Andre Schurrle to Fulham

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:35 pm

KRBFC wrote:Even if it's considerably cheaper than signing British based players?

It may be cheaper over the duration of a players contract but it is increasing the club’s liability substantially. If we were relegated then our revenue would drop significantly and we would be lumbered with players on wages that we can’t sustain. We might not be able to sell those players. So in no way is it a given that these players would be cheaper, never mind considerably cheaper, than British based players. Unless of course Fabregas et al would be happy to drop down to £20k per week in the event of relegation.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:36 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Where did I say they were better?

As for saying wow, considering some of the ******** you come out with regularly that's laughable.

So you genuinely think Cork and Westwood are more consistent than Cesc Fabregas?

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:38 pm

Rileybobs wrote:It may be cheaper over the duration of a players contract but it is increasing the club’s liability substantially. If we were relegated then our revenue would drop significantly and we would be lumbered with players on wages that we can’t sustain. We might not be able to sell those players. So in no way is it a given that these players would be cheaper, never mind considerably cheaper, than British based players. Unless of course Fabregas et al would be happy to drop down to £20k per week in the event of relegation.

The point is the british players arent either. How are they? We cant get a refund on the transfer if we go down? We still have to pay what we committed to be it up front or installments.

KRBFC · Post by **KRBFC** » Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:45 pm

Rileybobs wrote:It may be cheaper over the duration of a players contract but it is increasing the club’s liability substantially. If we were relegated then our revenue would drop significantly and we would be lumbered with players on wages that we can’t sustain. We might not be able to sell those players. So in no way is it a given that these players would be cheaper, never mind considerably cheaper, than British based players. Unless of course Fabregas et al would be happy to drop down to £20k per week in the event of relegation.

So how would we get back the £30M outlay on Dawson if we were relegated?

tim_noone · Post by **tim_noone** » Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:47 pm

Personally fabregas has never floated my boat as a player...now I do like Diego Costa.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:49 pm

cricketfieldclarets wrote:So you genuinely think Cork and Westwood are more consistent than Cesc Fabregas?

Cork has been for us definitely, Westwood has done a steady job.

Fabregas has lots of ability, but he's not the player he was at Arsenal, he appears to drift in and out of seasons nowadays and that's no good for us.

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:51 pm

Remember name signings at Burnley? It took the club 20 years to recover. They almost didn't.

tim_noone · Post by **tim_noone** » Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:51 pm

He's been on the beach since leaving arsenal.

Steddyman · Post by **Steddyman** » Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:53 pm

Blburnrvrs wrote:The difference between 40k and 100k is quite substantial. I wouldn't imagine many clubs have players with that much a gap for any long period of time.

I would bet every Premier League club has a gap that big if they pay salaries as large as 100k and yet year after year we roll out the same excuse. All that should matter is the full cost of the player over the contract period. Period.

Shore claret · Post by **Shore claret** » Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:54 pm

cricketfieldclarets wrote:So you genuinely think Cork and Westwood are more consistent than Cesc Fabregas?

Yes they are , they are not as talented as fabregas but they are definitely more consistent.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:55 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Cork has been for us definitely, Westwood has done a steady job.

Fabregas has lots of ability, but he's not the player he was at Arsenal, he appears to drift in and out of seasons nowadays and that's no good for us.

no comment.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:56 pm

Pstotto wrote:Remember name signings at Burnley? It took the club 20 years to recover. They almost didn't.

I know. Ian Wright was an absolute disaster. Cant believe we paid him more than Andy Payton.

And Andy Cole. And Joey Barton.

Sure we had Gazza though. At least one worked out.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:56 pm

Shore claret wrote:Yes they are , they are not as talented as fabregas but they are definitely more consistent.

Please elaborate.

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:03 am

I was thinking more of before and the John Bond circus.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:03 am

Steddyman wrote:I would bet every Premier League club has a gap that big if they pay salaries as large as 100k and yet year after year we roll out the same excuse. All that should matter is the full cost of the player over the contract period. Period.

Nail on the head.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:05 am

Pstotto wrote:I was thinking more of before and the John Bond circus.

I know sorry i was being pedantic. Big names alone arent a sure fire guarantee of success. But then neither is hoping you can consistently compete on low budgets and motivation alone.

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:06 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:The point is the british players arent either. How are they? We cant get a refund on the transfer if we go down? We still have to pay what we committed to be it up front or installments.

Indeed, but we can afford to pay the transfer fee at the point of purchase (we’re currently cash rich) and when installments are due (presumably based on known future cash injections). We can also afford to take on the liability of the players wage if we go down. We clearly can’t afford to be paying wages of £100k+ if we are in the Championship.

You may then say, why don’t we pay the player £10m up front and give him £50k per week? To which I’d argue that there’s a significant risk that a player will be less motivated if paid the bulk of his contract salary up front. He may also decide to angle for a move after a season for the wage that he is worth.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:12 am

Rileybobs wrote:Indeed, but we can afford to pay the transfer fee at the point of purchase (we’re currently cash rich) and when installments are due (presumably based on known future cash injections). We can also afford to take on the liability of the players wage if we go down. We clearly can’t afford to be paying wages of £100k+ if we are in the Championship.

You may then say, why don’t we pay the player £10m up front and give him £50k per week? To which I’d argue that there’s a significant risk that a player will be less motivated if paid the bulk of his contract salary up front. He may also decide to angle for a move after a season for the wage that he is worth.

I dont disagree with a lot of what you say. Bit its all swings and roundabouts.

Plus we build in clauses that say if we go down your wages are deducted accordingly. Its easy to budget even on such big numbers.

10m up front is 300k a month before wages. Either way we are commiting to spending it with no guarantee of recouping it. Whether we stay up. go down. The player breaks a leg. The player scores 50 goals a season. Theres no guarantees.

Thats the point. Thats why we should be looking at better pedigree for less outlay.

Cleveleys_claret · Post by **Cleveleys_claret** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:13 am

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Moutinho was on £60k a week ish at Monaco, so he's gonna want a pay rise to sign for Wolves.

Not being petty, just asking if you knew.

I see what you're saying, but Wolves are able to throw money at it and not worry about what happens if the signing doesn't work out.

He is on 75k a week and like all monaco players he doesnt pay any tax....the club sort it out

boatshed bill · Post by **boatshed bill** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:14 am

Is he any good?

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:18 am

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Where did I say they were better?

As for saying wow, considering some of the ******** you come out with regularly that's laughable.

Regarding that coming out with ********...

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:19 am

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:20 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:I dont disagree with a lot of what you say. Bit its all swings and roundabouts.

Plus we build in clauses that say if we go down your wages are deducted accordingly. Its easy to budget even on such big numbers.

10m up front is 300k a month before wages. Either way we are commiting to spending it with no guarantee of recouping it. Whether we stay up. go down. The player breaks a leg. The player scores 50 goals a season. Theres no guarantees.

Thats the point. Thats why we should be looking at better pedigree for less outlay.

I’m not an accountant but I suspect there’s a lot more to it than that. Let’s say you’re right...why would extremely successful business men heading up a company making multi-multi-million pounds of profit, and one of the country’s best football management teams, not have thought of this?

I know this is a message board and there’s no harm in debating these issues but let’s face it, when it comes to running a football club we don’t have a clue. There will be a number of perfectly logical reasons why we don’t go down the route that some people have suggested on this thread. I think I’ve listed a good few of them but I’m sure there will be countless more.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:20 am

Westwood, Cork, Hendrick and even our excellent Steven Defour. Between them in our most recent 2 seasons theyve contributed 17 goals. Fabregas did that on his own in 2016/17.

But at least they were consistent in providing 2 assists a season.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:25 am

Rileybobs wrote:I’m not an accountant but I suspect there’s a lot more to it than that. Let’s say you’re right...why would extremely successful business men heading up a company making multi-multi-million pounds of profit, and one of the country’s best football management teams, not have thought of this?

I know this is a message board and there’s no harm in debating these issues but let’s face it, when it comes to running a football club we don’t have a clue. There will be a number of perfectly logical reasons why we don’t go down the route that some people have suggested on this thread. I think I’ve listed a good few of them but I’m sure there will be countless more.

But we did in our most recent promotion. We knew that in order to make a real go of it we had to push on to a higher level of investment than ever before. And look at how we did. We pushed the boat out and got gray and barton along with a few others.

Similarly when you compare the season after vs our previous premier league seasons. and last season again. We invested in better players and got better results. Its no coincidence.

The focus we put on characters should never be overlooked. should we sign moutinho if hes an absolute dixkhead? Of course not. But Barton, Gray, Hendrick, Defour and one or two others arent without offield baggage and ego. Its all about balance.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:26 am

Blburnrvrs wrote:I don't see the point in this r.e. fabregas..

It was a hypothetical example which someone took literally while at the same time saying he is no better than what we have. when evidently hes better than any player weve ever had

tim_noone · Post by **tim_noone** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:30 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:It was a hypothetical example which someone took literally while at the same time saying he is no better than what we have. when evidently hes better than any player weve ever had

He couldn't lace taffys boots to name one player.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:34 am

tim_noone wrote:He couldn't lace taffys boots to name one player.

Its a fair point. 110 caps for spain a world cup and 2 euros, during their period of domination with a midfield of Silva, Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets et all to compete with. Or leighton james

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:41 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:But we did in our most recent promotion. We knew that in order to make a real go of it we had to push on to a higher level of investment than ever before. And look at how we did. We pushed the boat out and got gray and barton along with a few others.

Similarly when you compare the season after vs our previous premier league seasons. and last season again. We invested in better players and got better results. Its no coincidence.

The focus we put on characters should never be overlooked. should we sign moutinho if hes an absolute dixkhead? Of course not. But Barton, Gray, Hendrick, Defour and one or two others arent without offield baggage and ego. Its all about balance.

But we are pushing on to a higher level of investment than ever before. We spend more on transfers and wages season on season. It’s gradual growth and it’s served us extremely well. Suggesting doubling our salary cap in one foul sweep is crazy talk.

As far as I’m aware none of the players you mention were signed with a salary outside of our wage bracket. It was well publicised that the contracts were heavily incentivised, which I can’t see the players mentioned on this thread accepting when they can guarantee a larger amount elsewhere.

tim_noone · Post by **tim_noone** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:44 am

He couldn't lace Brian o Neil's boots either.

KRBFC · Post by **KRBFC** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 1:02 am

Rileybobs wrote:But we are pushing on to a higher level of investment than ever before. We spend more on transfers and wages season on season.

Wages, you have a point, Transfers though? we spent more in 2016 than we did in 2017, considerably more infact.

Vegas Claret · Post by **Vegas Claret** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 2:50 am

KRBFC wrote:Wages, you have a point, Transfers though? we spent more in 2016 than we did in 2017, considerably more infact.

We both know it's got **** all to do with transfer free, it's the market we continue to shop in that is causing us the issue.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 6:39 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:It was a hypothetical example which someone took literally while at the same time saying he is no better than what we have. when evidently hes better than any player weve ever had

I didn't say he's no better, he has far more ability then anyone We've got, I questioned his consistency.

I'm also questioning your ability to read and understand what's written.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 6:55 am

tim_noone wrote:He couldn't lace Brian o Neil's boots either.

Someone who's played for Spain 110 times.....hmmm

cutsy123 · Post by **cutsy123** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 7:01 am

Living in london on decent wages attracts

Claretmatt4 · Post by **Claretmatt4** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 7:43 am

The difference is that there is no risk to Fulham. If he's crap or gets injured then they just buy someone else with their owners money.

If we bought Fabre gas or Schurrle and it didn't work out we'd suffer the consequences of that contract for its duration.

These clubs don't have any risk anymore so they'll buy who they want until they get a good team. Look how much dog sh!t city bought before they assembled a title winning side. Remember Robinho? Jo? By removing the risk element it's removing the competitive element. I wasn't that arsed when it was city and Chelsea as we weren't gonna win the league anyway but now it's probably putting us out of touch of Europe long term.

I don't expect our board to match it, I'm happy with evolution over revolution. Just makes a mockery of the competition when some tin pot outfit from London can jump up the league and buy superstars like its nothing.

italianclaret88 · Post by **italianclaret88** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 7:54 am

That is the transfer of the year, but we don't know how is fit schurle.... before deadline we gonna buy someone and i think belgian and secondary market are the best for us... Fabregas is an ex player, a traitor and a middle man....we need strong motivated player like irish...

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 8:31 am

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:I didn't say he's no better, he has far more ability then anyone We've got, I questioned his consistency.

I'm also questioning your ability to read and understand what's written.

His consistency is there for all to see. Hes had a hand in 58 goals in just 4 seasons. And Giggs aside who olayed for 25 years, hes the top assist provider in premier league history despite playing his peak years in la liga.

His consistency has never been in question.

italianclaret88 · Post by **italianclaret88** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 8:35 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:His consistency is there for all to see. Hes had a hand in 58 goals in just 4 seasons. And Giggs aside who olayed for 25 years, hes the top assist provider in premier league history despite playing his peak years in la liga.

His consistency has never been in question.

Fabregas is **** mate, when the game will be a little be nervous is the firs to retire from tackling....we need peoples like karl henry or colin cameron!

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 8:36 am

italianclaret88 wrote:Fabregas is **** mate, when the game will be a little be nervous is the firs to retire from tackling....we need peoples like karl henry or colin cameron!

karl henry. Mr consistency.

Lets sort the defence out and go for Kevin muscat too.

KRBFC · Post by **KRBFC** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 8:43 am

Claretmatt4 wrote:The difference is that there is no risk to Fulham. If he's crap or gets injured then they just buy someone else with their owners money.

If we bought Fabre gas or Schurrle and it didn't work out we'd suffer the consequences of that contract for its duration.

These clubs don't have any risk anymore so they'll buy who they want until they get a good team. Look how much dog sh!t city bought before they assembled a title winning side. Remember Robinho? Jo? By removing the risk element it's removing the competitive element. I wasn't that arsed when it was city and Chelsea as we weren't gonna win the league anyway but now it's probably putting us out of touch of Europe long term.

I don't expect our board to match it, I'm happy with evolution over revolution. Just makes a mockery of the competition when some tin pot outfit from London can jump up the league and buy superstars like its nothing.

Which part did you not understand about Moutinho working out cheaper than if we were to buy Dawson? Are you saying British players aren't a risk? We could buy ''superstars'' if we wanted, for cheaper than we'll likely pay for Dawson.

Shore claret · Post by **Shore claret** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 8:44 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Please elaborate.

I don't think I have to, it says it all in the post.

KRBFC · Post by **KRBFC** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 8:45 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:His consistency is there for all to see. Hes had a hand in 58 goals in just 4 seasons. And Giggs aside who olayed for 25 years, hes the top assist provider in premier league history despite playing his peak years in la liga.

His consistency has never been in question.

Honestly, you're wasting your time, they're saying Fabregas is sh*t and inconsistent because you mentioned Fabregas, if you said Iniesta they would be saying the same nonsense just to argue with you. Anyone who has ever watched football knows Fabregas is top draw, it simply isn't even up for debate.

italianclaret88 · Post by **italianclaret88** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 8:50 am

KRBFC wrote:Honestly, you're wasting your time, they're saying Fabregas is sh*t and inconsistent because you mentioned Fabregas, if you said Iniesta they would be saying the same nonsense just to argue with you. Anyone who has ever watched football knows Fabregas is top draw, it simply isn't even up for debate.

So bring all spanish players and play tiki taka....

JTClaret · Post by **JTClaret** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 9:27 am

Just going to put it out there, that as much as I want to see some signings... if we were to get relegated, we don't HAVE to sell
It'd be nice to see us looking at some quality signings though.

BOYSIE31 · Post by **BOYSIE31** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 9:41 am

[quote="Claretmatt4"]Undergoing medical tomorrow apparently.

What is happening to this league. First Wolves and now Fulham.

We've worked hard for everything and this lot are just cheating![/quo

It's called spending what the league gives you every year that's all

KRBFC · Post by **KRBFC** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 10:09 pm

Just signed for Fulham on loan, incredible signing really.

Tuddybfc · Post by **Tuddybfc** » Wed Jul 25, 2018 10:56 pm

He’s regressed considerably since he was last in the premier league, there’s a reason Dortmund are getting rid, and barely played him despite their first choice left winger being injured most of last season. He’s a big name but not really an impressive signing