Middlesbrough123
Well-known member
I suppose if delap does well it’s not £16m it’s maybe £8m if he’s there 2 years before he’s sold for a fee well in excess of £16m .
Again why is that any different to us signing Djed Spence for free and then selling him for £12m? Or Ramirez for free and selling him for £6m? Bernardo for free and selling for £4m? If a players contract is up then of course you're gonna sell him for more when he has a longer deal.Don't like the way such Clubs seem to 'flip' these free transfers either (I know anyone could do it but they attract).
Ben Davies - Preston to Liverpool FREE - Liverpool to Celtic £4m
Omar Richards - QPR to Bayern FREE - Bayern to Forest £8m (after just 12m and 12 appearances for Bayern)
I guess. The other 'issue' is that City have added so many clauses that they won't get much if he is a success.Bazunu isn’t a risk, he was one of the best keepers in the football league last year, he has a huge future
Delap is more unproven but clearly has huge potential. Clubs like Southampton should be taking risks on players like that, he could turn out to be fantastic. They wouldn’t get a premier league quality striker for under 20 million so it’s worth the risk
I havnt read the full thread, but I agree. Didn’t Chelsea do that at one point. Had about 20 players out on loan. Some will make it, some won’t. The ones that do or don’t won’t make a difference as the club loaning them are paying yeh wages. Then Chelsea just pick and choose who they want to keep.What I find amazing about deals like this is the amount of money these massive corporate entities are charging for kids. Delap for £16m is absolutely absurd. Southampton have already signed Romeo Lavia from Manchester City for £10.5m. He has no senior league football to his name, only two cup appearances. Man. City have sold a player to Leeds for £5m this summer. Darko Gyabi. No senior football to his name.
Gavin Bazunu was sold for £12m and if Southampton signed Delap for the price quoted above they'd have agreed to pay one club almost £40m for three kids who've made fewer than 100 senior games between them. Southampton also paid Manchester City around £13.5m for Angus Gunn a few years back. What's the link between these clubs? Is there one? It just seems a bit off IMO.
Farming out kids for millions. Hoovering up the best young talent and then charging other clubs an absolute premium in loan fees, sell-on clauses and transfer fees when, in two or three or four years' time, they haven't made it into their first team. I hate it. It feels like it's become another way the wealthiest clubs can negotiate their way around FFP.
There should be a cap on the number of players a football club can have on the books IMO.
Chappy but you miss my argument - I don't like how much power is going to the PL.I think the prices have inflated so it seems worse than it actually is. Why is it any different to us buying Greening and Wilson from United? Or Marinelli who hadn't played senior football?
If there is perceived talent then clubs will pay for it.
Again why is that any different to us signing Djed Spence for free and then selling him for £12m? Or Ramirez for free and selling him for £6m? Bernardo for free and selling for £4m? If a players contract is up then of course you're gonna sell him for more when he has a longer deal.
Gutted the way Chelsea were bailed out.Chelsea had 47 players out on loan for the 18/19 season. 23 last season.
Academy squads should be a similar size to first team for U-18s and U-23s.....but not 25 plus 25 loaned out. It's a joke.