I think we did. The year before, Everton simply didn't want to sell. So they said 50 million or Fuck off. Meaning either you pay excessively coz we'd rather keep him. By the time we went in for him Everton wanted to sell and they has already brought in a replacement. At that point he should have been a 25 to 30 million player. A potential star with add one. Instead we paid the "fuck you" amount Chelsea got quoted.
I like the lad, but the price was shit. And the way you know is this - if we tried to move Stones today l, no one will pay 31 million for him.
This is how we need to start thinking.
Three reasons I can't agree with that.
1 - if we want to buy the best you have to pay the inflated prices. John stones is a young, highly promising English player and he was highly in demand when we bought him. It doesn't matter that Everton had a replacement, we were in competition with united and chelsea for him. we were never going to get him much cheaper than we did.
2 - you can look at almost any team in the top flight and you will be able to find a handful of players that look like they may have been overpriced when bought. It's just the way these things go. For every mangala is a Gabi Jesus.
We can either spend a lot less in future or we can buy the best, we can't do both, it's not realistic
3 - if we sold stones today we may not make back what we paid but in 2-3 years time he could be worth much more. This is the very nature of speculative investment.