Official Summer Transfer Rumours Thread 2020-2021

[83owl]

31 minutes ago, Philb125 said:

Don’t talk nonsense! 
 

Forestieri signed at 25, we rejected bids of around 10m. I’d also be shocked if we haven’t had the opportunity to make money on Bannan signed at 25 Westwood again I’m sure was over 24 too. 
 

It’s not always the age of the player that ruins the resale value of players we sign, players still generate decent fees in late twenties/early thirties....

 

where we go wrong is signing players with points to prove for a low fee, letting them prove their point and then instead of selling them we offer them a mega pay rise and price them out of others budgets. We’ve done that with: 

 

Forestieri, Bannan, Hutchinson, Westwood, Lees off top of my head. Weirdly at time our fans on mass celebrate us keeping hold of these players. Whenever there’s rumours of interest of our players the typical ‘they can get fizzed’ or ‘tell them we want 5x the realistic profitable bid was’ instead of us cashing in and finding the next Bannan etc. 
 

Championship clubs for the whole don’t typically double players wages at point of re contracting, that’s where we go wrong not signing players 25-28 years old. 
 

Whenever there’s a sniff of someone signing a player all you read is “we can’t sell him, how much would it cost to replace him with similar quality” or “we need to build a team around him”.
 

I’m sure people think that Bannan is Steven gerrard and FF was in fact Messi with the reactions to potentially selling them. 

[83owl]

2 minutes ago, Bloxwich Owl said:

Two more clubs, QPR and Sheffield Wednesday, are reportedly interested in Rangers winger Jordan Jones, bringing the number of linked Championship teams to five.

In July, the Daily Record reported that the 25-year-old had been told he was free to leave Ibrox amid interest from Middlesbrough, Stoke City and Blackburn Rovers.

No move has yet materialised, but on Friday night, a fresh Daily Record report claimed that two further English second-tier clubs, QPR and Sheffield Wednesday, have joined the hunt.

QPR got the eze money  

[gurujuan]

4 minutes ago, 0wl18 said:

 
Complete and utter tripe.

 

Jonathan Kodjia - Bought by Bristol City aged 25, sold for a 9m profit. 
 

Ross McCormack - Joined Leeds aged 24, sold for 11m aged 28. 
 

Harry Maguire - Joined Leicester aged 24, sold for 80m aged 26.

 

Virgil Van Dijk - joined Southampton aged 24, sold for 75m aged 27.

 

Salah - Joined Roma aged 24, sold for £35m a couple of seasons later.

 

Matic - Joined Chelsea for the 2nd time aged 26, sold to Man U aged 29 for a reported 19m profit.

 

That’s a list without really taking too much time to look into it. It’s not only a ridiculous statement what you’ve come out with, it’s just simply not true.

 

 

 

 

 

That’s just being silly, are those the only examples you can find? Seriously, it’s madness to deny that it isn’t the case that the bigger clubs will pay more money for younger talent.

[0wl18]

Just now, gurujuan said:

That’s just being silly, are those the only examples you can find? Seriously, it’s madness to deny that it isn’t the case that the bigger clubs will pay more money for younger talent.

No it really isn’t. Bigger clubs pay more for PROVEN talent. 

[gurujuan]

Just now, 0wl18 said:

No it really isn’t. Bigger clubs pay more for PROVEN talent. 

Not from smaller clubs they don’t They scour the leagues below for talent they can develop. Sometimes they do take an older player from a club below, in but in majority of cases they will be looking for younger talent

[0wl18]

2 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

Not from smaller clubs they don’t They scour the leagues below for talent they can develop. Sometimes they do take an older player from a club below, in but in majority of cases they will be looking for younger talent

That’s not what you said though is it?

 

You said that players aged 24 and over don’t tend to have a resale value. I’ve merely pointed out you’re talking absolute nonsense.

 

Your argument now is that bigger clubs are more likely to scour the lower leagues for younger talent. A completely different conversation. 

[Philb125]

20 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

Possibly yes, but generally the bigger clubs are only interested in paying money for younger talent though. Clearly we have missed opportunities to sell when a player’s stock was high Sometimes, in the case of Bannan perhaps, his usefulness to us, will have outweighed any potential profit we might make 

Its true that not many fall into that category though, and we’ve doubtless missed many opportunities to cash in. I still maintain though, the recruitment of younger players, with potentially more resale value, will make us more sustainable in the future, presuming we are prepared to sell at the right time that is.

Hence my stance over Windass, going for a younger player like Leko, is always going to be preferable

Generally? Really... so many things wrong or dubious with this statement. 
 

Who do you class as bigger clubs? What do you consider as paying money? How would you define younger? 
 

As I’m sure you’ll find that many many clubs that are bigger than us, are spending real money on players that are older than 24. 

[Philb125]

5 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

Not from smaller clubs they don’t They scour the leagues below for talent they can develop. Sometimes they do take an older player from a club below, in but in majority of cases they will be looking for younger talent

Why do we have to sell to these clubs? Our biggest failings have been not selling to Fulham’s, Derby’s etc. Those type of clubs regularly buy players from same leagues for multi million pound deals. 

[gurujuan]

3 minutes ago, 0wl18 said:

That’s not what you said though is it?

 

You said that players aged 24 and over don’t tend to have a resale value. I’ve merely pointed out you’re talking absolute nonsense.

 

Your argument now is that bigger clubs are more likely to scour the lower leagues for younger talent. A completely different conversation. 

It’s not though is it, if they are far more likely to be looking for younger talent, it stands to reason, the more younger talent you have, the more likely you are to get a sale Nobody is saying there aren’t exceptions to that rule, and indeed, you’ve provided some. 

[gurujuan]

2 minutes ago, Philb125 said:

Why do we have to sell to these clubs? Our biggest failings have been not selling to Fulham’s, Derby’s etc. Those type of clubs regularly buy players from same leagues for multi million pound deals. 

Maybe, but it’s the bigger clubs who have the greater wealth, and would probably be more inclined to gamble

[gurujuan]

6 minutes ago, Philb125 said:

Generally? Really... so many things wrong or dubious with this statement. 
 

Who do you class as bigger clubs? What do you consider as paying money? How would you define younger? 
 

As I’m sure you’ll find that many many clubs that are bigger than us, are spending real money on players that are older than 24. 

Unlikely, but not impossible, to be from lower league clubs though

[Philb125]

Just now, gurujuan said:

Maybe, but it’s the bigger clubs who have the greater wealth, and would probably be more inclined to gamble

You keep talking in vaguenesses. 
 

Top clubs scour the lower league for Younger gems I agree. But these are few and far between. To run a sustainable club trying to just unearth these gems is a ludicrous business model. 
 

Buying players with resale value to a wider array of clubs however is not only something we’ve almost done right before but also something far more realistic. 
 

To state that players over 24 lose resale value in 3 years is demonstrably false. There are far more examples to disprove your theory of that than there are examples of big clubs buying young players for big money as you put it. 
 

 

[gurujuan]

4 minutes ago, Philb125 said:

You keep talking in vaguenesses. 
 

Top clubs scour the lower league for Younger gems I agree. But these are few and far between. To run a sustainable club trying to just unearth these gems is a ludicrous business model. 
 

Buying players with resale value to a wider array of clubs however is not only something we’ve almost done right before but also something far more realistic. 
 

To state that players over 24 lose resale value in 3 years is demonstrably false. There are far more examples to disprove your theory of that than there are examples of big clubs buying young players for big money as you put it. 
 

 

I think you’ll find that is incorrect, the amount of times a club would sell such a player to a lower club, for a profit, is negligible 

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

I've always been impressed by Owlstalk users' ability to vociferously argue about absolutely bloody anything!

 

[0wl18]

10 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

It’s not though is it, if they are far more likely to be looking for younger talent, it stands to reason, the more younger talent you have, the more likely you are to get a sale Nobody is saying there aren’t exceptions to that rule, and indeed, you’ve provided some. 

So what you’re essentially saying is all players aged 24+ are likely to be free transfers then? I mean as soon as they hit that age there’s no resale value??

 

What do you determine as a big club? Are clubs in the championship included? You can profit off of players by selling them to rivals too funnily enough.

[gurujuan]

Just now, 0wl18 said:

So what you’re essentially saying is all players aged 24+ are likely to be free transfers then? I mean as soon as they hit that age there’s no resale value??

 

What do you determine as a big club? Are clubs in the championship included? You can profit off of players by selling them to rivals too funnily enough.

OK, first of all, I’m not suggesting players of 24 have no value, but if say we sign a player over the age of 24, for arguments sake, say 26, Windass’s age, he gets a three year contract, does well for a few years and we decide to sell, he is unlikely to have the same market value as someone of 24, who’d reached that same level. Bigger clubs, are clubs with greater resources than the selling club, so yes they could be in the Championship, if we’re talking about us

[Philb125]

2 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

OK, first of all, I’m not suggesting players of 24 have no value, but if say we sign a player over the age of 24, for arguments sake, say 26, Windass’s age, he gets a three year contract, does well for a few years and we decide to sell, he is unlikely to have the same market value as someone of 24, who’d reached that same level. Bigger clubs, are clubs with greater resources than the selling club, so yes they could be in the Championship, if we’re talking about us

Really? As you literally said: ‘When you’re signing players over 24, they’re generally not going to have any resale value three years down the line’.

 

Which one is it, as a few of us tried to point out that what you said is nonsense and they would have resale? 
 

Windass as an example, if he had 1-2 good years we would make a profit. It may not be as good as the profit from Leko with 1-2 good years, but I’d suggest Windass is more a certainty of what you’ll get vs a gamble on Leko. 
 

My point is, you can buy lots of players of variety of ages that are undervalued. When Carlos first got here that seemed to be our plan. Buy players that wanted a chance, had lost their way etc. Then we almost made the big time and started trying to buy ready made players that had been there and done it; Fletch, Abdi, Boyd, Jones.... they I agree offer little in terms of resale value. 
 

[0wl18]

I don’t think anyone would argue with young, talented players in the lower leagues, being more likely to be of interest to clubs in the Premier League. In turn, more likely to generate a larger profit for the club due to the nature of the clubs involved. That’s a perfectly reasonable argument.
 

It’s a ridiculous argument to suggest that a player aged 24+ is unlikely to have a resale value. It’s a complete and utter falsity. They still have the majority of their career in front of them at such an age. Barry Bannan Joined for free, he’d command a fee in the region of 5m at the age of 30. Tom Lees was linked with Burnley during Carlos’ time here. Talks of a fee 7m+ were mentioned. FF was 26 when his transfer saga unravelled, we’d have made good money if we decided to sell. Reach was linked with a move to the Premier League during Jos’ spell. Again a player we’d have made money on. That’s just a list of our so called flops. What about successful sides within the division?

 

There just isn’t a coherent argument which can be made to suggest that players signed aged 24+ generally don’t have a resale value. It ultimately depends who that player is and, what they go on to achieve with the club.

[Philb125]

Back to transfer related news.... Mooy has gone to China from Brighton. I’d love him here (despite his age). Top player! 

[TheEnchanter]

1 minute ago, Philb125 said:

Back to transfer related news.... Mooy has gone to China from Brighton. I’d love him here (despite his age). Top player! 

 

We'd have to have been in the Prem to ever have a chance of getting him.