Clubs who are good and bad in the transfer market?

Redlips

Redlips

Well-known member
Starting with bad.

Everton win the gold medal 40, 50m plus for bang average players. Deli Alli my word what a terrible transfer.

Man United, Harry McGuire, Luke Shaw over priced and not very good footballers.

Bronze, could you say Boro. Pay OTT for players and receive peanuts in transfer fees?

Good

Liverpool, flog young squad players for millions and find diamonds.
Brentford, moneyball is working well.
Peterborough, constantly finding diamonds on pebble beaches.
 
The same Everton who have had bids of over £40m for an unproven striker who has a similar goal scoring record to Akpom?
 
laughingboroboy said:
Penuts...?

Tav - 15m
Spence - 20m
Traore - 18m
Gibson - 15m
Downing - 12m
Click to expand...
Those are the successes but Traore is the only one there we bought and sold. The others are all youth players. It is very rare for us to do the Brentford/Peterbrough example of buy cheap and sell for a profit. We tend to buy big and then try and get shot of them just to clear them off the wage bill.
 
Leicester have a history of great success in the transfer market (Kante, Maguire, Mahrez, Vardy) although they've been a bit more hit and miss in recent seasons.

Transfer market Champions over the past 3 seasons are, by some distance, Brighton.
 
laughingboroboy said:
Penuts...?

Tav - 15m
Spence - 20m
Traore - 18m
Gibson - 15m
Downing - 12m
Click to expand...
Tav, Spence, troare(sell on clause met), Gibson and Downing all went for well below the market value. I would add Adam Johnson and James Morrison to that list also.

The last player we made a killing in was Brad Jones in 2009.
 
Nano said:
Southampton also had great success in buying players and flogging them to Liverpool for huge profits. They've struggled in recent seasons though.
Click to expand...

I can see Walker-Peters moving on for big money eventually too, cracking player.
 
Everton’s spend over recent years has been ridiculous. But Alli isn’t that bad a deal really, basically a low cost punt on a player who was very good a couple of years ago.
 
B-Man said:
Everton’s spend over recent years has been ridiculous. But Alli isn’t that bad a deal really, basically a low cost punt on a player who was very good a couple of years ago.
Click to expand...
£100k per week on a player who clearly isn't interested in football anymore. They might not trigger the transfer fees but that just makes it worse. Spending so much in wages on a player not deemed good enough to make 20 appearances for a side as bad as Everton doesn't sound like a low cost punt to me.
 
Nano said:
£100k per week on a player who clearly isn't interested in football anymore. They might not trigger the transfer fees but that just makes it worse. Spending so much in wages on a player not deemed good enough to make 20 appearances for a side as bad as Everton doesn't sound like a low cost punt to me.
Click to expand...
£100k a week is fairly standard for a premier league player these days. He was only 25 when he joined for free and Lampard believes/hopes he can get him back to what he was.
 
B-Man said:
£100k a week is fairly standard for a premier league player these days. He was only 25 when he joined for free and Lampard believes/hopes he can get him back to what he was.
Click to expand...
Yes, but if he can't, which I don't think he can because it rarely works and I don't think Lampard has that ability anyway, then it is £15m on a contract, probably £25m because it only takes 20 appearances to trigger the 1st £10m to Spurs. If he somehow becomes the £100m player he was a few years ago then I agree it would be a bargain but there is more chance they get stuck in the championship with a player that still won't perform on a massive contract.

Strikes me as a Woodgate thinking he can get the best out of Ravel Morrison situation except they've spent a lot more on him.

It's typical of the daft amounts of money Everton have spent in recent seasons on rubbish.
 
I don’t know the ins and the outs of all the clauses so it’s difficult to comment too far. But I think Lampard said wages were also structured around performance.
I could we’ll see a situation whereby they get to a year in and if it has really not worked out he’ll be sat on 1 performance less than his first clause. Ala Downing a few years back.

Equally, there’s probably some wild accounting going on that makes him net positive to their balance sheet for FFP purposes. So on paper there’s a good chance he’s costing than less than nothing.
 
Brighton seem to be top of the tree at the moment. Got decent money for Dan Burn. Sold Bissouma this summer for 25M and Curacella for a massive 63M and now Man Utd and Arsenal are interested in Caicedo who has only played about 10 games for them (crazy). I'm sure he'll be another 20M plus sale. Potter and their recruitment team have done brilliantly of late.
 
Stoke always seem to get what seem like decent players but since they’ve been in the championship they’ve never really came close to finishing in the top 6.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top