dozens of strikers under 23 with potential that we could pick up for circa £3m that have the potential to get considerably better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcx666 Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 6 minutes ago, royalowlisback said: The best striker on League 1 is Ivan Toney, he will probably move for north of 10m, possible double knowing Peterborough. Well the chairman came out this morning and said Toney wouldn't be leaving for anything less than 12 mill........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
royalowlisback Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 Just now, HirstWhoScoredIt said: That may well be correct but doesn't really detract from my point. I am sure there are dozens of strikers under 23 with potential that we could pick up for circa £3m that have the potential to get considerably better. I agree with you regarding players with potential and cost comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markg Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 4 minutes ago, HirstWhoScoredIt said: It may well be. But similarly he might get injured after one minute. Also, the player you buy may score the goals you need to avoid relegation. You have to have a strategy and a vision. Its no good keeping making the same mistakes for 20 years. If you have a strategy and a vision like Brentford and then implement it successfully you are not worried about FFP or relegation or point deductions. It seems ridiculous to try and solve your short term plight by adopting a strategy that has got you into this mess in the first place. Bang on. Can you now just email it to chansiri? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HirstWhoScoredIt Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 2 minutes ago, marcx666 said: Well the chairman came out this morning and said Toney wouldn't be leaving for anything less than 12 mill........ He won't be leaving then. But Peterborough are another great example. Imagine if a club that has spent the resources we had over the past 4 seasons had followed the model of Brentford and Peterborough. We'd have been buying youngsters of a far better pedigree would have sold a few for mega bucks and would have no FFP concerns, a squad with a high value and most likely we'd be a division higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OwlofOliveGrove Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shetland Owl Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 According to sky, looks like Wickam will not be going anywhere this transfer window. There new striker has picked up an injury and we have made no fresh approach Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OurDan Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 19 minutes ago, HirstWhoScoredIt said: So Wickham is on a decent whack, £40K per week? - Total guess. He's extremely injury prone. We agree to take him on loan until the end of May. Total cash cost:- circa £700K. Total FFP loss £700K No sell on value. Just £700K tipped down the drain. Similarly, we could go for the best striker in league One or a good youngster that's not quite going to make it in the PL for lets say £3m. Give him a 4.5 year contract and wages of say £20K per week. Cash cost to the end of June (our year end) of £3m plus £400k wages. But FFP cost of £3m amortised for the 6 months of a 4.5 year contract = 333K + wages = total FFP cost of £733K. So from an FFP point of view, one method costs you £700K down the drain. The other costs you £733K and you have an asset that may appreciate in value. This is where we continually get it wrong. Money spunked on loan players. Money spunked on players that are of an age where they won't appreciate in value. The likes of SUFC, Norwich and Brentford have shown us the way. Even WBA, a club with parachute payments has caught on. That doesn't take into account the benefit we get off loaning out Rhodes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalthamOwl Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 7 minutes ago, Shetland Owl said: According to sky, looks like Wickam will not be going anywhere this transfer window. There new striker has picked up an injury and we have made no fresh approach FFS. Let’s hope we have other deals lined up then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beswetherick Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 7 minutes ago, Shetland Owl said: According to sky, looks like Wickam will not be going anywhere this transfer window. There new striker has picked up an injury and we have made no fresh approach Classic Wednesday. Leave it to the last minute and then it all falls apart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deano Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 I still think he will come Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sMacLean Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 The build up and focus on Wickham is something you'd expect to be getting Mbappe at the end of. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowl Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 (edited) I'd dearly love for us to copy Brentford's approach. It isn't that it's particularly complicated really, but it's principled and they stick to it. But more to the point, it's proving to be successful for them both financially and on the pitch too. One great additional consequence of their approach is they have very little need for the over-priced loan market. In fact, I don't think they've used it for a number of seasons now (well, at least for bringing players in). As it is for us though, trying to manage our striking options between now and May, and assuming we've not really been seriously looking at talent in Leagues One and Two, I'm not opposed to us bringing Wickham in. I'd like to think we could embrace a more forward thinking Brentford-style approach, but I doubt there'd be the necessary commitment to this from Chansiri. Edited January 30, 2020 by cowl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minton Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, beswetherick said: Classic Wednesday. Leave it to the last minute and then it all falls apart Nothing to do with our approach. Palace have waited until the last minute to do any deal in case their planned incomings don't happen or if there are injuries to players. It's why deals across the leagues are only just starting to get done now. Edited January 30, 2020 by Minton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspector Lestrade Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 Just now, cowl said: I'd dearly love for us to copy Brentford's approach. It's that it's particularly complicated really, but it's principled and they stick to it. But more to the point, it's proving to be successful for them both financially and on the pitch too. One great additional consequence of their approach is they have very little need for the over-priced loan market. In fact, I don't think they've used it for a number of seasons now (well, at least for bringing players in). As is it is for us though, trying to manage our striking options between now and May, and assuming we've not really been seriously looking at talent in Leagues One and Two, I'm not opposed to us bringing Wickham in. I'd like to think we could embrace a more forward thinking Brentford-style approach, but I doubt there'd be the necessary commitment to this from Chansiri. Agree with you but at Brentford they have little expectation from the fans being in the Championship is success to a degree. For Wednesday to follow it we would have to do both buy for today so we can challenge and satisfy our fans and buy for the future. They are to be applauded it will be interesting to see how they fare with the new ground coming online and a new expectation with the fans. Exciting times for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wednesday_Jack Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 Wickham won’t be leaving palace...what a waste if 43 pages of virtual paper, no wonder the environment is fizzed!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now