Summer 2016 Transfer Rumour Thread

[elhadjihenry]

Like I said, even a very conservative wage increase of £30m, they will be able to afford 3 new players on 100-150k a week, and increase around 8 players wages £50k a pop.

I agree with this, but I think the point some of us are trying to make is that this PL money increase is coming to every club, so the competition between PL clubs for wages is basically as-you-were. The UCL is the point of difference in terms of income and keeping/attracting top players. Hence if Arsenal/City offer Mahrez or Kante a 5 year deal at 150k per week, with the fairly certain (touch wood) UCL qualification and huge commercial revenue on the cards in all those seasons there is no risk of losing out on the deals, whereas Leicester have that risk and it could come back to bite them.

 

[jd2010]

I think if any leave it'll be Kante as he's the only one who has a viable alternative in PSG who could offer him more. I can't see any of the others leaving, at least not this summer, no.

Mahrez is the other that would not look out of place at Arsenal

 

[SM]

I understand it much better than whatever bizarre fantasy world you live in.

You've never heard of wage reduction clauses and don't think Leicester would use them. I'm not the one in a bizarre fantasy world.

 

[SM]

Mahrez is the other that would not look out of place at Arsenal

Why would he go to a lesser PL club (relatively speaking for next season)? Does he seriously think Arsenal would be a better environment for him next season?

Do you honestly think if he has a poor start to next season, those clubs are suddenly going to go cold on the Player of the Season for 2015/16? If Leicester stink it up in the CL, their players will still be in demand come January/the following Summer. I just can't see him jumping ship now.

 

[elhadjihenry]

Mahrez is the other that would not look out of place at Arsenal

Fair few rumours around that we will trigger Kante's release clause in the summer. Haven't seen much talk about Mahrez, but either are both players we could use to strengthen as they are our "weaker" positions.

 

[Jatz]

Fair few rumours around that we will trigger Kante's release clause in the summer. Haven't seen much talk about Mahrez, but either are both players we could use to strengthen as they are our "weaker" positions.

Who does Kante replace in your starting 11? Eleny?

 

[jd2010]

Why would he go to a lesser PL club (relatively speaking for next season)? Does he seriously think Arsenal would be a better environment for him next season?

Do you honestly think if he has a poor start to next season, those clubs are suddenly going to go cold on the Player of the Season for 2015/16? If Leicester stink it up in the CL, their players will still be in demand come January/the following Summer. I just can't see him jumping ship now.

As much as a I dislike Arsenal players/agent still see them as a safe CL option with great financial security.

Agreed that what's one season seeing what could happen at Leicester. But when the money starts getting offered around the head can turn

 

[elhadjihenry]

Who does Kante replace in your starting 11? Eleny?

I think he'd start ahead of either Coquelin or Elneny, definitely ahead of Ramsey.

We would play 2 central mids with a combination of Kante/Coquelin against strong opposition or Kante/Elneny against weaker. Ramsey would be relegated to playing wide or being depth I imagine.

 

[SM]

As much as a I dislike Arsenal players/agent still see them as a safe CL option with great financial security.

Agreed that what's one season seeing what could happen at Leicester. But when the money starts getting offered around the head can turn

Sure. The head could turn. All I've said all along is I'd like to think the players would stick with Leicester for a season. Players don't always listen to their agents.

 

[Jatz]

I think he'd start ahead of either Coquelin or Elneny, definitely ahead of Ramsey.

We would play 2 central mids with a combination of Kante/Coquelin against strong opposition or Kante/Elneny against weaker. Ramsey would be relegated to playing wide or being depth I imagine.

If he's a guaranteed starter I guess it would make sense for him. Not sure it'd be worth it for him if he was going to compete with Coq/Elneny.

 

[RossFC]

I'm not saying Kante will leave, But Kante and Coquelin next to each other would be pretty good.

 

[Pykie]

I agree with this, but I think the point some of us are trying to make is that this PL money increase is coming to every club, so the competition between PL clubs for wages is basically as-you-were. The UCL is the point of difference in terms of income and keeping/attracting top players. Hence if Arsenal/City offer Mahrez or Kante a 5 year deal at 150k per week, with the fairly certain (touch wood) UCL qualification and huge commercial revenue on the cards in all those seasons there is no risk of losing out on the deals, whereas Leicester have that risk and it could come back to bite them.

Yeah, I'm sorry, your point is completely flawed in it's basis.

At no point can a PL club get anywhere near damaging it's bottom line (Like Leeds) in the current climate without completely breaking the FFP rules.

Considering your wage budget has to be in line with your commercial revenue, excluding TV, of which, TV revenue probably accounts for 80% of turnover for most PL clubs, I can't envisage any scenario apart from gross negligence (and a 3-4 year transfer ban) where anyone can possibly go into administration from their wage budget with the current TV deal.

 

[Shoei]

You've never heard of wage reduction clauses and don't think Leicester would use them. I'm not the one in a bizarre fantasy world.

You think that players are just going to accept wage reduction clauses in their contracts because they are nice guys.

Why doesn't every club use them then

"Oh hey, we didn't win the league this season so your wage just went from 150k to 100k, you're cool with that right?"

"Oh hey, we didn't make Champions League this season so your wage just went from 100k to 70k, you're cool with that right?"

"Oh hey, we didn't finish in the top 10 this season so your wage just went from 70k to 40k, you're cool with that right?"

I doubt there are ANY player contracts outside of those clubs that are a good chance of being relegated that have anything resembling a "wage reduction" clause. To think otherwise is bizarre and not based in reality.

 

[elhadjihenry]

If he's a guaranteed starter I guess it would make sense for him. Not sure it'd be worth it for him if he was going to compete with Coq/Elneny.

Based on his form this season he would definitely be a starter, adds as much midfield security as Coquelin but with added forward thrust. Mahrez would have a guaranteed spot on the RW that's for sure, possibly the weakest position in our starting XI.

 

[elhadjihenry]

Yeah, I'm sorry, your point is completely flawed in it's basis.

At no point can a PL club get anywhere near damaging it's bottom line (Like Leeds) in the current climate without completely breaking the FFP rules.

Considering your wage budget has to be in line with your commercial revenue, excluding TV, of which, TV revenue probably accounts for 80% of turnover for most PL clubs, I can't envisage any scenario apart from gross negligence (and a 3-4 year transfer ban) where anyone can possibly go into administration from their wage budget with the current TV deal.

The Leeds example is obviously a worst case scenario I don't think anyone will actually imagine Leicester being relegated. I am referring to Leicester having a huge wage bill and not the income to afford it if they lose UCL and the commercial revenue that goes with and potentially having to offload players because of it, likely to those clubs that do have the income to offer huge wages to those players. If they structure their wages accordingly and have bonuses for CL qualification rather than assuming it and giving the players huge base wages, they should be fine.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Who does Kante replace in your starting 11? Eleny?

Surely if it were to eventuate it'd end Ramsey in that role. I'm sure Arsenal fans would love to have him for that reason alone.

 

[SM]

You think that players are just going to accept wage reduction clauses in their contracts because they are nice guys.

Why doesn't every club use them then

"Oh hey, we didn't win the league this season so your wage just went from 150k to 100k, you're cool with that right?"

"Oh hey, we didn't make Champions League this season so your wage just went from 100k to 70k, you're cool with that right?"

"Oh hey, we didn't finish in the top 10 this season so your wage just went from 70k to 40k, you're cool with that right?"

I doubt there are ANY player contracts outside of those clubs that are a good chance of being relegated that have anything resembling a "wage reduction" clause. To think otherwise is bizarre and not based in reality.

Wage reduction or bonus, call it what you want they're the same thing. You seriously think that all players are paid their base wage regardless of if they play or not? Of course not. Players will have appearance bonuses. Do you think players are paid the same regardless of the result? Of course not. Players will have win bonuses. Do you think players are paid the same if they score a hattrick or score nothing? Of course not, players will have goal bonuses.

If you think none of the above are pretty much standard in contracts, then you're the one in the bizarro world.

You then need to consider players at a club playing the CL for potentially a one off season. Those players could then, as Jd2010 says, jump ship to a stable Top 4 club. Do you seriously think the club wouldn't approach them and convince them to stick with them for that coming season by giving them a bonus for CL appearances?

All of your quoted scenarios are tripe as you seem under the impression that contracts and wages are updated on the fly.

 

[Buckleys Jocks]

Reading some of these posts gives you the feeling that the supporters of the big established clubs don't like the thought of Leicester being a permanent fixture amongst the prem's elite. They are happy for them to be a one off but no more than that.

Really?

I think this has been blown out of proportion big time, jod23 just refuted the claim that Leicester can match any other PL team when it comes to offering big wages to their best players, and he's right. The likes of United, City and Chelsea absolutely are ahead of the rest of the competition when it comes to what they are willing and able to offer, saying that isn't a slight on Leicester at all though, particularly when only one of those three clubs looks likely to finish top four this season.

IMO there's a fair bit of playing the man going on here from some posters who seem to be fuelled by previous comments or attitudes that Jod has displayed towards 'smaller' clubs in the past.

 

[SM]

Really?

I think this has been blown out of proportion big time, jod23 just refuted the claim that Leicester can match any other PL team when it comes to offering big wages to their best players, and he's right. The likes of United, City and Chelsea absolutely are ahead of the rest of the competition when it comes to what they are willing and able to offer, saying that isn't a slight on Leicester at all though, particularly when only one of those three clubs looks likely to finish top four this season.

IMO there's a fair bit of playing the man going on here from some posters who seem to be fuelled by previous comments or attitudes that Jod has displayed towards 'smaller' clubs in the past.

Jod said that Leicester couldn't afford 100k a week for their players. One of their players is currently on 100k due to them winning the league. People rightly called him out on the lack of logic he was displaying.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

"Oh hey, we didn't win the league this season so your wage just went from 150k to 100k, you're cool with that right?"

Test that out on Walcott first?

 

[jd2010]

Sure. The head could turn. All I've said all along is I'd like to think the players would stick with Leicester for a season. Players don't always listen to their agents.

it would add to the fairytale of theirs if they all stick around and do it again

 

[SM]

Test that out on Walcott first?

He'd score 50 a season and play in goal as well, not conceding once.

 

[Jatz]

Based on his form this season he would definitely be a starter, adds as much midfield security as Coquelin but with added forward thrust. Mahrez would have a guaranteed spot on the RW that's for sure, possibly the weakest position in our starting XI.

He'll get bored in a midfield that has more than 50% of possession

 

[elhadjihenry]

Test that out on Walcott first?

If a "wage reduction" was ever in order...

 

[Shoei]

Wage reduction or bonus, call it what you want they're the same thing. You seriously think that all players are paid their base wage regardless of if they play or not? Of course not. Players will have appearance bonuses. Do you think players are paid the same regardless of the result? Of course not. Players will have win bonuses. Do you think players are paid the same if they score a hattrick or score nothing? Of course not, players will have goal bonuses.

If you think none of the above are pretty much standard in contracts, then you're the one in the bizarro world.

You then need to consider players at a club playing the CL for potentially a one off season. Those players could then, as Jd2010 says, jump ship to a stable Top 4 club. Do you seriously think the club wouldn't approach them and convince them to stick with them for that coming season by giving them a bonus for CL appearances?

All of your quoted scenarios are tripe as you seem under the impression that contracts and wages are updated on the fly.

No. no. no. no. no. no. no. no.

A wage reduction is totally different from a bonus.

My yearly wage is 100k over 5 years. That doesn't change. If i get a bonus 25%, that is my yearly wage 100k + 25%. I still get my 100k regardless each year.

A wage reduction is a reduction in my yearly wage. A 25% wage reduction now means i earn 75k a year for the next 5 years.

They are not interchangeable terms.