gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
I think that’s on top of them paying £250k p/w of his wages.Isn't that just to cover part of his wages?
I think that’s on top of them paying £250k p/w of his wages.Isn't that just to cover part of his wages?
So just a coincidence that the transfer fee is exactly the same as the wages that they are prepared to subsidise.I think that’s on top of them paying £250k p/w of his wages.
The loan will be to the end of June 2026 (in accordance with established practice) which is 46 weeks which works out at over £300k pw, so not quite ‘exactly the same’. Even at 52 weeks it’s £270k pw.So just a coincidence that the transfer fee is exactly the same as the wages that they are prepared to subsidise.
Honestly we are way past that, everyone knows the transfer was a failure on the part of the scouts, the transfer team and the coaching team. That's nothing newGrealish to anywhere on loan is an admission of failure for Peps and the coaching staff. Just shows how privileged we have become when an 100 million pound player can be fobbed off on loan to another PL team. Its absurd.
If true, it’s a huge commitment from Everton. At least a £23.5m layout for just one season for a player that has barely played any football for 18 months.The loan will be to the end of June 2026 (in accordance with established practice) which is 46 weeks which works out at over £300k pw, so not quite ‘exactly the same’. Even at 52 weeks it’s £270k pw.
You might be right, one could be in lieu of the other, but the maths you have deployed to support your argument don’t quite add up.
Either way, it’s a good move for Jack and City. His time here was clearly done.
Like I said, you could be right.If true, it’s a huge commitment from Everton. At least a £23.5m layout for just one season for a player that has barely played any football for 18 months.
Oh yeah, lets just forget we spent 100 million pounds on a player we are prepared to loan out to another PL team.Honestly we are way past that, everyone knows the transfer was a failure on the part of the scouts, the transfer team and the coaching team. That's nothing new
I love City, would play my heart out and think I’m a good person. Sometimes it just doesn’t work out. Sadly, he’s been seen worse the wear at more than just the parade. I wish he’d just give up the booze permanently, it’s not a good image for an athlete, if you want to play at an elite level then you have to think in an elite way.I would like to know what exactly Jack Grealish did wrong? He loves City, he plays his heart out and is a good person. What the heck did he do?
Please don't say he got drunk at the parade....so did others but hid it well.
I will be really disappointed if Jack goes.
So it’s nothing to do with Jack pissing his career away?Honestly we are way past that, everyone knows the transfer was a failure on the part of the scouts, the transfer team and the coaching team. That's nothing new
No, it has everything to do with the buyer not realising or rather ignoring the one glaring flaw the product always had.So it’s nothing to do with Jack pissing his career away?
I just can't imagine Everton doing that... that would be the deal of the century to get so much for a loaned player that Pep has clearly phased out. I'd have thought covering his wages would be more realistic, maybe with a couple million thrown in for good measure.If true, it’s a huge commitment from Everton. At least a £23.5m layout for just one season for a player that has barely played any football for 18 months.
I don't think you can call Grealish a failure for the simple fact that he was integral and played a major part in our Treble winning season.Grealish to anywhere on loan is an admission of failure for Peps and the coaching staff. Just shows how privileged we have become when an 100 million pound player can be fobbed off on loan to another PL team. Its absurd.
Is that the case, thought he was a pissheadHonestly we are way past that, everyone knows the transfer was a failure on the part of the scouts, the transfer team and the coaching team. That's nothing new
To be fair gdm, I think @uwerosler28 read the 2nd 'paragraph' as it appears to be the sequitur to the immediately previous 'Jack has the skillset', rather than the comparison to Hoddle... just a misunderstanding of comment sequenceThat’s exactly what I said. I’m struggling to see how anyone with even the most basic English comprehension skills could not deduce that from what I posted. Each to their own ffs.