John Stones

[Fallingbostel Blue]

might be controversial but I Would rather keep Stones than Garcia, As much as I love Garcia I don't think he is made for the physicality of the Premier league.I hope I am proven wrong and Garcia turns into another Cannavaro

 

[mosssideblue]

They got 11 million for Lovren during a pandemic? FFS.

I would be disappointed if Stones went for anything under 20 mill.

I wouldn't. It gets him off the books and frees up a spot

 

[I'm With Stupid]

Yeah £20m is a piss take. Michael Keane went for £25m rising to £30m. Tyrone Mings went for £20 rising to £25m when he wasn't even deemed good enough for Bournemouth. An £18m bid wasn't enough to buy a 30 year-old Jonny Evans a couple of seasons ago. Keiron Trippier went for £20m to Atletico Madrid. These are all home grown players and the English ones are all behind Stones in the England pecking order. He's still only 26, which means a club could easily get 8-10 years out of him. And obviously the evidence is all right there in the newspaper articles saying what a bargain it would be for West Ham or Arsenal to get him for that price. The whole point of us buying younger players like Stones when we were building the team was that they would still have some resale value if it didn't work out.

But it's all part of a wider trend of us failing to get money for our best assets. Sure, we sometimes get quite a good wad for one of our youth products, but how do we get into a situation where we're selling Sane for almost the same amount as we paid for him? How are we losing £25-30m on John Stones? Even when other clubs intend to sell a player, they still seem to be able to convince the player to sign a new contract so that they get a decent fee. Maybe that's part of the strategy. We allow players to leave fairly easily in the hope that it makes us a more attractive prospect for future signings. But presumably in terms of FFP, getting a decent fee counts towards our balance?

 

[sir baconface]

A bit of digression but how do Liverpool and Chelsea are able to sell their players at such a good price something we could never do.
Liverpool in a last few years have sold Benteke, Ibe Solanke Coutinho and now Lovren at a very good price. It is almost criminal!
A CL club like RB Leipzeg won't pay 20 mil for Angelino who actually is a first team player with huge potential.

It’s rumoured that the dippers have offered to cover the UK’s entire furloughing costs out of the remnants of the Coutinho sale.

 

[sir baconface]

Yeah £20m is a piss take. Michael Keane went for £25m rising to £30m. Tyrone Mings went for £20 rising to £25m when he wasn't even deemed good enough for Bournemouth. An £18m bid wasn't enough to buy a 30 year-old Jonny Evans a couple of seasons ago. Keiron Trippier went for £20m to Atletico Madrid. These are all home grown players and the English ones are all behind Stones in the England pecking order. He's still only 26, which means a club could easily get 8-10 years out of him. And obviously the evidence is all right there in the newspaper articles saying what a bargain it would be for West Ham or Arsenal to get him for that price. The whole point of us buying younger players like Stones when we were building the team was that they would still have some resale value if it didn't work out.

But it's all part of a wider trend of us failing to get money for our best assets. Sure, we sometimes get quite a good wad for one of our youth products, but how do we get into a situation where we're selling Sane for almost the same amount as we paid for him? How are we losing £25-30m on John Stones? Even when other clubs intend to sell a player, they still seem to be able to convince the player to sign a new contract so that they get a decent fee. Maybe that's part of the strategy. We allow players to leave fairly easily in the hope that it makes us a more attractive prospect for future signings. But presumably in terms of FFP, getting a decent fee counts towards our balance?

I take your point but you do have to look case by case. It didn’t suit Sane’s career/earnings plans to sign up and make it more difficult for Bayern. With Stones, it’s just unfortunate that he’s on a downward trend and his value has plummeted. I wouldn’t be too hard on the club in these two cases. Shit happens.

On a more general level, the wages we pay are certainly a barrier to securing fat transfer fees. If a player is established and on an upward trajectory, that’s less of an issue. However we mainly sell either young, relatively inexperienced players or goods that are going off.

 

[NMB]

A bit of digression but how do Liverpool and Chelsea are able to sell their players at such a good price something we could never do.
Liverpool in a last few years have sold Benteke, Ibe Solanke Coutinho and now Lovren at a very good price. It is almost criminal!
A CL club like RB Leipzeg won't pay 20 mil for Angelino who actually is a first team player with huge potential.

Or maybe they inflate the reported fee received for FFP purposes. Simon Jordan should look into it and get the EPL and UEFA involved.

 

[Bill Walker]

With Garcia likely to be Barcelona bound, Otto seemingly surplus to requirements and Ferno starting to show signs of age it might not be wise to let him go this window as that would mean we need 3 new centre backs for next season unless we promote HB or bring back loanees. Not an ideal situation tbh.

Thats right, everything I've heard Pep say leads me to believe that Pep fully believes in John Stones.
It's when he never mentions players like with Denayer or Mangala you see the exit sign.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

Or maybe they inflate the reported fee received for FFP purposes. Simon Jordan should look into it and get the EPL and UEFA involved.

I've always thought Chelsea's fees receive are very suspicious. £60m for Oscar and £50m for David Luiz always stood out in particular (especially given that they bought the latter back for £35m fairly soon after). A pretty old Matic for £40m.

It's definitely a thing too, because there was obviously some sort of accounting reason why Cancelo and Danilo were valued so highly in that swap deal.

 

[decmancity]

I've always thought Chelsea's fees receive are very suspicious. £60m for Oscar and £50m for David Luiz always stood out in particular (especially given that they bought the latter back for £35m fairly soon after). A pretty old Matic for £40m.

It's definitely a thing too, because there was obviously some sort of accounting reason why Cancelo and Danilo were valued so highly in that swap deal.

Always seems to be a perfect storm for their transfers I think.
Oscar, Chinese club wants to spend big money on a big name, Chelsea basically named a price.
David Luiz, PSG again wanted to make a splash, Thiago Silva probably endorsed the move.
Matic, the dinosaur sees him as a key part of his setup and so they named their price again and the rags are daft enough to pay it.

The dippers get some ridiculous fees e.g. Solanke, Ibe and so on but I often just put the blame for those on crap management and blindly falling into deals on the oppositions side.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

The dippers get some ridiculous fees e.g. Solanke, Ibe and so on but I often just put the blame for those on crap management and blindly falling into deals on the oppositions side.

I don't know. Is £15m for Jordan Ibe really that crazy in the current market, given that he was widely touted as a talented youngster and was still only 20 or 21 at the time? Solanke is a rip of for a striker that's only scored one goal, I'll give you that. The worst ones for Liverpool were a crocked Fernando Torres for £50m and Coutinho for £130m. Again in that case though, Barcelona were going through a period of overspending on crap. But Coutinho was always a 1 game in 4 player.