Transfer discussion thread

[moomba]

Can't think of any valid reason to change the amortisation rules. Just seems typical UEFA reactionary bollocks, no doubt as a result of pressure from clubs that don't want to give out long term contracts (but don't want anyone else to have the benefit either).

 

[99 Problems]

It does seem like a loophole that benefits the premier league teams far more than anyone else. Most of Europe just can’t afford the risk of paying serious cash into dead wages for years on top of competing in the premier league inflated transfer market.

 

[moomba]

 

[dirty2]

It does seem like a loophole that benefits the premier league teams far more than anyone else. Most of Europe just can’t afford the risk of paying serious cash into dead wages for years on top of competing in the premier league inflated transfer market.

Will we see the EPL become outright #1 league in the world? English teams seem have alot of money... Even the not so rich teams...

 

[99 Problems]

Will we see the EPL become outright #1 league in the world? English teams seem have alot of money... Even the not so rich teams...

That happened years ago money wise. Premier league clubs are already struggling to find buyers for players if the European giants aren’t interested.

I expect to see a lot more deals like Sterling to Chelsea going forward. With players of that stature now, there’s no more than a handful of teams in the rest of Europe that can afford them unless the selling club is willing to take unders.

 

[chef]

Can't think of any valid reason to change the amortisation rules. Just seems typical UEFA reactionary bollocks, no doubt as a result of pressure from clubs that don't want to give out long term contracts (but don't want anyone else to have the benefit either).

I think the problem is only English clubs are allowed to give contracts longer than 5 years, or so ive read elsewhere.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

I think the problem is only English clubs are stupid enough to give contracts longer than 5 years, or so ive read elsewhere.

EFA

 

[Bojan KantKick]

That happened years ago money wise. Premier league clubs are already struggling to find buyers for players if the European giants aren’t interested.

I expect to see a lot more deals like Sterling to Chelsea going forward. With players of that stature now, there’s no more than a handful of teams in the rest of Europe that can afford them unless the selling club is willing to take unders.

It's not the transfer fees that are the major issue, it's the wages. The average wage in the prem must be around 90-100k a week these day. In a lot of leagues they pay that money to their best players, not average ones.

 

[moomba]

I think the problem is only English clubs are allowed to give contracts longer than 5 years, or so ive read elsewhere.

UEFA rules apparently set a 5 year limit, but if local laws allow it you can sign a player for longer.

Be surprised if England was the only country that doesnt limit employment contracts to 5 years or less.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

I thought UEFA were trying to restrict the initial amortisation period to 5 years, not the length of employment contract.

 

[moomba]

I thought UEFA were trying to restrict the initial amortisation period to 5 years, not the length of employment contract.

I think that's the gist of it.

There really isn't much point to it.

 

[RossFC]

 

[SM]

Rumours about Falcao too. Bonkers signings.

 

[moomba]

 

[Jaymin]

Nationality checks out.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Nationality checks out.

Can imagine the Leeds recruitment flow chart...

Did he play for a RB team under Marsch or is he american? Yes - Recruit, No - don't recruit

 

[Bojan KantKick]

Todd Lasso haha. That's a good one.

 

[99 Problems]

It's not the transfer fees that are the major issue, it's the wages. The average wage in the prem must be around 90-100k a week these day. In a lot of leagues they pay that money to their best players, not average ones.

You’re right, the majority of the issue is the wages, prem clubs just can’t offload players abroad because they’re paying them too much. And a team like Chelsea can take a chance on a 7 year deal because they know if they end up paying them to sit on the bench or go on loan for the last 3 years they’ll be fine financially.

Even the transfer fees rule out most non-prem teams if you want to sell without taking a loss though. If Chelsea want to sell Mudryk in 3 years, unless Barca, Madrids or maybe Bayern were interested, they’d have to be willing to sell to another top prem club.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

You’re right, the majority of the issue is the wages, prem clubs just can’t offload players abroad because they’re paying them too much. And a team like Chelsea can take a chance on a 7 year deal because they know if they end up paying them to sit on the bench or go on loan for the last 3 years they’ll be fine financially.

Even the transfer fees rule out most non-prem teams if you want to sell without taking a loss though. If Chelsea want to sell Mudryk in 3 years, unless Barca, Madrids or maybe Bayern were interested, they’d have to be willing to sell to another top prem club.

Loads of players end up being loaned out with their new clubs only paying a moderate percentage of their wages.

 

[moomba]

Nationality checks out.

Reminds me of us under Mark Hughes.

Wouldn't look beyond what he already knew.

 

[Magma]

 

[SM]

And this is how the cycle is never broken. You only need half a dozen of these guys to hang around after relegation to walk the Championship.

 

[RossFC]

 

[Magma]

spurs trying to take danjuma on loan before he signs with everton. based on the last 18 months i wouldnt be trying to trump any signings everton are making.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Quite an important part left until last. Not sure if I like this loan or not but no doubt Everton need impetus far more than us. So every miss should hurt them more.